The impressive Google Chrome for Android launched today in beta for Ice Cream Sandwich devices, and people began noticing quickly that the browser did not include Flash. It is a very interesting move by the Android team, considering Android’s default browser includes Flash. Moreover, it is something that some Android users have prided themselves on, especially since Apple’s iOS Safari does not include Flash. It is evident that the Android team hopes to move Chrome for Android to replace the stock browser and keep Android flash-less. Adobe confirmed that the new beta does not contain Flash in an effort to move to HTML 5 technologies.

As we announced last November, Adobe is no longer developing Flash Player for mobile browsers, and thus Chrome for Android Beta does not support Flash content. Flash Player continues to be supported within the current Android browser.

Do not think Chrome for Android is completely Adobe-less. The new browser features CSS Regions and a few other Adobe products that did make it into the new browser.

You may remember in November when Adobe announced it was official killing Flash on mobile devices and choosing to favor HTML 5 instead. This new beta continues that push.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

One Response to “Google Chrome for Android beta does not include support for Adobe Flash”

  1. stacyshelves says:

    I remember Steve Jobs getting ripped by certain corners of the web when he said that Flash wasn't really suitable for mobile, but I think he's been vindicated in a big way. I like Flash for certain uses (gaming for instance is pretty solid on Flash within browsers on desktops) but on a mobile device its too much of an energy hog and has too many negatives to be the best option. I see HTML5 increasing in ability and importance over the long-term. The only minor negative I see with my iPad is that sometimes some random website I visit (usually smaller sites that aren't technically knowledgeable) will sometimes have a video that is only available in Flash. But market pressures will force even the smallest sites to have to offer some type of solution on mobile. The main problem here is that there's some competing standards at play (h.264 vs VP8) and some bit of uncertainty in how that plays out, which is negative given that video is so important to the web and there's still so much uncertainty with these formats.