Flash Site Design - Flash sites inferior. Developers responsible?

Author

Flash sites inferior. Developers responsible?

=Snappy=

2004-02-24, 8:29 pm

Let me get some things established up front: I am not a web developer. I am not
a Flash developer. I have no 'stake' -- personal, political, or 'other' -- in
seeing Macromedia/Flash technologies live or die -- other than: I know what
kind of websites I like (HTML) and I know which kind I DON'T LIKE (Flash).

Since day one, I have hated Flash websites. I could probably count the number
of 'good' ones I have seen on one hand, and have several fingers remaining, IF
I could recall ANY GOOD ONES at all!

Instead, what I remember are all the rest: too-slow-running, too-small,
over-multimedia'ed, over-scripted pure BLOAT, that appear to be designed by
people who think the technology (Flash) is the end, not the means.

Don't you developers realize this makes YOU *AND* YOUR TECHNOLOGY look bad?!
Do you want to be noted for using the technology that concentrates more on
_presentation_ than on _content_?! (rhetorical questions, both: your works
already speak for you.)

The #1 issue that has annoyed the crap out of me since day one, and FINALLY
has prompted me to register for this forum and give you all my $.02 on your
development work (now that several years have passed and you don't seem to show
ANY sign of being able to address this issue on your own (or of even being
aware it's a deficiency, for that matter...)):

Are you all aware of the amazing technological innovation known as the
'mousewheel'? Some of you are? OK good. Let's proceed.

A mousewheel can be used to assist in many tasks! One of the more common uses
is to scroll a web page that contains more text than can fit on the screen at
one time.

The user 'scrolls' the mousewheel up or down, to see the portions of the text
that would otherwise be hidden. (a metaphor for moving ones eyes up or down a
physical page of text)

OK, enough 'comedic' vehicle. Here's my point: Why don't Flash textboxes
support the mousewheel out-of-the-box, and WHY OH WHY don't you developers
recognize this GRIEVOUS INADEQUACY and subclass one that does, and then share
it with all the newbies?! (By the way, I'm talking to the GOOD developers
here... I KNOW there are at least a few of you.)

It's the least that you can do, considering that the next-most-efficient means
of scrolling text (grabbing the scroll box and dragging) doesn't work properly
either!!!

(see this site:
[L=http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp]http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp[/L].
enter the Flash site, then click 'Features->Squad Tactics'. Now try to scroll
the box to the bottom using the 'click and drag the scrollbox' technique. Note
that the text doesn't scroll all the way to the bottom. Great job, everyone!!!
You all get raises!</sarcasm> )

That's right, folks: Flash SEVEN-POINT-OH!

Now let's hear those excuses!

-------------------------------------------------------

PS - to Macromedia's Flash development team: the coolest possible thing you
could do with this technology (short of abolishing it entirely, which wouldn't
exactly disappoint me), is to create a feature whereby ANY flash website (no
matter how ignorant or stubborn the original developer was) should be able to
be rendered into HTML on-demand by the user. (all I care about is the
human-consumable content: e.g. text, pictures, links. you can keep the bells
and whistles, as well as any proprietary 'secured' content that the user isn't
allowed to download.) And, like inclusion of 'credit to Macromedia', inclusion
of this feature should be made LAW in the distribution license!!

(Any of you who are 'aligned' with my opinions on this subject are probably
chuckling right now, knowing that this will never happen. Why?! Because it
would prove all-too-frequently, that ACTUAL PRIMARY CONTENT can be delivered
MOST-EFFECTIVELY without even MENTIONING the words 'Macromedia Flash'.)

HERESY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-------------------------------------------------------

PPS - it's worth mentioning, that I'm trying to be a BIT objective while
writing this article, and therefore, I'm trying to think of something Flash
that has actually amused or entertained me -- that is: let me walk away feeling
POSITIVE about Flash, not NEGATIVE. It speaks volumes that the best I can come
up with is the [L=Fanta Shokata
movies]http://www.fanta.dk/showmovie.asp?mid=EA2D35C7-073F-4718-869C-D1B725E0115
F[/L] & goofy standalone animations to be found on all the indie
animation/comedy sites! But can I come up with a non-frivolous example? HA! I
wouldn't even know where to begin looking! (note: the contrived examples I'd
probably find if I started poking around the Macromedia site DO NOT COUNT!)

-------------------------------------------------------

There are plenty more gripes I have with Flash and the ways it has been used.
But right now, I won't waste our time, for several reasons:

#1 - I haven't done the research required to make a truly unassailable case,
even though you'd all probably dismiss it as 'just trolling' anyway.
#2 - as already stated, other than the occasions where it actively
hinders/offends me personally, I couldn't give a hoot whether
Macromedia/Flash/Your Livelihood lives or dies.
#3 - most of you probably stopped reading when I said 'I [hate Flash]', anyway.
#4 - Macromedia's QA & Marketing/Product Proliferation departments stopped
sending me paychecks. (Actually, they never started! :P)

AWD

2004-02-24, 8:29 pm

It is all the next evolution in holding a persons interest long enough to
absorb the material. Would you rather read text and still images on TV or
see a full blown program about the history of Egypt. The information is the
same, the delivery is what makes it successful. A full color brochure is
always more memorable then a typed page of text. Moving images and sound
will always be more absorbing then a page of html. Take the same content
side by side and 9 out of 10 times the person will remember the flash
content more. Think back to school...how much of your WWII history do you
remember from endless lectures and dry text. Watch Saving Private Ryan and
Band of Brothers and I'll bet you can recite more facts and events. The web
is not meant for static content. Soon it will replace your TV. The ability
to entertain as you educate, even if it is only to educate about a product,
is what makes ANY multimedia presentation far better then static text and
HTML.

--
Al Winchell
www.Amazingwebs.com
den.tigersquadron.com

Craig Grummitt

2004-02-24, 9:29 pm

although you've outlined several reasons snappo, i'm still curious to know
where your obvious disdain for flash comes from? it's just that - surely
you would agree that there are brilliant and poor developers in all the
disciplines - even HTML. you are obviously uninterested in 'bells and
whistles' - fair enough - but i think you may be in the minority - a lot of
people like bells and whistles. apart from the problems with the site you
mentioned, and the fact that i'm not really into war games, i thought the
site wasn't bad. and better for the bells and whistles that flash made
possible.

you do make some valid points. text boxes in the past have been
inconsistently implemented, however since flash 6(MX) scrolling components
they have generally been more consistent. and since 7(MX 2004) flash has
mouse-wheel support. as this is still a relatively new release probably not
enough developers would be using it yet to make a noticable improvement to
the web, but here's a link for designers interested:

http://www.communitymx.com/content/...3BDC567C4BE81CE

RobbieSoule

2004-02-24, 9:29 pm

I don't address the mousewheel issue in any of my Flash websites for aerobic
reasons. I figure I am contributing to the fitness level of web surfers
everywhere when I force them to have to click on a scroll bar and then
physically drag it down, as opposed to the much lazier scroll-the-mousewheel
option. Although the click-and-drag method can get quite tiring after a
while (not to mention that additional .002 seconds it takes EVERY SINGLE
TIME!) I do feel this inconvenience is for the greater good.

Seriously though, if I had a dime for every time I've heard from someone
complaining about the lack of mousewheel functionality at one of my sites I
would have 10 cents. (That's including your post, of course.)

Gratuitously yours,
rob.e9

"=Snappy=" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:c1gnfu$96d$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Let me get some things established up front: I am not a web developer. I
am not
> a Flash developer. I have no 'stake' -- personal, political, or 'other' --
in
> seeing Macromedia/Flash technologies live or die -- other than: I know
what
> kind of websites I like (HTML) and I know which kind I DON'T LIKE (Flash).
>
> Since day one, I have hated Flash websites. I could probably count the
number
> of 'good' ones I have seen on one hand, and have several fingers
remaining, IF
> I could recall ANY GOOD ONES at all!
>
> Instead, what I remember are all the rest: too-slow-running, too-small,
> over-multimedia'ed, over-scripted pure BLOAT, that appear to be designed
by
> people who think the technology (Flash) is the end, not the means.
>
> Don't you developers realize this makes YOU *AND* YOUR TECHNOLOGY look
bad?!
> Do you want to be noted for using the technology that concentrates more on
> _presentation_ than on _content_?! (rhetorical questions, both: your works
> already speak for you.)
>
> The #1 issue that has annoyed the crap out of me since day one, and
FINALLY
> has prompted me to register for this forum and give you all my $.02 on
your
> development work (now that several years have passed and you don't seem to
show
> ANY sign of being able to address this issue on your own (or of even being
> aware it's a deficiency, for that matter...)):
>
> Are you all aware of the amazing technological innovation known as the
> 'mousewheel'? Some of you are? OK good. Let's proceed.
>
> A mousewheel can be used to assist in many tasks! One of the more common
uses
> is to scroll a web page that contains more text than can fit on the screen
at
> one time.
>
> The user 'scrolls' the mousewheel up or down, to see the portions of the
text
> that would otherwise be hidden. (a metaphor for moving ones eyes up or
down a
> physical page of text)
>
> OK, enough 'comedic' vehicle. Here's my point: Why don't Flash textboxes
> support the mousewheel out-of-the-box, and WHY OH WHY don't you developers
> recognize this GRIEVOUS INADEQUACY and subclass one that does, and then
share
> it with all the newbies?! (By the way, I'm talking to the GOOD developers
> here... I KNOW there are at least a few of you.)
>
> It's the least that you can do, considering that the next-most-efficient
means
> of scrolling text (grabbing the scroll box and dragging) doesn't work
properly
> either!!!
>
> (see this site:
>
[L=http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp]http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp[/
L].
> enter the Flash site, then click 'Features->Squad Tactics'. Now try to
scroll
> the box to the bottom using the 'click and drag the scrollbox' technique.
Note
> that the text doesn't scroll all the way to the bottom. Great job,
everyone!!!
> You all get raises!</sarcasm> )
>
> That's right, folks: Flash SEVEN-POINT-OH!
>
> Now let's hear those excuses!
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> PS - to Macromedia's Flash development team: the coolest possible thing
you
> could do with this technology (short of abolishing it entirely, which
wouldn't
> exactly disappoint me), is to create a feature whereby ANY flash website
(no
> matter how ignorant or stubborn the original developer was) should be able
to
> be rendered into HTML on-demand by the user. (all I care about is the
> human-consumable content: e.g. text, pictures, links. you can keep the
bells
> and whistles, as well as any proprietary 'secured' content that the user
isn't
> allowed to download.) And, like inclusion of 'credit to Macromedia',
inclusion
> of this feature should be made LAW in the distribution license!!
>
> (Any of you who are 'aligned' with my opinions on this subject are
probably
> chuckling right now, knowing that this will never happen. Why?! Because it
> would prove all-too-frequently, that ACTUAL PRIMARY CONTENT can be
delivered
> MOST-EFFECTIVELY without even MENTIONING the words 'Macromedia Flash'.)
>
> HERESY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> PPS - it's worth mentioning, that I'm trying to be a BIT objective while
> writing this article, and therefore, I'm trying to think of something
Flash
> that has actually amused or entertained me -- that is: let me walk away
feeling
> POSITIVE about Flash, not NEGATIVE. It speaks volumes that the best I can
come
> up with is the [L=Fanta Shokata
>
movies]http://www.fanta.dk/showmovie.asp?mid=EA2D35C7-073F-4718-869C-D1B725E
0115
> F[/L] & goofy standalone animations to be found on all the indie
> animation/comedy sites! But can I come up with a non-frivolous example?
HA! I
> wouldn't even know where to begin looking! (note: the contrived examples
I'd
> probably find if I started poking around the Macromedia site DO NOT
COUNT!)
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> There are plenty more gripes I have with Flash and the ways it has been
used.
> But right now, I won't waste our time, for several reasons:
>
> #1 - I haven't done the research required to make a truly unassailable
case,
> even though you'd all probably dismiss it as 'just trolling' anyway.
> #2 - as already stated, other than the occasions where it actively
> hinders/offends me personally, I couldn't give a hoot whether
> Macromedia/Flash/Your Livelihood lives or dies.
> #3 - most of you probably stopped reading when I said 'I [hate Flash]',
anyway.
> #4 - Macromedia's QA & Marketing/Product Proliferation departments
stopped
> sending me paychecks. (Actually, they never started! :P)
>

Linda Rathgeber

2004-02-24, 10:29 pm

The only thing about Flash sites that bugs the heck out of me is that if
you use your back button, the whole page has to reload again. :-)

Linda Rathgeber
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Razzle Dazzle - Design Aid #2 - Fireworks visual effects.
http://www.webdevbiz.com/pwf/
Victoriana | Theme Pack 03 - Club | http://www.projectseven.com
Playing with Fire | http://www.playingwithfire.com
Team MM Fireworks Volunteer | www.macromedia.com/go/team
----------------------------------------------------------------------

abeall

2004-02-24, 11:28 pm

LOL

Hope you feel better.

Because I don't think many people are on your side, my friend.

BTW, Robbie, I'll bet your 10 cents this guy invented the mousewheel. It's the
only explanation to his ramblings, eh? :)

Linda: you can always use "Named Anchors" to utilize the bakc/forard browser
buttons in Flash.

RedAntMedia

2004-02-25, 12:28 am

You know. I've heard quite of bit from both sides of the Flash vs. HTML
battle, and I've only come up with ONE decent result:

Flash Haters couldn't've POSSIBLY taken the time to learn it, beacuase if
they'd [i]had[/i] they would appreciate it alot more.

It's a fair thing to say that a VAST number of Flashers (heh...) know HTML. I
, for one, do. everyone that works for and with me knows it, as well.

My only suggestion: Jump on Yahoo or google or <insert your favorite search
engine url here> and search for Flash sites. Some suck fat <CENSORED> , and
some rock. the best for you is to look...

Start here: [L=Sonicboom.com]http://www.sonicboom.com[/L]
then here:
[L=XtremeIllusions.net]http://www.Xtremeillusions.net/Loading.swf[/L]
or maybe even here: [L=Urbantakeover.co.uk]http://urbantakeover.co.uk[/L]

Some of the BEST sites are the ones where you can't even TELL it's flash.

If you don't want take the extra time to look at the opposition, how can you
critisize it?

Ant (A Flasher)
Red.Ant.Media

acadian

2004-02-25, 1:28 am

I have to agree with that. I;ve been developing for 7 years now and by far the
greatest strength of Flash is it's flexibility. People often think of flash
simply as a platform with which to deliver funky animations but it is much
more. Any experienced java, html or PHP coder will find flash's ability to
integrate dynamically with the aforementioned a blessing in disguise. My
largest client os a major software manufacturer and I;ve built several
prototype software models for their development team solely in Flash. My only
gripe with many Flash developers is the trend in rendering HTMl text on their
pages at irritatingly small sizes.

RedAntMedia

2004-02-25, 8:28 pm

Mutli-Layering HTML into Flash - as opposed to the easier option if doing it
vice-verse - is a LITTLE more difiicult than MOST are willing to explore.

I, for one, and my company, are all about the excitement and challenges of
figuring out how to do multi-media integration into/ with Flash.

Most aren't about the work, but I love it.

As far as the warm, fuzzy feelings:

Just order me one full-length fur coat, and we'll call it even!

Ant
Red.Ant.Media

abeall

2004-02-25, 11:29 pm

Most of the advantages to Flash are obvious, but as RedAnt said, making Flash
able to render as HTML(as an option) is - well I'll say - ridiculous. Most
people actually appreciate the advantages, and bloating the Flash Player, not
to mention the complexities of making it work like that; all for a small
percent of internet users = bad idea. :)

George Hartshorn

2004-02-26, 9:29 pm

Try this site http://www.townandcountrymotel.com

"=Snappy=" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:c1gnfu$96d$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Let me get some things established up front: I am not a web developer. I
am not
> a Flash developer. I have no 'stake' -- personal, political, or 'other' --
in
> seeing Macromedia/Flash technologies live or die -- other than: I know
what
> kind of websites I like (HTML) and I know which kind I DON'T LIKE (Flash).
>
> Since day one, I have hated Flash websites. I could probably count the
number
> of 'good' ones I have seen on one hand, and have several fingers
remaining, IF
> I could recall ANY GOOD ONES at all!
>
> Instead, what I remember are all the rest: too-slow-running, too-small,
> over-multimedia'ed, over-scripted pure BLOAT, that appear to be designed
by
> people who think the technology (Flash) is the end, not the means.
>
> Don't you developers realize this makes YOU *AND* YOUR TECHNOLOGY look
bad?!
> Do you want to be noted for using the technology that concentrates more on
> _presentation_ than on _content_?! (rhetorical questions, both: your works
> already speak for you.)
>
> The #1 issue that has annoyed the crap out of me since day one, and
FINALLY
> has prompted me to register for this forum and give you all my $.02 on
your
> development work (now that several years have passed and you don't seem to
show
> ANY sign of being able to address this issue on your own (or of even being
> aware it's a deficiency, for that matter...)):
>
> Are you all aware of the amazing technological innovation known as the
> 'mousewheel'? Some of you are? OK good. Let's proceed.
>
> A mousewheel can be used to assist in many tasks! One of the more common
uses
> is to scroll a web page that contains more text than can fit on the screen
at
> one time.
>
> The user 'scrolls' the mousewheel up or down, to see the portions of the
text
> that would otherwise be hidden. (a metaphor for moving ones eyes up or
down a
> physical page of text)
>
> OK, enough 'comedic' vehicle. Here's my point: Why don't Flash textboxes
> support the mousewheel out-of-the-box, and WHY OH WHY don't you developers
> recognize this GRIEVOUS INADEQUACY and subclass one that does, and then
share
> it with all the newbies?! (By the way, I'm talking to the GOOD developers
> here... I KNOW there are at least a few of you.)
>
> It's the least that you can do, considering that the next-most-efficient
means
> of scrolling text (grabbing the scroll box and dragging) doesn't work
properly
> either!!!
>
> (see this site:
>
[L=http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp]http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp[/
L].
> enter the Flash site, then click 'Features->Squad Tactics'. Now try to
scroll
> the box to the bottom using the 'click and drag the scrollbox' technique.
Note
> that the text doesn't scroll all the way to the bottom. Great job,
everyone!!!
> You all get raises!</sarcasm> )
>
> That's right, folks: Flash SEVEN-POINT-OH!
>
> Now let's hear those excuses!
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> PS - to Macromedia's Flash development team: the coolest possible thing
you
> could do with this technology (short of abolishing it entirely, which
wouldn't
> exactly disappoint me), is to create a feature whereby ANY flash website
(no
> matter how ignorant or stubborn the original developer was) should be able
to
> be rendered into HTML on-demand by the user. (all I care about is the
> human-consumable content: e.g. text, pictures, links. you can keep the
bells
> and whistles, as well as any proprietary 'secured' content that the user
isn't
> allowed to download.) And, like inclusion of 'credit to Macromedia',
inclusion
> of this feature should be made LAW in the distribution license!!
>
> (Any of you who are 'aligned' with my opinions on this subject are
probably
> chuckling right now, knowing that this will never happen. Why?! Because it
> would prove all-too-frequently, that ACTUAL PRIMARY CONTENT can be
delivered
> MOST-EFFECTIVELY without even MENTIONING the words 'Macromedia Flash'.)
>
> HERESY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> PPS - it's worth mentioning, that I'm trying to be a BIT objective while
> writing this article, and therefore, I'm trying to think of something
Flash
> that has actually amused or entertained me -- that is: let me walk away
feeling
> POSITIVE about Flash, not NEGATIVE. It speaks volumes that the best I can
come
> up with is the [L=Fanta Shokata
>
movies]http://www.fanta.dk/showmovie.asp?mid=EA2D35C7-073F-4718-869C-D1B725E
0115
> F[/L] & goofy standalone animations to be found on all the indie
> animation/comedy sites! But can I come up with a non-frivolous example?
HA! I
> wouldn't even know where to begin looking! (note: the contrived examples
I'd
> probably find if I started poking around the Macromedia site DO NOT
COUNT!)
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> There are plenty more gripes I have with Flash and the ways it has been
used.
> But right now, I won't waste our time, for several reasons:
>
> #1 - I haven't done the research required to make a truly unassailable
case,
> even though you'd all probably dismiss it as 'just trolling' anyway.
> #2 - as already stated, other than the occasions where it actively
> hinders/offends me personally, I couldn't give a hoot whether
> Macromedia/Flash/Your Livelihood lives or dies.
> #3 - most of you probably stopped reading when I said 'I [hate Flash]',
anyway.
> #4 - Macromedia's QA & Marketing/Product Proliferation departments
stopped
> sending me paychecks. (Actually, they never started! :P)
>

mattbarnettuk

2004-02-27, 7:28 am

Yeah, I bet you would rather watch TV than listen to the radio all fekin
day.

Fekin Moron.

"George Hartshorn" <designbygeorge@charter.net> wrote in message
news:103t6q3b019r857@corp.supernews.com...
> Try this site http://www.townandcountrymotel.com
>
>
>
>
> "=Snappy=" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
> news:c1gnfu$96d$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> am not
'other' --[color=darkred]
> in
> what
(Flash).[color=darkred]
> number
> remaining, IF
> by
> bad?!
on[color=darkred]
works[color=darkred]
> FINALLY
> your
to[color=darkred]
> show
being[color=darkred]
common[color=darkred]
> uses
screen[color=darkred]
> at
the[color=darkred]
> text
> down a
textboxes[color=darkred]
developers[color=darkred]
> share
developers[color=darkred]
next-most-efficient[color=darkred]
> means
> properly
>
[L=http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp]http://www.callofduty.com/index.asp[/
> L].
> scroll
technique.[color=darkred]
> Note
> everyone!!!
> you
> wouldn't
> (no
able[color=darkred]
> to
> bells
> isn't
> inclusion
> probably
it[color=darkred]
> delivered
while[color=darkred]
> Flash
> feeling
can[color=darkred]
> come
>
movies]http://www.fanta.dk/showmovie.asp?mid=EA2D35C7-073F-4718-869C-D1B725E
> 0115
> HA! I
> I'd
> COUNT!)
> used.
> case,
> anyway.
> stopped
>
>