Flash is an unmatched technology at the moment for making rich web content. People should still be given the choice to use it if they want to. I personally think a lot of this is more a hate campaign against adobe that saint jobs started. When adobe is dominating the market with html 5 creative tools and the browser is making the iphone's platform specific apps look crippled then we'll see saint job's true colors.
Which is a load of crap; for almost a decade Flash has been the inflicted upon the end users of the world thanks to incompetent idiots who have used and abused the technology for worthless and pointless crap. I don't want your banners, I don't want your games, I don't want your pop-ups, pop-unders and all the other crap that you push on your end users. The only person who would ever defend Flash is a person who has a vested interest in making money off it in some way - for everyone else the day it dies the day Apple can work on improving the whole user experience.
What can Adobe do to counter this? open source the bloody plugin! open source it, make it a standard and let different vendors and volunteers work to improve it; it is quite clear that for almost a decade that Adobe has owned the code they've don't sweet-bugger-all in the way of address grievances, I think giving some outsiders a go on the code can hardly cause any more problems!
Which is a load of crap; for almost a decade Flash has been the inflicted upon the end users of the world thanks to incompetent idiots who have used and abused the technology for worthless and pointless crap. I don't want your banners, I don't want your games, I don't want your pop-ups, pop-unders and all the other crap that you push on your end users. The only person who would ever defend Flash is a person who has a vested interest in making money off it in some way - for everyone else the day it dies the day Apple can work on improving the whole user experience.
What can Adobe do to counter this? open source the bloody plugin! open source it, make it a standard and let different vendors and volunteers work to improve it; it is quite clear that for almost a decade that Adobe has owned the code they've don't sweet-bugger-all in the way of address grievances, I think giving some outsiders a go on the code can hardly cause any more problems!
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
My brand new, dust free, out of the box MBP i7 in simple tests I did had its fan blasting in minutes while running a few Flash videos on YouTube whereas the same videos run using HTML5 had no heat issues what so ever. Also running a CNN web page with numerous Flash ads on a page plus a video report can kick in the fan as the poor MBP heats to egg frying temperature but the same page with click to Flash and just watching the video report (by clicking to allow it) keeps it to a modest simmer. I am convinced, sorry Adobe.
Looking around, it is hard to get a real good idea about how well the new phone is selling. There are sellouts in Europe but don't how how many phones were made and how many were sold. I would think if it was a really good number that MSFT would have released it in a press release. No stories of long lines, 20 phones to a store make it a difficult situation to really assess without the bean counters coming up with an actual number. I haven't seen many on the street reviews about this being a phone that is something that people love or must have so it will be interesting to see what happens to sales going forward from here.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
To be honest, your example is the epitome of the kind of web sites I leave right away. It is not a web site it is an interactive movie.
IMHO the most clicked on link on the web is "Skip Intro". Once you have visited one of these 100% flash sites you rarely want to visit it again other that to show someone else the cool movie.
That said, perhaps, there should be an entirely different class of site for these interactive movies, as I admit many are entertaining the first visit. Maybe instead of <http.domain.com> there could be a new type such as <flash.domain.com>. Then people would know and could choose.
I feel really sorry for Adobe, when companies start lying outright you know they're circling the drain. If only they'd improve the efficiency of Flash instead of defending a old worn out codebase...
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
The person who owns and designed that website needs to be tied to a poll and beaten without mercy. I don't want gimicky crap, I want content, and I want a simple layout. I use the internet as a tool not a some sort of click and drool "ooh shiny" simpleton that so many seem to enamoured with when it comes to the use of Flash.
Quote:
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
How about using it and not abusing it. There is no reason for an ad to be done in Flash; use Flash where it is required and stick to HTML for everything else. Is it really so difficult to expect people not to abuse technology? not to flog it to death? it reminds me of people with those obnoxious 'splash screens' to their website.
To be honest, your example is the epitome of the kind of web sites I leave right away. It is not a web site it is an interactive movie. ...
This is true of pretty much all heavily Flash based websites. There's just something about Flash that leads to horrible site design and a horrible user experience. This is why when people say that HTML5 must duplicate all of Flash's functionality before it's a viable replacement, I think to myself, "god, I hope it never does." The Flash design philosophy needs to die along with Flash, and the web will be a much better place when it does.
Quote:
... That said, perhaps, there should be an entirely different class of site for these interactive movies, as I admit many are entertaining the first visit. Maybe instead of <http.domain.com> there could be a new type such as <flash.domain.com>. Then people would know and could choose.
Maybe a new top-level 'flash' domain, like the 'xxx' the porn industry got, so you could segregate it off.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
Seriously? That's the website you're using to promote flash?
That is precisely the type of website that has caused many of us to dislike Flash. In all my years of web usage, i've only witnessed flash used well a handful of times. It seems like 99.5% of the time, flash worsens my web browsing experience rather than improving it. Not everyone feels this way, but many people do.
Our dislike of flash long predates the iOS/flash controversy. Jobs' decision to not pursue a usable iOS flash runtime, is largely motivated by the prevalence of the experience described above.
What happened to Frontpage, after a while not many people ended up using that?
I'm still of the opinion that any serious web developer uses a text editor and their favorite image editing software. Frontpage and Dreamweaver are children's toys. Adobe can continue ruling whatever market they think that is, and it won't affect me.
With regards to flash, I've had it blocked on my Mac well before this Jobs vs. Flash thing started. Why? It was a nuisance. It never performed well on the Mac due to Adobe's apathy, and 99% of the time it was just being used to display obnoxious ads or power websites with sloppy navigation and annoying transitions. Whatever SJ's motives are, I'll be glad when Flash is gone.
What are examples of Microsoft "defending technologies" against the interests of consumers? What the heck are you talking about?
Flash being one example; if there was a transition to HTML5 then all the responsibility would be in the browsers hands; the browser vendors could then spend their time on heavily optimising their HTML5 technology to improve the user experience rather than the experience being at the mercy of a third party vendor whom they have no input on - how many times have you heard people complain about their browser crash but it is due to a plugin?
It all comes down to control, the more of the stack you control the more consistent the experience will be - and that is the argument for Apple, the more open the technology is the more Apple can spend optimising Webkit technologies to produce a top notch experience for end users rather than having that experience being dictated by a whether a third party does a good job with a plugin.
It is the same reason Microsoft prefers to do things in house; if they control the code, control the technology then they're able to provide a consistent user experience - same can be said for Apple as well.
ClickToFlash is a great plugin, but probably not the best plugin to use to cast a vote against Flash. The problem with ClickToFlash is that it masquerades as Flash, and still leaves Flash running in the background. In this way, to a website owner, it still looks like their Flash content is getting hits even though you're not viewing it.
John Gruber of daringfireball.net wrote an excellent article about Flash, ClickToFlash, and how to disable Flash completely (except when you need it --Google Chrome) here:
The person who owns and designed that website needs to be tied to a poll and beaten without mercy. I don't want gimicky crap, I want content, and I want a simple layout. I use the internet as a tool not a some sort of click and drool "ooh shiny" simpleton that so many seem to enamoured with when it comes to the use of Flash.
How about using it and not abusing it. There is no reason for an ad to be done in Flash; use Flash where it is required and stick to HTML for everything else. Is it really so difficult to expect people not to abuse technology? not to flog it to death? it reminds me of people with those obnoxious 'splash screens' to their website.
Do you not understand the whole concept of design and branding? That website is not about a fancy easy user experience for geeks, it is meant to be something creative that stands out at it certainly does that.
Like many sites that are 100% flash it was made by a designer with no coding skills. As clever as code monkey web developers are, they are not always the most creative. Flash lets creative types make very different websites to conventional ones.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
One of the biggest problems with Flash is that its not great for SEO and rankings, the lifeblood of any good site. Flash is outdated bloatware and is a pain to develop for, in fact most of Adobe's software these days is bloatware. As a designer myself I run away from Flash, screaming.
A good brand manager will also tell you that a pretty Flash site is useless if it can't be found.
BTW, that site the corridor is a prime example of horrible navigation with useless communication, which is also something Flash is notorious for. What is that site? A design agency? Marketers? It tells me nothing.
Seriously? That's the website you're using to promote flash?
That is precisely the type of website that has caused many of us to dislike Flash. In all my years of web usage, i've only witnessed flash used well a handful of times. It seems like 99.5% of the time, flash worsens my web browsing experience rather than improving it. Not everyone feels this way, but many people do.
Our dislike of flash long predates the iOS/flash controversy. Jobs' decision to not pursue a usable iOS flash runtime, is largely motivated by the prevalence of the experience described above.
See above. The site is about creativity and design as its main content is about a group of designers. It needs to stand out and be different which it achieves.
Flash fills a gap that html5 can't meet yet. Sure html5 is great for video, I have developed websites choosing that over flash already and will continue to, but it does not cater for anyone that is a web DESIGNER yet. You can't make animated content without getting down to low level code with html5, you can with flash. This will change when adobe brings out its html5 creative tools but until then FLASH FILLS A GAP IN THE MARKET whether you or saint jobs likes it or not.
Do you not understand the whole concept of design and branding? That website is not about a fancy easy user experience for geeks, it is meant to be something creative that stands out at it certainly does that.
Designers designing for design sake, is not something I find desirable outside of a purely artistic context. Websites should always be designed for the user unless they are intended as purely art.
As for branding, that website is harming the brand. It does stand out... stands out as a website so bad that I can't even remember what it was about and I didn't actually end up reading any of the content.
Comments
Flash is an unmatched technology at the moment for making rich web content. People should still be given the choice to use it if they want to. I personally think a lot of this is more a hate campaign against adobe that saint jobs started. When adobe is dominating the market with html 5 creative tools and the browser is making the iphone's platform specific apps look crippled then we'll see saint job's true colors.
Which is a load of crap; for almost a decade Flash has been the inflicted upon the end users of the world thanks to incompetent idiots who have used and abused the technology for worthless and pointless crap. I don't want your banners, I don't want your games, I don't want your pop-ups, pop-unders and all the other crap that you push on your end users. The only person who would ever defend Flash is a person who has a vested interest in making money off it in some way - for everyone else the day it dies the day Apple can work on improving the whole user experience.
What can Adobe do to counter this? open source the bloody plugin! open source it, make it a standard and let different vendors and volunteers work to improve it; it is quite clear that for almost a decade that Adobe has owned the code they've don't sweet-bugger-all in the way of address grievances, I think giving some outsiders a go on the code can hardly cause any more problems!
Which is a load of crap; for almost a decade Flash has been the inflicted upon the end users of the world thanks to incompetent idiots who have used and abused the technology for worthless and pointless crap. I don't want your banners, I don't want your games, I don't want your pop-ups, pop-unders and all the other crap that you push on your end users. The only person who would ever defend Flash is a person who has a vested interest in making money off it in some way - for everyone else the day it dies the day Apple can work on improving the whole user experience.
What can Adobe do to counter this? open source the bloody plugin! open source it, make it a standard and let different vendors and volunteers work to improve it; it is quite clear that for almost a decade that Adobe has owned the code they've don't sweet-bugger-all in the way of address grievances, I think giving some outsiders a go on the code can hardly cause any more problems!
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
My brand new, dust free, out of the box MBP i7 in simple tests I did had its fan blasting in minutes while running a few Flash videos on YouTube whereas the same videos run using HTML5 had no heat issues what so ever. Also running a CNN web page with numerous Flash ads on a page plus a video report can kick in the fan as the poor MBP heats to egg frying temperature but the same page with click to Flash and just watching the video report (by clicking to allow it) keeps it to a modest simmer. I am convinced, sorry Adobe.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
To be honest, your example is the epitome of the kind of web sites I leave right away. It is not a web site it is an interactive movie.
IMHO the most clicked on link on the web is "Skip Intro". Once you have visited one of these 100% flash sites you rarely want to visit it again other that to show someone else the cool movie.
That said, perhaps, there should be an entirely different class of site for these interactive movies, as I admit many are entertaining the first visit. Maybe instead of <http.domain.com> there could be a new type such as <flash.domain.com>. Then people would know and could choose.
That which does not grow, dies.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
The person who owns and designed that website needs to be tied to a poll and beaten without mercy. I don't want gimicky crap, I want content, and I want a simple layout. I use the internet as a tool not a some sort of click and drool "ooh shiny" simpleton that so many seem to enamoured with when it comes to the use of Flash.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
How about using it and not abusing it. There is no reason for an ad to be done in Flash; use Flash where it is required and stick to HTML for everything else. Is it really so difficult to expect people not to abuse technology? not to flog it to death? it reminds me of people with those obnoxious 'splash screens' to their website.
If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash.
To be honest I didn't see anything on that page that couldn't be done with HTML5. Have a look at some HTML5 demos and see what you think.
I feel really sorry for Adobe, when companies start lying outright you know they're circling the drain.
Are you talking about this article or something else. I don't see who lied in this one?
Some bloggers failed to understand the data and drew some poor conclusions, but I don't see that anyone flat out lied.
To be honest, your example is the epitome of the kind of web sites I leave right away. It is not a web site it is an interactive movie. ...
This is true of pretty much all heavily Flash based websites. There's just something about Flash that leads to horrible site design and a horrible user experience. This is why when people say that HTML5 must duplicate all of Flash's functionality before it's a viable replacement, I think to myself, "god, I hope it never does." The Flash design philosophy needs to die along with Flash, and the web will be a much better place when it does.
... That said, perhaps, there should be an entirely different class of site for these interactive movies, as I admit many are entertaining the first visit. Maybe instead of <http.domain.com> there could be a new type such as <flash.domain.com>. Then people would know and could choose.
Maybe a new top-level 'flash' domain, like the 'xxx' the porn industry got, so you could segregate it off.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
Seriously? That's the website you're using to promote flash?
That is precisely the type of website that has caused many of us to dislike Flash. In all my years of web usage, i've only witnessed flash used well a handful of times. It seems like 99.5% of the time, flash worsens my web browsing experience rather than improving it. Not everyone feels this way, but many people do.
Our dislike of flash long predates the iOS/flash controversy. Jobs' decision to not pursue a usable iOS flash runtime, is largely motivated by the prevalence of the experience described above.
Frontpage, sort of destroys your argument.
What happened to Frontpage, after a while not many people ended up using that?
I'm still of the opinion that any serious web developer uses a text editor and their favorite image editing software. Frontpage and Dreamweaver are children's toys. Adobe can continue ruling whatever market they think that is, and it won't affect me.
With regards to flash, I've had it blocked on my Mac well before this Jobs vs. Flash thing started. Why? It was a nuisance. It never performed well on the Mac due to Adobe's apathy, and 99% of the time it was just being used to display obnoxious ads or power websites with sloppy navigation and annoying transitions. Whatever SJ's motives are, I'll be glad when Flash is gone.
Adobe and Microsoft have a habit of defending technologies AGAINST the interests of customers,
What are examples of Microsoft "defending technologies" against the interests of consumers? What the heck are you talking about?
What are examples of Microsoft "defending technologies" against the interests of consumers? What the heck are you talking about?
Flash being one example; if there was a transition to HTML5 then all the responsibility would be in the browsers hands; the browser vendors could then spend their time on heavily optimising their HTML5 technology to improve the user experience rather than the experience being at the mercy of a third party vendor whom they have no input on - how many times have you heard people complain about their browser crash but it is due to a plugin?
It all comes down to control, the more of the stack you control the more consistent the experience will be - and that is the argument for Apple, the more open the technology is the more Apple can spend optimising Webkit technologies to produce a top notch experience for end users rather than having that experience being dictated by a whether a third party does a good job with a plugin.
It is the same reason Microsoft prefers to do things in house; if they control the code, control the technology then they're able to provide a consistent user experience - same can be said for Apple as well.
John Gruber of daringfireball.net wrote an excellent article about Flash, ClickToFlash, and how to disable Flash completely (except when you need it --Google Chrome) here:
http://daringfireball.net/2010/11/fl..._google_chrome
The person who owns and designed that website needs to be tied to a poll and beaten without mercy. I don't want gimicky crap, I want content, and I want a simple layout. I use the internet as a tool not a some sort of click and drool "ooh shiny" simpleton that so many seem to enamoured with when it comes to the use of Flash.
How about using it and not abusing it. There is no reason for an ad to be done in Flash; use Flash where it is required and stick to HTML for everything else. Is it really so difficult to expect people not to abuse technology? not to flog it to death? it reminds me of people with those obnoxious 'splash screens' to their website.
Do you not understand the whole concept of design and branding? That website is not about a fancy easy user experience for geeks, it is meant to be something creative that stands out at it certainly does that.
Like many sites that are 100% flash it was made by a designer with no coding skills. As clever as code monkey web developers are, they are not always the most creative. Flash lets creative types make very different websites to conventional ones.
I agree banners suck and everything but the fact remains. There is no technology that matches flash for rich web content. If there is, you will explain how it is possible to currently make a website like http://www.seecorridor.com/ without flash. This is what designers and brand managers use.
I do not have a vested interest in flash at all. I have never created any flash content in my life. I am just trying to be rational on this forum because most of you cult followers don't see the other side of the argument whatsoever.
One of the biggest problems with Flash is that its not great for SEO and rankings, the lifeblood of any good site. Flash is outdated bloatware and is a pain to develop for, in fact most of Adobe's software these days is bloatware. As a designer myself I run away from Flash, screaming.
A good brand manager will also tell you that a pretty Flash site is useless if it can't be found.
BTW, that site the corridor is a prime example of horrible navigation with useless communication, which is also something Flash is notorious for. What is that site? A design agency? Marketers? It tells me nothing.
Seriously? That's the website you're using to promote flash?
That is precisely the type of website that has caused many of us to dislike Flash. In all my years of web usage, i've only witnessed flash used well a handful of times. It seems like 99.5% of the time, flash worsens my web browsing experience rather than improving it. Not everyone feels this way, but many people do.
Our dislike of flash long predates the iOS/flash controversy. Jobs' decision to not pursue a usable iOS flash runtime, is largely motivated by the prevalence of the experience described above.
See above. The site is about creativity and design as its main content is about a group of designers. It needs to stand out and be different which it achieves.
Flash fills a gap that html5 can't meet yet. Sure html5 is great for video, I have developed websites choosing that over flash already and will continue to, but it does not cater for anyone that is a web DESIGNER yet. You can't make animated content without getting down to low level code with html5, you can with flash. This will change when adobe brings out its html5 creative tools but until then FLASH FILLS A GAP IN THE MARKET whether you or saint jobs likes it or not.
Do you not understand the whole concept of design and branding? That website is not about a fancy easy user experience for geeks, it is meant to be something creative that stands out at it certainly does that.
Designers designing for design sake, is not something I find desirable outside of a purely artistic context. Websites should always be designed for the user unless they are intended as purely art.
As for branding, that website is harming the brand. It does stand out... stands out as a website so bad that I can't even remember what it was about and I didn't actually end up reading any of the content.