| SitePoint Sponsor |
Making music isn't about you. This is a service industry and it's about our consumers needs and filling those needs in a way that's beneficial to them. Every bit of experimentation is done to fulfill a need, hiphop, punk, new age, country, etc were all created to serve the need of the consumer. That consumer was not us the musicians but the owners of the cd's who pay us to create them.Originally Posted by firegryphon3207
Who cares about creativity..
That's because your not supposed to use it for layout or design. Structure your page and content with HTML and suplement it with CSS to have an eye-pleasing intuitive layout and design.
I don't bother with all-flash web sites. They're a waste of my time and bandwidth, are a PAIN to navigate, break some valuable browser features, sacrifice content for eye-candy, et cetera.
Flash has very important specific uses. However, it should not be used as a "replacement" for HTML.
http://www.statgfx.com
It can be a replacement for eye-candy. It can be an alternate for html. It can also be a replacement for html. But should you use it as a replacement for html? We've already given you reasons why end-users won't or can't visit a flash site.
To repeat what everyone else said: accessibility. If you're gonna use flash, at least give non-flash users an alternative.
Duh, html was never meant to be a design tool. Everyone knows that. It was a way to "mark-up" documents to structure and organize data. If you're using tables to organize your content on a browser, then you've missed the whole point of html. Any web-developer worth their fees knows that html is used to organize data and css is used to format and present it.
The fact that you use html tables for page layout without a mention of css tells me that you're not on the same page that some of us here are. While some here look forward to xhtml/css as the future, you seem stuck in 1990s web-design techniques.
Take a look a www.csszengarden.com and then try to tell us that xhtml/css stifles creativity.
Oh, and btw: The open and experimental nature and the promise of open information exchange of radio gave way to commercial purposes. Ditto TV. Ditto the internet. The difference is that commercial and non-commercial sites can easily co-exist on the internet because you can spend as little as $0 or spend the whole kaboodle on a website.
The Royal National Institute for the Blind is currently providing the backing for a number of people to take legal action against the owners of a number of websites (sorry, don't have the actual numbers) for not complying with the disability discrimination act - if successful then it can be expected that the amount of litigation will increase quite rapidly. As it stands there is a requirement for organisations to make reasonable adjustments to the way services are delivered in order to comply.
http://www.disability.gov.uk/dda/#part3
Hey can you stop trying to impress and being such a smartass for a moment? I'm not much of a code head (you guessed right?) I am aware of css though, and dreamweaver makes using it a pretty intuitive affair. However there are also problems with that, in that dreamweaver's layers don't always render in the browser the way you intended. Also not all browsers render css equally right? (oops, sorry for stating the blaringly obvious again)
Jeez, it must be great to know everything and be light years ahead of the rest..
oh and I agree, csszengarden is a very impressive and creative site, incase you get me wrong.
Last edited by Blunderboy; Jul 30, 2003 at 02:18.
for the time being, hybrid/transitional designs using a mixture of CSS and tables are quite acceptable...mainly to cater for older browsers that have trouble with pure CSS positioning layouts.
now let's all calm down and be civil
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
WaSP Accessibility Task Force Member
splintered.co.uk | photographia.co.uk | redux.deviantart.com
Hi Blunderboy! I've actually been in you exact situation a few years back. I was sick of HTML, and I liked how Flash allowed be to position my stuff perfectly, down to the last pixel.
Many people, graphic artists in particular, dislike the lack of precision you get with HTML. You cannot always make your site pixel-perfect, and that is very hard to accept in the beginning, as it forces you to compromise on your artistic talent.
However, when you say that "HTML was never designed as a precision layout tool", you are both wrong and right. HTML, as you might know, is now a dead technology, which is no longer getting updated or developed. XHTML is the new standard for developing web sites, coupled with CSS. And it's most definetly a precision layout tool, and much more intuitive to work with than standard HTML with it's table-based layouts.
I understand your desire to give up on HTML and go into the warm embrace of Flash, but by doing so, you are shooting yourself in the foot by alienating a lot of users, and more importantly, search engines. Whatever some people say, search enginges cannot spider flash efficiently. They might pick up a few keywords, but your competitors with XHTML/CSS web pages will sit at the top of the rankings and laugh at you.
Now, this is not to say that Flash is a bad technology. Rather the opposite - it's a fantastic technology. It's bloody fantastically used on some sites, like HostRocket, or Macromedias own site. Palm uses it in a very efficient manner for their product tour of the Tungsten W. I also saw a site with a fantastic online booking system that benefited greatly from being Flash (can't find the URI now, though). however, none of those sites used Flash for anything it wasn't good at. It's used it for complex interfaces and multimedia (which in turn is used to impress). They didn't use Flash for what it is mediocre at - i.e. full web sites. XHTML is simply more well adapted at that.
Now, people will say, look at 2Advanced - it's a fantastic web site! And it's made with Flash! Well, first of all, the main goal of 2advanced.com is to impress clients with their skill. It's not mainly meant to be a usable web site. The usability of the site does not, in any way whatsoever, benefit from using flash. Rather the opposite, in fact. It has an unstandardized interface that many users wont understand, it takes a long time to load, and the animation between pages slows down navigation to a crawl. It's also devastating to search engine rankings. But that's okay, since the point of the site is to impress, and people already link to it, so they don't need any search engine rankings.
However, 2Advanced are well aware that all-flash is not always the way to go. Take a look at their portfolio of sites, and you'll see that most of the sites they actually made for clients, are XHTML based. Why? Because Flash is not the best medium for a web site. XHTML is (currently). UNLESS your primary goal is to impress and entertain, in which case flash often serves you better.
Mattias Johansson
Short, Swedish, Web Developer
Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
FatStatement.com
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to M. Johansson again.
Very eloquent response!
Thank you for your constructive and informative comments M.
In my path of progression down the web development self-taught road I am finding myself using flash less and less, and heading toward the css and xhtml more and more. I used to build entire sites in flash, but now the majority of sites I build don't contain any flash.
Besides all of the great arguments against flash that are already posted, there is something about working in flash that makes me not want to use it!
I do. I like nice looking sites. I was bored with the black text white backround in about 3 minutes. There are millions of pages on the net. If I can get the same information from a black/white site or a nice looking html/flash/css/xml/xhtml/cgi/php/orwhatever site. Of course I want the pretty site. Its human nature, wanting to look at something that is pleasing to the eye. I use css on my site to get some eye candy. Flash too. html too. Extensive use of php on the backend. Some perl. A few shell scripts here and there. Its all part of the whole.
One more thing for the group
I am really suprised at the anger coming out here. You guys need to get a grip on reality for a minute. Its just flash. A simple browser plugin. Some have it, some dont. Some use it, some dont. Its not like we are discussing child abuse here. I dont mind a lively discussion but if you get this upset over a browser plugin I dont want to be around when you spot some child being shot up in a war or something. Please dont beat up on me because I like it. compuwhiz7 uses XML, I have not learned that yet, and dont use it. I dont put him down because I dont like xml. I would appreciate it if you wouldnt put me down (or anyone else) because you dont like flash.
I just wanted to quote this for emphasis. Some people in this thread need to behave more maturely. Act you age. (If you actually are 13, don't)
Mattias Johansson
Short, Swedish, Web Developer
Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
FatStatement.com
My $0.02. I like Flash. It's cool. But the best Flash site on the web (Macromedia.com IMHO), I hate. I was trying to get a Dreamweaver extension the other day and tried right clicking to open it in a new window.
Opps - it won't work. That's right, I forgot. It's a Flash site. And one that's paid a lot of attention to usability and accessibility.
Outside certain very narrow markets, doing entire sites in Flash is mostly bad.
Hmmm... in regard to some of the heated comments in this threa, the use of Macromedia Flash always has been a rather personal thing. It's kinda like the Apple Mac versus Microsoft Windows discussions... I (and many others) call them "religious debates" 'cause no one really listens... they just holler their opinions.
Off Topic:
What if you're a really mature 13-year-old, Mattias? I'm not 13, but I just thought I'd add that little hypothetical tidbit.
All of the above are true. Keeping that in mindI just wanted to quote this for emphasis. Some people in this thread need to behave more maturely. Act you age. (If you actually are 13, don't)
Creativity is a good thing. I sometimes think that the ability to be creative within a framework is an ability far too often overlooked. There's alot to be said for overcoming a limitation of a specific framework without breaking out of the framework itself. A good example is SitePoint itself. I saw it for the first time yesterday without it's stylesheets.
edit because I stepped away before posting this:
hillsy: You are right about Macromedia, they are the best flash site. But it's thier product. I guess they have to choose between promoting thier product and usability. Kind of a tough choice and not one I envy
Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.
-----------------------------------------------------
tinyplanet.org <--a nifty spot.
I would strongly disagree with your first statement. Under no circumstances should flash EVER be used as a replacement for html. It's not even designed to do so. If you CAN do it in html, you should. If flash provides functionality that can't be done without it (or can't be done as well) then you should use flash for that small portion, assuming it benefits the audience. And since you alluded to my web development skills, I have been a professional web developer since 1996. That means I am paid by a company (MCI) for web programming and development full time.
Here is your original post...
This sounds to me like you are saying you want to replace html with flash because it's easier on you, the coder. This is absolutely backwards logic. As firegryphon pointed out (nicely put, btw), it's not about you. It's about your users and their experience. As a serious web developer, you should go out of your way to provide the best experience possible, at any cost. Even if that means learning a new language for the task. That should never mean taking the easiest way out possible. At least to me, if you want to be taken seriously, you have to have this attitude.I was trying to design a site with dreamweaver3 and was just about going nuts trying to get my tables to show up in the browser the way they do in dreamweaver. (WYSIWYG my ***!) Well, I gave up and have decided to go ahead with my own solution: I simply sit a Flash movie in the middle of the html doc, and can freely position text and images/animations exactly where I want them with all the flexibility that flash offers. Because this is such an easy/intuitive technique, I'm surprised that I don't see it being done very often. Does anyone else do this?
While I agree html was never designed a great layout tool, other things have been tailored to that purpose (CSS w/ xHTML, for example).
It's not fuss about getting a plug-in. It's fuss about people using the wrong technology for the job simply because they are too lazy to do it right, at the cost of the users' experience. It cheapens the Web as a whole to fill it with garbage. Web developers who cheat their way through the process is far more narrow-minded, in my opinion.
--Viral
A computer without Windows is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
HTML has it's own purpose and so is Flash! Flash is cool but you're cooler if you're good at both HTML and Flash!
It's true that Flash pluggin is starting to become a standard in all browsers but sometimes you just got to know HTML too.
Gotta get rid of them goddam cheapo flasher wanna-be scum. They shouldn't even be allowed to touch a computer..uurghh!!
yeah, whatever Viral.
Last edited by Blunderboy; Jul 30, 2003 at 12:27.
Okaydoki.. Since people don't get the hint:
This is the first and last warning. Be nice to eachother, or I'll start deleting posts, closing threads and kicking butts with the banhammer.
Off Topic:
That's why I said:What if you're a really mature 13-year-old, Mattias? I'm not 13, but I just thought I'd add that little hypothetical tidbit.
Act you age. (If you actually are 13, don't)
I.e. don't act like you're 13, even though you are.
Mattias Johansson
Short, Swedish, Web Developer
Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
FatStatement.com
Lighten up, html gods and devils (and advisors)...anyone remember what a sense of humour is?
BlunderBoy, we do know what a sense of humor is... but we also feel there's such a thing as going too far. I side with Mattias.
Off Topic:
I don't act like I'm 13, Mattias! The fact that I'm not 13 is irrelevant. [img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]
Last edited by cfm; Jul 30, 2003 at 14:10.
I'm right behind you there. And the view back here isn't that bad either. jk about the view.
Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.
-----------------------------------------------------
tinyplanet.org <--a nifty spot.
Off Topic:
Aha! Someone agrees with me.
Off Topic:
then again I could be sucking up to mattias to get my hands on his uber cool microwave
Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.
-----------------------------------------------------
tinyplanet.org <--a nifty spot.
That's true...
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks