Bandwidth auto detect for determing type of site to load: Flash or HTML

[z.heineman]

We are looking to update our website to a flash based layout, but we do
not want to loose customers because of long load times. I am hoping
someone can inform me of a way to have the webserver determine the
clients connection speed and decide whether to load a Flash or HTML
website (lite version). Is this possible?.

 

[Stan McCann]

(e-mail address removed) wrote in

I plan on giving the option and for it to be saved in a cookie, but
I was hoping for the server to determine which site to provide
initially.
Is this possible?

I don't think it is possible, at least, not easily. As Berg said,
leave it up to the visitor. Some will also not accept your cookie.

 

[Bergamot]

a way to have the webserver determine the
clients connection speed and decide whether to load a Flash or HTML
website (lite version).

Connection speed is not the only factor.

Leave the choice up to the visitor. Some will want Flash even if it's
slow, while others will want HTML regardless of speed.

 

[z.heineman]

Connection speed is not the only factor.

Leave the choice up to the visitor. Some will want Flash even if it's
slow, while others will want HTML regardless of speed.

I plan on giving the option and for it to be saved in a cookie, but I
was hoping for the server to determine which site to provide initially.
Is this possible?

 

[Michael Fesser]

..oO([email protected])

I plan on giving the option and for it to be saved in a cookie, but I
was hoping for the server to determine which site to provide initially.
Is this possible?

No.

Micha

 

[Sid]

On 9 Nov 2006 12:45:26 -0800, (e-mail address removed) wrote:

: We are looking to update our website to a flash based layout, but we do
: not want to loose customers because of long load times. I am hoping
: someone can inform me of a way to have the webserver determine the
: clients connection speed and decide whether to load a Flash or HTML
: website (lite version). Is this possible?.


Even if its the fastest DSL a flash splash page is bad news.

Sid

 

[cwdjrxyz]

We are looking to update our website to a flash based layout, but we do
not want to loose customers because of long load times. I am hoping
someone can inform me of a way to have the webserver determine the
clients connection speed and decide whether to load a Flash or HTML
website (lite version). Is this possible?.

I think that it is possible, but I can not point you to a ready-made
code. I think it likely would best be done on the server using php. It
is quite possible to determine download speed. For example a download
speed test for my isp which is SBC/Yahoo DSL is at
http://support.sbcglobal.net/dsl/speedtest/ . This sort of speed test
often uses JAVA. You would need only the download speed test, and of
course the location to which the viewing browser points for your test
would be on your own server. The speed test need not be very accurate,
so you can design the test to be fairly rapid. When the speed test is
completed, the user is then redirected to one page for a slow
connection and another for a fast connection, or possibly everything
could be done on a single page.

 

[Michael Fesser]

..oO(cwdjrxyz)

I think that it is possible, but I can not point you to a ready-made
code. I think it likely would best be done on the server using php. It
is quite possible to determine download speed.

Not reliably.

For example a download
speed test for my isp which is SBC/Yahoo DSL is at
http://support.sbcglobal.net/dsl/speedtest/ . This sort of speed test
often uses JAVA.

That's the first problem - the Java RTE is not available/enabled on most
machines. Additionally a test inside of the local ISP network is
somewhat different than a test in the open Internet.

You would need only the download speed test, and of
course the location to which the viewing browser points for your test

That's the second problem - the way from the user through the Internet
to the server. Every single router on that way can dramatically slow
down the transfer.

would be on your own server. The speed test need not be very accurate,
so you can design the test to be fairly rapid. When the speed test is
completed, the user is then redirected to one page for a slow
connection and another for a fast connection, or possibly everything
could be done on a single page.

What if the user has some downloads or a P2P client running in the
background? What if there's a temporary network congestion?

In short: You can't test the connection speed, you can just guess.
If that's enough for you - try it. I wouldn't.

Micha

 

[richard]

We are looking to update our website to a flash based layout, but we do
not want to loose customers because of long load times. I am hoping
someone can inform me of a way to have the webserver determine the
clients connection speed and decide whether to load a Flash or HTML
website (lite version). Is this possible?.

use a gateway door entery style page. let the visitor pick which is most
appropriate.
I totally hate sites that demand on using flash for all of it's design and
presentation.
flash is meant to enhance certain aspects, not be the website.

 

[Travis Newbury]

We are looking to update our website to a flash based layout, but we do
not want to loose customers because of long load times. I am hoping
someone can inform me of a way to have the webserver determine the
clients connection speed and decide whether to load a Flash or HTML
website (lite version). Is this possible?.

Not like you at thinking. One way we use is with javascript, so it
will not work for all your visitors. But the basic idea is this:

You start a timer in Javascript. You then have a 1k (1024 byte)
comment, then you check the timer again. The amount of time that has
passed will allow you to tell how fast the user was able to download
the 1024 byte comment. This will give you an approximation of the
speed they are connected.

Before everyone jumps all over my ass, no, this is not perfect. But it
will give you an indication.

 

[Andy Dingley]

use a gateway door entery style page.

Don't do that, it's nearly as bad an idea as a Flash-dependent site.

 

[Andy Dingley]

We are looking to update our website to a flash based layout,

I'm having trouble associating "Flash" with "update". Don't you mean
"Throw away all the content and replace it with pictures of dancing
penguins, on a site you can no longer navigate quickly" ?

we do not want to loose customers because of long load times.

If your customers can really benefit from Flash, then they'll wait for
it. These days we have plenty of bandwidth.

The customers who won't want Flash don't want it because they don't
want it, not because oof the file sizes.

Forget trying to measure the connection speed. Instead allow the users
a simple manual (and possibly persistent) switch between the useful and
the Flash versions. Make sure they can switch from each and every page,
not just a one-off selection from some splash page.

Make sure that the HTML version of the site offers just as much
content, and is as up-to-date-as, the Flash site.

 

[Travis Newbury]

I'm having trouble associating "Flash" with "update". Don't you mean
"Throw away all the content and replace it with pictures of dancing
penguins, on a site you can no longer navigate quickly" ?

Andy. If a company switched from a "everyone in the freeking world can
see it" website to a Flash website and their revenue increases. Is it
a good thing or a bad thing?

And how would you justify to the stock holders (owners, mom and pop,
who ever) that they need to go back to the format that made them less
revenue? Because for Mom and Pop, the stock holders, whoever, the
bottom line IS REVENUE. No one goes into business to make LESS money.

What argument would you use to convince me to make LESS money so more
people can see the site?

 

[Bergamot]

If a company switched from a "everyone in the freeking world can
see it" website to a Flash website and their revenue increases. Is it
a good thing or a bad thing?

And how would you justify to the stock holders (owners, mom and pop,

I am often curious about the decision to switch from HTML to an all
Flash site in the first place, particularly for mom and pop type of
operations. Your argument sounds like it's a given that Flash will be
automatically better. Are you so sure?

Have these owners actually done any research that indicates their
revenue will increase, or are they doing it just because they think it's
the kewl thing to do, or because there are some developmental advantages
with Flash (and users aren't a significant part of the equation)?

I suspect it's less the first and more the other reasons, but that's
just an opinion based on Flash sites I've come across in the past. Flash
isn't for everyone, and unless they've actually done the research, they
may be throwing money out the window.

What argument would you use to convince me to make LESS money so more
people can see the site?

If the client hasn't done their homework, what argument would you use to
convince me that they will make more money just because it's Flash?

 

[Travis Newbury]

I am often curious about the decision to switch from HTML to an all
Flash site in the first place, particularly for mom and pop type of
operations. Your argument sounds like it's a given that Flash will be
automatically better. Are you so sure?

Not saying that at all. I am saying that flash sites (all flash or
partial flash) have their place. ESPECIALLY in the entertainment
industry (any movie site) and sites geared to children (barbie.com,
cartoonnetwork.com etc...)

Flash is NOT for everyone. But it is not "evil" either. And in many
cases (like those listed above) it can actually be beneficial.

Have these owners actually done any research that indicates their
revenue will increase, or are they doing it just because they think it's
the kewl thing to do, or because there are some developmental advantages
with Flash (and users aren't a significant part of the equation)?

They have done the research. That is why they continue to use it, and
more and more similar sites are moving to it. I doubt you can actually
find a major studio movie release site that is not Flash based.
(Actually, I can ONLY speak for Cartoon network. I am assuming the
other similar sites would find the same)

If the client hasn't done their homework, what argument would you use to
convince me that they will make more money just because it's Flash?

A client (AND developer) doing their homework is the key. But the
premise of my question was that they DID switch, and they DID see a
revenue increase. Can you come up with an argument that would convince
the client to revert back to a non Flash site? Or do you agree, that
IF the flash site increases revenue (and that is measurable) then flash
was correct for that site?

 

[Bergamot]

They have done the research.

You assume they have, anyway. I'm not so convinced of that.

Anyway, you're really only saying it's a given that entertainment type
sites need Flash. You didn't make any distinction as to the type of site
before, you more or less made the unqualified statement that Flash will
make them more money, whoever they are.

I doubt you can actually
find a major studio movie release site that is not Flash based.

Entertainment sites are a different animal. I'm asking about other types
of sites, specifically mom and pop small business since you included
them in your list of those who benefit from switching to Flash. Say, for
example, a local auto repair shop (as one in my neighborhood does). Why
would they think they need a Flash site unless someone thought it would
be kewl?

A client (AND developer) doing their homework is the key.

And most clients don't have a clue as to what they really need, and many
developers prostitute themselves and give the client whatever they ask
for, regardless of whether it is the right thing to do or not. We hear
that in these newsgroups all the time.

But the
premise of my question was that they DID switch, and they DID see a
revenue increase.

And my question was whether it was an informed decision to switch in the
first place. You assume yes, I don't.

Hey, I'm all for making money, but Flash doesn't automatically mean they
will. You suggested it will.

 

[Andy Dingley]

Andy. If a company switched from a "everyone in the freeking world can
see it" website to a Flash website and their revenue increases. Is it
a good thing or a bad thing?

Of course it's a good thing.

Now how often does it happen? Of the vast number of Flash sites out
there, how many are _better_ for using Flash and how many have just
fallen into the trap of too many pointless animations that look pretty,
add nothing and generally get in the way.
Flash is great.
Typical use of >90% of Flash is bad.

http://www.tidefordorganics.com

Was this site really better in Flash?


Also the OP posted "update to flash", implying that Flash was "newer"
than HTML and implying that it was "better" than HTML. Now a particular
_use_ of Flash might be better, but the technique itself is neither
newer nor better, it's neutral.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Of course it's a good thing.
Now how often does it happen?

Depends on the industry. In entertainment, quite a lot, in most other
cases probably not.

Flash is great.
Typical use of >90% of Flash is bad.

No argument from me there. That is one of the reasons we get so much
work. Because 99%+ of the flash developers out there do nothing but
make dancing penguins, and then, they don't even dance well...

http://www.tidefordorganics.com
Was this site really better in Flash?

Nope, it is a fancy dancing penguin. (I like your dancing penguin
phrase. It will be mentioned in the next client meeting). If I were
looking for that information I would enjoy the flash for a few seconds,
play with turning the pages. Then leave and go get the recipes from a
different site.

I love flash. But only when it is used appropriately. (And sometimes
that means an entire, inaccessible to some flash site)

 

[Andy Dingley]

Nope, it is a fancy dancing penguin. (I like your dancing penguin

phrase. It will be mentioned in the next client meeting).

Not mine - it's an old Java expression from the mid- / late 90s

Java applets did animation at a time when not much else on the web did,
and when Java applets did little else. "Duke", the Java mascot (still
on the Sun site) bears a certain resemblance....

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Andy Dingley wrote:

Typical use of >90% of Flash is bad.

http://www.tidefordorganics.com

Was this site really better in Flash?

On dialup the "wait vs reward" was not really worth it. Click on
"Contact Us" in the contents and you have to virtually page through the
entire "book" to the end! Nope! I would not return! It is like one of
the "educational" games (time wasters) for the kiddies.