RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are > > among the most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" > > light/white background, dark/black text, blue underlined > > links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor > > differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They > > know what works. And we can leverage the usability of those > > sites by mimicking their navigation and design elements. > > Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like > > them. I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out > > there, but it's the truth: the big sites really define > > usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. > > The "big sites", as you call them, fall within a pretty > limited subset of > what web applications can do. They're all designed for very > broad use, by > lots of people using all sorts of browsers, in an environment > where there > are lots of alternatives if you don't like their sites. It's > a mistake to > follow their examples too closely, to the point where you're > limiting your > application inappropriately. Well, I think it's only a mistake if you do NOT want "very broad use, by lots of people using all sorts of browsers, in an environment where there are lots of alternatives". IMHO, that describes the entire web. Even if there are no alternatives to a given site (that seems unlikely in this day and age--maybe 5 years ago but not so much now), who would NOT want their site usable by the most people? Are you willing to lose 10% or 5% or even 1% of potential users/customers just to use a "cool" new widget? Ask a client what percentage of potential customers they are comfortable excluding from the web site you're building for them because you want to use design elements that some users will not understand and who will bail at the first opportunity. It's cold, but it true: users are impatient and demanding. As for me, I want as many people as possible to be able to use my site. I want to make it drop-dead simple for them to view my info or make a purchase. I will do just about ANYTHING to make that happen, including using "standard" web page widgets and links that they will all recognize and know how to use. I will use nonstandard widgets only where absolutely necessary. Anybody here remember boo.com and their grand assumptions that people will flock to a new design paradigm? FLOP! We must be careful when dealing with the giant pool of [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s who make up our pool of potential users/customers. Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
On Saturday, Jun 21, 2003, at 11:23 US/Pacific, Jochem van Dieten wrote: >> But that's the browser developer being in control - the behavior you >> describe is specific to the browser you use. > Specific to the way I tell my browser to behave. If you're lucky enough to have a browser that lets you decide what combination of shift-option-alt-ctrl-apple-whatever keys to use to get which effect. Again, it just reinforces the point that your choices are determined by the browser developer - some (many) browsers do not let you change that behavior (heck, some browsers don't even provide tabbed browsing). Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> -Original Message- > From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 2:23 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > Sean A Corfield wrote: > > On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 19:00 US/Pacific, Dave Watts wrote: > > > >>>That puts the developer of the Flash application in > >>>control, not me. > >>> > >>>And in my browser I can shift-click to open in a new > >>>window and control-click to open in a new tab. > > > > > > But that's the browser developer being in control - the behavior you > > describe is specific to the browser you use. > > Specific to the way I tell my browser to behave. Or, perhaps more realisitically, specific to amount of control that the browser developer has offered you. There's really no reason that well-constructed Flash application can't offer similar control within itself. There's definitely an issue of time (would you do this for a small, one-time applet?) and consistency (will every developer offer a different set of options/styles?) but there's nothing in Flash preventing it. The level of control given to the end user is developer controlled. Different applications offer different levels. A productivity app in which a user spends a lot of time (a word processor, PIM, or a browser) may be heavily configurable while even a complex game may limit the control offered to preserve the emotional context of the game. That being said there is a pretty solid correlation to the amount of time spent in an application (as a user-base) and the amount of customization that application provides. Flash applications generally offer little customization as much time isn't spent with them. The Flash developer's interface on the other hand - LOTS of customization. ;^) Jim Davis ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Sean A Corfield wrote: > On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 19:00 US/Pacific, Dave Watts wrote: > >>>That puts the developer of the Flash application in >>>control, not me. >>> >>>And in my browser I can shift-click to open in a new >>>window and control-click to open in a new tab. > > > But that's the browser developer being in control - the behavior you > describe is specific to the browser you use. Specific to the way I tell my browser to behave. Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
On Friday, Jun 20, 2003, at 19:00 US/Pacific, Dave Watts wrote: >> That puts the developer of the Flash application in >> control, not me. >> >> And in my browser I can shift-click to open in a new >> window and control-click to open in a new tab. But that's the browser developer being in control - the behavior you describe is specific to the browser you use. In my browser: apple-click - open in new tab behind current tab shift-apple-click - open in new tab (in front) alt-apple-click - open in new window behind current window shift-alt-apple-click - open in new window (in front) > I don't think that's really a fair comparison. In an application > interface, > the application developer should be in control. Yes - which is why each browser behaves differently. Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ "If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Dave Watts wrote: >>That puts the developer of the Flash application in >>control, not me. >> >>And in my browser I can shift-click to open in a new >>window and control-click to open in a new tab. > > I don't think that's really a fair comparison. In an application interface, > the application developer should be in control. To a certain extend. But in a traditional application interface, lets say an intranet application, the application developer knows much more about the visitor. He knows the visitor is on the intranet with 0.4 ms latency, using a computer with a 14+ inch screen, a mouse and a keyboard so he can design an interface for exactly that situation. But does that really work when you are delivering an application over the internet to the other side of the world and you don't know if the guy on the other end is using a PDA or a workstation with a 22 inch screen? And even then, the problem is not just control, it is also predictability. I know how my browser respnds to certain commands, but every Flash application can respond differently. I mean, after Mike's code example I went to the DevEx to try the Shift-click and Control-click expecting them to work because the code looks trivial. But it didn't work, and there is no way to see that from the outside. > The developer should be able > to guide and constrain the user of the application. We take this for granted > with non-HTML applications. We don't really take it for granted. If we don't like the buttons of the mediaplayer, we skin it. If we think these insanely big buttons of the browser take up to much room on our PDA screens, we use a minimalistic theme. On our desktop, we all arrange the shortcuts in a different way, we use different color scheme's etc. > Why should we expect web applications to behave > like documents? Why should we limit web applications to what documents can > present? I don't expect applications to behave like documents. But I expect them to copy the best behaviour from documents and combine that with the best behaviour of traditional applications. And in some areas I feel it is actually the web applications that are quite limited. I hope you can prove me wrong, but I haven't seen any web application that recognizes that I have a laptop that I have customised to some high contrast colors because the screen is so lousy. But both traditional applications that use the OS color scheme and web documents that use my browser colors can easily provide a legible interface. (That laptop died, but you get the point.) I think Flash has reached the point where it can compete with many full blown intranet applications (intranet = controlled environment). I think Flash can deliver powerfull widgets over the internet (and people will often not even notice it is Flash). I am not so sure if Flash is the answer to deliver full blown applications over the internet. I think it is better as the applet/activeX options, but it still lacks some of the features of HTML. (HTML on the other hand lacks persistence, has implementation issues and isn't really interactive.) Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> When I hear that someone is "doing a website in Flash", > that never sits well with me. If you are building an > application that doesn't use HTML, doesn't reload, can't > be indexed by Google, doesn't even need to run in a web > browser in the first place, is it really a web site or > is it something else? If we were to all use Flash to > build our internet applications, there would be no > practical use for the web browser in the first place and > suddenly the web is a propritary place. So the question > I pose is this: If someone were to ask you to build them > a website and your final product is a URL to a web page > that runs a full page Flash movie, did you build them > what they asked for? Did you build a website? And my answer would be ... yes. If you open a browser, and enter a URL, then it's a web site or web application. But I don't think you have to worry about the web becoming Flash-only. Flash is great for web applications, but HTML is better for text content. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> I happen to think MM.com's use of MX is pretty much state > of the art as well, and it's not working more efficiently > (from my pov) than it did before all the time and money > were invested in it. It follows that the majority of other > implementations will have similar problems. I disagree that the Macromedia site is a "state of the art" use of Flash. I think that most of the things on the MM site fall more within the realm of content than of applications, and thus aren't especially suited to Flash. Following that, I would also disagree that most other Flash implementations will have similar problems. Where Flash is better suited, you'll have fewer problems. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> There have been numerous scientific studies and papers > on web site navigation and user experience, which suggest > the user does expect a certain standard navigation. > Vertical-Left, and Horizontal-Upper-Right are where most > users expect the nav to be. I can't recall a "look" study > offhand but it probably exists out there. I would agree that there's a common expectation for web site navigation. However, I wouldn't read all that much into this expectation. Users are people too, and they're generally smart enough to figure out how things work if it's worth their while. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word > definitions. And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, > but the simple fact is that users know what to do with > blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from > something that users know? It only makes it harder for > them and increases the likelihood that they won't use > your site--unless they have no place else to go. While I agree that a familiar interface will be, all other things being equal, easier to navigate than an unfamiliar interface, that doesn't mean that the familiar interface is better. There's no reason that a Flash interface can't be useful, or intuitive, or better than the standard HTML interface. > > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely > > different. > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. > On the web, different != good usability. All of those sites > with different/unique navigation are harder to use than > "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users > have to figure them out--and they HATE that. Even if you > think, what's the big deal, it only takes a few minutes? > They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they > want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web > site to endure their "different" navigation. I agree that site navigation shouldn't be different for the sake of being different. On the other hand, why should the navigation functionality be limited to what HTML is capable of doing? > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are > among the most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" > light/white background, dark/black text, blue underlined > links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor > differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They > know what works. And we can leverage the usability of those > sites by mimicking their navigation and design elements. > Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like > them. I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out > there, but it's the truth: the big sites really define > usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. The "big sites", as you call them, fall within a pretty limited subset of what web applications can do. They're all designed for very broad use, by lots of people using all sorts of browsers, in an environment where there are lots of alternatives if you don't like their sites. It's a mistake to follow their examples too closely, to the point where you're limiting your application inappropriately. > There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash > example that were suggested on the list are shooting > themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care > whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which > means more opportunities for sales/readers/customers/etc) > then we must bow to the simple needs of users and not force > our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using > Flash like most sites do goes against good usability. I agree that there are lots of examples of poor uses of Flash. But then again there are lots of examples of poor uses of HTML, too. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> > > Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible > > > in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. > > > > How about an org chart? > > > > http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm > > (Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be > > cross-browser, and it wouldn't work very well, and it would be > > expensive to support, and you'd lose all your hair.) > > Piece of cake...I can visualize the code, but no NS4 would not be > supported, but IE5+, NS7+, and Opera would on their various platforms. Well, we originally implemented this using DHTML, and it wasn't quite a "piece of cake". It wasn't nearly as responsive or reliable, either. This, on the other hand, was created in Flash 4 (!), and we could (and did) deploy it on NS 4, and it'll run today on my Pocket PC, among other places. > > How about a whiteboard? > > > > http://products.figleaf.com/ > > The UI could be done in DHTML fairly easily as well, the > communications part could be done but inefficiently. The browser > is not really suited for this kind of app though. The subject was > UI though. I think you're making my point for me. HTML interfaces alone aren't really suited for this kind of app. Exactly. Should we bind our applications to only what HTML can do? I think the distinction that you're making between "UI" and this is pretty specious - it's a widget that you can put on your page, and you can interact with it. If that's not UI, I don't know what is. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
>I don't think that's really a fair comparison. In an application interface, >the application developer should be in control. The developer should be >able >to guide and constrain the user of the application. We take this for >granted >with non-HTML applications. Why should we expect web applications to behave >like documents? Why should we limit web applications to what documents can >present? Extremely good point Dave. This certainly makes the case for why Flash should support customization of the right-click menu. chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> That puts the developer of the Flash application in > control, not me. > > And in my browser I can shift-click to open in a new > window and control-click to open in a new tab. I don't think that's really a fair comparison. In an application interface, the application developer should be in control. The developer should be able to guide and constrain the user of the application. We take this for granted with non-HTML applications. Why should we expect web applications to behave like documents? Why should we limit web applications to what documents can present? Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>Yeah, but so much of what Flash can do is tied into CF it is appropriate to comment >on it here. Well, maybe Flash Remoting / FMX and CFMX. I would disagree that what Flash can do and CF can do are tied together. Just differing technologies. I think most people are used to seeing flash cartoons, and not flash apps. RIAs are so new that most people don't recognize them when they see them. E ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>You can control your right click behavior in DHTML, you are forced to see those menus >in Flash. Custom Context Menu - DHTML - 1 FLASH - 0 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Mike Chambers wrote: >Well, you can do shift / ctrl clicks: Doesn't work in the MM Dev Exchg. Bummer :( Any chance of that happening? You would be back on the Christmas card list of s many developers :D --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- Original Message -- From: "Mike Chambers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 16:46:38 -0400 >Well, you can do shift / ctrl clicks: > >http://www.markme.com/mesh/archives/002390.cfm > >mike chambers > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >- Original Message - >From: "Stephenie Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 4:02 PM >Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > >> That is fine and all, but what I really miss in flash is the ability to >> right click -- > open in new window... >> >> >> ~~ >> Stephenie Hamilton >> Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Professional >> CFXHosting >> >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Chris Kief [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:47 PM >> To: CF-Talk >> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> >> >> Guess you missed it... >> >> http://www.riseinteractive.com/cftalk/ >> >> chris >> >> >> --- >> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >> Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003 >> >> >> > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
It just occurred to me what DHTML has over Flash: You can control your right click behavior in DHTML, you are forced to see those menus in Flash. M -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:22 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible > in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. How about an org chart? http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm (Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be cross-browser, and it wouldn't work very well, and it would be expensive to support, and you'd lose all your hair.) How about a whiteboard? http://products.figleaf.com/ Good luck with that DHTML. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Mike Chambers wrote: > Well, you can do shift / ctrl clicks: > > http://www.markme.com/mesh/archives/002390.cfm That puts the developer of the Flash application in control, not me. And in my browser I can shift-click to open in a new window and control-click to open in a new tab. Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Well, you can do shift / ctrl clicks: http://www.markme.com/mesh/archives/002390.cfm mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Stephenie Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 4:02 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > That is fine and all, but what I really miss in flash is the ability to > right click -- > open in new window... > > > ~~ > Stephenie Hamilton > Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Professional > CFXHosting > > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Chris Kief [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:47 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Guess you missed it... > > http://www.riseinteractive.com/cftalk/ > > chris > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003 > > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Yeah, but so much of what Flash can do is tied into CF it is appropriate to comment on it here. M -Original Message- From: CF Dude [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 4:35 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? >People are really, really confused about what Flash can do if you have >to say this. You are correct. However, this is a CF forum, and not a flash forum. E FLASH RULES ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Mike, I've been trying to figure out how to do that... can you send me the snippet of code :) I can't believe this debate is still going on. Sounds to me like those opposed of Flash, are scared shitless of the development interface (as I was 2 years ago mind you.) and what you don't know or fear you often dislike or discredit. It would be a great thing for those people if Flash were to die, because that is just one less technology they have to learn, or worse yet, play catch-up on... Just as it would be great for JSP developers everywhere if ColdFusion did not compile to Java Byte Code... because now WE ARE ALL LETHAL JAVA DEVELOPERS!!! -Igor -Original Message- From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:33 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I just want to make sure that everyone understands: You can have blue links in Flash. mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Just jumping in here... > > It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we > would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and > houses would be caves. > > We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses > are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, > so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design > our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten > years because it will make the user experience easier, more > aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on > the server end. > > Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) > > > Matthew Small > IT Director > Showstopper American Dance Championships > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 843-357-1847 > > > -Original Message----- > From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:27 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > Yeah I definitely agree with everything you are saying. Well... mostly. > I'm just saying that traditional navigation schemes transcend the media. > Just because it's done in flash doesn't mean you can't have blue > underline links. Everything can be implemented identically in one or the > other. > > But as far a blue links go (or any long standing tradition), just > because it's been this way in the past, doesn't mean we should keep > doing it into the future. Using established proven methodologies for > navigation yes, I think coloring and underlining menu object is just > aesthetic at this point. I agree it may well have been true 3 years ago, > but now users expect visually pleasing sites and applications. (Look at > OSX and WinXP) > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > > function or dhtml. > > > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > > this for it's > > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > > menus. > > > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. > And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is > that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. > Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for > them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless > they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > > > effective because users are familiar > > That is the heart of the matter. > > > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the > web, different != good usability. All of those sites with > different/unique navigation
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
is it cause dinowitz is at that conference that he didn't tell us to take this to cf-community :) -Original Message- From: CF Dude [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 4:35 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? >People are really, really confused about what Flash can do if you have to say this. You are correct. However, this is a CF forum, and not a flash forum. E FLASH RULES ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
You know what I meant. :Þ ~~ Stephenie Hamilton Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Professional CFXHosting -Original Message- From: CF Dude [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 4:24 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? How do you miss a feature that was never there? I agree though. I wish you could have custom context menus as well. E --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>People are really, really confused about what Flash can do if you have to say this. You are correct. However, this is a CF forum, and not a flash forum. E FLASH RULES ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
How do you miss a feature that was never there? I agree though. I wish you could have custom context menus as well. E - Original Message - From: "Stephenie Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That is fine and all, but what I really miss in flash is the ability to right click -- > open in new window... ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
That is fine and all, but what I really miss in flash is the ability to right click -- > open in new window... ~~ Stephenie Hamilton Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Professional CFXHosting -Original Message- From: Chris Kief [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:47 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? Guess you missed it... http://www.riseinteractive.com/cftalk/ chris --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 6/10/2003 ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Mesh - People are really, really confused about what Flash can do if you have to say this. You need to straighten them out. M -Original Message- From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:33 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I just want to make sure that everyone understands: You can have blue links in Flash. mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
i don't think i was listening to much to this branch of the thread :) i thought someone was talking about visited links and whatnot -Original Message- From: Turetsky, Seth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:46 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? on a similar note...i've seen photo galleries in flash where each image greys out after you click on them, so you don't keep looking at the same one with a little code you can do pretty much anything you would like. -Original Message- From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:33 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I just want to make sure that everyone understands: You can have blue links in Flash. mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Just jumping in here... > > It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we > would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and > houses would be caves. > > We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses > are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, > so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design > our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten > years because it will make the user experience easier, more > aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on > the server end. > > Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) > > > Matthew Small > IT Director > Showstopper American Dance Championships > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 843-357-1847 > > > -Original Message----- > From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:27 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > Yeah I definitely agree with everything you are saying. Well... mostly. > I'm just saying that traditional navigation schemes transcend the media. > Just because it's done in flash doesn't mean you can't have blue > underline links. Everything can be implemented identically in one or the > other. > > But as far a blue links go (or any long standing tradition), just > because it's been this way in the past, doesn't mean we should keep > doing it into the future. Using established proven methodologies for > navigation yes, I think coloring and underlining menu object is just > aesthetic at this point. I agree it may well have been true 3 years ago, > but now users expect visually pleasing sites and applications. (Look at > OSX and WinXP) > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > > function or dhtml. > > > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > > this for it's > > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > > menus. > > > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. > And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is > that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. > Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for > them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless > they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > > > effective because users are familiar > > That is the heart of the matter. > > > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the > web, different != good usability. All of those sites with > different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue > underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and > they HATE
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
But not for long; Every time I underline blue text in Flash MX, it throws an alert saying "Blue underline text is deprecated." When I run the movie its even worse "Blue underline text detected. This RIA will self destruct in 5,4..." :) Is it 5 o'clock yet? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:46 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I demand proof! -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 3:33:24 PM, you wrote: MC> I just want to make sure that everyone understands: MC> You can have blue links in Flash. MC> mike chambers MC> [EMAIL PROTECTED] MC> - Original Message - MC> From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MC> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MC> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM MC> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> Just jumping in here... >> >> It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we >> would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and >> houses would be caves. >> >> We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses >> are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, >> so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design >> our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten >> years because it will make the user experience easier, more >> aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on >> the server end. >> >> Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) >> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
example by Chris Kief: http://www.riseinteractive.com/cftalk/ - Original Message - From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:45 PM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > I demand proof! > > -- > jon > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Friday, June 20, 2003, 3:33:24 PM, you wrote: > MC> I just want to make sure that everyone understands: > > MC> You can have blue links in Flash. > > MC> mike chambers > > MC> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > MC> - Original Message - > MC> From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MC> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MC> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM > MC> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > >> Just jumping in here... > >> > >> It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we > >> would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and > >> houses would be caves. > >> > >> We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses > >> are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, > >> so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design > >> our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten > >> years because it will make the user experience easier, more > >> aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on > >> the server end. > >> > >> Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) > >> > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Guess you missed it... http://www.riseinteractive.com/cftalk/ chris >-Original Message- >From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:46 PM >To: CF-Talk >Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > >I demand proof! > >-- > jon > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Friday, June 20, 2003, 3:33:24 PM, you wrote: >MC> I just want to make sure that everyone understands: > >MC> You can have blue links in Flash. > >MC> mike chambers > >MC> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >MC> - Original Message - >MC> From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >MC> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >MC> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM >MC> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > >>> Just jumping in here... >>> >>> It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we >>> would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and >>> houses would be caves. >>> >>> We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses >>> are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, >>> so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design >>> our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten >>> years because it will make the user experience easier, more >>> aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on >>> the server end. >>> >>> Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) >>> > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
on a similar note...i've seen photo galleries in flash where each image greys out after you click on them, so you don't keep looking at the same one with a little code you can do pretty much anything you would like. -Original Message- From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:33 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I just want to make sure that everyone understands: You can have blue links in Flash. mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Just jumping in here... > > It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we > would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and > houses would be caves. > > We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses > are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, > so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design > our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten > years because it will make the user experience easier, more > aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on > the server end. > > Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) > > > Matthew Small > IT Director > Showstopper American Dance Championships > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 843-357-1847 > > > -Original Message- > From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:27 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > Yeah I definitely agree with everything you are saying. Well... mostly. > I'm just saying that traditional navigation schemes transcend the media. > Just because it's done in flash doesn't mean you can't have blue > underline links. Everything can be implemented identically in one or the > other. > > But as far a blue links go (or any long standing tradition), just > because it's been this way in the past, doesn't mean we should keep > doing it into the future. Using established proven methodologies for > navigation yes, I think coloring and underlining menu object is just > aesthetic at this point. I agree it may well have been true 3 years ago, > but now users expect visually pleasing sites and applications. (Look at > OSX and WinXP) > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > > function or dhtml. > > > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > > this for it's > > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > > menus. > > > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. > And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is > that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. > Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for > them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless > they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > > > effective because users are familiar > > That is the heart of the matter. > > > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the > web, different != good usability. All of those sites with > different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue > underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and > they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes a > few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all > they want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site > to endure their "different" navigation. > > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amaz
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I demand proof! -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 3:33:24 PM, you wrote: MC> I just want to make sure that everyone understands: MC> You can have blue links in Flash. MC> mike chambers MC> [EMAIL PROTECTED] MC> - Original Message - MC> From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MC> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MC> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM MC> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> Just jumping in here... >> >> It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we >> would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and >> houses would be caves. >> >> We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses >> are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, >> so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design >> our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten >> years because it will make the user experience easier, more >> aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on >> the server end. >> >> Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) >> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
FMX also supports a limited amount HTML text in the movies. E - Original Message - From: "Mike Chambers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I just want to make sure that everyone understands: You can have blue links in Flash. mike chambers ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I just want to make sure that everyone understands: You can have blue links in Flash. mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Matthew Small" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Just jumping in here... > > It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we > would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and > houses would be caves. > > We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses > are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, > so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design > our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten > years because it will make the user experience easier, more > aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on > the server end. > > Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) > > > Matthew Small > IT Director > Showstopper American Dance Championships > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 843-357-1847 > > > -Original Message- > From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:27 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > Yeah I definitely agree with everything you are saying. Well... mostly. > I'm just saying that traditional navigation schemes transcend the media. > Just because it's done in flash doesn't mean you can't have blue > underline links. Everything can be implemented identically in one or the > other. > > But as far a blue links go (or any long standing tradition), just > because it's been this way in the past, doesn't mean we should keep > doing it into the future. Using established proven methodologies for > navigation yes, I think coloring and underlining menu object is just > aesthetic at this point. I agree it may well have been true 3 years ago, > but now users expect visually pleasing sites and applications. (Look at > OSX and WinXP) > > Adam Wayne Lehman > Web Systems Developer > Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health > Distance Education Division > > > -Original Message- > From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:56 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > > function or dhtml. > > > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > > this for it's > > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > > menus. > > > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. > And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is > that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. > Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for > them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless > they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > > > effective because users are familiar > > That is the heart of the matter. > > > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the > web, different != good usability. All of those sites with > different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue > underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and > they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes a > few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all > they want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site > to endure their "different" navigation. > > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the > most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white > background, dark/black text, blue underlined links and (for the most > part) standard form elements. Minor differences, but they don't stray > far from the basics. They know what works. And we can leverage the > usability of those sites
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I think you can safely change the links color and not loose any users. It's very minor, and it's the only way we can 'train' our users. Slowly. Sides, a lot of sites do not color their link blue and underline them, and they get along just fine. Remember that blue on white is second easiest to read than black on white. Just because the link is blue on a lot sites, doesn't necessarily mean it's done for standardization. Mostly its done because green and red don't read well. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Thane Sherrington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:16 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? At 01:35 PM 6/20/03 -0400, Lofback, Chris wrote: >I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally understood as >a clickable link, and the vast majority of users recognize a standard HTML >button widget. These are instantly recognizable and usable. I'd argue >that for all practical purposes this is as close to a standard as you can get. That's a very good point. I've recently been changing the blue underlined text and the buttons in one app because they are ugly. But I'm thinking that might be a mistake. For a specialized app, it might not be an issue, but for something where you want every one to be able to use it instantly, sticking with the basics is probably the way to go. T Tired of your bookmarks/favourites being limited to one computer? Move them to the Net! www.stuffbythane.com/webfavourites makes it easy to keep all your favourites in one place and access them from any computer that's attached to the Internet. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Just jumping in here... It sure would be a dull world if nothing evolved. If that were true, we would not have nice cars (they would all be horseless carriages) and houses would be caves. We use new things because the technology becomes available. Some uses are good, some are bad. There are plenty of bad sites written in HTML, so should we not use HTML? Nope, the answer is to intelligently design our web sites. The fact is, RIA is going to become the norm within ten years because it will make the user experience easier, more aesthetically pleasing, and more functional with fewer client errors on the server end. Sure, blue links are standard, but people like flash. (no pun intended) Matthew Small IT Director Showstopper American Dance Championships [EMAIL PROTECTED] 843-357-1847 -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:27 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? Yeah I definitely agree with everything you are saying. Well... mostly. I'm just saying that traditional navigation schemes transcend the media. Just because it's done in flash doesn't mean you can't have blue underline links. Everything can be implemented identically in one or the other. But as far a blue links go (or any long standing tradition), just because it's been this way in the past, doesn't mean we should keep doing it into the future. Using established proven methodologies for navigation yes, I think coloring and underlining menu object is just aesthetic at this point. I agree it may well have been true 3 years ago, but now users expect visually pleasing sites and applications. (Look at OSX and WinXP) Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:56 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > function or dhtml. > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > this for it's > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > menus. Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > effective because users are familiar That is the heart of the matter. > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the web, different != good usability. All of those sites with different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes a few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site to endure their "different" navigation. Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white background, dark/black text, blue underlined links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They know what works. And we can leverage the usability of those sites by mimicking their navigation and design elements. Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like them. I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out there, but it's the truth: the big sites really define usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash example that were suggested on the list are shooting themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which means more opportunities for sales/readers/customers/etc) then we must bow to the simple needs of users and not force our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using Flash like most sites do goes against good usability. Man, I need a weekend off! :) Chri
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Yeah I definitely agree with everything you are saying. Well... mostly. I'm just saying that traditional navigation schemes transcend the media. Just because it's done in flash doesn't mean you can't have blue underline links. Everything can be implemented identically in one or the other. But as far a blue links go (or any long standing tradition), just because it's been this way in the past, doesn't mean we should keep doing it into the future. Using established proven methodologies for navigation yes, I think coloring and underlining menu object is just aesthetic at this point. I agree it may well have been true 3 years ago, but now users expect visually pleasing sites and applications. (Look at OSX and WinXP) Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:56 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > function or dhtml. > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > this for it's > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > menus. Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > effective because users are familiar That is the heart of the matter. > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the web, different != good usability. All of those sites with different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes a few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site to endure their "different" navigation. Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white background, dark/black text, blue underlined links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They know what works. And we can leverage the usability of those sites by mimicking their navigation and design elements. Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like them. I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out there, but it's the truth: the big sites really define usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash example that were suggested on the list are shooting themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which means more opportunities for sales/readers/customers/etc) then we must bow to the simple needs of users and not force our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using Flash like most sites do goes against good usability. Man, I need a weekend off! :) Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
At 01:35 PM 6/20/03 -0400, Lofback, Chris wrote: >I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally understood as >a clickable link, and the vast majority of users recognize a standard HTML >button widget. These are instantly recognizable and usable. I'd argue >that for all practical purposes this is as close to a standard as you can get. That's a very good point. I've recently been changing the blue underlined text and the buttons in one app because they are ugly. But I'm thinking that might be a mistake. For a specialized app, it might not be an issue, but for something where you want every one to be able to use it instantly, sticking with the basics is probably the way to go. T Tired of your bookmarks/favourites being limited to one computer? Move them to the Net! www.stuffbythane.com/webfavourites makes it easy to keep all your favourites in one place and access them from any computer that's attached to the Internet. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
it's unfortunate that we have to fight off a trends because bad design becomes standard. the user experience can become enriched whatever medium it is delivered in. I think what sets us back in when people compare "cf" to "flash" or "dhtml" to "flash" All these tools can play friendly together. I would be upset if everyone just "settled" on 1 particular navigation. I guess I am just surprised with the either or methodology here. Lofback, Chris wrote: >>Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common >>identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily >>navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript >>function or dhtml. >> >>Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use >>this for it's >>core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four >>categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If >>selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, >>but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular >>menus. > > > > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I know I'm > blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users know what to do > with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from something that users > know? It only makes it harder for them and increases the likelihood that they won't > use your site--unless they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your > post: > > >>effective because users are familiar > > > That is the heart of the matter. > > >>Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the web, different > != good usability. All of those sites with different/unique navigation are harder > to use than "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure > them out--and they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes > a few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they want to > do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site to endure their > "different" navigation. > > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the most heavily > used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white background, dark/black text, blue > underlined links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor > differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They know what works. And > we can leverage the usability of those sites by mimicking their navigation and > design elements. Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like them. > I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out there, but it's the truth: > the big sites really define usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. > > There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash example that were suggested > on the list are shooting themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care > whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which means more opportunities > for sales/readers/customers/etc) then we must bow to the simple needs of users and > not force our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using Flash like most > sites do goes against good usability. > > > > Man, I need a weekend off! :) > > Chris > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I want to clarify somethig. What I, personally am talking about, are Flash Applications, not web sites. I consider what I am doing is creating Flash/CFMX based applications, not a 'typical' website. I agree, for a content based site, i.e. amazon, ebay, google, flash is not right for those sites. But, for an application, ie a helpdesk, phone book, Flash is great as the UI. Yes, there are somethings that are missing, mousewheel support is a big one, but for now I think we can get by without it. I am not saying this just to say it. I am saying this off of the response from my customers that used a convential HTML phone book, and then used the Flash based one, and they love the Flash one and hate the HTML one. Its all in how you build it and what you build. My 2cents... Clint - Original Message - From: "Lofback, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:55 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > > function or dhtml. > > > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > > this for it's > > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > > menus. > > > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > > > effective because users are familiar > > That is the heart of the matter. > > > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the web, different != good usability. All of those sites with different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes a few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site to endure their "different" navigation. > > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white background, dark/black text, blue underlined links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They know what works. And we can leverage the usability of those sites by mimicking their navigation and design elements. Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like them. I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out there, but it's the truth: the big sites really define usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. > > There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash example that were suggested on the list are shooting themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which means more opportunities for sales/readers/customers/etc) then we must bow to the simple needs of users and not force our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using Flash like most sites do goes against good usability. > > > > Man, I need a weekend off! :) > > Chris > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> >Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I >know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users >know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate >from something that users know? It only makes it harder for them and >increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless they have no >place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > >> effective because users are familiar > >That is the heart of the matter. Ahh...the beautiful blue link... If that's in your project requirements...Flash is definitely not holding you back... Quick example...with and without CSS style rollover... http://www.riseinteractive.com/cftalk/ chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Again, bad design. Here is the code necessary to add tabbing and enter
support.
---
userNameField.tabIndex = 0;
passWordField.tabIndex = 1;
Object listener = new Object();
listener.onKeyDown = function()
{
if(Key.getCode() == Key.ENTER)
{
submitForm();
}
}
Key.addListener(listener);
-
mike chambers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "John Wilker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:16 PM
Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> I agree with you on that one! Discover card has a little desktop app.
Flash
> or generator. You have to tab 2x to get from username to Password and
enter
> doesn't work, you have to click submit. PITA
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more
resources for the community.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
That has nothing to do with flash though, but rather bad movie design. Flash has support for tabbing between fields (and submitting the form on hitting enter). You can see an example here: http://www.markme.com/mxna/emaillink.cfm?id=E67CA192-A2FA-0E9B-DC5FC160C6E6460E mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Greg Luce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:09 PM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to > field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, > the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are > "trained" to use a form. > > Greg > > -Original Message- > From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. > > http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html > > Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was > talking about. > > If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. > > thanks, > Clint > > - Original Message ----- > From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > > > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many > > of > the > > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > > > and show > pretty > > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > > > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as > > CFMX, CF > 5.0, > > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business > > entity, > including > > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the > business > > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > > believe > all of > > the software publishers are throwing marketing > > (name-your-currency-here) > to try > > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, > > CF, > CFMX, > > PHP, and others. > > > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > > the > job > > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the > customer's > needs. > > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote > > example after > example > > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, > > just because > it > > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > > > bit > of > > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > > publications., > whose > > focus changes from issue to issue. > > > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development > starts, > > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > > the > bottom > > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > > believe, > is > > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > > job, > and > > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large > scale > > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the > IT > > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > > data > driven > > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, > > to > pure > > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of > which > have > > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > > implemented. Th
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Yes. We just need to make sure that we separate the technology, from implementations of the technology. A bad implementation does not mean that the technology itself is bad. my two cents... mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:26 PM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > I disagree, I think it's our duty to fight off trends in technology > that are focused more on marketing than on getting stuff done more > efficiently (I don't think Flash necessarily fits in this category). > That's why computers were invented, and that's why I buy books on > Amazon instead of going down to the book store. > > So, whether or not I end up a flash partisan after Royale comes > out...I feel the negatives and positives of any technology that > affects out industry should be argued about ad nauseum by us. > If we don't do it, no one else will, because no one else understands > the technology. > > -- ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common > identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily > navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript > function or dhtml. > > Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use > this for it's > core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four > categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If > selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, > but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular > menus. Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I know I'm blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users know what to do with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from something that users know? It only makes it harder for them and increases the likelihood that they won't use your site--unless they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your post: > effective because users are familiar That is the heart of the matter. > Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the web, different != good usability. All of those sites with different/unique navigation are harder to use than "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure them out--and they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes a few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they want to do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site to endure their "different" navigation. Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the most heavily used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white background, dark/black text, blue underlined links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They know what works. And we can leverage the usability of those sites by mimicking their navigation and design elements. Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like them. I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out there, but it's the truth: the big sites really define usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash example that were suggested on the list are shooting themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which means more opportunities for sales/readers/customers/etc) then we must bow to the simple needs of users and not force our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using Flash like most sites do goes against good usability. Man, I need a weekend off! :) Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
www.miniusa.com-buildyourown-minicooper -Original Message- From: Haggerty, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:30 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? Well, these days I don't know if even that is true. There are a lot of good sites being done by good developers that are really slick in how they handle, where things like tab stops are the least of what they handle for. The problem, IMHO, is that not enough people 'see' RIAs. They are not ubiquitous, there are no big RIA sites the general public visits (MM is not a site for the general public), and there are many, many brocureware-style projects out there for each application oriented project. The perception of Flash these days is still that of about two or three years ago. I would love it if a big auto company, a major online retailer, or someone that the general public sees would switch to an RIA. M ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I agree that the exchange is a terrible use. Each time I look at a download and go back I have to repeat my search. Sometimes it finds nothing and I have to close the browser and go back then it finds the same 30 it found before Very badly executed in that particular case -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:47 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Friday, June 20, 2003, 1:32:25 PM, you wrote: TS> example: i work for a large company, car rides home are free after a certain hour since public transp is deemed unsafe...previously the dispatcher was doing this all by paper, i wrote a flash TS> app on a PocketPC for him, now he scans id cards and a barcode on the car into a flash form, gets about a hundred of these. submits them all, gets stored locally(no internet connection), synches TS> it up at night...done with sharedObjects in Flash and remoting. we looked at other ways to do this, and flash was the easiest and quickest way to get this going for him. Look at the developer exchange. It takes me longer than it used to to find what I want to in order to download it than it did before, even on Allaire's old overloaded servers. It wont even work at all for people who don't have permission to install plugins on their work computers. TS> so you can say flash doesn't make things more efficient...but you'd be wrong per example above, I can say it makes things (another relative term) less efficient...and be right as well. I happen to think MM.com's use of MX is pretty much state of the art as well, and it's not working more efficiently (from my pov) than it did before all the time and money were invested in it. It follows that the majority of other implementations will have similar problems. TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:26 PM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> I disagree, I think it's our duty to fight off trends in technology TS> that are focused more on marketing than on getting stuff done more TS> efficiently (I don't think Flash necessarily fits in this category). TS> That's why computers were invented, and that's why I buy books on TS> Amazon instead of going down to the book store. TS> So, whether or not I end up a flash partisan after Royale comes TS> out...I feel the negatives and positives of any technology that TS> affects out industry should be argued about ad nauseum by us. TS> If we don't do it, no one else will, because no one else understands TS> the technology. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I did my first Flash MX nav system a few weeks back and it took about 12 hours (ouch). My second one (also from scratch) took about 6 hours, so my learning curve is getting shorter. For a long time I have been put off by Flash MX's interface, but decided to delve into it because of market demand. It's a different way of thinking than using CFMX. I would hope / guess that Royale would make the whole process of using/integrating Flash a lot easier. Here's what really concerns me, though. We are all beginning to see the presence of flash popup marketing ads which take up a sizeable amount of screen real estate and block the content you came to the site for (you know the ones -- with exceedingly small [close] buttons). With JS popups, a market quickly grew for popup stoppers which kills not only the annoying popups, but also some legitimate popups used for data presentation. These JS popup stoppers are now installed at some large ISP's. I now am seeing software that will allow an end user to turn off Flash in the browser (they don't just turn off the popup, but all Flash). So, over time, more and more apps built in Flash will be crippled or rendered useless by "flash stoppers". As I have found with popup stoppers, end users complain about not being able to see legitimate data viewed in a popup window. It's always resolved by having the end user disable the popup stopper. Do a search at google for "Flash popup stoppers" This is yet another example of marketers ruining it for everyone. -- Thanks, Mark -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:11 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? There have been numerous scientific studies and papers on web site navigation and user experience, which suggest the user does expect a certain standard navigation. Vertical-Left, and Horizontal-Upper-Right are where most users expect the nav to be. I can't recall a "look" study offhand but it probably exists out there. Search on Google. boxesandarrows.com is a good place to look as well. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 2:01:47 PM, you wrote: AWL> Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common AWL> identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily AWL> navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a AWL> javascript function or dhtml. AWL> Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use this for AWL> it's core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The AWL> four categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. AWL> If selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a AWL> standard, but none the less is effective because users are familiar AWL> with tabular menus. AWL> Users however familiar with blue underline text (the majority of AWL> site on the internet apply different colors, so I'd say the AWL> universal sign of a link is just the underline), are also familiar AWL> with a drop down window. They are familiar with side bar menus and AWL> horizontal tabs. AWL> Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. AWL> From how the menu is displayed, to how it's organized. This is what AWL> I mean by no such thing a standard navigation. AWL> However, I think the closest thing you could call standard AWL> navigation is underlined test links centered at the bottom of a AWL> page. It's an extremely common practice, but not very effective. AWL> Could you imagine having to scroll to the bottom of each page to AWL> navigate a site? AWL> Adam Wayne Lehman AWL> Web Systems Developer AWL> Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health AWL> Distance Education Division AWL> -Original Message- AWL> From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] AWL> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:36 PM AWL> To: CF-Talk AWL> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation >> non-standard >> in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard >> navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. AWL> I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally AWL> understood as a clickable link, and the vast majority of users AWL> recognize a standard HTML button widget. These are instantly AWL> recognizable and usable. I'd argue that for all practical purposes AWL> this is as close to a standard as you can get. AWL> Using different link styles, custom buttons and clickable "hot AWL> spots" is nonstandard, and forces the user to learn how to use the AWL> app. Make the widgets different enough, and users just won't do AWL> it. Unless the site is the only
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Yes, I complete agree that users expect some navigation. I just disagree that there is a standard. Vertical-left, horizontal-upper-right, horizontal top, horizontal-top with drop down... only one can be the standard. I think we're confusing what's traditional and what's a standard. To bring it back to flash, the same types of navigation schemes listed above are used in flash also. The traditions/standards above are universal to all application design, not just the browser and web sites. I'm all up on boxesandarrows.com. Great site, but you'll notice, they don't underline their links. Nor are they the traditional blue. But to keep this inline with what were talking about, I just don't see any standard navigation, just traditional approaches. Regardless, whether its in a browser, a flash plugin, or a windows form, it's the designer who defines navigation. Not the medium. (Which is what I think we're talking about) Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:11 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? There have been numerous scientific studies and papers on web site navigation and user experience, which suggest the user does expect a certain standard navigation. Vertical-Left, and Horizontal-Upper-Right are where most users expect the nav to be. I can't recall a "look" study offhand but it probably exists out there. Search on Google. boxesandarrows.com is a good place to look as well. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 2:01:47 PM, you wrote: AWL> Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common AWL> identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily AWL> navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript AWL> function or dhtml. AWL> Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use this for it's AWL> core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four AWL> categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If AWL> selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, AWL> but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular AWL> menus. AWL> Users however familiar with blue underline text (the majority of site on AWL> the internet apply different colors, so I'd say the universal sign of a AWL> link is just the underline), are also familiar with a drop down window. AWL> They are familiar with side bar menus and horizontal tabs. AWL> Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. From AWL> how the menu is displayed, to how it's organized. This is what I mean by AWL> no such thing a standard navigation. AWL> However, I think the closest thing you could call standard navigation is AWL> underlined test links centered at the bottom of a page. It's an AWL> extremely common practice, but not very effective. Could you imagine AWL> having to scroll to the bottom of each page to navigate a site? AWL> Adam Wayne Lehman AWL> Web Systems Developer AWL> Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health AWL> Distance Education Division AWL> -----Original Message- AWL> From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] AWL> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:36 PM AWL> To: CF-Talk AWL> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation >> non-standard >> in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard >> navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. AWL> I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally understood AWL> as a clickable link, and the vast majority of users recognize a standard AWL> HTML button widget. These are instantly recognizable and usable. I'd AWL> argue that for all practical purposes this is as close to a standard as AWL> you can get. AWL> Using different link styles, custom buttons and clickable "hot spots" is AWL> nonstandard, and forces the user to learn how to use the app. Make the AWL> widgets different enough, and users just won't do it. Unless the site AWL> is the only place to get what they want, they will go find another site AWL> that is easier to use. And this is especially true of the non-techie AWL> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"s who makes up a large portion of the user/customer AWL> pool. AWL> So why put a user through it? They want fast and easy to use. What's AWL> wrong with giving them what they want? And a simple way to do that is AWL> to stick as closely as possible to design "standards". AWL> I love the ease of use at Google and am thankful t
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
i agree, as i'm one of those people that can't install plugins at work, and i take that into account when developing...many times I've had to settle exporting to flash 5 so the users won't run into problems. efficiency and usability should be huge factors in using flash we could go on all day, trying to change each other's opinions...just don't rule out flash because of people's poor uses or because MM is trying to push the package and show what they can do with their own technologies. -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:47 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Friday, June 20, 2003, 1:32:25 PM, you wrote: TS> example: i work for a large company, car rides home are free after a certain hour since public transp is deemed unsafe...previously the dispatcher was doing this all by paper, i wrote a flash TS> app on a PocketPC for him, now he scans id cards and a barcode on the car into a flash form, gets about a hundred of these. submits them all, gets stored locally(no internet connection), synches TS> it up at night...done with sharedObjects in Flash and remoting. we looked at other ways to do this, and flash was the easiest and quickest way to get this going for him. Look at the developer exchange. It takes me longer than it used to to find what I want to in order to download it than it did before, even on Allaire's old overloaded servers. It wont even work at all for people who don't have permission to install plugins on their work computers. TS> so you can say flash doesn't make things more efficient...but you'd be wrong per example above, I can say it makes things (another relative term) less efficient...and be right as well. I happen to think MM.com's use of MX is pretty much state of the art as well, and it's not working more efficiently (from my pov) than it did before all the time and money were invested in it. It follows that the majority of other implementations will have similar problems. TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:26 PM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> I disagree, I think it's our duty to fight off trends in technology TS> that are focused more on marketing than on getting stuff done more TS> efficiently (I don't think Flash necessarily fits in this category). TS> That's why computers were invented, and that's why I buy books on TS> Amazon instead of going down to the book store. TS> So, whether or not I end up a flash partisan after Royale comes TS> out...I feel the negatives and positives of any technology that TS> affects out industry should be argued about ad nauseum by us. TS> If we don't do it, no one else will, because no one else understands TS> the technology. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
This thread has been the most interesting part of my day. -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:38 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? Fridays are such fertile ground for technology debates. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:33 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? Uh oh, here we go again. I've taken the 'flash is unnecessary' side before. So I'll try my hand at the argument that flash is the future. Usability, usability, usability. I'd imagine that probably only 5% (if we're lucky) of web developers have studied usability at all. As for designers, I'd like to say that the percentage is more, but all the designers I know are 'artists' and have no clue about application design or usability. They know what is visually appealing, not functional. If developers put as much time into usability, case studies, and actually perform usability tests (which I'm sure most companies will view as a worthless expense) as we do coding, I think the perception of the flash RIA would dramatically improve. Bottom line is, if a flash application is done correctly, with enough focus on usability, then it will smoke any comparable HTML application. As for google and yahoo's success. I can think of a million ways google would be better as an RIA. As for weight, this comes back to the application's design. Which can very from app to app, so it's unfair the generalize RIA as being heavy just because a few are. Not to mention you can conserve a lot more bandwidth and download time with a flash app. Maybe there is an initial download of 50k, but every time you want to refresh the screen, or pull in some db data, you don't have to make another page call. You can get only the minimum data necessary, rather than load the same html and images over... and over... and over... and over again. As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation non-standard in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:07 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > However, with a thread like this, it makes me think that you > are like the others who bitch about flash yet haven't seen > any flash movies worth while. Here are a few flash sites > that I consider to be worth your viewing. > > http://www.2advanced.com/flashindex.htm > > http://www.egomedia.com > > http://www.estudio.com > > just about any flash site on http://www.cwd.dk > > http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail.html (had to throw this > is for the humor) > > Just to name a few. Well, call me old school, but I find these sites annoying and difficult to use. It is my firm opinion that the vast majority of web users do not care for this stuff. It is meant to impress developers, techies and managers but it is hopelessly unfriendly to the majority of users who simply want to accomplish a task on a site. They do not want to wait for these gee-whiz animations to load or to figure out which widget does what--they just want to get what they are there for, and making them wait while your site goes into these gyrations is just bad business. Who wants aggravated customers? Customer service always wins over gimmicks. On the web, "speed and usability" = good customer service, "splash pages and non-standard navigation" = bad service. This is going to be hotly denounced by those who love the bleeding edge, but plain HTML (black text, white BG, blue links, no fancy DHTML) is almost always the best choice to let the user get what they want fast. Unless your product IS multimedia-based, or you are using Flash (or any other plugin/gizmo) to make your service easier/faster to use or to provide some vital capabilities--like enhanced form validation/processing--I wouldn't use it. For whom do we develop our web apps? The developers or the users? If you are an online business, you'd better think about it! Look at Yahoo and Google. It's no coincidence that they are successful and they both use simple designs. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ OK, Flame on! :) Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
There have been numerous scientific studies and papers on web site navigation and user experience, which suggest the user does expect a certain standard navigation. Vertical-Left, and Horizontal-Upper-Right are where most users expect the nav to be. I can't recall a "look" study offhand but it probably exists out there. Search on Google. boxesandarrows.com is a good place to look as well. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 2:01:47 PM, you wrote: AWL> Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common AWL> identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily AWL> navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript AWL> function or dhtml. AWL> Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use this for it's AWL> core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four AWL> categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If AWL> selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, AWL> but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular AWL> menus. AWL> Users however familiar with blue underline text (the majority of site on AWL> the internet apply different colors, so I'd say the universal sign of a AWL> link is just the underline), are also familiar with a drop down window. AWL> They are familiar with side bar menus and horizontal tabs. AWL> Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. From AWL> how the menu is displayed, to how it's organized. This is what I mean by AWL> no such thing a standard navigation. AWL> However, I think the closest thing you could call standard navigation is AWL> underlined test links centered at the bottom of a page. It's an AWL> extremely common practice, but not very effective. Could you imagine AWL> having to scroll to the bottom of each page to navigate a site? AWL> Adam Wayne Lehman AWL> Web Systems Developer AWL> Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health AWL> Distance Education Division AWL> -Original Message- AWL> From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] AWL> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:36 PM AWL> To: CF-Talk AWL> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation >> non-standard >> in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard >> navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. AWL> I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally understood AWL> as a clickable link, and the vast majority of users recognize a standard AWL> HTML button widget. These are instantly recognizable and usable. I'd AWL> argue that for all practical purposes this is as close to a standard as AWL> you can get. AWL> Using different link styles, custom buttons and clickable "hot spots" is AWL> nonstandard, and forces the user to learn how to use the app. Make the AWL> widgets different enough, and users just won't do it. Unless the site AWL> is the only place to get what they want, they will go find another site AWL> that is easier to use. And this is especially true of the non-techie AWL> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"s who makes up a large portion of the user/customer AWL> pool. AWL> So why put a user through it? They want fast and easy to use. What's AWL> wrong with giving them what they want? And a simple way to do that is AWL> to stick as closely as possible to design "standards". AWL> I love the ease of use at Google and am thankful that they don't force AWL> me to endure their idea of an "experience" to get what I want. They use AWL> standard navigation links and buttons and my user experience is great. AWL> Chris AWL> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Ok, here is the code for the simple example that I showed earlier. http://www.solowebworx.com/download.cfm Now, let me say this again... this is not a FULL example of this kinda of app. This is a small taste that was built specifically to show this kind of search interface. Please feel free to ask me any questions about this example OFF list, please. Thanks, Clint ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript function or dhtml. Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use this for it's core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular menus. Users however familiar with blue underline text (the majority of site on the internet apply different colors, so I'd say the universal sign of a link is just the underline), are also familiar with a drop down window. They are familiar with side bar menus and horizontal tabs. Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. From how the menu is displayed, to how it's organized. This is what I mean by no such thing a standard navigation. However, I think the closest thing you could call standard navigation is underlined test links centered at the bottom of a page. It's an extremely common practice, but not very effective. Could you imagine having to scroll to the bottom of each page to navigate a site? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:36 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation > non-standard > in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard > navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally understood as a clickable link, and the vast majority of users recognize a standard HTML button widget. These are instantly recognizable and usable. I'd argue that for all practical purposes this is as close to a standard as you can get. Using different link styles, custom buttons and clickable "hot spots" is nonstandard, and forces the user to learn how to use the app. Make the widgets different enough, and users just won't do it. Unless the site is the only place to get what they want, they will go find another site that is easier to use. And this is especially true of the non-techie "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"s who makes up a large portion of the user/customer pool. So why put a user through it? They want fast and easy to use. What's wrong with giving them what they want? And a simple way to do that is to stick as closely as possible to design "standards". I love the ease of use at Google and am thankful that they don't force me to endure their idea of an "experience" to get what I want. They use standard navigation links and buttons and my user experience is great. Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
just bad flash programming.. someone not knowing or understanding the focus features or key trapping in flash. jay miller Greg Luce wrote: > I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to > field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, > the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are > "trained" to use a form. > > Greg > > -Original Message- > From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. > > http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html > > Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was > talking about. > > If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. > > thanks, > Clint > > - Original Message - > From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > >>Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either >>media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > > >>of business/commerce centric Flash sites. >> >>Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many >>of > > the > >>other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple >>popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > > >>and show > > pretty > >>animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. >> >>There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > > >>an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as >>CFMX, CF > > 5.0, > >>PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, >>well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business >>entity, > > including > >>our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" >> >>The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the > > business > >>"face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I >>believe > > all of > >>the software publishers are throwing marketing >>(name-your-currency-here) > > to try > >>to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, >>CF, > > CFMX, > >>PHP, and others. >> >>A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get >>the > > job > >>done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the > > customer's > needs. > >>Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will >>choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote >>example after > > example > >>of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development >>money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, >>just because > > it > >>seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > > >>bit > > of > >>attention in articles written in the various "free" trade >>publications., > > whose > >>focus changes from issue to issue. >> >>The practice of management dictating the technology before development > > starts, > >>is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts >>the > > bottom > >>line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I >>believe, > > is > >>probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his >>job, > > and > >>also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large > > scale > >>operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the > > IT > >>manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion >>data > > driven > >>web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, >>to > > pure > >>Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of > > which > have > >>since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully >>implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates >>on > > the > >>existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Friday, June 20, 2003, 1:32:25 PM, you wrote: TS> example: i work for a large company, car rides home are free after a certain hour since public transp is deemed unsafe...previously the dispatcher was doing this all by paper, i wrote a flash TS> app on a PocketPC for him, now he scans id cards and a barcode on the car into a flash form, gets about a hundred of these. submits them all, gets stored locally(no internet connection), synches TS> it up at night...done with sharedObjects in Flash and remoting. we looked at other ways to do this, and flash was the easiest and quickest way to get this going for him. Look at the developer exchange. It takes me longer than it used to to find what I want to in order to download it than it did before, even on Allaire's old overloaded servers. It wont even work at all for people who don't have permission to install plugins on their work computers. TS> so you can say flash doesn't make things more efficient...but you'd be wrong per example above, I can say it makes things (another relative term) less efficient...and be right as well. I happen to think MM.com's use of MX is pretty much state of the art as well, and it's not working more efficiently (from my pov) than it did before all the time and money were invested in it. It follows that the majority of other implementations will have similar problems. TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:26 PM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> I disagree, I think it's our duty to fight off trends in technology TS> that are focused more on marketing than on getting stuff done more TS> efficiently (I don't think Flash necessarily fits in this category). TS> That's why computers were invented, and that's why I buy books on TS> Amazon instead of going down to the book store. TS> So, whether or not I end up a flash partisan after Royale comes TS> out...I feel the negatives and positives of any technology that TS> affects out industry should be argued about ad nauseum by us. TS> If we don't do it, no one else will, because no one else understands TS> the technology. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation > non-standard > in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard > navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. I don't agree. Blue, underlined text is nearly universally understood as a clickable link, and the vast majority of users recognize a standard HTML button widget. These are instantly recognizable and usable. I'd argue that for all practical purposes this is as close to a standard as you can get. Using different link styles, custom buttons and clickable "hot spots" is nonstandard, and forces the user to learn how to use the app. Make the widgets different enough, and users just won't do it. Unless the site is the only place to get what they want, they will go find another site that is easier to use. And this is especially true of the non-techie "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"s who makes up a large portion of the user/customer pool. So why put a user through it? They want fast and easy to use. What's wrong with giving them what they want? And a simple way to do that is to stick as closely as possible to design "standards". I love the ease of use at Google and am thankful that they don't force me to endure their idea of an "experience" to get what I want. They use standard navigation links and buttons and my user experience is great. Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
example: i work for a large company, car rides home are free after a certain hour since public transp is deemed unsafe...previously the dispatcher was doing this all by paper, i wrote a flash app on a PocketPC for him, now he scans id cards and a barcode on the car into a flash form, gets about a hundred of these. submits them all, gets stored locally(no internet connection), synches it up at night...done with sharedObjects in Flash and remoting. we looked at other ways to do this, and flash was the easiest and quickest way to get this going for him. so you can say flash doesn't make things more efficient...but you'd be wrong -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:26 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I disagree, I think it's our duty to fight off trends in technology that are focused more on marketing than on getting stuff done more efficiently (I don't think Flash necessarily fits in this category). That's why computers were invented, and that's why I buy books on Amazon instead of going down to the book store. So, whether or not I end up a flash partisan after Royale comes out...I feel the negatives and positives of any technology that affects out industry should be argued about ad nauseum by us. If we don't do it, no one else will, because no one else understands the technology. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 12:40:07 PM, you wrote: TS> too tired to think of it myself TS> i think as developers we should accept trends in technology, not fight them off. this is why developers read other developers' blogs, to keep current. TS> as for the site you sent, sure it's nice and somewhat soothing and no i wouldn't make it into a flash movie as it doesn't do anything. i'm not defending flash as an animation tool, but as a tool TS> that can do much much more. TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:21 PM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> I did...I didn't go Windows, X or otherwise, until Win95b (Memphis). TS> Besides, I think stuff like http://www.csszengarden.com/ is TS> incredible and quite "fancy" enough for any site, application or TS> content oriented. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Well, these days I don't know if even that is true. There are a lot of good sites being done by good developers that are really slick in how they handle, where things like tab stops are the least of what they handle for. The problem, IMHO, is that not enough people 'see' RIAs. They are not ubiquitous, there are no big RIA sites the general public visits (MM is not a site for the general public), and there are many, many brocureware-style projects out there for each application oriented project. The perception of Flash these days is still that of about two or three years ago. I would love it if a big auto company, a major online retailer, or someone that the general public sees would switch to an RIA. M -Original Message- From: John Wilker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:22 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? true true. I think it just is easy to not go that extra mile and those are the sites that incur this terrible reputation for flash. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I disagree, I think it's our duty to fight off trends in technology that are focused more on marketing than on getting stuff done more efficiently (I don't think Flash necessarily fits in this category). That's why computers were invented, and that's why I buy books on Amazon instead of going down to the book store. So, whether or not I end up a flash partisan after Royale comes out...I feel the negatives and positives of any technology that affects out industry should be argued about ad nauseum by us. If we don't do it, no one else will, because no one else understands the technology. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 12:40:07 PM, you wrote: TS> too tired to think of it myself TS> i think as developers we should accept trends in technology, not fight them off. this is why developers read other developers' blogs, to keep current. TS> as for the site you sent, sure it's nice and somewhat soothing and no i wouldn't make it into a flash movie as it doesn't do anything. i'm not defending flash as an animation tool, but as a tool TS> that can do much much more. TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:21 PM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> I did...I didn't go Windows, X or otherwise, until Win95b (Memphis). TS> Besides, I think stuff like http://www.csszengarden.com/ is TS> incredible and quite "fancy" enough for any site, application or TS> content oriented. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
So is this: http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail57.html - Original Message - From: Greg Luce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:11 am Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > Here is a good use of Flash. > http://www.3dfestival.com/tmp/kozoFlash.htm > -Original Message- > From: Greg Luce [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:09 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to > field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, > the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are > "trained" to use a form. > > Greg > > -Original Message- > From: Clint [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. > > http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html > > Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was > talking about. > > If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my > site. > thanks, > Clint > > - Original Message ----- > From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a > dearth > > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or > many> of > the > > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while > noisy > > and show > pretty > > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use > flash as > > > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, > such as > > CFMX, CF > 5.0, > > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the > business > > entity, > including > > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the > business > > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > > believe > all of > > the software publishers are throwing marketing > > (name-your-currency-here) > to try > > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, > ASPX,> CF, > CFMX, > > PHP, and others. > > > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > > the > job > > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the > customer's > needs. > > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can > quote > > example after > example > > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular > technology, > > just because > it > > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting > quite a > > > bit > of > > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > > publications., > whose > > focus changes from issue to issue. > > > > The practice of management dictating the technology before > developmentstarts, > > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > > the > bottom > > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > > believe, > is > > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > > job, > and > > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very > largescale > > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In > one, the > IT > > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > > data > driven > > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping > cart,> to > pure > > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, > 18 of > which > have > > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been > fully> im
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
true true. I think it just is easy to not go that extra mile and those are the sites that incur this terrible reputation for flash. -Original Message- From: Haggerty, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:15 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? These are things a good developer handles for. Tab controls are certainly easy to add to a form in Flash. M -Original Message- From: Greg Luce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:09 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are "trained" to use a form. Greg -Original Message- From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many > of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as > CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business > entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing > (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, > CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote > example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, > just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, > to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates > on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have > been thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due > to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked > well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I'd love to see the code. Did you package it as a component? Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:43 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either media > centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth of > business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple popup > windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as an > adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, well > designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will choose a > technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development money in > trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have been > thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on writing all applications in pure Java, > which we all recognize is still a moving target. > > As a Macromedia User group manager, I have been exposed from among our > membership, all of the above. We have a wide diversity of developer and > management types among our membership. There are some really atrociously > designed web sites that, while full of eye candy, are really short on > functionality. There are some web sites that function fairly well, but are > poorly organized and suffer from design effort. Even fewer are the web sites > that bring together both design and functionality. Each of us have that area in > which we excel, and that is a good thing, but all of us must widen our skills to > at least have a
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
These are things a good developer handles for. Tab controls are certainly easy to add to a form in Flash. M -Original Message- From: Greg Luce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:09 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are "trained" to use a form. Greg -Original Message- From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many > of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as > CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business > entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing > (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, > CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote > example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, > just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, > to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates > on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have > been thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due > to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked > well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on writing all applications in > pure Java, > which we all recognize is still a moving target. > > As a Macromedia User group manager, I have been exposed from among our > membership, all of the above. We have a wide diversity of developer > and management types among our membership.
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I agree with you on that one! Discover card has a little desktop app. Flash or generator. You have to tab 2x to get from username to Password and enter doesn't work, you have to click submit. PITA -Original Message- From: Greg Luce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:09 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are "trained" to use a form. Greg -Original Message- From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many > of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as > CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business > entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing > (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, > CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote > example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, > just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, > to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates > on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have > been thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due > to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked > well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on writing all applications in > pure Java, > which we all recognize is still a moving target. > > As a Macromedia User group manager, I have been exposed from among our > membe
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Here is a good use of Flash. http://www.3dfestival.com/tmp/kozoFlash.htm -Original Message- From: Greg Luce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:09 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are "trained" to use a form. Greg -Original Message- From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many > of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as > CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business > entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing > (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, > CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote > example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, > just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, > to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates > on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have > been thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due > to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked > well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on writing all applications in > pure Java, > which we all recognize is still a moving target. > > As a Macromedia User group manager, I have been exposed from among our > membership, all of the above. We have a wide diversity of developer > and management types among our membership. There are some really > atrocious
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I personally dislike flash forms where you can't tab from field to field, and when you hit "enter" with the cursor in any of the fields, the form won't submit. That in my experience is the way users are "trained" to use a form. Greg -Original Message- From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:43 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either > media centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth > of business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many > of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple > popup windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy > and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as > an adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as > CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, > well designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business > entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I > believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing > (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, > CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get > the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will > choose a technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote > example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development > money in trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, > just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a > bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade > publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts > the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I > believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his > job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion > data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, > to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates > on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have > been thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due > to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked > well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on writing all applications in > pure Java, > which we all recognize is still a moving target. > > As a Macromedia User group manager, I have been exposed from among our > membership, all of the above. We have a wide diversity of developer > and management types among our membership. There are some really > atrociously designed web sites that, while full of eye candy, are > really short on functionality. There are some web sites that function > fairly well, but are > poorly organized and suffer from design eff
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
too tired to think of it myself i think as developers we should accept trends in technology, not fight them off. this is why developers read other developers' blogs, to keep current. as for the site you sent, sure it's nice and somewhat soothing and no i wouldn't make it into a flash movie as it doesn't do anything. i'm not defending flash as an animation tool, but as a tool that can do much much more. -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:21 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? I did...I didn't go Windows, X or otherwise, until Win95b (Memphis). Besides, I think stuff like http://www.csszengarden.com/ is incredible and quite "fancy" enough for any site, application or content oriented. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 12:07:08 PM, you wrote: TS> "I see no reason for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces." TS> Did you say that when Mosaic came along, why didn't you stick with Lynx? TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:50 AM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:30:41 AM, you wrote: >>>The subject was UI though. CD>> I thought the topic was "Is flash really that good" and "Flash is evil", not flash doesn't look good. TS> You are getting semantic. I'll spell it out though TS> 1. The subject of the original post was what you say. TS> 2. One of the reasons given for supporting the fact that, yes, Flash TS>really is that good, what that you could do stuff in Flash that was TS>practically impossible in DHTML. (This is true, but practically is TS>a relative term). The poster chose the word "you" instead of "I" TS>meaning that he felt that his statements were more than an opinion, TS>but fact. I took the opportunity to inject some truth. TS> 3. I chose to take out of context the UI bit, and concentrate on that. TS>(my fault) should have addressed the cross-platform issue as well. TS>The subject of my sentence however, was the UI layer, which is TS>Flash. TS> The root issue is that I don't believe that the future of the web TS> should be defined by one company, whether I like that companies TS> products or not. I've been floating around the internet since before TS> the web existed, and it's been coming along nicely. I see no reason TS> for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good
I imagine the whole point is giving the customer what they want, and helping them to recognize what they want. (g) == Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway! For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 == If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! - Original Message - From: "Clint" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:45 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good | If the apps that I built didn't show sensitive data I would post the links. | They have no animations, but are useful interactive apps that have made the | people that use them VERY, VERY happy because they allow them to do their | jobs much easier and faster. | | I even tried doing this app in .Net with the server controls but still could | not get it to do *exactly* what my customers wanted it to do. So I said, | 'hey, lets try this in flash and use remoting to filter the data coming in'. | So with Flash/CFMX and remoting, I gave my customer exactly what they | wanted. | | Clint | ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Ok, here is a simplified version of what I did for my company. http://www.solowebworx.com/search.html Now, this is a quick example and not a FULL example of what I was talking about. If anyone is interested in the code, I will post a zip of it on my site. thanks, Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:36 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > Unfortunately, There are a ton of Flash web sites, that are either media > centric, cartoon centric, or game centric, and there is a dearth of > business/commerce centric Flash sites. > > Referring a potential commercial client to the Macromedia.com or many of the > other "sample" Flash sites, which are full of slow loading, multiple popup > windows, and other absolutely useless functionality, while noisy and show pretty > animations and colors, will surely turn most of them completely off. > > There have been a very few (unfortunately) Web sites that use flash as an > adjunct to conventional commercial development languages, such as CFMX, CF 5.0, > PHP or even ASP can do much more IMHO, in creating a user friendly, well > designed, bandwidth conservative, presentation of the business entity, including > our by-words; "Dynamic data-driven web application" > > The competition is on for the most eye-catching presentation of the business > "face" done with the mission of bringing the client back often. I believe all of > the software publishers are throwing marketing (name-your-currency-here) to try > to corner the market where the big bucks are. Be it .NET, ASP, ASPX, CF, CFMX, > PHP, and others. > > A web developer must keep in mind that all of these are tools to get the job > done. The focus should be on doing the job and meeting the customer's needs. > Managers, frequently either fall for the marketing hype, or will choose a > technology based on the in-house skillsets. I can quote example after example > of businesses that have wasted a tremendous amount of development money in > trying to develop in, or convert to a particular technology, just because it > seemed to be the "in" thing to do at the time, and was getting quite a bit of > attention in articles written in the various "free" trade publications., whose > focus changes from issue to issue. > > The practice of management dictating the technology before development starts, > is, in most cases, a costly, very costly mistake, and not only hurts the bottom > line, but wastes developer resources. The previous sentence, I believe, is > probably the greatest contributor to developer unhappiness with his job, and > also contributes to developers moving from job to job. Two very large scale > operations come to mind, but I will not name names here. In one, the IT > manager dictated three years ago a complete switch from a ColdFusion data driven > web site, which included a high volume order entry and shopping cart, to pure > Java. They had a twenty developer ColdFusion developer team, 18 of which have > since left the company, and the new technology has not yet been fully > implemented. The two remaining CF coders, are kept busy with updates on the > existing site, but literally thousands upon thousands of dollars have been > thrown down a empty hole with little or no progress, mainly due to the moving > target of the adopted technology. The other made a deal with Oracle for > enterprise licensing, and the attending Java hype, and is spending millions to > convert a Hodge-podge of database programs that previously worked well, but were > not integrated, and a blind insistence on writing all applications in pure Java, > which we all recognize is still a moving target. > > As a Macromedia User group manager, I have been exposed from among our > membership, all of the above. We have a wide diversity of developer and > management types among our membership. There are some really atrociously > designed web sites that, while full of eye candy, are really short on > functionality. There are some web sites that function fairly well, but are > poorly organized and suffer from design effort. Even fewer are the web sites > that bring together both design and functionality. Each of us have that area in > which we excel, and that is a good thing, but all of us must widen our skills to > at least have a working knowledge of each technology, as it applied to the > project(s) in hand. We must remain focused on the solution to the customer's > needs and wants, and should integrate their input every step of the way. > > Bottom, line, as one who is intimate with several technologies, and centered on > ColdFusion, I am
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
om ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 == If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! - Original Message - From: "Lofback, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:07 AM Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? | > However, with a thread like this, it makes me think that you | > are like the others who bitch about flash yet haven't seen | > any flash movies worth while. Here are a few flash sites | > that I consider to be worth your viewing. | > | > http://www.2advanced.com/flashindex.htm | > | > http://www.egomedia.com | > | > http://www.estudio.com | > | > just about any flash site on http://www.cwd.dk | > | > http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail.html (had to throw this | > is for the humor) | > | > Just to name a few. | | Well, call me old school, but I find these sites annoying and difficult to use. It is my firm opinion that the vast majority of web users do not care for this stuff. It is meant to impress developers, techies and managers but it is hopelessly unfriendly to the majority of users who simply want to accomplish a task on a site. They do not want to wait for these gee-whiz animations to load or to figure out which widget does what--they just want to get what they are there for, and making them wait while your site goes into these gyrations is just bad business. Who wants aggravated customers? | | Customer service always wins over gimmicks. On the web, "speed and usability" = good customer service, "splash pages and non-standard navigation" = bad service. | | This is going to be hotly denounced by those who love the bleeding edge, but plain HTML (black text, white BG, blue links, no fancy DHTML) is almost always the best choice to let the user get what they want fast. Unless your product IS multimedia-based, or you are using Flash (or any other plugin/gizmo) to make your service easier/faster to use or to provide some vital capabilities--like enhanced form validation/processing--I wouldn't use it. For whom do we develop our web apps? The developers or the users? If you are an online business, you'd better think about it! Look at Yahoo and Google. It's no coincidence that they are successful and they both use simple designs. | | http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ | | OK, Flame on! :) | | Chris | ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Fridays are such fertile ground for technology debates. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Adam Wayne Lehman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:33 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? Uh oh, here we go again. I've taken the 'flash is unnecessary' side before. So I'll try my hand at the argument that flash is the future. Usability, usability, usability. I'd imagine that probably only 5% (if we're lucky) of web developers have studied usability at all. As for designers, I'd like to say that the percentage is more, but all the designers I know are 'artists' and have no clue about application design or usability. They know what is visually appealing, not functional. If developers put as much time into usability, case studies, and actually perform usability tests (which I'm sure most companies will view as a worthless expense) as we do coding, I think the perception of the flash RIA would dramatically improve. Bottom line is, if a flash application is done correctly, with enough focus on usability, then it will smoke any comparable HTML application. As for google and yahoo's success. I can think of a million ways google would be better as an RIA. As for weight, this comes back to the application's design. Which can very from app to app, so it's unfair the generalize RIA as being heavy just because a few are. Not to mention you can conserve a lot more bandwidth and download time with a flash app. Maybe there is an initial download of 50k, but every time you want to refresh the screen, or pull in some db data, you don't have to make another page call. You can get only the minimum data necessary, rather than load the same html and images over... and over... and over... and over again. As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation non-standard in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:07 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > However, with a thread like this, it makes me think that you > are like the others who bitch about flash yet haven't seen > any flash movies worth while. Here are a few flash sites > that I consider to be worth your viewing. > > http://www.2advanced.com/flashindex.htm > > http://www.egomedia.com > > http://www.estudio.com > > just about any flash site on http://www.cwd.dk > > http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail.html (had to throw this > is for the humor) > > Just to name a few. Well, call me old school, but I find these sites annoying and difficult to use. It is my firm opinion that the vast majority of web users do not care for this stuff. It is meant to impress developers, techies and managers but it is hopelessly unfriendly to the majority of users who simply want to accomplish a task on a site. They do not want to wait for these gee-whiz animations to load or to figure out which widget does what--they just want to get what they are there for, and making them wait while your site goes into these gyrations is just bad business. Who wants aggravated customers? Customer service always wins over gimmicks. On the web, "speed and usability" = good customer service, "splash pages and non-standard navigation" = bad service. This is going to be hotly denounced by those who love the bleeding edge, but plain HTML (black text, white BG, blue links, no fancy DHTML) is almost always the best choice to let the user get what they want fast. Unless your product IS multimedia-based, or you are using Flash (or any other plugin/gizmo) to make your service easier/faster to use or to provide some vital capabilities--like enhanced form validation/processing--I wouldn't use it. For whom do we develop our web apps? The developers or the users? If you are an online business, you'd better think about it! Look at Yahoo and Google. It's no coincidence that they are successful and they both use simple designs. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ OK, Flame on! :) Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
Uh oh, here we go again. I've taken the 'flash is unnecessary' side before. So I'll try my hand at the argument that flash is the future. Usability, usability, usability. I'd imagine that probably only 5% (if we're lucky) of web developers have studied usability at all. As for designers, I'd like to say that the percentage is more, but all the designers I know are 'artists' and have no clue about application design or usability. They know what is visually appealing, not functional. If developers put as much time into usability, case studies, and actually perform usability tests (which I'm sure most companies will view as a worthless expense) as we do coding, I think the perception of the flash RIA would dramatically improve. Bottom line is, if a flash application is done correctly, with enough focus on usability, then it will smoke any comparable HTML application. As for google and yahoo's success. I can think of a million ways google would be better as an RIA. As for weight, this comes back to the application's design. Which can very from app to app, so it's unfair the generalize RIA as being heavy just because a few are. Not to mention you can conserve a lot more bandwidth and download time with a flash app. Maybe there is an initial download of 50k, but every time you want to refresh the screen, or pull in some db data, you don't have to make another page call. You can get only the minimum data necessary, rather than load the same html and images over... and over... and over... and over again. As for non-standard navigation, what make flash navigation non-standard in compared to HTML. What is standard navigation anyhow? Standard navigation doesn't exist. It's just a concept. Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: Lofback, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:07 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > However, with a thread like this, it makes me think that you > are like the others who bitch about flash yet haven't seen > any flash movies worth while. Here are a few flash sites > that I consider to be worth your viewing. > > http://www.2advanced.com/flashindex.htm > > http://www.egomedia.com > > http://www.estudio.com > > just about any flash site on http://www.cwd.dk > > http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail.html (had to throw this > is for the humor) > > Just to name a few. Well, call me old school, but I find these sites annoying and difficult to use. It is my firm opinion that the vast majority of web users do not care for this stuff. It is meant to impress developers, techies and managers but it is hopelessly unfriendly to the majority of users who simply want to accomplish a task on a site. They do not want to wait for these gee-whiz animations to load or to figure out which widget does what--they just want to get what they are there for, and making them wait while your site goes into these gyrations is just bad business. Who wants aggravated customers? Customer service always wins over gimmicks. On the web, "speed and usability" = good customer service, "splash pages and non-standard navigation" = bad service. This is going to be hotly denounced by those who love the bleeding edge, but plain HTML (black text, white BG, blue links, no fancy DHTML) is almost always the best choice to let the user get what they want fast. Unless your product IS multimedia-based, or you are using Flash (or any other plugin/gizmo) to make your service easier/faster to use or to provide some vital capabilities--like enhanced form validation/processing--I wouldn't use it. For whom do we develop our web apps? The developers or the users? If you are an online business, you'd better think about it! Look at Yahoo and Google. It's no coincidence that they are successful and they both use simple designs. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ OK, Flame on! :) Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
The fact of the matter is that Flash IS around now. The free plugin IS on almost every computer. Personally I think you should be updating your application. It is fool hearted to think that your application cannot be improved with the changing technology. Take a javascript/html based calculator written in 1995. It will still work in today's browsers (maybe... if you managed to avoid any of the thousands of changes made to JavaScript and HTML since, which is highly unlikely). Anyway, regardless of how unlikely it is, lets just say that its true. Now I come out with a flash bases calculator, which looks incredible, has some nifty little sounds, and overall provides a better user experience. Now the logic in both are exactly the same, but I think you'll agree the flash based application will be preferred by every user. Ford sold the model T for over 20 years, and claimed that no person would ever need more. Sure the technology behind the model T still holds true today, but I happen to enjoy power steering, brakes, windshield wipers... etc. (I recently heard a piece on Ford's 100 year history on NPR) Adam Wayne Lehman Web Systems Developer Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Distance Education Division -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:52 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Can Flash be run outside of the Flash plugin? Uh no. Can you guarantee to me that the Flash plugin, and API will forever be free and open? Don't need the code...thanks though. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:36:31 AM, you wrote: C> How about running this app OUTSIDE the browser? AFAIK, DHTML cannot be run C> outside the browser, my Flash App can, and still talk to the database. C> All I am saying is that for some things, like applications(not entire C> websites that are content based), using Flash as the UI is going to be C> better than using HTML or DHTML. C> If anyone cares, I will post and an example of my search app to show you C> what I mean. C> Clint C> - Original Message - C> From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:34 AM C> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? >> I doubt the 10 minute figure, but with some forethought I could write >> a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly >> quickly. Say 20 minutes...I've done this in the past. >> Changing the look would be as easy as changing the css definition. >> >> -- >> jon >> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:22:54 AM, you wrote: >> C> I have an interactive search that as you type filters the data that you C> see. >> >> C> This could be done in DHTML, but in NOT 10 minutes, NOT outside a C> browser, >> C> and NOT as easy to change as the Flash interface. >> >> C> Clint >> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I did...I didn't go Windows, X or otherwise, until Win95b (Memphis). Besides, I think stuff like http://www.csszengarden.com/ is incredible and quite "fancy" enough for any site, application or content oriented. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 12:07:08 PM, you wrote: TS> "I see no reason for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces." TS> Did you say that when Mosaic came along, why didn't you stick with Lynx? TS> -Original Message- TS> From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TS> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:50 AM TS> To: CF-Talk TS> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? TS> Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:30:41 AM, you wrote: >>>The subject was UI though. CD>> I thought the topic was "Is flash really that good" and "Flash is evil", not flash doesn't look good. TS> You are getting semantic. I'll spell it out though TS> 1. The subject of the original post was what you say. TS> 2. One of the reasons given for supporting the fact that, yes, Flash TS>really is that good, what that you could do stuff in Flash that was TS>practically impossible in DHTML. (This is true, but practically is TS>a relative term). The poster chose the word "you" instead of "I" TS>meaning that he felt that his statements were more than an opinion, TS>but fact. I took the opportunity to inject some truth. TS> 3. I chose to take out of context the UI bit, and concentrate on that. TS>(my fault) should have addressed the cross-platform issue as well. TS>The subject of my sentence however, was the UI layer, which is TS>Flash. TS> The root issue is that I don't believe that the future of the web TS> should be defined by one company, whether I like that companies TS> products or not. I've been floating around the internet since before TS> the web existed, and it's been coming along nicely. I see no reason TS> for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I feel that flash is a good TOOL to extend the functionality or design of an application. When used as a tool, flash is very powerful and has it's place. It is when it is abused that it becomes combersome. I equate it to using a hammer to drive screws; when you use the right tool, you'll get the desired results. -Original Message- From: Jon Block [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:59 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? I've always equated Flash movies with special effects in movies. The best special effects in movies are the ones you don't even know are there. Sometimes I'm on a site and I realize wow how'd they do that ... and then a right click on a certain area of the screen reveals its a Flash movie. Thats where I think Flash is best used. Something else that I wanted to mention... if you load a JPG in your browser, would you consider it to be a website? Probably not. If you load a quicktime movie in your browser, is that a web site? I would say "no". Same is true for a Java applet. By the same logic, I think that when a flash movie is loaded into a web browser and its the only thing on the page, its really not a "web site" but instead a Flash movie running in your browser. When I hear that someone is "doing a website in Flash", that never sits well with me. If you are building an application that doesn't use HTML, doesn't reload, can't be indexed by Google, doesn't even need to run in a web browser in the first place, is it really a web site or is it something else? If we were to all use Flash to build our internet applications, there would be no practical use for the web browser in the first place and suddenly the web is a propritary place. So the question I pose is this: If someone were to ask you to build them a website and your final product is a URL to a web page that runs a full page Flash movie, did you build them what they asked for? Did you build a website? Thoughts? -Jon ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
"I see no reason for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces." Did you say that when Mosaic came along, why didn't you stick with Lynx? -Original Message- From: jon hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 11:50 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:30:41 AM, you wrote: >>The subject was UI though. CD> I thought the topic was "Is flash really that good" and "Flash is evil", not flash doesn't look good. You are getting semantic. I'll spell it out though 1. The subject of the original post was what you say. 2. One of the reasons given for supporting the fact that, yes, Flash really is that good, what that you could do stuff in Flash that was practically impossible in DHTML. (This is true, but practically is a relative term). The poster chose the word "you" instead of "I" meaning that he felt that his statements were more than an opinion, but fact. I took the opportunity to inject some truth. 3. I chose to take out of context the UI bit, and concentrate on that. (my fault) should have addressed the cross-platform issue as well. The subject of my sentence however, was the UI layer, which is Flash. The root issue is that I don't believe that the future of the web should be defined by one company, whether I like that companies products or not. I've been floating around the internet since before the web existed, and it's been coming along nicely. I see no reason for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
F*&( the customer. We're not talking about customers. >Yikes! Do you develop business-related web apps? If so, double yikes! I'll stand by what I said, but only in this context only. > Unfortunately, too many people see simple uses for flash, and not the good uses. >Again, yikes! Simple vs. good? These are rarely opposites. They are almost always >synonymous. Yes. That was poor choice of wording (just like above) on my part because I was trying to describe the constant pop-ups/downs or over web site ads that seem to be the rage right now. >The "never mind the customer" and "fancy/complicated = good" mindset leads to >user-unfriendly designs and--even worse from a business standpoint--lost customers. It's OK among techies, but it's horrible in the business world. Yes, the sites I submitted fall into this category, and despite my earlier customer comment, I like lists like this because I consider it mostly if not only techies. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>Search the archives for the complaints. The site has been changed after that and some progress has been made on making Flash work all the way on Opera and Safari, but when the Macromedia site was launched it was pretty much IE and Mozilla/Netscape only. I was not aware of that. I still think Flash has the upper hand on DHTML in most scenarios. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Ehh...onKeyPress then? I would think that would be self evident. jon Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:41:21 AM, you wrote: >>I could write a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly CD> Hmm. I tried the following code in IE6, MOZ1.1, and Opera6 and it didn't work in Opera6 CD> CD> Flash will work in all 3 browsers. CD> DHTML - 0 CD> FLASH - 1 CD> E ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
I've always equated Flash movies with special effects in movies. The best special effects in movies are the ones you don't even know are there. Sometimes I'm on a site and I realize wow how'd they do that ... and then a right click on a certain area of the screen reveals its a Flash movie. Thats where I think Flash is best used. Something else that I wanted to mention... if you load a JPG in your browser, would you consider it to be a website? Probably not. If you load a quicktime movie in your browser, is that a web site? I would say "no". Same is true for a Java applet. By the same logic, I think that when a flash movie is loaded into a web browser and its the only thing on the page, its really not a "web site" but instead a Flash movie running in your browser. When I hear that someone is "doing a website in Flash", that never sits well with me. If you are building an application that doesn't use HTML, doesn't reload, can't be indexed by Google, doesn't even need to run in a web browser in the first place, is it really a web site or is it something else? If we were to all use Flash to build our internet applications, there would be no practical use for the web browser in the first place and suddenly the web is a propritary place. So the question I pose is this: If someone were to ask you to build them a website and your final product is a URL to a web page that runs a full page Flash movie, did you build them what they asked for? Did you build a website? Thoughts? -Jon ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Jon Block wrote: > > Maybe I'm wrong. I admit I have only got into Flash a little bit but every > time I do, I end up asking myself why I am wasting my time with this tool. > As application developers, do you take Flash seriously? Yes. > Do you think it does > or will ever make since to use it for your full blown applications? Yes. I doubt it will ever make sense for a whole websites. Content oriented sites for the general public can reach a level of functionality in XHTML that I don't see Flash reach anytime soon, not even at the current speed it is developed. But integration of Flash components can already make sense (but not for splash screens, never). However, for client-server applications that are now mostly written in C++/VB/Java and run over an intranet, I think Flash is a real killer. All those SAP/PeopleSoft/BAAN/MedWare etc. applications now require extensive installations on the client, with all the problems they generate (dependencies, incompatibilities with applications requiring a different MDAC version, no client available for platform X etc.). In this area, Flash can shine. Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
CF Dude wrote: >>Safari > > I wish I had a MAC to test this, but I don't. > > >>Opera + new Macromedia website??? > > On a pc, I went and only had a problem because I had JS turned off. File / enable > Javascript got me going. > > I thought we were talking about flash Search the archives for the complaints. The site has been changed after that and some progress has been made on making Flash work all the way on Opera and Safari, but when the Macromedia site was launched it was pretty much IE and Mozilla/Netscape only. Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Can Flash be run outside of the Flash plugin? Uh no. Can you guarantee to me that the Flash plugin, and API will forever be free and open? Don't need the code...thanks though. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:36:31 AM, you wrote: C> How about running this app OUTSIDE the browser? AFAIK, DHTML cannot be run C> outside the browser, my Flash App can, and still talk to the database. C> All I am saying is that for some things, like applications(not entire C> websites that are content based), using Flash as the UI is going to be C> better than using HTML or DHTML. C> If anyone cares, I will post and an example of my search app to show you C> what I mean. C> Clint C> - Original Message - C> From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:34 AM C> Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? >> I doubt the 10 minute figure, but with some forethought I could write >> a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly >> quickly. Say 20 minutes...I've done this in the past. >> Changing the look would be as easy as changing the css definition. >> >> -- >> jon >> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:22:54 AM, you wrote: >> C> I have an interactive search that as you type filters the data that you C> see. >> >> C> This could be done in DHTML, but in NOT 10 minutes, NOT outside a C> browser, >> C> and NOT as easy to change as the Flash interface. >> >> C> Clint >> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
RE: Is Flash really THAT good?
> Yeah, but this list is made up of developers and techies, not > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes, developers and techies who talk about using Flash and other technologies in the real world to deliver real apps for real users. The list also includes many professionals who need to understand the needs of users/customers and apply their skills in the real business world. > F*&( the customer. We're not talking about customers. Yikes! Do you develop business-related web apps? If so, double yikes! > Unfortunately, too many people see simple uses for flash, and not the good uses. Again, yikes! Simple vs. good? These are rarely opposites. They are almost always synonymous. The "never mind the customer" and "fancy/complicated = good" mindset leads to user-unfriendly designs and--even worse from a business standpoint--lost customers. It's OK among techies, but it's horrible in the business world. > the "vast majority of web users" probably don't even know what flash is. The point is users don't like being aggravated by poor designs, whether it's Flash, HTML, DHTML or some other unnecessary but "cool" gizmo. Using Flash for its own sake or because you can do things that impress you and other developers does not mean it's appropriate for the "vast majority of web users", who usually make up your customer base. When building business apps, a developer must keep their eye on the goal, not what thrills THEM as a developer. But if Flash delivers something that cannot be delivered better (or at all) in another simpler/faster way, then use it. But IMHO, using it like the sites you cited is not good design or business. Chris ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>Safari I wish I had a MAC to test this, but I don't. >Opera + new Macromedia website??? On a pc, I went and only had a problem because I had JS turned off. File / enable Javascript got me going. I thought we were talking about flash E ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:30:41 AM, you wrote: >>The subject was UI though. CD> I thought the topic was "Is flash really that good" and "Flash is evil", not flash doesn't look good. You are getting semantic. I'll spell it out though 1. The subject of the original post was what you say. 2. One of the reasons given for supporting the fact that, yes, Flash really is that good, what that you could do stuff in Flash that was practically impossible in DHTML. (This is true, but practically is a relative term). The poster chose the word "you" instead of "I" meaning that he felt that his statements were more than an opinion, but fact. I took the opportunity to inject some truth. 3. I chose to take out of context the UI bit, and concentrate on that. (my fault) should have addressed the cross-platform issue as well. The subject of my sentence however, was the UI layer, which is Flash. The root issue is that I don't believe that the future of the web should be defined by one company, whether I like that companies products or not. I've been floating around the internet since before the web existed, and it's been coming along nicely. I see no reason for us to sell it out for fancier user interfaces. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good
If the apps that I built didn't show sensitive data I would post the links. They have no animations, but are useful interactive apps that have made the people that use them VERY, VERY happy because they allow them to do their jobs much easier and faster. I even tried doing this app in .Net with the server controls but still could not get it to do *exactly* what my customers wanted it to do. So I said, 'hey, lets try this in flash and use remoting to filter the data coming in'. So with Flash/CFMX and remoting, I gave my customer exactly what they wanted. Clint - Original Message - From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:42 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good > 2 days huh? That is awesome > > I have taken the liberty of forwarding your email address to our HR department. > There is a chance there will be a recruitment attempt sent to you before long. > > == > Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway! > For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com > ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 > == > If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! > > - Original Message - > From: "Clint" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 9:00 AM > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good > > > | oops... clicked on the wrong message for my reply... > | ;) > | > | Here is my opinion: > | > Here at work we have a horribly designed Intranet that was built by the > | > coder that I replaced. It is built in ASP(classic) and uses SQL 2000 for > | the > | > database. Now the interface is all HTML and it is very bad. Hard to use, > | > content spread out on to many pages. > | > > | > Now, in 2 days, I have rebuilt the intranet phone book search and an asset > | > search to include all the content that used to be spread out over several > | > pages onto a single interactive movie. I do not have any animations, this > | > just a straight forward application that uses FlashMX/CFMX and remoting. > | > > | > It took me less time to build these 2 apps in Flash/CF than just plain > | > HTML/CF and the user experience is much better. > | > > | > Anyway, that is my opinion... > | > Clint > | > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>But - everyone just started tossing around "cool" and "pretty" sites - 2advanced etc, estudio, ego - I think these are typical of the 2000 to 2002 era.. certainly graphically inspiring - but an odd url to post for "if flash is that good" - the demos don't show flash being used other than pretty animations. I don't know - the insides may be powerful database driven ria's - which I wouldn't be surprised.. but on surfing that site -it's all pretty. Yes I agree completely. I was not prepared for the 'flash is bad' convo and therefore there were the only sites I could think of off the top of my head >Except the ones that force full screen.. i will close the browser and refuse to visit >any site that does that.. on triple monitors it is amazingly frustrating. Don't even get me started. E ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I had forgotten to mention what Clint does below.. I have done quite a few little mini desktop flash apps that allow clients to modify products and e commerce products instead of opening a brower and such. They just mouse over a little icon hanging out on their desktop - it expands with some menu choices - they grab data from online and modify and add products. Has a powerful use. Clint wrote: > How about running this app OUTSIDE the browser? AFAIK, DHTML cannot be run > outside the browser, my Flash App can, and still talk to the database. > > All I am saying is that for some things, like applications(not entire > websites that are content based), using Flash as the UI is going to be > better than using HTML or DHTML. > > If anyone cares, I will post and an example of my search app to show you > what I mean. > > Clint > > - Original Message - > From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:34 AM > Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > >>I doubt the 10 minute figure, but with some forethought I could write >>a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly >>quickly. Say 20 minutes...I've done this in the past. >>Changing the look would be as easy as changing the css definition. >> >>-- >> jon >> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:22:54 AM, you wrote: >>C> I have an interactive search that as you type filters the data that you > > see. > >>C> This could be done in DHTML, but in NOT 10 minutes, NOT outside a > > browser, > >>C> and NOT as easy to change as the Flash interface. >> >>C> Clint >> >>C> - Original Message - >>C> From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>C> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>C> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:22 AM >>C> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> >> >> >>>>>Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible >>>>>in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. >>>> >>>>How about an org chart? >>>> >>>>http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm >>>>(Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be >>> > cross-browser, > >>C> and >> >>>>it wouldn't work very well, and it would be expensive to support, and >>> >>C> you'd >> >>>>lose all your hair.) >>>> >>>>How about a whiteboard? >>>> >>>>http://products.figleaf.com/ >>>> >>>>Good luck with that DHTML. >>>> >>>>Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >>>>http://www.figleaf.com/ >>>>voice: (202) 797-5496 >>>>fax: (202) 797-5444 >>>> >>>> >>> >>C> >> > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>I could write a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly Hmm. I tried the following code in IE6, MOZ1.1, and Opera6 and it didn't work in Opera6 Flash will work in all 3 browsers. DHTML - 0 FLASH - 1 E ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
CF Dude wrote: > > The point I was making was that you can't take the EXACT same code from a DHTML app > and run it in all of the browsers > that support flash. With flash you can. Safari & Opera + new Macromedia website??? How quickly we forget. Jochem ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good
2 days huh? That is awesome I have taken the liberty of forwarding your email address to our HR department. There is a chance there will be a recruitment attempt sent to you before long. == Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway! For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com ISP rated: http://www.forta.com/cf/isp/isp.cfm?isp_id=772 == If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done! - Original Message - From: "Clint" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 9:00 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good | oops... clicked on the wrong message for my reply... | ;) | | Here is my opinion: | > Here at work we have a horribly designed Intranet that was built by the | > coder that I replaced. It is built in ASP(classic) and uses SQL 2000 for | the | > database. Now the interface is all HTML and it is very bad. Hard to use, | > content spread out on to many pages. | > | > Now, in 2 days, I have rebuilt the intranet phone book search and an asset | > search to include all the content that used to be spread out over several | > pages onto a single interactive movie. I do not have any animations, this | > just a straight forward application that uses FlashMX/CFMX and remoting. | > | > It took me less time to build these 2 apps in Flash/CF than just plain | > HTML/CF and the user experience is much better. | > | > Anyway, that is my opinion... | > Clint | ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.cfhosting.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
How about running this app OUTSIDE the browser? AFAIK, DHTML cannot be run outside the browser, my Flash App can, and still talk to the database. All I am saying is that for some things, like applications(not entire websites that are content based), using Flash as the UI is going to be better than using HTML or DHTML. If anyone cares, I will post and an example of my search app to show you what I mean. Clint - Original Message - From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:34 AM Subject: Re: Is Flash really THAT good? > I doubt the 10 minute figure, but with some forethought I could write > a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly > quickly. Say 20 minutes...I've done this in the past. > Changing the look would be as easy as changing the css definition. > > -- > jon > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:22:54 AM, you wrote: > C> I have an interactive search that as you type filters the data that you see. > > C> This could be done in DHTML, but in NOT 10 minutes, NOT outside a browser, > C> and NOT as easy to change as the Flash interface. > > C> Clint > > C> - Original Message - > C> From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > C> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > C> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:22 AM > C> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? > > > >> > Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible > >> > in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. > >> > >> How about an org chart? > >> > >> http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm > >> (Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be cross-browser, > C> and > >> it wouldn't work very well, and it would be expensive to support, and > C> you'd > >> lose all your hair.) > >> > >> How about a whiteboard? > >> > >> http://products.figleaf.com/ > >> > >> Good luck with that DHTML. > >> > >> Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > >> http://www.figleaf.com/ > >> voice: (202) 797-5496 > >> fax: (202) 797-5444 > >> > >> > C> > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I am cautiously stepping into this conversation.. And I wish I had a different sample to post then my own - because I am sure their will be a issue or too... But - everyone just started tossing around "cool" and "pretty" sites - 2advanced etc, estudio, ego - I think these are typical of the 2000 to 2002 era.. certainly graphically inspiring - but an odd url to post for "if flash is that good" - the demos don't show flash being used other than pretty animations. I don't know - the insides may be powerful database driven ria's - which I wouldn't be surprised.. but on surfing that site -it's all pretty. Except the ones that force full screen.. i will close the browser and refuse to visit any site that does that.. on triple monitors it is amazingly frustrating. I am NOT AT ALL comparing on of my sites to any others.. but I think where the power of flash really lies is in hybrid pages. One of my sites, www.speedpeople.com on the upper right side of the page has a vehicle search. I chose flash to drill through an access database.. to come up with acurate db results instead of pre querying lists and getting to a dead end - you know those "sorry - no match". I also avoided the walk through refresh issue.. I don't want a user to refresh all the same graphics on a page like that.. Let them drill down - and choose if they want to leave the page or find something new through the search. And impressive usage of a hybrid is http://www.westonfl.org/ - That has very useful information.. great interface, pretty on top of it.. and easy to use. I think there in lies the power of flash. I think if someone has to mention that they are angry at splash pages.. they perhaps haven't read any posts or updated flash since "future splash" or flash 4 even. Most are angry at splash pages.. and I find it amazing that flash still is fighting to seperate itself from that.. Jay Miller P.S. - Fantastic samples below Dave. As always amazing stuff. Dave Watts wrote: >>Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible >>in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. > > > How about an org chart? > > http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm > (Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be cross-browser, and > it wouldn't work very well, and it would be expensive to support, and you'd > lose all your hair.) > > How about a whiteboard? > > http://products.figleaf.com/ > > Good luck with that DHTML. > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ > voice: (202) 797-5496 > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
I doubt the 10 minute figure, but with some forethought I could write a script that onKeyUp change the contents of an html widget fairly quickly. Say 20 minutes...I've done this in the past. Changing the look would be as easy as changing the css definition. -- jon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:22:54 AM, you wrote: C> I have an interactive search that as you type filters the data that you see. C> This could be done in DHTML, but in NOT 10 minutes, NOT outside a browser, C> and NOT as easy to change as the Flash interface. C> Clint C> - Original Message - C> From: "Dave Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:22 AM C> Subject: RE: Is Flash really THAT good? >> > Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible >> > in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. >> >> How about an org chart? >> >> http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm >> (Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be cross-browser, C> and >> it wouldn't work very well, and it would be expensive to support, and C> you'd >> lose all your hair.) >> >> How about a whiteboard? >> >> http://products.figleaf.com/ >> >> Good luck with that DHTML. >> >> Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >> http://www.figleaf.com/ >> voice: (202) 797-5496 >> fax: (202) 797-5444 >> >> C> ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
>The subject was UI though. I thought the topic was "Is flash really that good" and "Flash is evil", not flash doesn't look good. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
> Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible in Flash that isn't > possible in DHTML. The point I was making was that you can't take the EXACT same code from a DHTML app and run it in all of the browsers that support flash. With flash you can. E ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Is Flash really THAT good?
Friday, June 20, 2003, 11:22:21 AM, you wrote: >> Really? Name just one UI component/paradigm that is possible >> in Flash that isn't possible in DHTML. DW> How about an org chart? DW> http://www.figleaf.com/development/flash4/orgchart/orgchart.cfm DW> (Actually, you could do this in DHTML, but it wouldn't be cross-browser, and DW> it wouldn't work very well, and it would be expensive to support, and you'd DW> lose all your hair.) Piece of cake...I can visualize the code, but no NS4 would not be supported, but IE5+, NS7+, and Opera would on their various platforms. DW> How about a whiteboard? DW> http://products.figleaf.com/ The UI could be done in DHTML fairly easily as well, the communications part could be done but inefficiently. The browser is not really suited for this kind of app though. The subject was UI though. DW> Good luck with that DHTML. ~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
