Web Design and E Commerce

[Logician]

I have been writing web pages since 1997, and using the Internet since
1993. But I work mostly with data based catalogs (eg OO (C#) classes
for data access, data designs in ORACLE/SQL SERVER) and not front end
pages, eg user interfacing pages. For my own site I have to build some
front end pages, so I studied a few books and the books ALL seems to
advocates FLASH.

I know Flash used to be condemned as a fad and not really taken
seriously for e-commerce websites. With the need removed for a Flash
plug-in, has Flash been more accepted?

A simple example of what I mean: www.9to5seating.com. This is a
catalog based site using Flash. Actually the code is quite simple to
write via an XML feed and then Flash can render it. But there are
issues of download time, and seo.

 

[Travis Newbury]

I know Flash used to be condemned as a fad and not really taken
seriously for e-commerce websites. With the need removed for a Flash
plug-in, has Flash been more accepted?

Flash is completely accepted for use on an e-commerce site. It
provides a standard controllable interface for a vast majority of your
customers. HOWEVER, it is NOT for ALL e-commerce sites. There must
be a good fit between the client and the product. A lot of research
needs to bo done in order to assure you do not hurt yourself.

A simple example of what I mean:www.9to5seating.com. This is a
catalog based site using Flash. Actually the code is quite simple to
write via an XML feed and then Flash can render it. But there are
issues of download time, and seo.

Download time is a non issue if it is done right. Actionscript and
dynamic loading of images, sound, and information will make a Flash
site no heavier than an html site offering the same content.

 

[David Segall]

I have been writing web pages since 1997, and using the Internet since
1993. But I work mostly with data based catalogs (eg OO (C#) classes
for data access, data designs in ORACLE/SQL SERVER) and not front end
pages, eg user interfacing pages. For my own site I have to build some
front end pages, so I studied a few books and the books ALL seems to
advocates FLASH.

I know Flash used to be condemned as a fad and not really taken
seriously for e-commerce websites. With the need removed for a Flash
plug-in, has Flash been more accepted?

A simple example of what I mean: www.9to5seating.com. This is a
catalog based site using Flash. Actually the code is quite simple to
write via an XML feed and then Flash can render it. But there are
issues of download time, and seo.

Flash is great if used with restraint on sites where the visitor
expects it and the web site designer is a talented graphic artist.
Your examples reflect this. Flash is inappropriate for a site that
offers factual information on a serious topic such as logicians.
Visitors would expect Apple to have a "flashy" site but would be
repelled if IBM had something similar.

 

[Dylan Parry]

With the need removed for a Flash
plug-in, has Flash been more accepted?

Not sure what you mean here. Flash is very much a plugin-based
technology and will continue to be so until browsers contain Flash as
part of their core (which will likely never happen).

--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

Programming, n: A pastime similar to banging one's head
against a wall, but with fewer opportunities for reward.

 

[Mike Minor]

Well....if Flash plugins are no longer necessary, then why did it tell me
that I needed to upgrade my Flash Player when I visited the site you
referenced as an example. In my humble opinion, you will want your site
accessible to as many users as possible. I also am leary of sites that
require me to load additional software ( plug-ins ) to be able to access the
site. Often, I skip on to the next site when I get a message like
that....just my 2 cents worth.


Thank you,

Mike Minor
Z-Code Systems, Inc,

 

[the red dot]

I have been writing web pages since 1997, and using the Internet since
1993. But I work mostly with data based catalogs (eg OO (C#) classes
for data access, data designs in ORACLE/SQL SERVER) and not front end
pages, eg user interfacing pages. For my own site I have to build some
front end pages, so I studied a few books and the books ALL seems to
advocates FLASH.

I know Flash used to be condemned as a fad and not really taken
seriously for e-commerce websites. With the need removed for a Flash
plug-in, has Flash been more accepted?

A simple example of what I mean: www.9to5seating.com. This is a
catalog based site using Flash. Actually the code is quite simple to
write via an XML feed and then Flash can render it. But there are
issues of download time, and seo.

thats horrible, stuff moving all over the place shouting at me out of the
corner of my eye, trying to stop a chair whilst they are whizzing past
really fast (why are they whizzing so fast?) and then the bloody dropdown
menus dropping down because id strayed off the chair line trying to catch
the chair arghghgh.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

the red dot wrote:

thats horrible, stuff moving all over the place shouting at me out of the
corner of my eye, trying to stop a chair whilst they are whizzing past
really fast (why are they whizzing so fast?) and then the bloody dropdown
menus dropping down because id strayed off the chair line trying to catch
the chair arghghgh.

Not quite intuitive, but you have to put your cursor close to the
'center' whizzing chair marquee to slow them. Farther to the left the
faster it advances, to the right it backs up! I bet some folks will hit
the back button and go to the next item they Googled before they figured
it out!

To OP, what if the visitor uses a keyboard to navigate? Try selecting a
chair then!

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=]

Travis Newbury wrote :

Flash is completely accepted for use on an e-commerce site.

I disagree.

"most of the Flash that Web users encounter each day is bad Flash with
no purpose beyond annoying people (...)
Despite such good intentions, most of the Flash that Web users encounter
each day is bad Flash with no purpose beyond annoying people. The one
bright point is that splash screens and Flash intros are almost extinct.
They are so bad that even the most clueless Web designers won't
recommend them, even though a few (even more clueless) clients continue
to request them.

Flash is a programming environment and should be used to offer users
additional power and features that are unavailable from a static page.
Flash should not be used to jazz up a page. If your content is boring,
rewrite text to make it more compelling and hire a professional
photographer to shoot better photos. Don't make your pages move. It
doesn't increase users' attention, it drives them away; most people
equate animated content with useless content."
Jakob Nielsen, october 2005, Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 2005
"Flash collected the bronze medal for annoyance"
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html

The Biggest Web Design Mistakes of 2004 - 12. Misusing Flash
Most of the time: no skip intro button, no way to turn off music, no way
to stop download, no reasonable way for the user to have full control
over the flash movie/animation. The frustration/powerlessness is worse,
more acute for people on dial-up connection.
"You have to watch a boring, soundless, twenty second flash intro with
no option to skip it. If you're still around when the content loads, the
pain doesn't stop. There is a lovely 8 or 10 second delay between when
you click one of the navigation options and when the content actually
arrives." Vincent Flanders
http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/biggest-web-design-mistakes-in-2004-part2.html

It
provides a standard controllable interface for a vast majority of your
customers.

This is rarely the case.

HOWEVER, it is NOT for ALL e-commerce sites. There must
be a good fit between the client and the product. A lot of research
needs to bo done in order to assure you do not hurt yourself.


Download time is a non issue if it is done right.

Absolutely disagree with you. Flash increases download time and is
almost always more cpu and RAM demanding than an HTML webpage.

Actionscript and
dynamic loading of images, sound, and information will make a Flash
site no heavier than an html site offering the same content.

Absolutely not true.

Gérard

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=]

Logician wrote :

[snipped]
(...)

so I studied a few books and the books ALL seems to
advocates FLASH.

I know Flash used to be condemned as a fad and not really taken
seriously for e-commerce websites. With the need removed for a Flash
plug-in,

Flash requires a plug-in. Flash is not natively embedded into web browsers.

has Flash been more accepted?

A website shouldn't be Flash-based and if it is, then accessible content
should be created for those who don't want/don't need/don't like/don't
use/don't support Flash. A Flash-based website should be functional and
accessible even if/when Flash support is disabled/turn off/inexistent.
A site navigation should never be Flash-based. Studies and usability
gurus (Nielsen, Flanders) all converge on this.

Gérard

 

[Andy Dingley]

A simple example of what I mean:www.9to5seating.com. This is a
catalog based site using Flash.

That's one of the worst Flash-based sites I've seen in ages. I love
it, simply because it makes me reminiscent for a site I worked on in
2000 which had a similarly horrible "Whack A Mole" menu system.

_Why_ does the publisher of this site think that making user
navigation deliberately difficult to use is a good idea?

 

[Andy Dingley]

Flash is completely accepted for use on an e-commerce site.

Obviously it isn't "completely accepted", or we wouldn't have this
thread.

It provides a standard controllable interface

That's the problem. Flash is standard, my customers aren't.

for a vast majority of your customers.

So what do I do about the rest? Can you really afford to alienate them
like this?


Flash (or any similar technology) should be used if it _adds_
something and ignored if it doesn't. It should be positively avoided
if it detracts or makes the site worse (as this one has).

Before using any technology like this, ask yourself _why_. Exactly
_what_ is it adding? If it isn't adding anything, don't use it. If
you don't know whether it is or not, then fire the clueless dezyner
who grabs at the shiny toys just because they're there, not because
they're useful to your goals for the site.

Flash is good at particular things. These tend to be useful for some
sites more than others, so games, animations, wrapping video,
pictorial interfaces for kids and product displays are all likely
candidates for it. Simple site nav isn't -- not because Flash does it
badly (even though this site did), but because it just doesn't _add_
any more than basic HTML can offer.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

On 29 Jan, 13:06, "Logician" <[email protected]> wrote:

catalog based site using Flash.

That's one of the worst Flash-based sites I've seen in ages. I love
it, simply because it makes me reminiscent for a site I worked on in
2000 which had a similarly horrible "Whack A Mole" menu system.

Perfect description! Such a system may be amusing for say Nickelodeon
cartoon fan site considering the audience, but for selling chairs? I
don't think so! Would anyone set up a "brick and mortar" market like a
carnival midway attraction where you have to stand behind a counter and
toss rings to select the items you wish to buy? That would be a business
plan of a doomed endeavor.

 

[Travis Newbury]

That's one of the worst Flash-based sites I've seen in ages. I love
it, simply because it makes me reminiscent for a site I worked on in
2000 which had a similarly horrible "Whack A Mole" menu system.
_Why_ does the publisher of this site think that making user
navigation deliberately difficult to use is a good idea?

The publisher obviously doesn't think he is doing that. They think it
is a cool site and the visitors love it. If they (the chair company)
have seen an increase in revenue since creating the site (which I
doubt because it does suck) then they are happy and will continue down
the same path as long as it is making them money.

Also, looking at the text animation, I would guess that this is a
swish site.

 

[Logician]

The publisher obviously doesn't think he is doing that. They think it
is a cool site and the visitors love it. If they (the chair company)
have seen an increase in revenue since creating the site (which I
doubt because it does suck) then they are happy and will continue down
the same path as long as it is making them money.

Also, looking at the text animation, I would guess that this is a
swish site.

Another example from my book:
http://www.fila.com/uk/eng - a catalogue based site but not one which
allows buying of goods.

 

[Bergamot]

That's one of the worst Flash-based sites I've seen in ages.

I've seen a worse one:
http://www.magnersanborn.com/

 

[mrcakey \(The Eclectic Electric\)]

I've seen a worse one:
http://www.magnersanborn.com/

Wow. That telephone looks vaguely like a tampon.

Still, they must be doing something right with that client list

::mrcakey::

 

[Travis Newbury]

Travis Newbury wrote :
I disagree.
"most of the Flash that Web users encounter each day is bad Flash with
no purpose beyond annoying people (...)
Despite such good intentions, most of the Flash that Web users encounter
each day is bad Flash with no purpose beyond annoying people.

No argument from me there. Most Flash is badly done. This is
probably because Flash developers generally came from an artist/
designer background. No clue (or cares) about anything but the eye
candy. (Hence your Flash splash screens.) More and more new Flash
developers are now coming from a programmers background. This makes a
huge difference in efficiency as well as how Flash is beginning to be
used on websites.

The one
bright point is that splash screens and Flash intros are almost extinct.
They are so bad that even the most clueless Web designers won't
recommend them, even though a few (even more clueless) clients continue
to request them.

Flash is a programming environment and should be used to offer users
additional power and features that are unavailable from a static page.
Flash should not be used to jazz up a page.

Not really sure what you are trying to say here. Flash is now a full
blown development tool for Web based applications. It is no longer
for "jazzing" up a site. When in the right hands it is a powerful
tool.

The Biggest Web Design Mistakes of 2004 - 12. Misusing Flash

This is 2007 Flash (and the web) has changed.

Most of the time: no skip intro button, no way to turn off music, no way
to stop download, no reasonable way for the user to have full control
over the flash movie/animation. The frustration/powerlessness is worse,
more acute for people on dial-up connection.

You seem to be dwelling about Flash splash screens. All of your
issues are moot to a well designed Flash site.

Absolutely disagree with you. Flash increases download time and is
almost always more cpu and RAM demanding than an HTML webpage.

I stand by my download time statement. In some cases (lets say a
photo album) an Actionscript driven Flash photo album can be MUCH
less of a footprint that the same photo album in HTML.

Absolutely not true.

Care to show me where this is "absolutely not true"? You are making
things up based of old preconceived notions about Flash. and relying
on 3 year old information. You need to re-educate yourself about
Flash.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Can you really afford to alienate them
like this?

I believe you can. I believe it is completely acceptable to turn away
the few to please the many. The key (for a commercial site) is
revenue.

Flash (or any similar technology) should be used if it _adds_
something and ignored if it doesn't. It should be positively avoided
if it detracts or makes the site worse (as this one has).

And this is exactly what I am saying too. If adding Flash to your
site increases revenue, (even though is might turn away a few people)
then it is a good thing. If adding Flash to your site does not
increase (or decreases) revenue then it is a bad thing.

Before using any technology like this, ask yourself _why_. Exactly
_what_ is it adding? I

There is one reason to add _anything_ to your site. Because it
increases revenue. If it does that, then it is a good thing.

Flash is good at particular things. These tend to be useful for some
sites more than others

Absolutely! Flash is NOT for every site. There are very specific
types of sites that benefit from Flash. Currently these seem to be in
the entertainment/media sectors.

,

 

[Chaddy2222]

I believe you can. I believe it is completely acceptable to turn away
the few to please the many. The key (for a commercial site) is
revenue.


And this is exactly what I am saying too. If adding Flash to your
site increases revenue, (even though is might turn away a few people)
then it is a good thing. If adding Flash to your site does not
increase (or decreases) revenue then it is a bad thing.


There is one reason to add _anything_ to your site. Because it
increases revenue. If it does that, then it is a good thing.


Absolutely! Flash is NOT for every site. There are very specific
types of sites that benefit from Flash. Currently these seem to be in
the entertainment/media sectors.

Yes, that is true, knowing when to use the correct tool for the job is
vital, especially where web design is concerned. I don't think it's at
all good for information based sites, or sites where you want to sell
a product or promote a service, unless it's the likes of YouTube which
rely on Flash and other client side technology for the functionality.
On the note of bad design, I have noticed from very bad CSS sites
recently.

 

[Bergamot]

Still, they must be doing something right with that client list

Note that their business is advertising, not web design. It's unlikely
many of their clients first come to them through the web site, or that
the web site is the reason they are hired.

It's more like abuse of power - a big name in the industry can get away
with just about anything. There might be something "clever" about it
that is attractive to some people, but it sure won't get any gold stars
for usability.