Any good reason not to use Flash?

B

Bald Purp

I never bothered to install any Flash plugin, hoping year after year
that it would eventually just go away.

Are there any cogent arguments against the use of Flash?
 
S

Spartanicus

Bald Purp said:
I never bothered to install any Flash plugin, hoping year after year
that it would eventually just go away.

Are there any cogent arguments against the use of Flash?

As with any other optional technology like Javascript or CSS, Flash is
ok when used appropriately. That normally means don't use it for
anything essential, although occasionally Flash is the best choice to
create essential content (quite rare though).
 
M

Marian Heddesheimer

I never bothered to install any Flash plugin, hoping year after year
that it would eventually just go away.

Are there any cogent arguments against the use of Flash?

You mean for you as a User? Not that I know. As far as I remember,
there are no serious security issues using the flash plugin (so it's
much better than having active-X, Java or JavaScript enabled).

There are some websites that don't work without flash, but I think
they are not worth installing the plugin ;-)

On the other hand, you will find a lot of nice online games or
interactive thingies that are done in flash, so I believe it's worth
installing the plugin if you are not a purely text-based user.

Marian
 
C

Chaddy2222

Bald said:
I never bothered to install any Flash plugin, hoping year after year
that it would eventually just go away.

Are there any cogent arguments against the use of Flash?
Well. It's not very good for issues concerning accessibility.
There are a lot of other reasons, I have an artticle on my site which
is on the particular subject.
http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc/design-tips4.html
 
A

Alan J. Flavell

There are some websites that don't work without flash, but I think
they are not worth installing the plugin ;-)

On the other hand, you will find a lot of nice online games or
interactive thingies that are done in flash, so I believe it's worth
installing the plugin if you are not a purely text-based user.

Well, after too many instances of my laptop being brought to an
uncontrollable crawl by commercial web sites which insisted on
dragging their way through a non-optional flash video before one could
get any access to their normal content, I de-installed the flash
plugin.

If there was a way of getting a prompt and being able to say "no
thanks" to the browser when unsolicited flash content was offered, I
might be willing to re-enable it. I haven't found an option like that
yet.

I see that there's currently an argument going on, on a couple of
railway-interest usenet groups including misc.transport.rail.europe,
about an interactive map (in French) at
http://www.ratp.info/orienter/cv/carteparis.php

While one contributor enthusiastically recommends it, another
comments:

| What a total mess!
|
| It does show what goes wrong when children are let loose
| without adult supervision.

Readers are, of course, free to form their own opinion on that!
My usual browser (Mozilla), as I say, has had its flash plugin
de-installed, whereas my MSIE simply brings up a security alert
refusing to execute "Active-X controls" from this untrusted site.

Seems to be working in Opera 8.5

cheers
 
T

\The Tactician\ Luke Michaels

Chaddy2222 said:
Bald Purp wrote:



Well. It's not very good for issues concerning accessibility.
There are a lot of other reasons, I have an artticle on my site which
is on the particular subject.
http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc/design-tips4.html

===I am ripping this article apart here. If you don't care and just want
to hear my response to the orginal question, scroll down...===

"Note that the website navigational structure has absolutely nothing to
do with anything art related…… So why designers waste their time making
there sites useless is a bit beyond me.."

Totally untrue.

1) The navigation, that is, the part of the website that creates the
interaction between the user and the website, is completely art-related.
Unique navigation is possible with Flash that is not possible with
hyperlinks and the websites that use Flash well have proven this over
and over again.

2) Flash navigation hardly makes a website useless by any stretch of the
imagination. That sounds like arbitrary bias to me.

"The main reason as to why the use of flash for items such as navigation
makes a site useless, is because overall it’s not necessary."

This statement does not make sense. Not everything that is not totally
necessary makes something useless. Otherwise design wouldn't exist, and
we would live in an ugly, grey world like something out of fatpie.

"Due to the fact that the navigation designed using flash is graphic
based, it means that search enjons can not access the content that is
hidden behind the links. Or if they do manage to interpret where the
link is headed, all attempts at seo are a waste of time. As the search
enjons won’t be able to work out what the link says so will not be able
to know its importance."

Firstly, "engines". Typing a word into Google will tell you if it's
spelled right. There's no excuse for this anymore. Also, what is "seo"?

Secondly, this is what meta tags are for.

"So the question is; what are things such as JavaScript and Macromedia
Flash good for. Well, they are ok for small things. To make a page look
good, But they should not be used for vital aspects such as navigation."

I don't think you exactly make a literate point here for me to attack,
but while I'm criticizing, exactly what magic javascript-unique
navigation are we talking about here? Do you just mean rollover images?

"The main reason for this is because you exclude some users. Mainly:
those with disabilities and who need to use adaptive technology, such as
Screen Readers. Also some people do not have access to flash enabled
browsers and some just choose not to use them."

You've made the first valid point in a really horrible way. Yes, some
people don't have access to Flash, so if you want /everyone/ to be able
to access your data you shouldn't use it. Yet, the big advertisers all
use Flash, because it's a more dynamic and exciting medium. So obviously
if you're targeting those demographics Flash is completely fine. And
while Macromedia's 98% claim is pretty suspicious, Internet Explorer
comes with a version of Flash now.

"Note that the same conditions apply when using JavaScript for
navigation and other vital features."

Now, this is pretty silly, on the other hand. JavaScript is a web
standard now. Every modern browser supports it fully and has for years.
You're worrying too hard at this point.

"As an alternative consider just making your links plain text. But the
event that it is not possible to change the existing site.

Consider creating a text only version of the site that contains the same
content as the graphical site .This will not only make your site more
search enjon friendly but it will also make your site more user friendly."

While making a text version of a flash site is a perfectly good
suggestion, what you've done is entirely missed the point...

===to here.===

Flash is a great medium for picture and sound, but it is not an
excellent medium for text. Nor is it supposed to be. Making an entire
website in Flash is alright if you don't have a lot to say, text-wise,
and just want to present multimedia, or if your primary goal is for the
website to be dynamic, eye-catching, and attention-grabbing. The people
who can't see your site probably can't see that kind of multimedia
anyway or don't care.

There's no reason, however, not to install the flash plug-in if your
browser and your computer can handle it. If you don't, you're missing
out on some pretty cool stuff.

--
"The Tactician" Luke Michaels
Outsmarting the wiliest wrestling legends since 2000

Anointed - Are you on fire for GOD, Scotty?

Scotty (Lowtax) - YES SIR I AM ON FIRE
 
P

PeterMcC

"The Tactician" Luke Michaels wrote in
<2%svf.31566$tl.4824@pd7tw3no>

"Due to the fact that the navigation designed using flash is graphic
based, it means that search enjons can not access the content that is
hidden behind the links. Or if they do manage to interpret where the
link is headed, all attempts at seo are a waste of time. As the search
enjons won’t be able to work out what the link says so will not be
able to know its importance."

Firstly, "engines". Typing a word into Google will tell you if it's
spelled right. There's no excuse for this anymore. Also, what is
"seo"?

Type it into Google ;)
Secondly, this is what meta tags are for.

None of the major search engines index on meta tags.
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

Alan said:
If there was a way of getting a prompt and being able to say "no
thanks" to the browser when unsolicited flash content was offered, I
might be willing to re-enable it. I haven't found an option like that
yet.

Would a Checkbox and/or a Kill Flash button suffice?

....
Readers are, of course, free to form their own opinion on that!
My usual browser (Mozilla), as I say, has had its flash plugin
de-installed, whereas my MSIE simply brings up a security alert
refusing to execute "Active-X controls" from this untrusted site.

How about the Mozilla/Firefox PrefBar extension?
http://prefbar.mozdev.org/
and a picture with the Customize dialog open:
http://k75s.home.att.net/images/prefbar.png

Place the Kill Flash control on the bar. That French rail site just ..
disappears! :)
 
J

Jim Higson

Beauregard said:
Would a Checkbox and/or a Kill Flash button suffice?

...

How about the Mozilla/Firefox PrefBar extension?
http://prefbar.mozdev.org/
and a picture with the Customize dialog open:
http://k75s.home.att.net/images/prefbar.png

Place the Kill Flash control on the bar. That French rail site just ..
disappears! :)

There's also an extention called FlashBlock. It puts a play button where the
flash would normally be. If you want to see it you can click the button,
otherwise it is never shown.

Jim
 
T

Travis Newbury

Chaddy2222 said:
Well. It's not very good for issues concerning accessibility.
There are a lot of other reasons, I have an artticle on my site which
is on the particular subject.
http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc/design-tips4.html
From your website:

Note that the website navigational structure has absolutely nothing to
do with anything art related...... So why designers waste their time
making there sites useless is a bit beyond me..

Looking at your site, if it obvious why this is beyond you.
 
R

rockradio2000

The Tactician" Luke Michaels said:
===I am ripping this article apart here. If you don't care and just want
to hear my response to the orginal question, scroll down...===

"Note that the website navigational structure has absolutely nothing to
do with anything art related...... So why designers waste their time making
there sites useless is a bit beyond me.."

Totally untrue.

1) The navigation, that is, the part of the website that creates the
interaction between the user and the website, is completely art-related.
Unique navigation is possible with Flash that is not possible with
hyperlinks and the websites that use Flash well have proven this over
and over again.
Hmmmmm. Name me one site which has done this. I certenly have not
noticed any of late. Well I have not noticed any useable ones.
2) Flash navigation hardly makes a website useless by any stretch of the
imagination. That sounds like arbitrary bias to me.
Well, as I have staited, it does not help with the sites accessibility.
"The main reason as to why the use of flash for items such as navigation
makes a site useless, is because overall it's not necessary."

This statement does not make sense. Not everything that is not totally
necessary makes something useless. Otherwise design wouldn't exist, and
we would live in an ugly, grey world like something out of fatpie.
Hmm. Interesting.
The thing is, if it's used in the wrong way, a way that confusers the
visitor, then they will just leave the site.
It's fine to use Flash in that way on an art type site, but it would
not really be good for a site that was trying to make money.
"Due to the fact that the navigation designed using flash is graphic
based, it means that search enjons can not access the content that is
hidden behind the links. Or if they do manage to interpret where the
link is headed, all attempts at seo are a waste of time. As the search
enjons won't be able to work out what the link says so will not be able
to know its importance."

Firstly, "engines". Typing a word into Google will tell you if it's
spelled right. There's no excuse for this anymore. Also, what is "seo"?

Secondly, this is what meta tags are for.
Well, yeah, I was aware of that fact.
But the Search Engines such as Google do not give a very high
importents to them anymore.
"So the question is; what are things such as JavaScript and Macromedia
Flash good for. Well, they are ok for small things. To make a page look
good, But they should not be used for vital aspects such as navigation."

I don't think you exactly make a literate point here for me to attack,
but while I'm criticizing, exactly what magic javascript-unique
navigation are we talking about here?

Well actually, I was making reference to more DHTML type markup.
Do you just mean rollover images?
"The main reason for this is because you exclude some users. Mainly:
those with disabilities and who need to use adaptive technology, such as
Screen Readers. Also some people do not have access to flash enabled
browsers and some just choose not to use them."

You've made the first valid point in a really horrible way. Yes, some
people don't have access to Flash, so if you want /everyone/ to be able
to access your data you shouldn't use it. Yet, the big advertisers all
use Flash, because it's a more dynamic and exciting medium
Yeah, but they use it sparingly

So obviously
if you're targeting those demographics Flash is completely fine. And
while Macromedia's 98% claim is pretty suspicious, Internet Explorer
comes with a version of Flash now. Yep.


"Note that the same conditions apply when using JavaScript for
navigation and other vital features."

Now, this is pretty silly, on the other hand. JavaScript is a web
standard now. Every modern browser supports it fully and has for years.
Yes, but not everyone has it enabled.
Although, on that point, more use JavaScript then Flash.
But, it's not supported for people who use Text Only Browsers.
You're worrying too hard at this point.

"As an alternative consider just making your links plain text. But the
event that it is not possible to change the existing site.

Consider creating a text only version of the site that contains the same
content as the graphical site .This will not only make your site more
search enjon friendly but it will also make your site more user friendly."

While making a text version of a flash site is a perfectly good
suggestion, what you've done is entirely missed the point...
I am aware of the many advantages that Flash has in a Multi-Media
environment, but if used too mutch for vital aspects such as site
navigation, where the user can not work out what they need too click
on. It can be a very bad tool.
===to here.===

Flash is a great medium for picture and sound, but it is not an
excellent medium for text. Nor is it supposed to be. Making an entire
website in Flash is alright if you don't have a lot to say, text-wise,
and just want to present multimedia, or if your primary goal is for the
website to be dynamic, eye-catching, and attention-grabbing. The people
who can't see your site probably can't see that kind of multimedia
anyway or don't care.
That's not the point I was trying to make.
The point is, It's not good if it's used in a situation where the site
needs too be accessable by as many people as they can get. Such a site
trying to make money for example. The only Corperation think why could
create a site built out of flash would be a group celling Video games
or similar products.
 
G

Glenn Knickerbocker

website in Flash is alright if you don't have a lot to say, text-wise,
and just want to present multimedia, or if your primary goal is for the
website to be dynamic, eye-catching, and attention-grabbing. The people
who can't see your site probably can't see that kind of multimedia
anyway or don't care.

I run into a lot of websites that are primarily about music and have
Flash-only navigation. Blind people have as much interest in music as
the rest of us, don't you think? Probably more, I would guess.

http://users.bestweb.net/~notr "The notion of objecting to a fake Web
¬R site on the grounds that it might possibly incite other people
to do bad things is so dangerous to our constitutionally protected
freedoms that it must never be mentioned, even in jest." --Matt McIrvin
 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

Travis said:
Note that the website navigational structure has absolutely nothing to
do with anything art related...... So why designers waste their time
making there sites useless is a bit beyond me..

Looking at your site, if it obvious why this is beyond you.

You talkin' about Chaddy's site? Personally, I think he does rather
well as a blind web author.
 
R

Rob McAninch

Jim Higson>:
There's also an extention called FlashBlock.

Thanks for that.

I use a site that requires a flash application (for setting up
online proofing of photographs) so I can see the use for Flash but I
do get annoyed and sometimes bogged down by Flash based ads.
 
T

Travis Newbury

Beauregard said:
You talkin' about Chaddy's site? Personally, I think he does rather
well as a blind web author.

I don't give a shit if he is blind or not. His site still sucks. If
the developer is blind or not is completely irrelevant.
 
R

Rob McAninch

Followup set to alt.html, the only relevant group.

Glenn Knickerbocker>:
Even for presenting multimedia only, Flash navigation is not a good
idea. It distracts from the content, wastes bandwidth that your
multimedia can use, and indeed creates navigation problems.

Numerous usability articles on Flash from useit.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:useit.com+Flash
I run into a lot of websites that are primarily about music and have
Flash-only navigation. Blind people have as much interest in music as
the rest of us, don't you think? Probably more, I would guess.

I would agree, didn't take the time to find an authoritative
reference. But
http://www.cnib.ca/eng/publications/pamphlets/lwvl/
suggests that music, as a leisure activity, may be enjoyed more so
than someone gifted with normal vision.

Of course, music can also be a distraction to the visually impaired
as they rely more on sound for navigating their physical environment
than we do. (Perhaps a good reason to avoid unnecessary music on a
site).
 
K

Krusty

"The Tactician" Luke Michaels said:
"The main reason for this is because you exclude some users. Mainly: those
with disabilities and who need to use adaptive technology, such as Screen
Readers. Also some people do not have access to flash enabled browsers and
some just choose not to use them."

You've made the first valid point in a really horrible way. Yes, some
people don't have access to Flash, so if you want /everyone/ to be able to
access your data you shouldn't use it. Yet, the big advertisers all use
Flash, because it's a more dynamic and exciting medium. So obviously if
you're targeting those demographics Flash is completely fine. And while
Macromedia's 98% claim is pretty suspicious, Internet Explorer comes with
a version of Flash now.

He's talking about 508 accessibility, and he's wrong.

Macromedia Flash is fully 508 compliant. It has been since version 6.

See the white paper:
http://www.macromedia.com/resources/accessibility/best_practices/bp_fp.html

Also the 98% penetration number isn't bunk. It's legit. Penetration is MUCH
higher the farther back in version you go. Version 7 has about a 91%
penetration and version 5 is actually higher than 98% in some countries
(Canada, Europe).

See the data:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/player_census/flashplayer/version_penetration.html

The short answer is, if you're creating pages for persons with hearing or
visual impairments, or even other accessibility issues, Flash is excellent.
There are few tools in the pure html arsenal that even come close.

And if you REALLY want to feel like a dinosaur, then just visit the Flash
platform page. Flash ain't the Flash everybody thinks it is.

http://www.macromedia.com/platform/

So, to answer your question authoritatively. No, there is no reason NOT to
use Flash. A lot of time, the bias against Flash is simply coming from
people who don't know how to use it properly.
 
K

Krusty

Rob McAninch said:
Even for presenting multimedia only, Flash navigation is not a good idea.
It distracts from the content, wastes bandwidth that your multimedia can
use, and indeed creates navigation problems.

Numerous usability articles on Flash from useit.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:useit.com+Flash

Jakob's on board with Flash. The only issues he has with it is that it
encourages "bad design". Also, the article that says "99% bad" is over 5
years old. In the past five years, Jakob Nielson has *radically* changed his
opinion on Flash. In fact, I sat in on a seminar where he extolled the
virtues of Flash and spoke *very* highly of it for use for interface design.

So, blame the designer, not the product.

In fact, the Halo UI has actually been *approved* by Jakob, who feels it's a
terrific way to navigate.

In this year's "Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005" he wrote the following:
"I view it as a personal failure that Flash collected the bronze medal for
annoyance. It's been three years since I launched a major effort to remedy
Flash problems and published the guidelines for using Flash appropriately.
When I spoke at the main Flash developer conference, almost everybody agreed
that past excesses should be abandoned and that Flash's future was in
providing useful user interfaces."

Again, blame bad designers, not Flash.
I would agree, didn't take the time to find an authoritative reference.
But
http://www.cnib.ca/eng/publications/pamphlets/lwvl/
suggests that music, as a leisure activity, may be enjoyed more so than
someone gifted with normal vision.

Again, don't forget that Flash is 508 compliant. Accessibility is not an
issue.
 
A

Alan J. Flavell

Looks good. Don't think me ungrateful, but unfortunately I've already
got an extra toolbar (Chris Pederick's web developer) - adding more is
going to get things a bit cluttered in that area, and I see a fair
amount of function duplication there.
There's also an extention called FlashBlock.

So there is! - I take it that you mean http://flashblock.mozdev.org/

Looks like this is the one that I'd go for. Apparently I do have to
re-install flash before installing the blocker (it mumbles about
browser crashes if the blocker is installed and flash isn't).

thanks both!
 
K

Krusty

Alan J. Flavell said:
Well, after too many instances of my laptop being brought to an
uncontrollable crawl by commercial web sites which insisted on
dragging their way through a non-optional flash video before one could
get any access to their normal content, I de-installed the flash
plugin.

A ridiculous solution to anecdotal bad design. Again, simply because someone
doesn't know how to use Flash certainly in my mind doesn't justify removing
the plug in. That sounds like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I mean, I don't use Flash extensively, I don't work for Macromedia, but
there certainly is a LOT of misinformation in this thread. It seems like
more people are making emotional responses rather than well thought out
authoritative replies.

Just always remember, Bad designers can create horrible, huge, clunky jpegs
just the same way inexperienced designers who think they're programmers can
create bad Flash. Flash is *advanced*. It's far more advanced than most
"designers" feel comfortable with, and certainly more advanced than any
formal programing training that any designer has ever attended. I think the
problem lies with people who go, "I used Freehand...how hard could Flash
be?" and then proceed to break every convention known to man to create a 2
meg opening slide show on their home pages.

Go to Flashforward.com and look at some of the nominated Flash pieces. Those
are hyper-advanced web applications that are *impossible* to do in any other
technology with the speed and efficiency of development...and again, the
issue of accessibility is simply, "you can do it, people just choose not to,
don't blame Flash for it".
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,733
Messages
2,569,440
Members
44,830
Latest member
ZADIva7383

Latest Threads

Top