Flash sites inferior. Developers responsible?

[=Snappy=]

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]

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
[url]www.Amazingwebs.com[/url]
den.tigersquadron.com

[Craig Grummitt]

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:

[url]http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A3BDC567C4BE81CE[/url]

[RobbieSoule]

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]

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.
[url]http://www.webdevbiz.com/pwf/[/url]
Victoriana | Theme Pack 03 - Club | [url]http://www.projectseven.com[/url]
Playing with Fire | [url]http://www.playingwithfire.com[/url]
Team MM Fireworks Volunteer | [url]www.macromedia.com/go/team[/url]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[abeall]

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]

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 had 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]

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.

[Peter Blumenthal]

It only encourages them and gives them a warm fuzzy feeling.

--
---------------------------------------
[url]http://www.phageinteractive.com[/url]
PhageInteractive Ltd.
remove mm_ to mail
---------------------------------------
'I wish we lived in a world where it was possible to be religious and think
at the same time.' - Jonh Graves

[RedAntMedia]

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]

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]

Try this site [url]http://www.townandcountrymotel.com[/url]




"=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]

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 [url]http://www.townandcountrymotel.com[/url]
>
>
>
>
> "=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)
> >

>
>

[nealaus]

<parody>

Let me get some things established up front: I am not a radio producer. I am
not a movie director. I have no 'stake' -- personal, political, or 'other' --
in seeing color and "talkie" movie technologies live or die -- other than: I
know what kind of entertainment I like (Radio, Silent Film) and I know which
kind I DON'T LIKE (Full color talkies).

Since day one, I have hated Full color movies with sound. 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-intense,
too-hard-to-understand, over-produced, over-directed pure BLOAT, that appear to
be designed by people who think the technology (Color and Sound) is the end,
not the means.

Don't you directors 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.)


</parody>

[Spinethetic]

[q]
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...)):
[/q]

It (Flash) is not a defiency, it is a highly evolved technology that is
constantly expanding and progressing AS WE SPEAK! Of course some people abuse
it, prime example:[L=5 SEC Studio]http://5sec.com[/L], as of currently the site
seems to be all about the animation and presentation of information that is of
quite a bit lesser value. (no offense if the 5sec designer happens to use these
forums) But there are also other sites that i believe provide adiquite
presentation to reveal LOADS of helpful content and images spaced and organized
just right to provide the rare (but successful) infusement of appropriate
information and innovative animation as one complete multimedia experience.
example(s)
[L=2Advanced]http://2advanced.com[/L]
[L=4D Studios]http://4dstudios.tk[/L]
[L=Foundstone]http://foundstone.com[/L](integrated w/ html)

So you see, unless abused by an unknowing developer, Flash technology is way
beyond just a static interface, once infused,programmed, planned, and layed out
in the proper manner with corresponding presentation, Flash can have virtually
endless possabilities. As web design and the Internet progresses as well this
will prove more and more difficult to develop a practical flash experience as
the biggest concept behind web and flash design is to create something that is
innovative, presents useful information and clearly layed out in a design that
is not already duplicated, BUT STILL present it in a fashionable way that suits
the company/organization. And if, and ONLY if you can achieve this, then the
developer has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of by using Flash technology.

[RedAntMedia]

<applause>
Amen to that.
</applause>