[thelist] Is flash always bad [was: google and other search engines]
Kasimir K
evolt at kasimir-k.fi
Mon May 10 15:42:02 CDT 2004
Allen Schaaf wrote:
> If we want to respect the "world wide" part of the web, we need to account
> for the real pipe sizes
Yep. And we need do that wheather or not we are using flash - if you
animate 50 huge images, it's going to be heavy both ways. If you have
just text, it's going to be light both ways (yes, I can imagine why
somebody would do text-only flash - actually I've seen some truly
beautiful text animations done in flash). And if you need to present
diagrams or line drawings, the flash often is lighter than an image.
> And this is where the hard work comes in, making an appealing entrance to
> your client's information. Information? I thought we were talking about
> Flash and other "enhancements" to the web?
Not all information is textual. Some information can be expressed only
with animation, some requires synchronization of images and audio. In
these cases, flash is not an "appealing entrance" to information, but
the best tool to present it.
> Well, when you distill the functionality of the site to its essence, what
> you are providing is information that is intended to bring the potential
> consumer to the door of the nightclub, etc. The only real difference is the
> form in which the information is conveyed. And this brings us right to the
> nub of the question, form vs. function, or put another way, means vs. ends.
True, it's this simple - as long as the purpose is to sell or bring
customers, and the site does it using text and images. Or actually no,
it's not that simple even then... if my client runs bussiness in an
obscure locatation, I might suggest using a flash-map, that the users
can zoom and move. A 25k flash-map is much better and informative than a
100k gif (which would of course be provided as an option).
And remember that sometimes the form *is* the function...
.k
More information about the thelist
mailing list