Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How come Flash isn't well liked?
- Thread starter definitive
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A few of these issues can be mitigated with proper flash development.
You can deep-link into pages using the swfaddress library, giving unique page urls to different "pages" of the flash movie.
You can reposition/rescale objects based on the browser resize event
Adobe worked with Google to implement search engine indexing on textual content in flash movies, and has since been implemented as is currently being used today
With swf object, flash can be embedded in a standards compliance way.
So yes, it seems to be more up to the developers than the actual limitations of flash. Here are a couple examples (although the GE website does take longer to load, it encompasses, 3D, augmented reality, animations, audio, and videos)
http://ge.ecomagination.com/smartgrid/
http://www.davematthewsband.com
You can deep-link into pages using the swfaddress library, giving unique page urls to different "pages" of the flash movie.
You can reposition/rescale objects based on the browser resize event
Adobe worked with Google to implement search engine indexing on textual content in flash movies, and has since been implemented as is currently being used today
With swf object, flash can be embedded in a standards compliance way.
So yes, it seems to be more up to the developers than the actual limitations of flash. Here are a couple examples (although the GE website does take longer to load, it encompasses, 3D, augmented reality, animations, audio, and videos)
http://ge.ecomagination.com/smartgrid/
http://www.davematthewsband.com
Actionscript can do many things but what does it matter if those things are way too hard for most people to do? Most people who make flash websites dont have a computer science degree, thats why so many flash sites suck, because they simply are unable to do things that SHOULD be extremely easy but are the complete opposite in AS3. So yes, Flash can do all those things, but most people sure as hell arent going to do them since its so hard.
Actionscript 3.0 itself is actually very simple to master once you get a handle on the overall structure of the platform.
This is mostly due to the new unified event architecture and the inclusion of E4X methods for handling XML. (XML is by far the most popular data source for Flash applications)
Experience in Flash8/AS2 is actually detrimental to the process of learning AS3, since so many of the "bad" practices that worked in AS2 have to be unlearned.
You cannot shoehorn relaxed AS2 practices into a strict programming environment like AS3.
The following link to Colin Moock's seminars on AS3 should be considered mandatory for new Flash developers.
If you can understand the basic concepts explained in the seminars, you will have far less trouble building Flash applications.
http://tv.adobe.com/show/colin-moocks-lost-actionscript-weekend/
This is mostly due to the new unified event architecture and the inclusion of E4X methods for handling XML. (XML is by far the most popular data source for Flash applications)
Experience in Flash8/AS2 is actually detrimental to the process of learning AS3, since so many of the "bad" practices that worked in AS2 have to be unlearned.
You cannot shoehorn relaxed AS2 practices into a strict programming environment like AS3.
The following link to Colin Moock's seminars on AS3 should be considered mandatory for new Flash developers.
If you can understand the basic concepts explained in the seminars, you will have far less trouble building Flash applications.
http://tv.adobe.com/show/colin-moocks-lost-actionscript-weekend/
Well the problem in my opinion is the developers!!! Developers are very short sited people and when they like something there is nothing else that compares to that in their opinion!!! You can ask the same question about all kinds of programs for web development and never get a basic answer.
As some other members have stated, most people don't know how to program it right. I do lots of flash design and I have never once heard a client say "i don't like this website"!!! Just look at most of the movie sites, they are all made with flash. When it comes to an advertising stand point flash is an excellent tool for ads, action that keeps the visitors interested and can be made to do great great graphics & audio which can capture an audience.
Everyone has a different opinion on flash. But it's not gonna go away and if it's developed properly can create a great effect. I personally love flash. What the real question should be:
Whats the best way to incorporate flash that effectively sends the clients message to their target audience?
I have done tons of flash sites, headers and ad's. Never once have I had a client say to get rid of it. They normally ask for more!!!!
Most web developers are coders and lack real artistry skills. Flash tends to be more production based then developer based in my opinion.
Hope this helps.
As some other members have stated, most people don't know how to program it right. I do lots of flash design and I have never once heard a client say "i don't like this website"!!! Just look at most of the movie sites, they are all made with flash. When it comes to an advertising stand point flash is an excellent tool for ads, action that keeps the visitors interested and can be made to do great great graphics & audio which can capture an audience.
Everyone has a different opinion on flash. But it's not gonna go away and if it's developed properly can create a great effect. I personally love flash. What the real question should be:
Whats the best way to incorporate flash that effectively sends the clients message to their target audience?
I have done tons of flash sites, headers and ad's. Never once have I had a client say to get rid of it. They normally ask for more!!!!
Most web developers are coders and lack real artistry skills. Flash tends to be more production based then developer based in my opinion.
Hope this helps.
Because it makes things harder to use.
Lets look at some very successful websites:
http://www.craigslist.com
http://www.google.com
http://www.wikipedia.org
http://www.twitter.com
Notice anything about them? Yes, they are all incredibly simple design wise. Flash just adds things that detract from the content of the site.
In fact most of the top 20 sites on the net are very simple indeed design wise with very little bloat added to them (with the exception of Myspace and Facebook).
Lets look at some very successful websites:
http://www.craigslist.com
http://www.google.com
http://www.wikipedia.org
http://www.twitter.com
Notice anything about them? Yes, they are all incredibly simple design wise. Flash just adds things that detract from the content of the site.
In fact most of the top 20 sites on the net are very simple indeed design wise with very little bloat added to them (with the exception of Myspace and Facebook).
If it's too hard for you to learn to use right, then don't use it. (some people think CSS is hard--and churn out non-compliant, broken website designs. Blaming CSS for 'being too hard' would be silly, right?).
To answer your question of "what does [Flash's ability to do all the things many people think it can't do] matter if those things are way too hard for most people?": It matters greatly for those of us for whom it isn't too hard, and for all the users who benefit from our skill (www.youtube.com, www.pandora.com, finance.yahoo.com, www.bmwusa.com, www.nike.com, etc.)
My point was to correct the erroneous belief that Flash is like it was a decade ago when it couldn't do these things. Many developers (some on this forum) are used to hearing "Flash can't _____" and simply parrot that line to others, propagating the myth, and sounding ignorant to those of us who have kept up with the times.
This is such a true statement, most people are not good at flash and simply push the "IT CAN"T" myth!!!
Cromulent made a statement concerning websites that are really good without flash. So I will list some very successful sites that incorporate flash properly.
http://disney.go.com/index
http://www.universalorlando.com/home/home.aspx
http://www.dreamworksanimation.com/
http://www.sixflags.com/national/index.aspx
http://www.buschgardens.com/Bgt/default.aspx
All these sites incorporate flash as a tool to reach their target audience and add the look and feel that only flash can provide.
Lets stop the developer’s viewpoint for a second and look at the marketing viewpoint. As a marketing tool splash pages and flash are very well received and continuously used to deliver the proper message. But you will hear web developers scream about both those marketing assets as very bad. The fact is flash and splash pages are used because they do exactly what they are supposed to do when used properly, THEY ARE A MARKETING MEDIUM THAT GENERATES REVENUE AND RESULTS.
Web developers will state it’s not search engine friendly, with the right SEO and Pay Per Click Campaign the website will generate great traffic regardless of the design.
Web designers are like computer techs and DJ’s, they all think they know more than the next guy and most have a certain outlook to their style of development that they believe is the perfect approach.
In closing:
Web developers (coders) don’t like flash and will slither away from it. Marketing staff will love what flash can do as a medium to send messages to their targeted audience. Websites are a MARKETING medium that is a more affordable option to TV and Radio advertising. Do you want to have a boring TV commercial or a radio campaign with no sound? Absolutely not!!! I would recommend that you work on the customers marketing needs and medium that both serves, represents and gives the desired results to the clients appeal, identity and revenue stream.
Implement what works for the clients marketing needs, this will include flash, splash pages for advertising mediums as a quick alert, SEO campaigns and anything that lets the people continuously view the message.
There is nothing wrong with flash if used properly; there is nothing wrong with any of the available tools for development when used properly.
Just going to comment on this one specifically, you said it is standards compliant and SEO yet it completely fails on accessibility. My keyboard does not work with it nor does my screen reader therefor the site does not work.
While it looks pretty and all and there was a nice voice over at the start that does not help a user with accessibility issues. Test it yourself with a blindfold and some accessibility software.
Or to simulate my fathers disability change your screen to greyscale and put on cloudy glasses and see if you can use the site. Then do the same with a standard html website and tell me which is better to use.
Not to mention this being illegal if the site is targeted in europe as there are strict laws here ensuring fair access.
All Flash sites can have alternate HTML content for disabled visitors and/or crippled browsers, via swfObject.
There's not a bit of difference between the Flash alternate HTML content and a plain vanilla standards compliant HTML website.
For example, underneath this Disney Flash website, there is a simple but functional HTML site.
You could even use PHP to parse the xml or rss data source for the Flash site into a basic functional HTML page in the alternate content div.
Unfortunately, few Flash developers take full advantage of this feature, unless specifically asked (and paid) to do so by their clients.
BTW, the title for this thread is essentially just an observation by the OP; it is not necessarily based on fact.
There's not a bit of difference between the Flash alternate HTML content and a plain vanilla standards compliant HTML website.
For example, underneath this Disney Flash website, there is a simple but functional HTML site.
You could even use PHP to parse the xml or rss data source for the Flash site into a basic functional HTML page in the alternate content div.
Unfortunately, few Flash developers take full advantage of this feature, unless specifically asked (and paid) to do so by their clients.
BTW, the title for this thread is essentially just an observation by the OP; it is not necessarily based on fact.
Very nicely put bro!!!! Once again a person who knows what he's talking about laying it down. Like I stated and this member has stated. There is nothing wrong with flash when used properly.
For me, I dislike flash (generally) because it seems too resource-hungry for what it does, regularly seems to be a security vulnerability that I'm sure many people don't patch as often as they should (being outside of automatic system updates), and it's not supported by the iPhone/iPod Touch (not adobe's fault directly I know, but still...).
I think more than all of those things though I just found it annoying when I'm surfing to have big distracting ads, silly animations, and OTT interfaces that seem to exist purely to scream 'see, we're a real website because we use flash!'.
I say 'found', past-tense, because I block flash by default now, so if you are trying to sell me things in flash, I'm probably just not seeing your ad at all unless a non-flash alternative is in place... I'm not sure that is effective communication of a client's product or site... .
I think more than all of those things though I just found it annoying when I'm surfing to have big distracting ads, silly animations, and OTT interfaces that seem to exist purely to scream 'see, we're a real website because we use flash!'.
I say 'found', past-tense, because I block flash by default now, so if you are trying to sell me things in flash, I'm probably just not seeing your ad at all unless a non-flash alternative is in place... I'm not sure that is effective communication of a client's product or site... .
All of this has happened before. At one point the internet was very text based. Then one day people started adding jpeg images to jazz up the sites. It caused a lot of problems for slow computers with 14.4kbps modems. Eventually the world adpated and now everybody is comfortable with images.
The next evolution for the web is motion. Like it or not but we are moving into a visual world. The gap between TV and internet is getting smaller and smaller everyday.
With that said I agree about over the top designs. I am a Flash designer and I teach web design. There is nothing wrong with Flash and many times it is an excellent marketing tool that helps sell a message to a customer. If it didn't make money for companies then you wouldn't see Flash designers as the number one growing field of design right now. Interactive design is an art form and just knowing how to write code does not make good interactive design. Many Flash designers and developers do things just because they can and not because it makes sense.
The next evolution for the web is motion. Like it or not but we are moving into a visual world. The gap between TV and internet is getting smaller and smaller everyday.
With that said I agree about over the top designs. I am a Flash designer and I teach web design. There is nothing wrong with Flash and many times it is an excellent marketing tool that helps sell a message to a customer. If it didn't make money for companies then you wouldn't see Flash designers as the number one growing field of design right now. Interactive design is an art form and just knowing how to write code does not make good interactive design. Many Flash designers and developers do things just because they can and not because it makes sense.
My problem with flash is Adobe's lazy coding and Apple's refusal to release the APIs for hardware acceleration. Were both to be resolved, then flash would not a problem. As it is, Flash has major security flaws on all platforms that could potentially allow remote code execution, Adobe's quarterly update program is rediculous. Both Apple and MS use more frequent updates. It's inefficent and flash cookies bypass your browser's cookie settings.
Add into that Apple not releasing the hardware acceleration API and you get a slow, buggy, insecure program.
I agree with you 100%. I go as far back as using Director and Shockwave to create rich internet media. Shockwave would fly even on an old school G3 Mac. In many ways Shockwave is still superior to Flash when it comes to code execution and engine playback speed. It was just a very efficient authoring platform. It had to be since computers and bandwidth were so bad back then. When Macromedia still had Flash it was still super slow but at least it wasn't a hog. I would love for Adobe to stop adding stupid features to Flash and focus on a way to make it more efficient instead of just banking on faster hardware to compensate for their horrible code optimization skills. This isn't really anything new for Adobe either. All of their software ends up a massive resource hog at some point including Premiere and After Effects.
The GE site is confusing and not built like a site one is used to using and as another poster brought up "fails miserably". The Dave Matthews site could have been done in web standard code, there's no reason for it to use flash.
The Dave Matthews site has HTML/CSS alternate content (it appears to have a Drupal CMS backend that feeds both versions).
Disable javascript and/or Flash to view the html site.
Disable javascript and/or Flash to view the html site.
Guys are you actually listening to what you are saying?? "Processor Hungry" "Resources" Do you really think the average person havs any ideas what that even means or would take that into consideration. If they did there wouldn't a need for a Genius Bar or Geek Squad! Guys honestly this in formation is so tainted. Lets say the truth of the matter: Flash is something web developers have a like or dislike for, not the general public. This is the reason web developers are not good at marketing.
what are websites? What are flash? They are an advertising medium!!! Nothing wrong with either.
Lets go out on the street and ask 100 people what flash does to their processors or their resources. You will get the same answer "i have no idea" and thats the truth. Lets stop giving short sighted advise and giving answers that actually help.
what are websites? What are flash? They are an advertising medium!!! Nothing wrong with either.
Lets go out on the street and ask 100 people what flash does to their processors or their resources. You will get the same answer "i have no idea" and thats the truth. Lets stop giving short sighted advise and giving answers that actually help.
Considering this website (and thread even more) are aimed at the technically savvy I don't see any point to your post.
"How come Flash isn't well liked?" if the general public doesn't even know what Flash is then they probably don't have an opinion, therefore this thread is not aimed at the general public. Get it?
haha you said "splash pages"
Yes, Flash can be useful if it's kept in it's place. The key thing to realize is that just because Flash is used properly doesn't mean it had to be used in the first place, bringing along with it its inborn problems. Few projects these days require Flash, or even lend themselves well to Flash. With Javascript APIs like jQuery & MooTools and AJAX (with it's own accessibility problems anyway), the cases where Flash is necessary are even more reduced.
It's true Flash has come a long way from being the clunky, inaccessible mashup it used to be. But, most Flash developers don't seem to incorporate the aforementioned changes that have made it more accessible, indexible, or portable - and that in itself is a problem with Flash development. Flash is not only unnecessary the majority of the time, but redundant for the bulk of most implementations. Most - and by that I mean I've yet to see it for myself - of the all-Flash websites could have just easily been developed using semantic markup and a Javascript API and in the process have been made available to a wider audience with greatly reduced risk of user alienation.
Flash is primarily (it seems to be) used by designers who put more importance on animations and effects than on portability and usability. Bear in mind, I used to use Flash extensively and was a big proponent of it so I can - to a point - understand where you're coming from.
Flash simply cannot match the qualities of good, semantic markup that allow for printing, indexing, and accessing. If your design or your content relies on Flashy animations and whatnot it's time to rethink your abilities as a designers.
I disagree. I have charged in upwards of 20 and 30 grand for flash sites and the effect they give could not be replicated by any java on the market. Plus for 3D java and other apps besides flash just don't make the grade. Once again I hear the bottom line of coders, but not the bottom line of good flash action scriptors.
But all views are good views as it benefits the members ability to go his own direction. I work the industry of hollywood and guess what the demand for flash and serious animations is huge.
http://www.transformersmovie.com/
http://www.xmenthelaststanddvd.com/#
http://terminatorsalvation.warnerbros.com/dvd/index2.html
http://www.startrekmovie.com/
An there are no scripts for ajax and or any other thing you can say that will let produce the high end presentations that flash will. I would like to hesr thge responses to relly bad websites using flash that the public just love.
None of those sites is anywhere near as popular as some of the ones I linked. Disney is the nearest at about 480 Alexa ranking but the rest are waaay down the list in terms of popularity.
Seeing as you spent much of your post going on about marketing, popularity should be a metric that you are intimately familiar with.