Beginner Question to Flash Developers

[Jas123]

I have never developed a flash website.

Could you tell me what the level of difficulty is for replicating this site: http://www.djstyle.com -- in CS3 -- i am just using this site as a benchmark, i found it on google

could you tell me the difficulty with the intro & the difficulty without the intro.

I'm trying to see if going through some tutorials would be enough

Thanks

 

[designguy79]

Please DON'T replicate that site! My eyes are hurting.

That level of Flash animation itself is not terribly difficult if you use something like http://www.swishzone.com -- unfortunately, that one is Windoze only.

One that works on OSX (well, any platform because it is a Flash plug-in) that is pretty cool is http://www.flasheff.com

HTH

 

[Nsutton]

Please DON'T replicate that site! My eyes are hurting.

Thats what I was just thinking. Its also why I dont like flash it encourages people to make "that".

 

[designguy79]

Oh yeah, and heavy use of Flash is bad for:

* iPhones & iPads
* Search engine optimization
* Screen readers

Use it sparingly, at your own risk, and always provide alternate way(s) to get the content and/or ability to navigate around.

 

[Nostromo]

I have never developed a flash website.

Could you tell me what the level of difficulty is for replicating this site: http://www.djstyle.com -- in CS3 -- i am just using this site as a benchmark, i found it on google

could you tell me the difficulty with the intro & the difficulty without the intro.

I'm trying to see if going through some tutorials would be enough

Thanks

You need sunglasses and earplugs to go to that site.

One of the worst examples of web design I have seen in a while.

It does everything you shouldn't do on a website, including long intros, music you can't turn off, and pointless animation.

 

[UTclassof89]

To address the OP's question:

the level of difficulty isn't affected by the intro (or lack thereof).

Flash is a complex technology, and there are lots of elements in play on that site (pulling data from external sources, controlling sound, resizing the geometry of the layout as the browser is resized, etc. etc.).

You can learn a lot about each element by going through tutorials, but few tutorials guide you through such a large and complex project (simply because there are so many ways to build it: Flash is very, very powerful, and very, very versatile).

___________

And don't let the MacRumors anti-Flash zealot majority dissuade you from learning Flash; just be prepared to spend a lot of time learning: doing things the right way in Flash is often harder than doing them the quick way.

Which is why sites like the one you showed prompt such disdain, and give Flash a bad name. People generally don't like intros on ANY sites, regardless of the technology used to build it. Search engines can see text in a SWF, Flash can be made accessible, the browser back button functionality and deep linking can be done in Flash. (people who learned to hate Flash back in 2000 never kept up with the advances that make it possible to do all of those things--but it takes effort by the developer, just like building any well-designed, highly usable site).

 

[Consultant]

To address the OP's question:

the level of difficulty isn't affected by the intro (or lack thereof).

Flash is a complex technology, and there are lots of elements in play on that site (pulling data from external sources, controlling sound, resizing the geometry of the layout as the browser is resized, etc. etc.).

You can learn a lot about each element by going through tutorials, but few tutorials guide you through such a large and complex project (simply because there are so many ways to build it: Flash is very, very powerful, and very, very versatile).

___________

And don't let the MacRumors anti-Flash zealot majority dissuade you from learning Flash; just be prepared to spend a lot of time learning: doing things the right way in Flash is often harder than doing them the quick way.

Which is why sites like the one you showed prompt such disdain, and give Flash a bad name. People generally don't like intros on ANY sites, regardless of the technology used to build it. Search engines can see text in a SWF, Flash can be made accessible, the browser back button functionality and deep linking can be done in Flash. (people who learned to hate Flash back in 2000 never kept up with the advances that make it possible to do all of those things--but it takes effort by the developer, just like building any well-designed, highly usable site).

And don't let the Flash zealots fool you.

Both Microsoft and Google have said HTML5 is the future.

 

[snickelfritz]

I have never developed a flash website.

Could you tell me what the level of difficulty is for replicating this site: http://www.djstyle.com -- in CS3 -- i am just using this site as a benchmark, i found it on google

could you tell me the difficulty with the intro & the difficulty without the intro.

I'm trying to see if going through some tutorials would be enough

Thanks

Either way, it's beginner-intermediate level.
BTW, some of the features of that site are extremely annoying and chaotic.
Generally speaking, this is the type of site people are referring to when they talk about "bad Flash".
Keep it simple; your visitors probably do not want to be overwhelmed with animation and sound. (and they certainly will not appreciate it if your website crashes their web browser)

Tutorials are kind of pointless if you don't understand the basics of AS3 and Flash Player 9.
Buy a book on AS3 / XML, and learn those languages.
Here's a good one that covers both topics: http://www.learningactionscript3.com/

Here's some videos that discuss some basics of Flash 9 and AS3.
You really need to understand this stuff, or you'll spend most of your time fixing errors that should not occur in the first place.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/actionscript/articles/lost_as_weekend.html

BTW,
It's highly likely that HTML5 will (within the next five years) become the standard for page markup, but the future of RIA platforms, such as Flash, is not as obvious.

 

[UTclassof89]

Both Microsoft and Google have said HTML5 is the future.

HTML 5 is the future... of HTML.


(I know Consultant has a closed mind from his history of bashing Flash at every opportunity, but for anyone interested, this is a good read on the topic)

 

[THX1139]

1999 called and they want their Flash animation back. I can't tell you how much I hate that site. And it's not because of Flash... it's because crappy designers ruined Flash by putting out terrible stuff like that. Yuck!

I WAS a Flash developer. I made lots of money doing some pretty cool interactive stuff with that technology over the years. Then Macromedia sold Flash to Adobe and then the player got bloated and websites got even more bloated (Flash advertising everywhere) and Flash start crashing browsers a lot and overheating processors. It's been downhill ever since. Flash is going to be around for awhile longer, but it's going to be more of niche player as other technologies replace it. HTML for video looks promising. But the over-the-top Flash crap that the OP showed us is over... or at least I hope it is. It can't play on iPad or iPhone, and you can bet that future versions of Safari is going to lock it out too. Steve has spoken, and he always gets his way.

As for the question? Yeah... it's a bit of learning curve for someone just starting out. I wouldn't want to go that direction if I were you because Flash is a lost cause. Your better off learning other more effective ways to build out your site. You'll gain more suited longterm skills and not piss off your customer base with that epileptic inducing ugliness. Most people who run into a Flash site like that would hit the back button as fast as possible and never go back. Sorry... but I'm telling you the truth and it's based on my professional experience. My suggestion is to incorporate a CMS solution with video modules.

 

[THX1139]

HTML 5 is the future... of HTML.


(I know Consultant has a closed mind from his history of bashing Flash at every opportunity, but for anyone interested, this is a good read on the topic)

Dude, you don't need to defend Flash. I am/was a professional Flash developer and I loved that program for what it could do! But even I can see the writing on the wall. Unless Adobe can pull off something amazing in the next 6 months, Flash is dead... or soon to be dead. It's definitely dying. The web is moving strongly into standards based direction and I for one am really glad to see it. It's been a long time coming. HTML 5 driven content is the near future. Flash is the past.

 

[snickelfritz]

Flash will continue to show us what is possible in a web browser, just like it always has.
HTML5/JS is an improvement over previous versions, but it is still way behind AS3 in terms of overall capabilities.

Flash trounces canvas in this test:
Canvas
Flash

 

[UTclassof89]

I'm only defending Flash from out-of-the-blue pronouncements that people pull out of their a**es like

...Flash is dead... or soon to be dead. It's definitely dying.

Did you even read the article I linked to? The point is that while it's overused, and often badly used (I think we'd agree the OP's example was one), it can do things HTML 5 can't

Such as...