I use flashblock in Firefox to prevent flash, as far as I'm concerned it is one of the banes of the interweb, switching off all that inane advertising makes browsing a much nicer experience. Plus those sites that use flash for no reason except to flagellate the ego of the developer/designer, so annoying. I have seen good use of flash but it is extremely rare. And don't get me started on acrobat reader, I deeply hate that product and I can't understand how they can create something that takes up so much memory and cpu to render their own document specification so badly.
However adobe air is a completely different kettle of giblets. As a web developer the issues I face constantly are all about browser versions and compatibility issues. It's a nightmare. Adobe air provides a consistent and rich development ecosystem that works on MS, Apple, and Linux (rsn I think) and is probably something that is familiar enough for users to not be concerned about downloading/installing because everyone knows Adobe via flash and acrobat reader. This thing has ubiquity written all over it and there is already a decent community of developers. Personally I think flex/air will be huge, not for information sites but definitely for internet applications.
Frankly I don't get the whole "Air" thing for general web design. For in house projects such as training and presentations, I think it is applicable. But for general web use, I do not want 100 different apps on my desktop.
I hear that Flex 3 is lighter in weight but you still run into the same SEO problems as Flash. Is it really benificial for a client to pay twice for the same product?
Don't get me wrong. I like and use Flash. Especially for slideshow presentations. I think Apple is a little bit behind in their multimedia application models. Ever try to present a slideshow in Quicktime? Not nearly as flexable as Flash.
I wish Apple would pay more attention to multimedia intergration as Adobe does. Web Galleries are nice but unusable on the pro level. Imagine a Quicktime slideshow with a custom designed UI, transitions, linked to an xml database.
If Apple wants the iPhone to be Flash free, then they should give us the tools to develop for it.
Frankly I don't get the whole "Air" thing for general web design. For in house projects such as training and presentations, I think it is applicable. But for general web use, I do not want 100 different apps on my desktop.
I hear that Flex 3 is lighter in weight but you still run into the same SEO problems as Flash. Is it really benificial for a client to pay twice for the same product?
Don't get me wrong. I like and use Flash. Especially for slideshow presentations. I think Apple is a little bit behind in their multimedia application models. Ever try to present a slideshow in Quicktime? Not nearly as flexable as Flash.
I wish Apple would pay more attention to multimedia intergration as Adobe does. Web Galleries are nice but unusable on the pro level. Imagine a Quicktime slideshow with a custom designed UI, transitions, linked to an xml database.
If Apple wants the iPhone to be Flash free, then they should give us the tools to develop for it.
Ed
I think we're on the same page - when I say I'm a web developer I work for a bank writing internet banking applications which have the double-whammy of browser compatibility issues back to version 4 browsers and trying to create consistent input forms. There is plenty of pain to go around, not least to do with the total lack of understanding by my current management of web development best practices. Frankly the ability to write to a single specification and have it run consistently and without great effort on the three main OS's would be a huge boon and I'm sure I'm not the only developer who feels this way.
I think we're on the same page - when I say I'm a web developer I work for a bank writing internet banking applications which have the double-whammy of browser compatibility issues back to version 4 browsers and trying to create consistent input forms. There is plenty of pain to go around, not least to do with the total lack of understanding by my current management of web development best practices. Frankly the ability to write to a single specification and have it run consistently and without great effort on the three main OS's would be a huge boon and I'm sure I'm not the only developer who feels this way.
I feel your pain. I work for a company that still uses FrontPage 2000 and will not embed Quicktime because of "security issues". This company loves MS and Flash even though our bandwith is worst than dial up. What company? NY Air National Guard.
I think everyone except Microsoft is working towards a singular standard. I am afraid that until the masses can ween themselves off of Microsoft, we will always have cross browser issues.
There is a significant omission in this article, the Flash community. There are millions of people that create Flash content as evidenced by the millions of sites that use Flash content. I think that it is interesting exercise to do a filetype search on google to see what kind of Flash content is on a given companies site: filetype:swf site:apple.com if you just do a filetype:swf you will find 37,400,000 results that has to say something about the community.
With Creative Suite 3 Adobe included Device Central which has been distributed to millions of users of Creative Suite. Device Central provides device intelligence and emulation for the devices that have the Flash Lite player to nearly every application in Creative Suite including Illustrator, Photoshop, Flash and Dreamweaver. When Flash Lite gives way to the Adobe Integrated Runtime on devices you will be able to use Flex Builder to develop applications for the devices that have that runtime. An obvious question is when will that happen and how will Adobe get that runtime onto devices? As part of the Open Screens Project Adobe will require that anyone that wants to distribute that runtime will have to make the runtime upgradeable. In other words you can have it free of charge but you have to make it upgradeable. This has been a missing piece of the puzzle for devices.
Actually I think the idiots are the ones who buy their PCs from Best Buy and never do maintenance or update anything. Oh.. do I have to do that?
Ed
Those are ridiculous statements. Some people like to see how heavy and big a laptop are at a BestBuy before buying a laptop. As for maintenance or updates - when was the last time you
did one for your television or stereo? No wonder why a lot of people hate PC's - we have engineers developing PC's for engineers and not consumers.
Computer manufacturers, Microsoft and software developers need to do a better job making computers easier to use and educating them about them getting maintenance and updates. (i.e. most drivers know that they need to get their oil changed every so often and have maintenance done on their car).
Those are ridiculous statements. Some people like to see how heavy and big a laptop are at a BestBuy before buying a laptop. As for maintenance or updates - when was the last time you
did one for your television or stereo? No wonder why a lot of people hate PC's - we have engineers developing PC's for engineers and not consumers.
Computer manufacturers, Microsoft and software developers need to do a better job making computers easier to use and educating them about them getting maintenance and updates. (i.e. most drivers know that they need to get their oil changed every so often and have maintenance done on their car).
Your right, a majority of people treat computers like their TVs which is exactly my point. That is what keeps Microsoft in business. Stellar products....NO... PC user ingnorance, that there are much better products available. Using Microsoft products is like using a TV with rabbit ears.
When I can connect a ethernet cable to my TV I am sure there will be updates.
Macromedia goofed by not rolling Director and Flash into a single application. Frankly the drawing tools with Flash are pretty darned dreadful, as is the support for vector art in Director (resulting in untenably large file sizes), but Director's interface and overall approach was much more user friendly.
By the time of the acquisition by Adobe, the user base had become enormous and the fusion of Flash and Director was no longer a viable concept. Director still exists, but its reign as the top banana interactive app ended a long time ago.
Frankly, I wish that Apple had bought Flash instead of Macromedia. Having the capabilities of Flash with the interface of Motion would have been to die for...and Flash would have been on the iPhone since day one.
I am sure there are some sites that use Flash appropriately, but more often than not, it is an annoyance, usually in a banner ad. Either the banner strobes or you hear a sound, usually a fly buzzing until you mute it which requires you to look at the banner to find the button.
Flash has become like animated GIF (remember that?) and javascript--used for things that could easily have been done with HTML. It is like you have a bunch of kids who want to show off their new "toy".
I think we're on the same page - when I say I'm a web developer I work for a bank writing internet banking applications which have the double-whammy of browser compatibility issues back to version 4 browsers and trying to create consistent input forms. There is plenty of pain to go around, not least to do with the total lack of understanding by my current management of web development best practices. Frankly the ability to write to a single specification and have it run consistently and without great effort on the three main OS's would be a huge boon and I'm sure I'm not the only developer who feels this way.
The problem is while there is a single specification for HTML (ISO/IEC 15445:2000) that has been around since May 2000 it is still hampered by browser behavior. So even if you stick to ISO HTML odds are the browser is going to do something totally bizarre with it. Until that problem is fixed web page development will always be a disjointed mess.
Macromedia goofed by not rolling Director and Flash into a single application. Frankly the drawing tools with Flash are pretty darned dreadful, as is the support for vector art in Director (resulting in untenably large file sizes), but Director's interface and overall approach was much more user friendly.
By the time of the acquisition by Adobe, the user base had become enormous and the fusion of Flash and Director was no longer a viable concept. Director still exists, but its reign as the top banana interactive app ended a long time ago.
Frankly, I wish that Apple had bought Flash instead of Macromedia. Having the capabilities of Flash with the interface of Motion would have been to die for...and Flash would have been on the iPhone since day one.
Apple was working on HyperCard 3.0 in 1996 which was planned to integrate with Quicktime via QuickTime interactive (QTi) so there was no incentive for them to buy Flash. By the time QTi was abandoned in favor of QuickTime 4.x with its streaming video Flash was already becoming popular.
Given the fate of QTi and even with developments of QuickTime VR (5.x), had Active X scripting (6.x), and developed QTKit (Cocoa framework) I doubt Apple would have done anything productive with Flash. Especially given that even by pre-QTKit standards Flash was an insane resource hog.
Comments
I use flashblock in Firefox to prevent flash, as far as I'm concerned it is one of the banes of the interweb, switching off all that inane advertising makes browsing a much nicer experience. Plus those sites that use flash for no reason except to flagellate the ego of the developer/designer, so annoying. I have seen good use of flash but it is extremely rare. And don't get me started on acrobat reader, I deeply hate that product and I can't understand how they can create something that takes up so much memory and cpu to render their own document specification so badly.
However adobe air is a completely different kettle of giblets. As a web developer the issues I face constantly are all about browser versions and compatibility issues. It's a nightmare. Adobe air provides a consistent and rich development ecosystem that works on MS, Apple, and Linux (rsn I think) and is probably something that is familiar enough for users to not be concerned about downloading/installing because everyone knows Adobe via flash and acrobat reader. This thing has ubiquity written all over it and there is already a decent community of developers. Personally I think flex/air will be huge, not for information sites but definitely for internet applications.
Frankly I don't get the whole "Air" thing for general web design. For in house projects such as training and presentations, I think it is applicable. But for general web use, I do not want 100 different apps on my desktop.
I hear that Flex 3 is lighter in weight but you still run into the same SEO problems as Flash. Is it really benificial for a client to pay twice for the same product?
Don't get me wrong. I like and use Flash. Especially for slideshow presentations. I think Apple is a little bit behind in their multimedia application models. Ever try to present a slideshow in Quicktime? Not nearly as flexable as Flash.
I wish Apple would pay more attention to multimedia intergration as Adobe does. Web Galleries are nice but unusable on the pro level. Imagine a Quicktime slideshow with a custom designed UI, transitions, linked to an xml database.
If Apple wants the iPhone to be Flash free, then they should give us the tools to develop for it.
Ed
Frankly I don't get the whole "Air" thing for general web design. For in house projects such as training and presentations, I think it is applicable. But for general web use, I do not want 100 different apps on my desktop.
I hear that Flex 3 is lighter in weight but you still run into the same SEO problems as Flash. Is it really benificial for a client to pay twice for the same product?
Don't get me wrong. I like and use Flash. Especially for slideshow presentations. I think Apple is a little bit behind in their multimedia application models. Ever try to present a slideshow in Quicktime? Not nearly as flexable as Flash.
I wish Apple would pay more attention to multimedia intergration as Adobe does. Web Galleries are nice but unusable on the pro level. Imagine a Quicktime slideshow with a custom designed UI, transitions, linked to an xml database.
If Apple wants the iPhone to be Flash free, then they should give us the tools to develop for it.
Ed
I think we're on the same page - when I say I'm a web developer I work for a bank writing internet banking applications which have the double-whammy of browser compatibility issues back to version 4 browsers and trying to create consistent input forms. There is plenty of pain to go around, not least to do with the total lack of understanding by my current management of web development best practices. Frankly the ability to write to a single specification and have it run consistently and without great effort on the three main OS's would be a huge boon and I'm sure I'm not the only developer who feels this way.
I think we're on the same page - when I say I'm a web developer I work for a bank writing internet banking applications which have the double-whammy of browser compatibility issues back to version 4 browsers and trying to create consistent input forms. There is plenty of pain to go around, not least to do with the total lack of understanding by my current management of web development best practices. Frankly the ability to write to a single specification and have it run consistently and without great effort on the three main OS's would be a huge boon and I'm sure I'm not the only developer who feels this way.
I feel your pain. I work for a company that still uses FrontPage 2000 and will not embed Quicktime because of "security issues". This company loves MS and Flash even though our bandwith is worst than dial up. What company? NY Air National Guard.
I think everyone except Microsoft is working towards a singular standard. I am afraid that until the masses can ween themselves off of Microsoft, we will always have cross browser issues.
Ed
With Creative Suite 3 Adobe included Device Central which has been distributed to millions of users of Creative Suite. Device Central provides device intelligence and emulation for the devices that have the Flash Lite player to nearly every application in Creative Suite including Illustrator, Photoshop, Flash and Dreamweaver. When Flash Lite gives way to the Adobe Integrated Runtime on devices you will be able to use Flex Builder to develop applications for the devices that have that runtime. An obvious question is when will that happen and how will Adobe get that runtime onto devices? As part of the Open Screens Project Adobe will require that anyone that wants to distribute that runtime will have to make the runtime upgradeable. In other words you can have it free of charge but you have to make it upgradeable. This has been a missing piece of the puzzle for devices.
Actually I think the idiots are the ones who buy their PCs from Best Buy and never do maintenance or update anything. Oh.. do I have to do that?
Ed
Those are ridiculous statements. Some people like to see how heavy and big a laptop are at a BestBuy before buying a laptop. As for maintenance or updates - when was the last time you
did one for your television or stereo? No wonder why a lot of people hate PC's - we have engineers developing PC's for engineers and not consumers.
Computer manufacturers, Microsoft and software developers need to do a better job making computers easier to use and educating them about them getting maintenance and updates. (i.e. most drivers know that they need to get their oil changed every so often and have maintenance done on their car).
Those are ridiculous statements. Some people like to see how heavy and big a laptop are at a BestBuy before buying a laptop. As for maintenance or updates - when was the last time you
did one for your television or stereo? No wonder why a lot of people hate PC's - we have engineers developing PC's for engineers and not consumers.
Computer manufacturers, Microsoft and software developers need to do a better job making computers easier to use and educating them about them getting maintenance and updates. (i.e. most drivers know that they need to get their oil changed every so often and have maintenance done on their car).
Your right, a majority of people treat computers like their TVs which is exactly my point. That is what keeps Microsoft in business. Stellar products....NO... PC user ingnorance, that there are much better products available. Using Microsoft products is like using a TV with rabbit ears.
When I can connect a ethernet cable to my TV I am sure there will be updates.
Ed
By the time of the acquisition by Adobe, the user base had become enormous and the fusion of Flash and Director was no longer a viable concept. Director still exists, but its reign as the top banana interactive app ended a long time ago.
Frankly, I wish that Apple had bought Flash instead of Macromedia. Having the capabilities of Flash with the interface of Motion would have been to die for...and Flash would have been on the iPhone since day one.
I am sure there are some sites that use Flash appropriately, but more often than not, it is an annoyance, usually in a banner ad. Either the banner strobes or you hear a sound, usually a fly buzzing until you mute it which requires you to look at the banner to find the button.
Flash has become like animated GIF (remember that?) and javascript--used for things that could easily have been done with HTML. It is like you have a bunch of kids who want to show off their new "toy".
I think we're on the same page - when I say I'm a web developer I work for a bank writing internet banking applications which have the double-whammy of browser compatibility issues back to version 4 browsers and trying to create consistent input forms. There is plenty of pain to go around, not least to do with the total lack of understanding by my current management of web development best practices. Frankly the ability to write to a single specification and have it run consistently and without great effort on the three main OS's would be a huge boon and I'm sure I'm not the only developer who feels this way.
The problem is while there is a single specification for HTML (ISO/IEC 15445:2000) that has been around since May 2000 it is still hampered by browser behavior. So even if you stick to ISO HTML odds are the browser is going to do something totally bizarre with it. Until that problem is fixed web page development will always be a disjointed mess.
Macromedia goofed by not rolling Director and Flash into a single application. Frankly the drawing tools with Flash are pretty darned dreadful, as is the support for vector art in Director (resulting in untenably large file sizes), but Director's interface and overall approach was much more user friendly.
By the time of the acquisition by Adobe, the user base had become enormous and the fusion of Flash and Director was no longer a viable concept. Director still exists, but its reign as the top banana interactive app ended a long time ago.
Frankly, I wish that Apple had bought Flash instead of Macromedia. Having the capabilities of Flash with the interface of Motion would have been to die for...and Flash would have been on the iPhone since day one.
Apple was working on HyperCard 3.0 in 1996 which was planned to integrate with Quicktime via QuickTime interactive (QTi) so there was no incentive for them to buy Flash. By the time QTi was abandoned in favor of QuickTime 4.x with its streaming video Flash was already becoming popular.
Given the fate of QTi and even with developments of QuickTime VR (5.x), had Active X scripting (6.x), and developed QTKit (Cocoa framework) I doubt Apple would have done anything productive with Flash. Especially given that even by pre-QTKit standards Flash was an insane resource hog.