Do Most UK Browsers Now Have Flash Enabled?

Flash or mpeg?

[kiwibrit]

I have steered away so far from animation on our company website. Not keen on offering mpeg links which depend upon a media player. Animated gifs can take a while to load. But we have a product that screams out for a small animation. Flash could be the answer.

But the question is, do most British internet users have Fash enabled, these days? Our site is aimed at fairly conservative trade customers. I don't want to confront them with having to download Flash player, if a significant percentage of them are unlikely to have it. In that case, I'd rather use an mpeg link.

[smokeyb]

I suppose it has nothing to do with where you are or what browser you use, but rather personal preference. I have never personally met someone who didn't have the flash plugin, but I have read many member's posts here in WebmasterWorld that say they don't install it intentionally. I would think that any of your potential customers that are interested in animation, should have it by a matter of course so it could be a good method for your type of business, and you could always have both options.
Smokey

ADDED: Scrap that, I thought you'd said your business was animation... my bad.

[whoisgregg]

Alternate content is the way to go with flash content on a non-flash site, both to satisfy users who don't want it installed and users who cannot use Flash because of accessibility issues. As long as you serve a flash and a non-flash version, your user base should be happy. :)

[Adam_T]

This is exactly the problem i am facing at the moment - I have always designed sites without any flash content, as they have mostly been aimed at the low-end user, but now I have a site that has some exceptional oppurtunities for the use of flash (maps, particularly). The entire site is nice though, and doesn't use any flash at present, and I am unsure whether to include it for a few elements, at the risk of losing some traffic from people who do not have/cannot be bothered to install the player.

I don't suppose anyone has any statistics/information regarding this?

Thanks,

[smokeyb]

As whoisgregg said, add the elements to a copy of your site and give people the choice of either. I agree that there are some things Flash does better than any other method.

[kiwibrit]

I take it what is being suggested is a totally distinct page which comes up if the viewing browser does not support Flash? Can someone give me a steer on coding that?

[whoisgregg]

Just look at the code provided by Flash in the "Publish settings..." dialog box. You can have it produce flash checking pages then modify the output to suit your needs.

[kiwibrit]

whoisgregg, bear with me on this. I have Flash as part of the Macromedia suite, but have never really got into it. Good time to start. I cannot find anything in the "Publish Settings" dialogue that will let me do that - can you be a little more explicit - ie: which tab and which check bx? I am using Flash MX 2004.

[whoisgregg]

Sorry for being short, here's better info:

File menu > Publish Settings... > Check "Flash (.swf)" and Check "HTML (.html)"

HTML Tab > Below the "Template:" menu, Check "Detect Flash Version"

Click the "Settings..." button which just became available. Give the three file names better names, I like to use (in order) "index.html" "flash.html" "noflash.html"

Click "OK", Click "Publish", Click "OK"

Now, you should have three HTML files to work with in the directory of your FLA file and two SWF files. If you open the "index.html" file you'll notice it's using a Flash movie to send the user to the real page "flash.html" if they meet the requirements and a META redirect in the HEAD to send the user to the "noflash.html" page after 2 seconds.

Modify the "index.html", "flash.html", and "noflash.html" page to your aesthetic delight, then (this is important) go back into "Publish Settings..." and UNCHECK BOTH the HTML box in the Format tab and the "Detect Flash Version" in the HTML Tab. If you don't do this Flash will overwrite your aesthetic improvements every time.

<edited>minor change</edit>

[whoisgregg]

More info, worth being separated:

If the user gets a link directly to either the "flash.html" or "noflash.html" page then they won't go through the "index.html" check. Each of those pages should have a conspicuous link to the alternate page, respectively:

<a href="noflash.html">Non-flash version</a> 
<a href="flash.html">Flash version</a>

[kiwibrit]

Aha. I had a 2-day course to kick me off with Dreamweaver - and am glad that I did. I can see there is a lot to learn about Flash as well. Many thanks for your help, it really is much appreciated.

[whoisgregg]

Happy to provide any assistance. Considering how useful WebmasterWorld has been to me over the last year, it's the least I can do. :)