Which is the better language to learn to do this? Java or HTML5?

HTML5 for the chatroom[/quote]
HTML5 chatroom either needs to swallow the whole long-poll overhead and complications on both, client and server, or use "true" HTML5 web sockets which are barely supported on a handful of browsers, but are barely adopted. Either way, it requires considerably more complication on both, client and server than needed.

It's good for experimentation or if one uses a third-party solution, but not worth the effort to roll custom version.

Flash aka ActionScript.

Client-side Java is either abandoned, obsolete or deprecated and either lacks even the most basic facilities (such as any meaningful sound/media capabilities) or is difficult to present seamlessly (security warnings aplenty). In addition, it's poorly supported in practice. Despite cited 60% install base about a third of PC users that will be able to run the actual applets without problems. Browsers on other OSes are not very supportive of Java.

For more practical issues, just dealing with bitmaps will be an incredible pain compared to one-line approach built into Flash.


Yes, it can be done. Yes, it has been done. Both, Java and HTML5. But just because chainsaws can be juggled, it doesn't mean it's a good idea or a good starting point. Start with 3 rubber balls, there will be much less pain..

Actually latest browsers have decent support for HTML5 and friends (WebGL, Typed Arrays, Web Sockets).
?
I don't get this "HTML5 is a step backwords" notion.
Why would you ever choose plugins (that are slow and take an amazing ammount of syrtem resources) over builtin functionality?

Actually latest browsers have decent support for HTML5 and friends (WebGL, Typed Arrays, Web Sockets).
?

Why would you ever choose plugins (that are slow and take an amazing ammount of syrtem resources) over builtin functionality?[/quote]
Um...

Make this in HTML5. Today. Not in 3 years, not on some fictional future browser. Something that will work, at least, on all same systems and browsers as Flash does.

Why would one choose Flash?

I don't get this "HTML5 is a step backwords" notion.[/quote]Because it makes no sense to take a huge step backwards.

Why would you ever choose plugins (that are slow and take an amazing ammount of syrtem resources) over builtin functionality?

Make this in HTML5. Today. Not in 3 years, not on some fictional future browser. Something that will work, at least, on all same systems and browsers as Flash does.
[/quote]
Can't tell if serious. context.drawImage is all you'd need. I will point out that I tend to use the Typed Array spec, but it's not fully supported in all browsers. To put it in perspective I made this in a few minutes for someone. I don't tend to program for browsers though. I program for the specs and submit bugs if something doesn't work. (Which is the correct way to program for the web). To make something work in all modern browsers you have to make a few browser specific changes. I prefer HTML 5 over working with Flash.

Can't tell if serious. context.drawImage is all you'd need.

To put it in perspective I made this in a few minutes for someone[/quote]
Not criticizing the work, but where is anti-aliasing, alpha-blended particle fountains, 1000+ live actors and full-screen shader effects? Where is the sound (note that I frequently mention sound when it comes to HTML5)?

But this should about putting Flash to shame. Where are the demos that make Gemcraft look like a 1980's arcade?

To make something work in all modern browsers you have to make a few browser specific changes.[/quote]And ebola may be worse than common cold.