Forum Moderators: open
Although he is a gifted artist, he has recently applied his skills to internet graphics and Flash. When I approached him with this idea of partnering, my assumption was that we would embed Flash into HTML only when appropriate using mostly DHTML, JavaScript, and animated gifs for the dynamics. I figured that most of the work required by him would be custom graphic work, which is a big job in itself. He is furiously trying to sell me the idea that Flash is the wave of the future and that we should be developing 100% Flash sites, and calling HTML and Forms only when needed. I am extremely leary of this approach, due to the search engine difficulties, printing problems etc. that I have heard... I don't have the arguments or knowledge in graphics/Flash to convince him otherwise. He is even supporting the idea that we should develop a Flash site for those who are capable and an HTML site for those who are not. I feel strongly that clients will not want to pay for both and that we should go for the integrated approach only when the content dictates that it is neccessary to use Flash.
What do you all think?... and can you give me some ammunition to use,.. or even tell me that he is right. I need some other guidance to help me in this matter.
(This might take a while...)
[edited by: martinibuster at 6:10 am (utc) on Oct. 4, 2002]
> I feel strongly that clients will not want to pay for both and that we should go for the integrated approach only when the content dictates that it is neccessary to use Flash.
I think you pretty much summed up what most around here will tell you. I see Flash as a design element. If the audience you are targeting is looking for the Flashy type site, then you must build to suit the audience.
Embedding small Flash elements here and there can be an added plus to an otherwise dull surfing experience, again, it depends on the audience.
If you do build 100% Flash sites, there must be an html alternative. My opinion is that you need to cater to the percentage that maybe does not have the Flash plugin, or the latest version, or they just don't like all the movement while they are looking for what they came for.
Now come the search engines. 100% Flash does not work. Oh, it may for a couple right now, but expect to wait a while longer before the rest catch up. Even then, there are other issues to contend with. If a client can afford 100% Flash, then they can afford a PPC/CPC campaign along with trusted feed programs. That's pretty much the industry trend anyway, Flash will force you down that path.
I've come across some very nice sites lately that are using a combination of Flash, html/xml along with css and I'm impressed. I ran a few through the Spider Simulator and they passed with flying colors. I may head down that path with you sometime soon but I'm an html purist at heart! ;)
Here are some earlier threads on Flash that may give you some insight to your problem.
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
I am a heavy Flash user. I have been developing Flash work since it came out.
Flash is the wave of the future and that we should be developing 100% Flash sites
From most hardcore Flash developers you will get the same answer to this statement; nonsense. Flash is a tool like video, xslt, vr, and whatever. You don't build a house with a screwdriver and some screws. You need all kinds of tools like saws and hammers and levels. I am a big promoter of Flash. I think it is wonderful technology when used properly. I would think someone stating it was the wave of the future and all sites need to be all flash are trying to learn it.
He is even supporting the idea that we should develop a Flash site for those who are capable and an HTML site for those who are not
<sarcasm>Let's just go back to using punch cards</sarcasm>
A site should dynamically serve up what a browser can handle within reason. I embed Flash navigations or multimedia, but if a browser can't handle it I use asp to earmark that fact and deliver more compatible content. Why have 2 sites so a designer can really overwork the content person because they want to show off their "psychodelic nonsense".
<added>Crikey! Would that be our very own Nick_W? If so disregard the link immediately!;)</added>
[edited by: joshie76 at 1:53 pm (utc) on Oct. 4, 2002]
Although I must admit, I do have all the content in HTML format as well.
The way I made this easy was to create content pages that are dynamicaly loaded into both flash and my .php pages. This way I only update the content once.
My final statment: I don't normaly recommend 100% flash to my clients but if that is what they want, that is what they get. IMHO Flash is a wonderful tool when used correcly. I even use it to create 90% of my graphics(static or animated). Most important, use it in moderation, music & things flying across the screen may look cool to some but NOT all!
Another bit of advice: If you feel you need to go 100% flash, break it up into many small files, this avoids the waiting for modem users!
dhdweb
You should 'NOT' put the link to html versions of the site into the Flash presentation (I promise you, I've seen that so often. LOL)
I wouldn't recommend link bars exclusively in Flash. I usually refuse to download and end up rudderless!
None of my sites belong in 'Art galleries' nor 'Tech exhibitions', but they work well as business tools and information sources. That's what interests my clients!
I played with Flash a little and think it's great fun, but sadly I don't have time to learn more about it now. I know little about programming in general (but I can play a guitar that'll knock you sideways :) ) so I'd recommend looking into the solutions of Pageoneresults, Korkus2000, dhdweb and others here, who do know!
This place rocks!
