Flash Bashers

[Markll]

Let's put the narrow - minded opposition to Flash to bed. Many Flash sites are quicker loading than would be their equivalent in HTML or Java.

Over 97% of the internet community's browsers support Flash.

I am much less interested in reaching the less than 3% of surfers not keeping up with the times as I am at making the internet experience better for the 97% that do.

"The cup is 97% full not 3% empty"

[carbonize]

But you yourself are guilty of being narrow minded as your answer to everything is to say "Do it in Flash". Here in the UK dial up connection is still predominant which means a site made entirely in flash soon gets left as they are not going to wait for it to load.

Flash is good for presentation sites such as band sites and sites that want to get a company image across, but for a site that is content heavy or constantly updated with news, stock, weather, or what have you, HTML/XHTML will always be the better option.

[Markll]

http://theshorelineshopper.com

All Flash, total file size less than 33k.
Less than 6 seconds at 56K.

[carbonize]

All flash maybe but it's a single page and not a site. All the links open in new windows. Apart from one which loads a different flash file that is just a collection of links. I was talking about full sites made in flash not single pages.

[Markll]

You need to learn more about Flash's capabilities to make the valid assesment. Would you build an html site in just one page?

[carbonize]

I would build a HTML site so that as much as possible opened in the same window as visitors do not like having every link open in a new window. Apart from your example every flash site I have ever seen has used the links to make changes to the flash it's self to display different information/images.

[Markll]

Your contempt for Flash aside. I visited your site and enjoyed it.

I was especially entertained by the Phobias page.

One in particular - Macrophobia: Fear of long waits
or should we rename it Macro(media)phobia

People are usually fearful of things the do not understand.

This discussion is starting to drive me to overcome my Potophobia.

[carbonize]

I have no contempt for flash. A friend of mine makes presentations for business meetings and conferences in flash. It's just that I feel that apart from presentation sites the only place for flash in websites is for adverts.

Flash sites having to be compiled like they do can also fall fate of the same thing that recently happened to me. I am a programmer as well as a web designer and during a recent testing of Lindows it went and deleted my partition along with three gigs worth of work including the source code to a program I had worked on over several months.

Personally I find Phobophobia, the fear of fear, to be a funny one. Talk about a self perpetuating phobia.

[tertius]

Let's put the narrow - minded opposition to Flash to bed.
...
Over 97% of the internet community's browsers support Flash.
...
"The cup is 97% full not 3% empty"

And if the Eolas v. Microsoft August judgment stands, what will be the impact on the Internet community's browsers and the pages using <embed> and <object> HTML coding?

Eolas is claiming a patent for how browsers handle HTML multimedia content, and the August ruling for Eolas is so broad that it would seem to impact the use of all website applications and plugins that use <embed> and <object> within the HTML code. (Eolas has indicated that if they prevail, other infringers will be targeted....)

It's potentially serious enough that the W3C empowered a committee to look into what kinds of changes would need to be made to the underlying structure of HTML/XHTML. And if the W3C does change the undelying fabric of HTML/XHTML, what will happen to all the existing websites coded for these technologies when the major browsers apply patches to avoid infringing on the Eolas patent (and avoid being targeted in a lawsuit)???

IMHO, it's just another reason to avoid using proprietary technologies on the Internet not provided for nor in substantial compliance with the W3C's HTML/XHTML/CSS and accessibility standards...

FWIW!
-Tertius

[voodooboy]

The reason computermarks site loads so quickly is because he is using the MOST BASIC symbols you can create in Flash and uses them repeatedly to create site with what appears to be a lot of functions. Yes, if you created a directory like that in HTML the graphic files WOULD exceed the overall size of his site. The difference here is that computermarks site is the most basic of basic Flash using boxes and text to populate the site. I doubt that he could claim the size and download time of the site if he were to add photos and company logos for those yet to be listed in the directories. The site will eventually become just as large as its counterparts.

What carbonize is referring to are the High-End Flash sites used to promote Rock Groups and large companies such as Coca-Cola and Nike. Those sites have much more advanced interactivity and much heavier graphic bases so they are naturally going to be larger than most static sites.

I for one am a strong believer in Flash, and using Flash MX 2004 I can see the growing potential of the media. But I have to agree with carbonize in that the true use of Flash, at this time, is best left for high-end companies and people who already have a large market share and just need to maintain their consumer visibility. Or for fun sites that have all the comics and games.

I am not saying the computermarks site is not a good site. But if we are going to compare apples to apples, we need something more comparable then an incomplete site.