|  ElCiudadano.cl |  Noticias

El Ciudadano

Original article: El crimen tecnológico de las élites: la discontinuidad de Flash y Swish, las herramientas que pudieron revolucionar internet para quienes no sabían programar

There was a time when the internet was a blank canvas where you didn’t need to be an engineer to create. Simply dragging shapes, marking keyframes on a timeline, and adding a couple of transitions could bring a website to life. This accessible magic was known as Flash and Swish, and their elimination was not merely a generational shift; it was a calculated execution that barred millions from digital creation. This is the story of how corporate warfare buried interactive democracy, sacrificed a thriving app market, and stunted the dream of allowing anyone to program without writing code.

By Bruno Sommer

The Visual Revolution Navigated with a Mouse

Macromedia Flash and its accessible counterpart SWiSH Max espoused a radically different philosophy: design should be a visual experience, not a programming task. The timeline, motion tweening, preconfigured effects, and the ability to embed sound, video, and interactivity with minimal use of Actionscript made these tools the perfect bridge between creativity and the web.

And if you wanted to dive into coding, the option was available.

SWiSH, specifically, was designed as an explicit «user-friendly alternative to Adobe Flash,» featuring an interface where «coding was not necessary.» Any design student, small business, or amateur artist could create a fully interactive application. And it wasn’t just animations: Flash Player included advanced capabilities like secure SSL/TLS connections, communication with servers, access to the camera and microphone, and cryptographic libraries like as3crypto that endowed the ecosystem with astonishing potential for e-commerce, online banking, and even cryptocurrency projects.

The App Store That Could Have Been and Was Not

Far from a fantasy, the interactive market born around the SWF format was the precursor to today’s App Stores. In 2009, Adobe announced that the next version of Flash Authoring would allow any application to be compiled directly as a native app for the iPhone, ready for distribution on Apple’s App Store. Shortly after, Flex and Flash Builder extended that capability to Android Market and BlackBerry App World—one codebase, a single SWF file, and cross-platform distribution that placed the key to mobile business in the hands of creators without native programming knowledge.

Platforms like FGL (Flash Game License) demonstrated the viability of this model, generating over $400,000 monthly at its peak by licensing SWF games to portals worldwide. The dream of a decentralized, open marketplace where anyone could sell their application directly from the web without paying a 30% toll to a corporate gatekeeper was underway. But that dream was killed by decree.

The White-Gloved Murder: Security, Excuses, and Control

The beginning of the end can be traced back to April 2010, with the publication of Steve Jobs’ open letter titled “Thoughts on Flash.” In it, the Apple CEO declared Flash to be 100% proprietary software, responsible for excessive battery consumption, riddled with security vulnerabilities, and simply unsuitable for touchscreens. Apple’s refusal to allow Flash on the iPhone was a blow from which the technology would never recover.

But was that story of technical rubbish accurate? The answer is bitter. Yes, Flash had serious security issues. In 2015 alone, 316 flaws were found, averaging six per week, making it a favorite attack vector for cybercriminals. However, security experts of the time wryly noted that Apple’s own QuickTime player had more vulnerabilities than Flash in 2009, yet no one called for its removal. The issue wasn’t merely the existence of holes—fixable with genuine development commitment—but rather a deeper design flaw. Flash’s sandbox, which was supposed to isolate it from the system, was a house of cards: every patch opened the door to new breaches because the architecture was simply never designed for the hostile internet of the 21st century.

But there was a far less confessable motivation at play. Apple didn’t want an external runtime competing with its closed ecosystem. Allowing a tool like Flash to generate native apps without going through Xcode would have opened a crack in its absolute control over the App Store. And Adobe, on its side, lacked the willingness or ability to completely rewrite a secure player, sacrificing its golden goose in a foretold death set for December 31, 2020. SWiSH, lacking the financial clout to migrate its engine to HTML5, announced its definitive closure in October 2016, taking down the friendliest alternative for non-code creators.

Online Banking and Crypto: The Executed Potential

Flash and Swish had all the necessary pieces to build a digital bank or crypto project. The SecureSocket class of ActionScript allowed TLS/SSL connections, the as3crypto library provided hashing and key generation functions, and there were ready-to-use implementations of SHA-256—the basis of Bitcoin. Technically, the ecosystem could support complex financial transactions without relying on external gateways.

However, the plugin’s terrible reputation for security became its own tombstone. The industry standards for payment card security (PCI DSS) would have banned any serious banking implementation, with online banking portals even advising clients to disable Flash Player to protect themselves. The vacuum left in decentralized finance was quickly filled by malicious tools for “transaction spoofing” (notorious scams known as “Flash USDT” or “Flash BTC”), a paradox that illustrates the potential was indeed there, but the tech elites chose to cut it off at the roots instead of mending the wounds.

The Legacy of a Perfect Crime

The disappearance of Flash and Swish was not a natural act of technical evolution, but the imposition of a new barrier to entry. While in 2005 a creative could produce an interactive experience in an afternoon by using a mouse and intuition, today, one must master a complex web of HTML, CSS, JavaScript, React, Webpack, and animation libraries that require deep programming knowledge. The question that echoed in forums after Flash’s death is more relevant than ever: “Flash vs HTML5, do you design or program?” And the answer, for the vast majority, is a closed door.

The modern web is faster and more secure, but in the process, it sacrificed a whole generation of creators who didn’t know—nor needed to know—how to code. The technological crime of the elites was realized, and while Apple, Google, and Adobe divvied up control over software and app stores, millions of creative voices were left without tools. And it didn’t even require a virus: a letter, a browser update, and a self-serving narrative about security were all it took.

Personally, I was affected by the change, as were many colleagues—it has been a dark chapter of the internet that is rarely discussed and analyzed, to which I hope to contribute with this text.

Today, projects like the emulator Ruffle try to salvage the remains of this shipwreck, allowing old SWF files to run in the browser. But the revolution that could have democratized banking, apps, and digital creativity without code evaporated amidst corporate interests. The story of Flash and Swish is proof that in technology, what is called “evolution” is often nothing more than a protective circle where only those already inside remain.

By Bruno Sommer

La entrada The Technological Crime of the Elites: The Discontinuation of Flash and Swish, Tools That Could Have Revolutionized the Web for Non-Coders se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.