Hat tip to Designora for inspiration of the title. He recently attended “Web 2.0 Expo in San Francisco,” per his post. Adobe showcased Flash enabled products, which there are many.
I however do not think that is the main argument for flash. One of the features of HTML5 is it is open source. This is a strong feature but it also has cons. If the source is open anybody can look at it making digital rights management impossible using just html5. Yes other assets can be used for example server side scripts could create a one use cookie and only deliver the content to people who have logged in; this cookie could be a decryption key – that does not prevent them from downloading a copy however – and if they can view the code they can determine the encryption method.
Flash does not share this feature of openness. Hence flash will be used not html5 for you tube pay per view services.
Viva la differences is a term used in competitive marketing. If you want something that can not easily be reproduced or copied, If you have something that you want to protect — flash is the correct tool.
This of course means HTML5 will not kill flash. Flash has the market were the money is. HTML5 has the market which is price sensitive. Will web developers use HTML5 with other technologies and make forays into Flash territory? Yup, but the most effective way to protect distributed content is using flash.