oops hit reply direct to you Brian, meant to reply to the list - apologies ________________________________
From: Simon Cobb Sent: 06 September 2007 12:45 To: 'Brian Butterworth' Subject: RE: [backstage] 50 designers 6 questions Thanks for that, very interesting. Though I thought as it was titled "Ten pieces of advice for old media <http://www.badscience.net/?p=512> " the blanket ban on use of Flash (point 9) was an odd one. Certainly I'd agree that flash could be "slow to load" and it would definitely be "irritating to browse" when providing text-based newspaper/ magazine content. But if you're a TV company offering promo clips and/ or interactive video content embedded on your page, surely Flash is the natural choice? This is Flash's problem in 2007 as I see it. Years of gimmickery have tainted what Flash has become really good at: video interactive video image rendering and transforming and to provide all that with the potential of a lovely interface on top. Plus since Flash neatly sidesteps any cross-browser issues, any lazy web dev/designer can put their content into it and know it looks the same in every browser. Regardless of how approriate that content is for flash. Rant over. ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 05 September 2007 16:00 To: Simon Cobb Subject: Re: [backstage] 50 designers 6 questions Simon, Very good article that one... Did you see this one? http://www.badscience.net/?p=512 On 05/09/07, Simon Cobb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: more great stuff from the folks at smashingmagazine http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2007/09/05/50-designers-x-6-questions/ S. -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv
