Forum Moderators: open
I'm going to write about why 'all flash' sites are so useless as business websites and hoped I might pick your brains for some ideas....
Okay, the main issues are:
Anyone care to expand on that?
Cheers
Nick
AND don't use it if an animated GIF would also do the job with a minimal difference in file size.
Any animation you can do in a .gif can be done in flash as a smaller file! And will aways look better.
Given a choice between a plain-looking site and a Flash site, most novices will look at a Flash site and think, "Oh, that looks cool". Then they try to use it, and usually change their minds pretty quickly. Flash sites that actually work without confusing or annoying visitors could be implemented just as easily in HTML.
No, it is not the user who is creating the demand for Flash; it is the developer, period. Mr and Ms Average-Surfer can't tell the difference. All they know is that some sites make them wait for five minutes before they can do anything (so they bail because they are paying by the second for internet access); and one or two tell them they have to update something called a Macromedia Flash Plugin, which they don't understand (so they bail because they think they're about to get a virus).
The most-visited website in Britain is [bbc.co.uk ]. Flash and animation generally is to be found only on certain pages, such as the CBeebies section, which is for small children. Even there, it is possible to navigate the site without the Flash plugin. Why Flash at all? So that you can have a voice reading out the buttons as you mouse over them. Why would you want that? To help very young children navigate. This is an appropriate (but, for the parents, highly annoying) use of Flash. Note also how animation is kept to an absolute minimum.
I could'nt disagree more.
I did a Flash animation for a spinning globe it was 12k and looked MUCH better then the GIF version which was 80k
>>Flash sites that actually work without confusing or annoying visitors could be implemented just as easily in HTML.
Erm, no they could'nt. Flash should be used to do the things HTML can't.
>>No, it is not the user who is creating the demand for Flash; it is the developer
NO! its both plus the client..often the user becaomes the client wanting thier site to be like a flash site they used before.
I have talked clients into using Flash AND talked clients out of using Flash.
Did you take away the colours/frames that were not needed? It can make a hell of a difference.
>Flash should be used to do the things HTML can't.
Such as?
I have mostly seen clients wanting flash, but normally when you explain them what it means, they back away.
First and foremost, just have your page do a check on the plugins the user has installed. Then you can serve him either the non-flash version or the flash version.Oh, oh, oh. Don't get me started on that. ;) I do have flash installed but the flash detection scripts some are using don't work correctly. Some pages tell me that I don't have flash installed and display nothing. Others at least offer me a "if you are sure you have the Flash plugin installed continue here". Again, others offer a choice between a Flash and Non-Flash version.
what??? of course I did...using Flash was the last thing I wanted to do! (even though most browsers have Flash 4 pre-installed i wanted to avoid any "i dont have the plugin scenario")
>>Such as?
I refuse to beleive that you are that ignorant about Flash
I'm not totally ignorant about flash, I just think that there is not much it can do that you cannot do another way. Not just with plain HTML of course, but add Javascript, Java, DHTML,... and you can do pretty much.
Okay, if you're going to put a spinning globe animation on your site, you might as well go ahead and use scrolling marquees, too.
The first people ever to use a spinning globe were the BBC when they first launched their domestic TV service (the BBC's motto: "Nation shall speak peace unto nation"). Even they have now ditched that idea for good, and as far as I know they never put it on their website.
Spinning globes are horribly clichéd, and any web designer who thinks they look cool should hang his or her head in shame. They are as tacky as animated flags, animated letters posting themselves, animated horizontal rules...
Why would you want to put a spinning globe on your website? Why do you want any form of animation at all?
I agree that Flash would do that particular job much better than GIF, but it has to be one of the daftest things to want to put on a web page. If it's supposed to represent the global nature of the WWW... come on, people, we know the WWW is globally accessible, that's what the first two W's stand for, and we've had ten years to get used to the idea. Get rid of all your clichés and use something imaginative and creative for a change.
Sheesh.
</rant>
Get rid of all your clichés and use something imaginative and creative for a change.
Yeah, and in the meantime, put an animated 'under construction' sign on your site. Flash, of course.
</rant>
Sorry, couldn't resist :)
1) Its not MY site
2) I didnt design the site
3) It wasnt my idea
4) Flash was the best way to do it
5) The spinning globe is a location finder, it simply spins to a country where it is then highlighted by a dot, press next and the globe spins to the next country.
6) I dont think this board is a good place to level your distaste for something I have done which you know nothing about!
Spinning globes are horribly clichéd, and any web designer who thinks they look cool should hang his or her head in shame.
I think you made a typo rewboss: Shouldn't it read:
Spinning globes are horribly clichéd, and any web designer who thinks they look cool should hang his or her self.?
Knighty: No reference to your situation, just thought it was a funny thing out of context ;)
Nick
In a sense, though, although it probably isn't appropriate to use these forums as a platform for ranting about ugly stuff, "Page Design" does occur in the title of this particular forum. Advocates of Flash maintain that you can use it to do really cool stuff you can't do with HTML, so when they start insisting on using it to replace stuff like animated GIFs when the best idea is really to dump the animations completely it gets kind of... frustrating.
I personaly love flashed sites that are done correctly, and hate the ones that aren't.
I boils down to this..... "Every web design tool has its place!"
Besides, it is also up to our clients, if they want flash give it to them. After all they are the ones signing the checks to us!
I once made the mistake of trying to talk a client into flash, they did not want it, the next thing I know im getting an e-mail saying they decided to use another designer. (ouch) Anyway, give 'em what they want!
Flash is a tool. It shouldn't be condemned because people can't use it properly. I think we can all say we don't like badly designed sites, Flash or not.
Google tells me that my browser doesn't support PDF files. That's a blatant lie since I have the Acrobat Reader plug-in installed and working.
I really hate it when web sites tell me what I have and have not, can and can not, must and must not do.
Well, according to the latest Nielsen Alterbox email announcement, will the testing of Flash in the U.S. be completed shortly (they are now looking for GERMAN Examples of Flash Applications). So maybe he will enlighten us all on some good Flash examples.
Maybe HTML is like a newspaper and Flash is like TV. Both have their right to exist, but we don't expect our newspaper to behave like TV. :)
As far as waiting for everything to load, isn't that the way it is with the entire web? If I want to view a jpg graphic, I have to wait for it to load. Same goes with Flash. The problem is, that many designers have the entire movie pre-load before the first frame of the "movie" plays. This can be easily overcome by staggering your loading.
Neilson to enlighten us on good use of Flash? I won't hold my breathe :)
Check this site out, [soh.nsw.gov.au...]
Most Flash sites tend to leave you looking at a "Loading..." animation. The question is, though: is it better to have one very long wait while an entire site downloads, or lots of shorter waits every time you click on a button?
Design an HTML page properly, and you can start reading it before it has finished downloading. It may take just as long to download as a well-designed Flash page, but subjectively it feels quicker. You get the same effect when you use interlaced GIFs and progressive JPEGs: they might be slightly heavier than their non-interlaced, non-progressive equivalents, but they appear to download faster.
Can we dispel the myth that anyone here is totally against Flash? The original question is why all-Flash sites are a bad idea, not why Flash sucks. There are many reasons why an all-Flash site is bad, but that doesn't mean that anyone here is against the appropriate use of Flash.
Nick
I wouldn't use z-index, I'd go like this:
div#bodytext {
display: none;
}
The problem with that though is that you run the risk of being reported by a competitor...
Nick
