[thelist] Jakob Nielsen [was Anti-aliasing]

[martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com]

Memo from Martin P Burns of PricewaterhouseCoopers

-------------------- Start of message text --------------------



Subject:    RE: [thelist] Jakob Nielsen [was Anti-aliasing]

>What matters is that flash has full potential to have good usability (save
>the external back button)
...and the list of things Jeff brought up

So why doesn't it get used? The only theory suggested so far is that
it's because it's too much work to recreate all the stuff you get for free
with a browser.

>What also matters is that sometimes it doesn't have to be absolutely
>accessible and easy to understand. Sometimes the client might want to keep
>the accountant-employees out, and get the mtv-kids in.

Apart from that that's a major simplification (on both sides), the key word
there
is "sometimes". Yes, there are good uses for Flash. But they're not common,
and need justifying on a case by case basis. And very few of them involve
recreating what browsers already do.

So yes, there is a role for Flash in information graphics (say to explain
how
an industrial process works), particularly where live interaction matters.
And
there is one for Flash in games - there was a particularly good crop in the
run up to the UK 2001 election like
http://www.panlogic.co.uk/splat_the_MP.html
but as standard interface? Rarely.

>Try as you might,
>these groups _want_ a bit of a challenge because they are not looking for
>content primarily, but for lifestyle and experience.

I'm really doubtful whether that's the simplistic self-evident truism that
many
'web consultancies' think it is. I think that the school-age audience is a
*lot*
more complex than you give them credit for.

>>>On top of that (and this
>>>again shows his ignorance) you don't have to be a "Flash
>>>professional" to change the language of external data files from
>>>which Flash culls text content.

>>When was that introduced, and how widespread is its usage?

>You're obviously ranting.

You're confusing me with Erik - I was asking a question. If there's an
accurate, well-researched answer, I'd be genuinely keen to hear it.

>Parsing / reading of variables from external files was available from
flash
>v3 I think.

To repeat the second part of my question - how widespread is its usage?

>That and Macromedia Generator (and other standalone tools)
>provide every bit as dynamic a site when it comes to updating and
>maintenance as any other site with a decent CMS. Yes, you can use a CMS to
>update for example database content which is retrieved into an ASP page
that
>flash reads to get the content.

Have you actually tried convincing a client to buy Generator? I have.
(Content
Management is part of what I do every day, and being able to manage images
and other non-text content is pretty important).

A CMS is more often non-negotiable. Generator is more often a 'nice to
have' which
gets dropped when budgets and timescales get squeezed. And they always get
squeezed.

btw, most pro CMSs (which if your client has budget for Generator done
properly (ie not
just one box), they won't be looking at phpNuke or that level of CMS) don't
store content
assets in simple databases to be retrieved simply by ASP or CF.

>btw, Flash 5 has an XML api (or whatever it is called). Didyaknowthat?

See my earlier question. How often does it get used?

>Jakob knows a lot. And he's right about many many things. But he
exaggerates
>gravely most of the time, the reason for it best explained by Tog
>(www.asktog.com) in one of his chronicles (can't find it). If you want
>attention you have to shout, and you have to put it black or white, or no
>one will listen.

Yes. But the core principles of even his wildest exaggerations are valid,
and
they make very, very good defaults.

I've never said "You have to do it like Jakob says", rather "You have to do
it like Jakob says unless you can come up with compelling reasons why
not to".

Make the case.

>Flash is only bad when it is used bad, and yes, that is often. But we
can't
>disregard a very good technology simply to the lacking abilities of dumb
>wannabe-designers (same problem as with wysiwyg:s), trigger happy tacky
>programmers and companies with little interest in user and client
>satisfaction.

Absolutely. But it's up to good Flash developers to learn to present what
they
do as appropriate solutions to business and technical issues. Part of that
is
standing up and pointing at bad Flash work as such, rather than mindlessly
defending the technology and attacking anyone who dares to criticise it.

And I very, very rarely see that.

Cheers
Martin


--------------------- End of message text --------------------

This e-mail is sent by the above named in their
individual, non-business capacity and is not on
behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers.

PricewaterhouseCoopers may monitor outgoing and incoming
e-mails and other telecommunications on its e-mail and
telecommunications systems.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.   If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.