is anyone good with Flash ?
Discussion
Nonsense. Why do you comment on threads like this? Do you really think the poster is interested in being told what he is doing is, in your opinion, wrong? Do you wander around forums responding to other questions where you disagree with the approach the poster has taken?
Q: What lens should I get for my Canon 40D?
Pigeon: Chuck it away and buy a Nikon.
Q: Can anyone recommend a good place to buy curtains?
Pigeon: They are inefficient at blocking light, buy some roller blinds instead.
Q: How do I cook a really good steak?
Pigeon: Fish is better for you, get some tuna.
Seriously, what is wrong with Flash?
Q: What lens should I get for my Canon 40D?
Pigeon: Chuck it away and buy a Nikon.
Q: Can anyone recommend a good place to buy curtains?
Pigeon: They are inefficient at blocking light, buy some roller blinds instead.
Q: How do I cook a really good steak?
Pigeon: Fish is better for you, get some tuna.
Seriously, what is wrong with Flash?
miniman said:
Seriously, what is wrong with Flash?
To be fair, quite a lot. Here's just one webpage on it:http://www.granneman.com/webdev/graphicsmultimedia...
cs02rm0 said:
miniman said:
Seriously, what is wrong with Flash?
To be fair, quite a lot. Here's just one webpage on it:http://www.granneman.com/webdev/graphicsmultimedia...
flash hater said:
Viewable only if you have the Flash plugin installed, and only then on your Web browser, not your cell phone or Palm.
Poorly built Flash maybe, but as for any multimedia (down to and including images) there should be a graceful degradation path. flash hater said:
Difficult for people with disabilities to work with.
Not anymore if it is done properly. Certainly no worse than a poorly written table-based layout.I could go on. It has its place. Not for general websites, it is completely unnecessary, however the OP has not even told us what he is doing with it and still it gets pilloried left, right and centre.
miniman said:
Sorry but either that is massively out of date or the author either doesn't know what he is talking about or has an axe to grind.
Didn't seem that unreasonable to me though, there were a lot of salient points.miniman said:
Poorly built Flash maybe, but as for any multimedia (down to and including images) there should be a graceful degradation path.
Flash sites rarely degrade as well as images.miniman said:
Not anymore if it is done properly. Certainly no worse than a poorly written table-based layout.
It's far easier to write software to parse table layouts than Flash?miniman said:
I could go on. It has its place. Not for general websites, it is completely unnecessary
Agreed. 
miniman said:
Why do you comment on threads like this?
Because if someone has a bad idea then it is better that they learn that point as soon as possible before they make too much of an investment in the bad idea.miniman said:
Do you really think the poster is interested in being told what he is doing is, in your opinion, wrong?
Evidence of this forum suggests that the answer is yes. There are numerous threads in here where someone has suggested using flash and has been advised not to by many posters. Most of the time I am not among them. Often the advice is accepted.miniman said:
Q: What lens should I get for my Canon 40D?
Pigeon: Chuck it away and buy a Nikon.
Wrong analogy. It's more like, don't spend money on a fancy aluminium pole to hold the middle of the washing line off the ground when you can do the job better for nothing with that old stick over there.Pigeon: Chuck it away and buy a Nikon.
miniman said:
Seriously, what is wrong with Flash?
Wrong question. What is right with it? The ONLY actual useful thing about it is that it has the highest cross-platform availability for playing videos. The rest of the time if it's worth doing it at all it's possible to do it in straight HTML/CSS. Perhaps a bit of javascript in extreme cases although even that is rarely the best solution. So apart from playing videos there is simply no point to its existence.miniman said:
Sorry but either that is massively out of date or the author either doesn't know what he is talking about or has an axe to grind.
Not in the least, there are one or two dubious points on it but for the most part it is entirely valid and a neat summary of lots of good reasons not to use flash.miniman said:
For example:
Which basically equates to: do it in HTML/CSS as well so it still works if you don't have flash. And that equates to: don't bother with the flash in the first place. Or else use it only for stuff that doesn't matter if it doesn't work - which again means there's no point having it in the first place.flash hater said:
Viewable only if you have the Flash plugin installed, and only then on your Web browser, not your cell phone or Palm.
Poorly built Flash maybe, but as for any multimedia (down to and including images) there should be a graceful degradation path. Go to a flash website without the flash plugin installed and what you see is a blank screen, it's useless. I have only ever found one website that actually offered an HTML alternative. One. All you get by way of "graceful degradation path" is when there's a message that tells you to install flash to see the content. Nobody duplicates the content in HTML/CSS.
To make it "degrade gracefully" requires that the content be duplicated in HTML/CSS, and therefore my initial advice to use HTML/CSS is applicable.
So, in this case, the OP has clearly already built most of the site in Flash so there is little point telling him not to build it in Flash as he already has. He's looking for some help finishing it off.
Typically the appropriate use for Flash is to enhance something that is already there. Like an image gallery or, as you say, videos. I don't think anyone would disagree that building entire sites in Flash is both pointless and annoying, but you are rubbishing it in all circumstances.
Pigeon said:
Go to a flash website without the flash plugin installed and what you see is a blank screen, it's useless.
Why would you not have the Flash plugin installed? With any modern browser (which if you actually know anything about XHTML + CSS you will have as they are more likely to be standards compliant) you would actually have to **uninstall** Flash in order to not have it. Typically the appropriate use for Flash is to enhance something that is already there. Like an image gallery or, as you say, videos. I don't think anyone would disagree that building entire sites in Flash is both pointless and annoying, but you are rubbishing it in all circumstances.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff