Page 2 of 3
Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:17 pm
by RobertGonzalez
I think Flash will have a long standing future. If for no other reason than because it is so widely used by many corporate internal systems (e-learning, training system, rookie developers wanting to try stuff that made the boss go 'WOW'). I am sure someday browser will be endowed with the ability to handle CSS driven interaction similar to that of Flash, but until there is a need for Flash so I believe it will be around for a time to come.
Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:12 pm
by superdezign
I'm assuming that anyone who's bashed Flash thus far doesn't really keep up with Flash, but the creators do a pretty good job of keeping up with the communities, especially FlashKit. Flash is about filesize. It has glitches, but nothing is perfect.
Google some flash websites. "best website design", "good flash websites", "flash website awards", or go straight to the source, Adobe. Developers have been creating very interesting effects and, with the advancements of current Flash, a lot more user interactivity is involved in the effects.
It really hurts to hear Flash shunned by web developers. It was made for us.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:02 am
by mikeeeeeeey
Wow. a lot of responses!
To be honest, I'm relatively new to all this to be saying such things as Flash
will die, I'm just merely asking a question
It's something thats been plaguing me all week, I think maybe I just really want to see something amazing in SVG.
and yeah. I totally didn't think about YouTube, but even then, it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if Flash wasn't ever there.
but generally, it seems like its not gonna die. you think they'll ever build it into ImageReady?
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:21 am
by onion2k
seodevhead wrote:I guess I'm a bit bias with my hatred towards flash video. The audio syncs horribly with the video and I don't care what anyone says, it can't shake a stick at H.264 or WMV9HD. Nor will it ever.
Well, it will, because H.264 is very likely to be available as an option in the next version of Flash.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:16 am
by seodevhead
onion2k wrote:Well, it will, because H.264 is very likely to be available as an option in the next version of Flash.
Really? Where did you hear this? I was under the impression that H.264 could not output to anything but quick/mpeg... if not, awesome... that would help flash tremendously... eventhough the player still stinks.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:54 am
by jyhm
Theres nothing better than having a time line editor and throwing in stuff like a motion tween ect,.. but to iterate once more, can you really see developers creating an entire site in Flash anymore? It's to much hassle. Animations are great, but only good when they are subtle.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:01 pm
by RobertGonzalez
If I visit a website that uses flash and it doesn't load in under 2 seconds, I am gone. But that is just me. And I think that is where Flash is lacking the most.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:07 pm
by jyhm
Everah wrote:If I visit a website that uses flash and it doesn't load in under 2 seconds, I am gone. But that is just me.
You are most people. I think the correct term is 'Skip Intro' sites!

I used to abide by a 5 second rule max but your attention span is really tight!
And I think that is where Flash is lacking the most.
I don't think its Flash but crappy developers who don't streamline their content.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:36 pm
by Chris Corbyn
Now Flash, I can just about deal with... at least it's (almost) cross-platform.
I just (minutes ago) tried buy an Album from HMV's new digital download site.
That really annoys me... people who make it sounds like it's my system that's not suitable, rather than their developers decided to rule out all but one Operating System as a Customer Base.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:39 pm
by Ollie Saunders
It's something thats been plaguing me all week, I think maybe I just really want to see something amazing in SVG.
Berners Lee's (sp?) idea was that of XHTML, where different XML schemas (things like SVG and XForms) would be integrated with HTML allowing it to be accessible and semantic. What a brilliant idea! Too bad everybody is in love with their, standards ignoring, copies of Dreamweaver and Director and now XHTML has all but been dropped. SVG looks to be dead before it ever got going.
Considering the massive size of the web development industry it is really incredible how shoddy everything is.
- HTML - several versions floating about, mainstream generators disobey standards, tags themselves are pretty limiting
- CSS - has never been powerful enough, browser implementations vary (mostly fault of Microsoft), hacks in use
- JS - compatibility issues everywhere you look. Used all too often where mark-up based solutions should have been provided a long time ago
- Flash - not mark-up, so it can be parsed, what use is that?
I'd like to see a web where that developers don't have to jump through hoops (expensive ones at that) to make their sites crawlible, accessible, compatible and pretty. The web just needs a whole lot more, better, standardization complete with the take up rates necessary to ensure that good ideas down get dropped.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:44 pm
by RobertGonzalez
@d11: That is something that especially <span style='color:blue' title='I'm naughty, are you naughty?'>smurf</span> me off. Although, I can say that the other day our database admin had a help ticket in to our application vendor for a web based issue she was having. Their response was something along the lines of:
Your problem is a known bug in the way IE handles certain styling elements. At this time we are not going to be modifying our web site to accommodate a non-compliant browser. To alleviate the problem you are experiencing, we suggest you download a standards compliant browser like Firefox or Opera.
That was awesome, but disturbing at the same time.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:41 pm
by Chris Corbyn
Everah wrote:Their response was something along the lines of:
Your problem is a known bug in the way IE handles certain styling elements. At this time we are not going to be modifying our web site to accommodate a non-compliant browser. To alleviate the problem you are experiencing, we suggest you download a standards compliant browser like Firefox or Opera.
That was awesome, but disturbing at the same time.
Haha awesome

But slight illogical from a business point-of-view all the same

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:10 pm
by superdezign
Well if EVERY website developer decided not to worry about styling in IE and do that, then sure, IE would die (or people would upgrade to IE7 :-p). But then, where's the challenge in CSS?

Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:26 pm
by RobertGonzalez
Remarkably, I have found that many of the IE6 CSS bugs are still present in IE7. It is really not that big of an improvement, so I continue to hack my crap to make it work in IE.
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:30 pm
by superdezign
Are you serious? What a pointless upgrade... Just tabs and security fixes. It's slower than Firefox and too flashy.
I downgraded any computer I've worked out to IE6 just to deal with CSS inconsistencies.