Forum Moderators: open
Only a tiny fraction of them realize they aren't getting any traffic and have turned to SEO companies for help. This means building separate web sites that redirect "targeted" and "relevant" traffic to the dealers web sites. Or, doorway style pages that have to be clicked through. The auto dealer gets to keep his choice of web sites and gets "targeted" and "relevant" traffic.
EVERYONE WINS including Google!
Without the help of SEO NO ONE WOULD WIN, including Google. So doesn't it make sense for "spam" to be about the relevance of the search to the information delivered rather than the method of delivery?
It would seem to me that SEO and Google should actually be on the sames team rather than opponents.
Just some random thoughts...
-s-
Flash maybe not sutible for every site but some sites need to use it.
I am not saying spam is acceptable, but to have some other means for those site to get indexed and the user can find them should be acceptable by google.
I agree that if there is a reliable way to index a flash site that the site that the search engines should do it. When someone figures it out, let me know :-).
Good point. Assuming someone were spamming with Flash, how could the end users detect and report it to Google? Unless with Flash it becomes as easy for all to find such trickery as doing a "View source", Google should NOT index text in Flash sites.
The remedy of this problem should be approached by both flash developers and the search engines.
There is a lack of good technology, and i think link text is the only feasible way RIGHT NOW that is available for attaining good serps with flash. OCR sounds like a possible idea, but I think it is more likely that macromedia (or other .swf proprietors) find a way to incorporate indexable html or other format into flash files.
Bottom line of this thread however.....
SPAM is never okay, and there is no justification for it, unless you are a corporate tycoon trying to get over on people to make a quick buck.
Google is the king of redirects yet it is completely against their rules. Hmmmmmmmm
Alta Vista took an automated approach to "spam" as did Inktomi and look where they are now.
Maybe Google should consider having registeres SEO'ers that use certain methods but are known not to spam but rather deliver "great search results" Well, that does sound a little too big brotherish doesn't it.
-s-
EVERY webmaster thinks it's self-evident that their site should rank in the top ten. Google has it's own ideas about this, and so far people have overwhelmingly voted with their feet to use Google's results -- whereas web surfers aren't exactly beating a path to FAST's door to use their Flash search capability.
Makes good sense to me. Spam in Google I find to be a problem. I actually consider Flash sites ranking low to be a *good* thing. :) As jomaxx wrote, are people beating down the doors at Alltheweb because they index Flash? Doesn't look like Joe Surfer cares the Google doesn't index Flash.
I understand there is no means of indexing flash, what i am saying is a doorway page should not be considerd spam if it is right on target with the product or service that the flash page/site is offering. :-)
I understand that.. the problem is that verifying this type of setup would take human eyes. Do you think that if an employee of Google were to come across a flash site that had this type of setup, they would consider it spam?
That said, I think that redirecting users or doing doorway pages is bad for a user experience, and they make scoring the content that a user really wants much harder or impossible. That's why we ask that people avoid those.
GoogleGuy, I have a flash site which utilizes a 'swf detection' page at the front - My first instinct was to make that page say :"detecting flash.. please be patient" or something along those lines, but when I noticed that that also had become the site's description in Google, I decided to change that to something along the lines of "this company specializes in bla, bla, bla.. the site is loading, please wait."
I don't see how that is a problem, although I can see how that could be considered a 'doorway' page. (or am i misunderstanding the concept of a doorway page?)
Forget doorway pages if you insist on using sucky Flash sitesrfgdxm, do you have a problem or something? .. I don't think any webmaster likes their sites to be called 'sucky' just because they are using one technology or another - if they are a good webmaster then they will create a good flash site .. give us a break.
Google indexes Flash links, so technically you can get by with a Flash intro on the front page and no static links. But most search engines won't go through the "flash barrier." I know FAST has said they use the Macromedia toolkit (we use our own), but other search engines besides Google and FAST typically don't parse Flash.
A better approach is to provide at least some static link to augment the Flash page, or better yet a static site map that exists outside of any Flash links.
Finally, I should mention that many users I've talked to seem to hate Flash; they seem to feel that it's an indicator of "brochureware." That's not my personal opinion--I've seen many cool sites done with Flash--but it's a perception that webmasters may want to consider. A couple savvy surfers have suggested that Google should look for "Skip Intro" links and treat them like redirects, thus skipping the Flash pages entirely. ;)
So: Google will follow Flash links, if you want to use them. The philosophy of providing static text links to help older/text browsers and improve accessibility is a handy one though.
Just my $0.02. Hope this helps,
GoogleGuy
Flash by itself is terrible for developing awareness, and interest which is primarily what you get from a search engine.
Flash is a very powerful tool for motivating, demonstrating and educating someone but without that initial "awareness & interest" you indeed have a difficult time generating web site activity without cross channel or integrated marketing.
In retrospect - building a web sites navigation and usability features within Flash is not good optimal design in practice.
Your sites link hierarchy should be outside of the applet - there is no benefit what-so-ever to having your link structure in Flash - it adds nothing to the visitors experience (e.g. clicking on a button/link (flash or not) to turn a page is not: awe inspiring, thought provoking, there's no added value, no educational awareness - it's really not a "big event" where many designers pretend it is.
Case-in-point -- turn a page in a book from page 1 to page 2 & page 2 to page 3 -- "was it mind-boggling"?
Using flash to demonstrate "mundane tasks" serves no purpose.
Using flash to demonstrate product/service value, product/service features, informative or educational value or research understanding makes your site successful, in more ways than one.
While I won't say that every possible usage of flash on the Intenet is sucky, any site that uses it extensively IMO ain't good. At least, I've never seen a "flash site" that loaded in a reasonable amount of time on dial up. And, when it did was worth it. Now, if the site has is fully usable with an "Ignore Flash garbage", or perhaps more euphemistically "Skip intro", such that the surfer can be mercifully spared having to endure Flash, that is of course ideal. All users can have what they want.
Main problems:
1. Time. Lack of a major shift to broadband, and i am not talking of the members here that sit on a multitude of connections, i'm talking of joe surfer. Patience is a resource.
2. Compatibility. As others have mentioned, browser compatibility with flash. I would'nt hang around to load in a flash module, just like loading in a browser upgrade < no chance.
3. Parsing. As G-Man put it, its a nightmare for SE's to read, and probably very server intensive, so why do it. I do appreciate GG's comments, about the alternate internal non-flash linking strategy.
In relation to Stcrim's, original comment, there are a lot of companies, in many industry's that believe that a flash site, which looks great on the board of director's computers, is what having a website is all about. No. This is where the lovely member's here, with the right intuition and forward thinking can pick up customers, there are thousands, if not millions of companies, that have reasonable resources, for a good ROI from web venture's, but just don't realise, how powerful a medium the web is for their companies to make more MONEY! Flash, isn't the only culprit, but one of many, it does seem to get pick on.
I think Flash is annoying.
That's the key.
1. making someone watch "cool" when they don't want "cool" isn't cool.
2. Cool animations and cool movies sell to people who make cool animations and cool movies but these people rarely buy - they design their own.
3. "Skip intro" is not a marketing upsell no matter how much you want to believe it is. If you placed a counter on the skip button - you will find 90+% visitors click this - doesn't that tell you somthing?
4. Anyone that places a big negative sign on the front page of their web site isn't considering their audience, and doesn't know much about marketing. Marketing is about "upselling" not skipping. You never market your own negative points.
4. Placing a marketing pitch in advance of knowing the visitors "needs" is simply bad marketing.
5. Making applets for web sites, not selling applets... is missing opportunties to sell. Making applets that allow visitors to "guage" the product/service features/benefits sells more.
6. Understanding technology and knowing how to use... isn't the same as marketing, promotions, and sales.
Designing is not marketing... and here lies the problem. Flash & Shockwave are exceptional motivational tools but they simply can't replace nor will they work without traditional marketing values.
One opinion only ;)
>>Placing a marketing pitch in advance of knowing the visitors "needs" is simply bad marketing.<<
Absoultely true. I remember the best flash application I saw. It was a demo for how "Human Click" worked, (now called "Live Helper" I think).
Point was they got my interest up first with lots of other text copy first. They told me it was a flash demo, and ASKED whether i wanted to view it. It was a highly useful demo, and they sold me. But i could tell you right now, that if the flash started loading without me having the choice i would have clicked away straight away, not on principal, but becuase I didnt know what was coming and whether it was worth the wait. To me that is just rudeness.
Principle: Im very happy viewing a flash, and even waiting on dial up, if i know before hand that it will be worth the wait and have some info on its relevance.
Fathoms post has beautifully summed up that the problem is not flash iteself, but the way it is used. Any technology can only be useful once it is harnessed in context
At the moment Flash is struggling in a purgatory between experimentation and true utility.
Once people stop ah-ing and oh-ing over how "cool" it is, only then we will know it has moved as a technique from adolesence to maturity.
This is like Fathoms post, only one opinion, but it seems to me that Flash's proponents are, to use marketing terminology, still more "product-driven", than "market-driven".
And getting back to the thread topic yet again, you can tell when flash has really matured only when it is no longer necessary to cloak it.
I think I'm with most of you on this : Flash (like evry other web-tech) is great if used appropriately and an annoyance when it's not.
Flash does have some potential advantages - updatability, size (if used correctly), browser-penetration&cross-platform compatibilty and design freedom.
I guess the last one (and the one the people who use/sell it like) is the one that gets it in so much trouble?
As far as SEO goes, if your going to make a 'Flash' site for someone.. Well, often the client will be happy to forego the potential search engine position gained by having an HTML site because they believe that the Flash site markets their product better.. (And in the case of some of the big companies their front page is getting enough incomming PR, why not let it accumulate on the front page anyway?)
I'm sure I'm not the only developer reading this thread who's been forced by a client to satisfy their marketing whim?
As it happens I made a mammoth Flash site a couple of years ago which exists on one html page and still does smashingly in Google (wasn't my idea before anyone asks!)
Thing is, if your making a decent sized Flash site the chances are the client is going to want to update it, so you'll probably keep the text content separate from your .swf's and if you do so - how much extra work is it to build an HTML equivalent - let Google index that, and visitors will then get the chance of visiting your fancy flash site if they want (and if they're in an office with good bandwidth)
Anyhoo.. getting off track here! ... My point was going to be that you can do stuff in Flash you wouldn't want to attempt in HTML/JavaScript (in the case of code intensive feature stuff) or as .gifs (in the case of marketing/advertising stuff).. But I think you would be hard pushed to justify building a decent sized Flash site for a commercial client these days.. (unless there was an html site to back it up)..
IMHO: in it's place (image viewers, marketing banners, product displays, widgets etc..) flash is fantastic... and Google shouldn't really have to worry about it.
Google's not the only reason to build SEO freindly sites..
.... IMVHO if your site is properly SEO'd (or GO'd) you should find that it is also quick and simple to use, easy to navigate, fast to download and render, easy for people who are hard of sight to use etc.. and all round better sites anyway...?
ok.. rant over.. must get back to work! :)
In my opinion there is nothing wrong with doorway pages, if they are related to what the site is really about. Also I can't imagine why people should forward user who have searched a complete different thing as what the doorway-pages owner is about. The user will see that it is not what he has searched for and return to the SERP.
In my opinion there is no difference between a sitemap and some doorway pages.
In the truest sense a site map is assessible from inside the web site and normally from every (site size dependent)
A doorway page is not.
