Comments on: Anti-Flash Standardistas - You’re Cutting Off Your Nose to Spite Your Face http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/ Your basic design blog. Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:01:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Harris http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-227121 Harris Sun, 06 Jan 2008 03:43:58 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-227121 Flash is often blocked by default due to its use in ads. In addition, I think firefox doesn't even come with it. Flash is often blocked by default due to its use in ads. In addition, I think firefox doesn’t even come with it.

]]> By: Daily Delicious - FAUST: Flash Augmenting Standards » SOME RANDOM DUDE http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-27193 Daily Delicious - FAUST: Flash Augmenting Standards » SOME RANDOM DUDE Thu, 01 Mar 2007 00:22:37 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-27193 [...] I have made very clear my opinion on anti-flash standardistas. That being said, I have a deep respect for web accessibility/standards and feel it is a high priority to make Flash as web-friendly as possible. A lot of work has been done towards this end and FAUST seems to be an attempt to put all the fragmented pieces together in one cohesive package. I really applaud this sort of work as it is all too infrequent but highly important. With media consumption on the web growing, Flash is almost assuredly going to become even more integral a part of the web. These sorts of methods are going to make the process just that much nicer for the end user. Major kudos. [...] […] I have made very clear my opinion on anti-flash standardistas. That being said, I have a deep respect for web accessibility/standards and feel it is a high priority to make Flash as web-friendly as possible. A lot of work has been done towards this end and FAUST seems to be an attempt to put all the fragmented pieces together in one cohesive package. I really applaud this sort of work as it is all too infrequent but highly important. With media consumption on the web growing, Flash is almost assuredly going to become even more integral a part of the web. These sorts of methods are going to make the process just that much nicer for the end user. Major kudos. […]

]]> By: Yousuf http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-15537 Yousuf Mon, 08 Jan 2007 19:22:56 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-15537 Increadibly boring and fascinating at the same time. <b> Boring:</b> because its just web <b> Facsinating: </b> i can see boundless levels of creativity. Increadibly boring and fascinating at the same time.
Boring: because its just web
Facsinating: i can see boundless levels of creativity.

]]> By: Tim http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-15176 Tim Sun, 07 Jan 2007 05:11:22 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-15176 Gil K - Well said. I'm in the same boat. I personally prefer to browse with flash disabled, then enable it for the sites I need it. But for the last 2 years, have not been able to install flash thanks to Macromedia not supporting my HARDWARE. If 64bit processors have been out for 2-3 years, why isn't the 64bit plugin?!! Gil K - Well said. I’m in the same boat.
I personally prefer to browse with flash disabled, then enable it for the sites I need it. But for the last 2 years, have not been able to install flash thanks to Macromedia not supporting my HARDWARE. If 64bit processors have been out for 2-3 years, why isn’t the 64bit plugin?!!

]]> By: Gil K. http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-13478 Gil K. Thu, 28 Dec 2006 07:00:24 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-13478 "With Flash you have a plugin in which nearly 100% of users have at least some version of the player on their system." This is simply not true. I'd love to be able to have the player on my system, but Adobe doesn't make a player for my OS/browser configuration. So basically if your site requires flash, I can't see it, no matter how many times you send me to Adobe's web site to download "the latest player." It's time for Adobe to release the source code to the Flash player as open source so that it can be ported to all operating systems, if this technology is going to be ubiquitous. I think it's dangerous to allow a corporation such as Adobe or Microsoft to dictate to everyone what operating system or browser platform we should be using. By requiring Flash or some other closed "standard" you are effectively allowing these companies to dictate what OS you put on your computer and how it is to be configured. My personal experience with websites that have Flash, when using other people's computers, is that it is being done simply to provide eye-candy navigation that could have been done using CSS or not at all. Why I need to have Flash just to find the location of a restaurant or see their menu is beyond my comprehension. “With Flash you have a plugin in which nearly 100% of users have at least some version of the player on their system.”

This is simply not true. I’d love to be able to have the player on my system, but Adobe doesn’t make a player for my OS/browser configuration. So basically if your site requires flash, I can’t see it, no matter how many times you send me to Adobe’s web site to download “the latest player.”

It’s time for Adobe to release the source code to the Flash player as open source so that it can be ported to all operating systems, if this technology is going to be ubiquitous. I think it’s dangerous to allow a corporation such as Adobe or Microsoft to dictate to everyone what operating system or browser platform we should be using. By requiring Flash or some other closed “standard” you are effectively allowing these companies to dictate what OS you put on your computer and how it is to be configured.

My personal experience with websites that have Flash, when using other people’s computers, is that it is being done simply to provide eye-candy navigation that could have been done using CSS or not at all. Why I need to have Flash just to find the location of a restaurant or see their menu is beyond my comprehension.

]]> By: David B. http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9924 David B. Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:35:22 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9924 I was about to respond to one of Rik Lomas's comments but then i read Rex's comment and I can rest my case on his points exactly, nice article Some Random Dude. I was about to respond to one of Rik Lomas’s comments but then i read Rex’s comment and I can rest my case on his points exactly, nice article Some Random Dude.

]]> By: somerandomdude http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9918 somerandomdude Tue, 05 Dec 2006 20:54:29 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9918 <strong>Kenny</strong> - There is a very simple option for that - you put the main content you would like to have indexed in HTML and inject the SWF on runtime with Javascript using <a href="http://blog.deconcept.com/swfobject/" rel="nofollow">SWFObject</a>. For clients not running Javascript (such as search engine spiders), the content persists and can be indexed - for the 99.9% of browsers with Javascript enabled, the HTML is replaced through the SWF injection process. We did this on a <a href="http://www.current.tv/burningman/" rel="nofollow">project I worked on recently</a>. This is very common and is used quite frequently - I am a little surprised more people do not know about it. Another thing to take into consideration is the vast amount of embedded Flash widgets within an otherwise standard and searchable HTML page - the entire page is your run-of-the-mill HTML except for the areas that need to be in Flash (see YouTube, Current TV, Revver, etc, etc, etc, etc.). If you are dealing with a game, video or some other form of mulitmedia in a non-written-language form, how is a search engine going to index that to begin with? I will say it again - if something can be done without Flash (regular copy, basic navigation, etc.) then <strong>do not do it</strong>. I am not suggesting we switch the internet to Flash - I am simply saying for those things that cannot be done (well) by HTML/CSS/Javascript, Flash is the correct (dare I say standard?) option. Kenny - There is a very simple option for that - you put the main content you would like to have indexed in HTML and inject the SWF on runtime with Javascript using SWFObject. For clients not running Javascript (such as search engine spiders), the content persists and can be indexed - for the 99.9% of browsers with Javascript enabled, the HTML is replaced through the SWF injection process. We did this on a project I worked on recently. This is very common and is used quite frequently - I am a little surprised more people do not know about it.

Another thing to take into consideration is the vast amount of embedded Flash widgets within an otherwise standard and searchable HTML page - the entire page is your run-of-the-mill HTML except for the areas that need to be in Flash (see YouTube, Current TV, Revver, etc, etc, etc, etc.). If you are dealing with a game, video or some other form of mulitmedia in a non-written-language form, how is a search engine going to index that to begin with?

I will say it again - if something can be done without Flash (regular copy, basic navigation, etc.) then do not do it. I am not suggesting we switch the internet to Flash - I am simply saying for those things that cannot be done (well) by HTML/CSS/Javascript, Flash is the correct (dare I say standard?) option.

]]> By: Kenny Saunders http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9915 Kenny Saunders Tue, 05 Dec 2006 19:02:46 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9915 Ok, but are we missing one main point here? What about Search Engine's? I'm not going to pretend to be an expert about it, but I'm pretty sure spiders can't crawl flash sites as of yet. Ok, but are we missing one main point here?

What about Search Engine’s? I’m not going to pretend to be an expert about it, but I’m pretty sure spiders can’t crawl flash sites as of yet.

]]> By: somerandomdude http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9912 somerandomdude Tue, 05 Dec 2006 18:48:30 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9912 <strong>Rex</strong> - Well said, I couldn't have conveyed your thoughts better. Rex - Well said, I couldn’t have conveyed your thoughts better.

]]> By: Rex http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9911 Rex Tue, 05 Dec 2006 18:45:04 +0000 http://www.somerandomdude.net/blog/development/anti-flash-standardistas/#comment-9911 The decision to use any technonlogy, be it Flash or Ajax, or DHTML etc...should be based on the specific project, client and end USER expectations), budget issues, and to a certain extent the designer's knowledge ..........AND NOT on the designer's personal feelings. I'm all for web standards. I'm also a big fan of flash in certain situations. All depends on the project. Purists on either side of the fence have got it wrong in my opinion...and just shows me that they need learn some market research skills. I've devoted a lot of time to learning web standards and flash. As a web proffessionl..i feel it's my responsbility to do so. What I am getting tired of...and this is directed at you standards purists out there...is the elitism you folks seem to have taken on. CSS, AJAX, XHTML etc etc...all very good things. Not the only things. You are not the only experts out there who are the only ones ALLOWED to make websites. Just one type of expert. There is good flash and bad flash. Same can be said for css based sites. So both camps need to get over themselves. Finally... all we are talking about are TOOLS. Flash, css, dhtml...they are just tools much like a hammer and nails. They don't make the designer. Some of you should remember that. The decision to use any technonlogy, be it Flash or Ajax, or DHTML etc…should be based on the specific project, client and end USER expectations), budget issues, and to a certain extent the designer’s knowledge

……….AND NOT on the designer’s personal feelings.

I’m all for web standards. I’m also a big fan of flash in certain situations. All depends on the project. Purists on either side of the fence have got it wrong in my opinion…and just shows me that they need learn some market research skills.

I’ve devoted a lot of time to learning web standards and flash. As a web proffessionl..i feel it’s my responsbility to do so. What I am getting tired of…and this is directed at you standards purists out there…is the elitism you folks seem to have taken on. CSS, AJAX, XHTML etc etc…all very good things. Not the only things. You are not the only experts out there who are the only ones ALLOWED to make websites. Just one type of expert.

There is good flash and bad flash. Same can be said for css based sites. So both camps need to get over themselves.

Finally… all we are talking about are TOOLS. Flash, css, dhtml…they are just tools much like a hammer and nails. They don’t make the designer. Some of you should remember that.

]]>