Re: Flash Loons
- From: Stephen <Stephen.D.Allen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 16 Jul 2006 16:08:34 +0200
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 23:57:14 -0500, Shawn K. Quinn in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html wrote:
begin quotation
from Stephen <Stephen.D.Allen@xxxxxxxxx>
in message <slrnebge54.3fv.Stephen.D.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
posted at 2006-07-15T01:09
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 20:02:32 -0500, Shawn K. Quinn in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html wrote:
<snip>
Flash is not an open specification. You must agree to a license
agreement before being allowed to download it,
What about Ming then ? <http://ming.sourceforge.net/>
That's an SWF *writer*. It's not an SWF *reader*. The only authorized
SWF *reader* is non-free software released for operating systems
Macromedia (Adobe now?) decides it's in its best interest to compile
binaries for.
By 'reader' I assume you mean player ? Here are some;
<http://osflash.org/open_source_flash_projects#flash_players>
The point is, it's similar to PDF; there are other means to produce
and read Flash, than using Adobe products, as is the case with Acrobat/PDF.
Many of the idiot "deeziners" who use Flash, use it to replace what used
to be good enough for a Web site with HTML and CSS, making one gigantic
Flash movie served over HTTP.
Yeah I keep hearing of those examples. I've found it hard to find recent
examples of that type of designer though.
I've seen too many to count.
Sure, but as a total % of HTML designed websites, a very small token I'd
wager. Anyway this conjecture isn't helpful in this discussion, as it's
anecdotal.
Most Flash designers aren't creating websites in Flash --
Because such a thing (to me anyway) doesn't exist. You have World Wide
Web sites, and then Flash movies. (I don't consider the minimal amount
of HTML to properly frame a Flash movie enough to qualify for World Wide
Web site status.)
I'm saying that it's for SEO indexing, I'm not saying that it's a web page
because of the added HTML. At least we should recognize that he was aware
of the issue of Flash and SEO. 8)
All I can say is we had better get used to Flash, because we're going to see
an increase in usage going forward, not a decrease.
There are some fascinating things happening now, with that platform now that
Adobe and Macromedia are one. There will be a lot of 2 way Flash/Acrobat support
along with some other RIA enabling technologies.
There are a lot of things that HTML isn't designed for or good at. Creating
a rich media experience is one of them. Since the Internet is evolving,
it's only natural for people to be attracted to the sites that display
interactive technology in a consistent manner.
I've spent much time in focus group dynamics. The younger demographic,
are the ones demanding the "Rich Interactive Experience". Technologies
mature and evolve, as does marketing. We, in this business are part and
parcel of marketing, as we're getting a message across or helping a user
interact with a company, and/or companies products.
They're using it in applications. It does present a nice way to deal
with a dynamic charting, as well as being good for animated signage.
As long as a non-Flash alternative exists, it's not a problem to me.
However, when essential site information or navigation is made into a
Flash movie with no alternatives, this is a huge problem.
This is improving in Flash, and will only improve going forward.
.
- References:
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Jeremy
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: David Stone
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Stephen
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Alan Silver
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Alan J. Flavell
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Stephen
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Shawn K. Quinn
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Stephen
- Re: Flash Loons
- From: Shawn K. Quinn
- Re: Flash Loons
- Prev by Date: Re: Flash Loons
- Next by Date: Re: Flash Loons
- Previous by thread: Re: Flash Loons
- Next by thread: Re: Flash Loons
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|