lets not make stupid statements , Jobs didnt invent HTML 5 nor its under his control

Ogg Theora and maybe VP8 (WebM) have potential to become alternative to flash

... they have. Plus some other video formats. None of them are related to HTML5 though.

Oh boy. The endless HTML5 vs Flash discussion has come here as well...

HTML5 is markup, people, nothing more.

What perhaps is intended is support for a feature complete web stack: HTML, CSS, DOM, ECMAScript and the auxiliary technologies like XHR, SVG, audio/video codecs, geolocation, web workers...

Add to that JavaScript with JIT or tracing and GPU accelerated Video, SVG, canvas, etc and a few other performance boosting rewrites of the rendering engine (e.g. retained layers in Gecko) and yes, new kinds of web applications are made possible.

But it is not all HTML5.

Some of these technologies have a new number after them: HTML5, CSS 3, ECMAScripth 5th edition, DOM 3, XHR2, etc. But it's only a number, people, nothing more. Exactly what features from the specs do you miss in Fennec or MicroB, and why? That's a far more productive discussion.

Oh yes. Nokia ditch MicroB and support Fennec or add SVG to MicroB!

I really, really want SVG in my browser, because I use that a lot in my teaching.

I'm greedy.

I want it all. Why is it so hard for any corporation or company to get both Flash 10.1; and whatever codecs/audio/video/etc that are part of the "HTML5" standard or whatever.

Why should we need a "compromise" again?

I want JAVA too, for that matter.

Markup or not, all major browsers that support HTML5 also announced support for the majority if not all its intended associated technologies, including said video formats. My trusty FF already has OGG and VP8 (formats)

For me, there is little doubt that HTML5 is going to displace Flash. For one, once the ball gets rolling, it will have wider support. And for two, it's a heck of a lot more open (is that a DIV0?), so in time unless Flash comes up with drag and drop 3D games, it will fail to keep up. Add to that that the alternative is going to be patched by the browser maker (which is a world of pain now - integrating Flash) and it goes even better.

Flash was a good idea, and will be a viable option for a while. After the new technology spreads, there is going to be little incentive what with the high entry barriers for developers and the silly interfacing of the engine. At the very least, I expect them to compete for a while, giving every one time to port both. By that time, there will be little excuse for a browser to not support one or another.

Soon, not having HTML5 is going to be funny, like those pages that still say "If your browser doesn't support frames" frames.

Disagree if you will, I'll just retract into my shell and hum.

I don't understand when people pick sides on these issues. Especially when they're affected (either positively or negatively) by public figures such as Steve Jobs.

Ask for Flash 10.1 support.
Ask for Html5 support.

With flash, I could get a "No" from AErdobe and I'm boned.

With HTML5, I have Nokia. Then I have Mozilla. Then Chromium project. Then other people that develop derivates of open browsers. Then there's partial support (I could have <video> but lack SVG), something I could live with. Then ...

It's not exactly picking sides so much as rooting for the team I have the best chances with.

I like how (newer builds of) Android allows the ability to turn on/off plugins as they're needed.

That's a better option - turn off what you "hate", use what you need as it's needed.

Hmmmm that sounds good.
I think it's time to give android another try...

http://twitpic.com/1qzk2j/full
http://twitpic.com/1qzk6y/full

There is no way you cannot consider that a much more eloquent solution. Don't like Flash? Turn it off. Hit a site that requires it? Turn it on just for that moment.