What do you think of this flash site so far?

I hate flash. You know why? Because every damn time I come to your website I have to look at that stupid intro. It's so dumb. Why can't people learn web standards? Visit http://www.w3.org. Do you see ANYTHING there about flash? No, because it's not a web standard. What happens if I want to go to your site on my Axim with WiFi? Oh, right...I can't.

Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness. The user has to do whatever the flash-maker wants. That's not what the Internet is about.

Oh, and use a non-serif font for the intro text. It looks like poo.

:|

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: jumpr
Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness.

Flash is all about user interactivity if you knew anything about it at all. But like anything available to developers, it's up to the creator to allow. Blame the implementation, not the tool.

And secondly, think target audience and purpose before you tell someone not to use it because it affects you negatively.

 

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr
Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness.

Flash is all about user interactivity if you knew anything about it at all. But like anything available to developers, it's up to the creator to allow. Blame the implementation, not the tool.

Right-O!

And not everyone looks to w3c as the god of the internet.

 

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr
Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness.

Flash is all about user interactivity if you knew anything about it at all. But like anything available to developers, it's up to the creator to allow. Blame the implementation, not the tool.

And secondly, think target audience and purpose before you tell someone not to use it because it affects you negatively.

Oops, I just went to Gobadgrs' site again and oh, that's weird, I had to watch an intro that I've already seen! That's not good, and while you claim that flash is all about interactivity, why then, did I have to sit through a 15 second intro that I don't want to see?

And why do I have to 'click here to proceed' on your site? Why can't I just go into it and read the content? I hate flash, because creators of flash think they're so cool for making a bloated, time-wasting intro while others who visit the site just want to see the content.

 

And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

 

[SagaLore]

Haha, widescreen. There is no point in a "widescreen" site since content is always scrollable, at least in a proper web page...

 

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr
Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness.

Flash is all about user interactivity if you knew anything about it at all. But like anything available to developers, it's up to the creator to allow. Blame the implementation, not the tool.

And secondly, think target audience and purpose before you tell someone not to use it because it affects you negatively.

Oops, I just went to Gobadgrs' site again and oh, that's weird, I had to watch an intro that I've already seen! That's not good, and while you claim that flash is all about interactivity, why then, did I have to sit through a 15 second intro that I don't want to see?

And why do I have to 'click here to proceed' on your site? Why can't I just go into it and read the content? I hate flash, because creators of flash think they're so cool for making a bloated, time-wasting intro while others who visit the site just want to see the content.

Thats lame man...hating flash because of the lack of abilities of flash designers.
Not all flash sites have the problems you mention. I totally agree with the annoyances and problems you mention.......but thats not a flash flaw, it's a designers flaw.

 

Originally posted by: jntdesign

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr
Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness.

Flash is all about user interactivity if you knew anything about it at all. But like anything available to developers, it's up to the creator to allow. Blame the implementation, not the tool.

And secondly, think target audience and purpose before you tell someone not to use it because it affects you negatively.

Oops, I just went to Gobadgrs' site again and oh, that's weird, I had to watch an intro that I've already seen! That's not good, and while you claim that flash is all about interactivity, why then, did I have to sit through a 15 second intro that I don't want to see?

And why do I have to 'click here to proceed' on your site? Why can't I just go into it and read the content? I hate flash, because creators of flash think they're so cool for making a bloated, time-wasting intro while others who visit the site just want to see the content.

Thats lame man...hating flash because of the lack of abilities of flash designers.
Not all flash sites have the problems you mention. I totally agree with the annoyances and problems you mention.......but thats not a flash flaw, it's a designers flaw.

Even so, why should I waste my time, even if there IS a "skip intro" link on the site? Why should I have an extra click to avoid something I don't want to see in the first place? Flash animation leads people to think they should showcase their abilities on long intros and 'cascading' menus that take 15 seconds to 'cascade' into place. What's wrong with just giving people the information they need without animating it? Would you like it if every time you came to Anandtech, there was a big swirling logo on a black background that said, "Click here to proceed?" I didn't think so.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why do I have to 'click here to proceed' on your site? Why can't I just go into it and read the content? I hate flash, because creators of flash think they're so cool for making a bloated, time-wasting intro while others who visit the site just want to see the content.

Read This. I wasn't catering to visitors. If you want to see Flash capability, go there. If not, I didn't mean it for you.

If you must know, "click here to proceed" was implemented because the flash movie lost focus upon loadup of the site. The focus is necessary for various input forms I have in the movie (so people don't have to click in the input boxes - the cursor would be ready to type).

And yes, I am cool because it took me 2 challenging months to do it from scratch. And no, I don't think anyone goes to my site to see factual content about one, rh71.

 

[yoda291]

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

by that argument, why bother using xhtml at all! Why not just code everything as formatted raw text. No silly tags, no crap, no table mess, no frames. Just plain old fashioned text. Heck, you could code the news in a quarter of the time using just text instead of html. Hell, put the whole site on a single page and tell people to use ctrl-f. That way, you don't have to bother with the clicking...just search.

Silly jumpr.

 

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

by that argument, why bother using xhtml at all! Why not just code everything as formatted raw text. No silly tags, no crap, no table mess, no frames. Just plain old fashioned text. Heck, you could code the news in a quarter of the time using just text instead of html. Hell, put the whole site on a single page and tell people to use ctrl-f. That way, you don't have to bother with the clicking...just search.

Silly jumpr.

I'm not saying that web designers shouldn't make their sites pretty. I'm saying that they should give users the information they want immediately, and if there's something auxiliary, then it should be at most, one or two clicks away, and shouldn't result in a bunch of animation that takes extra seconds for users to get through.

Look at my site: http://www.mikeroth.org - I don't use a lick of flash, the site is XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant and it's lightning fast, as compared to RH71 or Gobadgrs' sites, which take more than 10 seconds each to get to the NAVIGATION itself! I'm not commenting on which site is better, I'm just commenting on the semantics of each. I'd rather see a page that gives me information first, with the option of seeing cool graphics and animations later. I don't want those animations forced down my throat when all I want is to read a weblog.

 

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: jntdesign

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr
Don't use flash. I hate it. It's not a standard, it's slow, and there's no user interactiveness.

Flash is all about user interactivity if you knew anything about it at all. But like anything available to developers, it's up to the creator to allow. Blame the implementation, not the tool.

And secondly, think target audience and purpose before you tell someone not to use it because it affects you negatively.

Oops, I just went to Gobadgrs' site again and oh, that's weird, I had to watch an intro that I've already seen! That's not good, and while you claim that flash is all about interactivity, why then, did I have to sit through a 15 second intro that I don't want to see?

And why do I have to 'click here to proceed' on your site? Why can't I just go into it and read the content? I hate flash, because creators of flash think they're so cool for making a bloated, time-wasting intro while others who visit the site just want to see the content.

Thats lame man...hating flash because of the lack of abilities of flash designers.
Not all flash sites have the problems you mention. I totally agree with the annoyances and problems you mention.......but thats not a flash flaw, it's a designers flaw.

Even so, why should I waste my time, even if there IS a "skip intro" link on the site? Why should I have an extra click to avoid something I don't want to see in the first place? Flash animation leads people to think they should showcase their abilities on long intros and 'cascading' menus that take 15 seconds to 'cascade' into place. What's wrong with just giving people the information they need without animating it? Would you like it if every time you came to Anandtech, there was a big swirling logo on a black background that said, "Click here to proceed?" I didn't think so.

I totally agree, and once again - thats not a requirement of flash...it's laziness of the developer.
Target audience also plays a huge role. A site that gets frequent return visitors should NOT force an intro or even delayed interface loading (<2 seconds)
Sites that have content that users may want to access via a wireless device would have an alternate site with content and layout (no flash) specifically for them.

Theres a time and place for everything, the whoopity whirley flash effects are the most overused and abused techniques out there.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

by that argument, why bother using xhtml at all! Why not just code everything as formatted raw text. No silly tags, no crap, no table mess, no frames. Just plain old fashioned text. Heck, you could code the news in a quarter of the time using just text instead of html. Hell, put the whole site on a single page and tell people to use ctrl-f. That way, you don't have to bother with the clicking...just search.

Silly jumpr.

I'm not saying that web designers shouldn't make their sites pretty. I'm saying that they should give users the information they want immediately, and if there's something auxiliary, then it should be at most, one or two clicks away, and shouldn't result in a bunch of animation that takes extra seconds for users to get through.

Look at my site: http://www.mikeroth.org - I don't use a lick of flash, the site is XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant and it's lightning fast, as compared to RH71 or Gobadgrs' sites, which take more than 10 seconds each to get to the NAVIGATION itself! I'm not commenting on which site is better, I'm just commenting on the semantics of each. I'd rather see a page that gives me information first, with the option of seeing cool graphics and animations later. I don't want those animations forced down my throat when all I want is to read a weblog.

Let's all have a hand for Mike. Good clean design and a quick loading page.

Now there's this side of the spectrum who do things as a means of challenge. How many of you realize Gobadgrs is not a flash professional trying to stick these animations in your face, but rather, trying to learn flash by example ?

Once again, target audience + purpose.

 

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

by that argument, why bother using xhtml at all! Why not just code everything as formatted raw text. No silly tags, no crap, no table mess, no frames. Just plain old fashioned text. Heck, you could code the news in a quarter of the time using just text instead of html. Hell, put the whole site on a single page and tell people to use ctrl-f. That way, you don't have to bother with the clicking...just search.

Silly jumpr.

I'm not saying that web designers shouldn't make their sites pretty. I'm saying that they should give users the information they want immediately, and if there's something auxiliary, then it should be at most, one or two clicks away, and shouldn't result in a bunch of animation that takes extra seconds for users to get through.

Look at my site: http://www.mikeroth.org - I don't use a lick of flash, the site is XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant and it's lightning fast, as compared to RH71 or Gobadgrs' sites, which take more than 10 seconds each to get to the NAVIGATION itself! I'm not commenting on which site is better, I'm just commenting on the semantics of each. I'd rather see a page that gives me information first, with the option of seeing cool graphics and animations later. I don't want those animations forced down my throat when all I want is to read a weblog.

Let's all have a hand for Mike. Good clean design and a quick loading page.

Now there's this side of the spectrum who do things as a means of challenge. How many of you realize Gobadgrs is not a flash professional trying to stick these animations in your face, but rather, trying to learn flash by example ?

Once again, target audience + purpose.

Okay, I'll give you that - and thanks for the round of applause. But like I've said before, I'll continue to code my pages with standards compliance in mind. And, I will continue to shake my head in annoyance every time I have to sit through a flash intro on a site where I just want to see the content. I love the MINI Cooper, but I hate http://www.miniusa.com. Why animate it?

 

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

by that argument, why bother using xhtml at all! Why not just code everything as formatted raw text. No silly tags, no crap, no table mess, no frames. Just plain old fashioned text. Heck, you could code the news in a quarter of the time using just text instead of html. Hell, put the whole site on a single page and tell people to use ctrl-f. That way, you don't have to bother with the clicking...just search.

Silly jumpr.

I'm not saying that web designers shouldn't make their sites pretty. I'm saying that they should give users the information they want immediately, and if there's something auxiliary, then it should be at most, one or two clicks away, and shouldn't result in a bunch of animation that takes extra seconds for users to get through.

Look at my site: http://www.mikeroth.org - I don't use a lick of flash, the site is XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant and it's lightning fast, as compared to RH71 or Gobadgrs' sites, which take more than 10 seconds each to get to the NAVIGATION itself! I'm not commenting on which site is better, I'm just commenting on the semantics of each. I'd rather see a page that gives me information first, with the option of seeing cool graphics and animations later. I don't want those animations forced down my throat when all I want is to read a weblog.

Let's all have a hand for Mike. Good clean design and a quick loading page.

Now there's this side of the spectrum who do things as a means of challenge. How many of you realize Gobadgrs is not a flash professional trying to stick these animations in your face, but rather, trying to learn flash by example ?

Once again, target audience + purpose.

Yep, Mikes site is nice and clean, very quick and to the point. The design is clean and functional - kudos.

 

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: jumpr

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: jumpr
And why does it take so damn long to load the 'news' on your webpage? The site you made could have EASILY been coded to use 10 times less bandwidth and load 5 times faster if you used XHTML 1.0 Transitional. Your website is all text and navigation buttons...why use flash and have your users sit through such a long animation while your site is 'composed?'

by that argument, why bother using xhtml at all! Why not just code everything as formatted raw text. No silly tags, no crap, no table mess, no frames. Just plain old fashioned text. Heck, you could code the news in a quarter of the time using just text instead of html. Hell, put the whole site on a single page and tell people to use ctrl-f. That way, you don't have to bother with the clicking...just search.

Silly jumpr.

I'm not saying that web designers shouldn't make their sites pretty. I'm saying that they should give users the information they want immediately, and if there's something auxiliary, then it should be at most, one or two clicks away, and shouldn't result in a bunch of animation that takes extra seconds for users to get through.

Look at my site: http://www.mikeroth.org - I don't use a lick of flash, the site is XHTML 1.0 Strict compliant and it's lightning fast, as compared to RH71 or Gobadgrs' sites, which take more than 10 seconds each to get to the NAVIGATION itself! I'm not commenting on which site is better, I'm just commenting on the semantics of each. I'd rather see a page that gives me information first, with the option of seeing cool graphics and animations later. I don't want those animations forced down my throat when all I want is to read a weblog.

Let's all have a hand for Mike. Good clean design and a quick loading page.

Now there's this side of the spectrum who do things as a means of challenge. How many of you realize Gobadgrs is not a flash professional trying to stick these animations in your face, but rather, trying to learn flash by example ?

Once again, target audience + purpose.

Okay, I'll give you that - and thanks for the round of applause. But like I've said before, I'll continue to code my pages with standards compliance in mind. And, I will continue to shake my head in annoyance every time I have to sit through a flash intro on a site where I just want to see the content. I love the MINI Cooper, but I hate http://www.miniusa.com. Why animate it?

The WOW factor makes their target audience happy and more willing to buy their cars.
Judging by their website, the MINI marketing team most likely produced USA demographics that say the age group of their target consumer is 16 - 34 middle class non-professional. Late gen-Y and genX middle class are said to like hip and interactive.

 

btw, i HATE sites that have the real website in a popup (like miniusa)
Also, i had to click proceed like 3 times

prime example of what causes jumprs hatred.

 

[rh71]

Can I ask WHEN would it be proper to have an intro/animation that would suit your taste then ? Is the answer NEVER ?

What I'm seeing is people who want only info vs. people who have time and like a little flavor.

The real feedback should come from someone ONLY in the middle of that spectrum. Otherwise, you don't realize (or care) what the web is entirely about.

 

[GoingUp]

Can I get my thread back please? Thanks!

Im making this site for myself, its not a commercial site that anyone has to visit. All of the three different views of my site have different themes. I know that some of you hate flash, noted, now please stop hijacking my thread

I just uploaded the latest version. I was trying an effect on the picture page. Tell me what you think of it.... the links to the pictures will be the slices of the pie....

 

[GoingUp]

what do you think of this? I just redid the colors a bit...


http://www.chadwickcmeyer.com/test/widescreen1.html

 

[yoda291]

Originally posted by: rh71
Can I ask WHEN would it be proper to have an intro/animation that would suit your taste then ? Is the answer NEVER ?

What I'm seeing is people who want only info vs. people who have time and like a little flavor.

The real feedback should come from someone ONLY in the middle of that spectrum. Otherwise, you don't realize (or care) what the web is entirely about.

it is within the programming capabilities of flash to not play an intro if a user's browser indicates it has already seen it.

 

[rh71]

What I think is that you've mastered a lot of basic-intermediate Flash how-to's and should go on coolhomepages.com to find some design ideas.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: rh71
Can I ask WHEN would it be proper to have an intro/animation that would suit your taste then ? Is the answer NEVER ?

What I'm seeing is people who want only info vs. people who have time and like a little flavor.

The real feedback should come from someone ONLY in the middle of that spectrum. Otherwise, you don't realize (or care) what the web is entirely about.

it is within the programming capabilities of flash to not play an intro if a user's browser indicates it has already seen it.

Actionscript alone ? Tell me how. The browsers get closed and the movies terminated.

You can do it by setting cookies and have AS pull some variables from there. If that's what you mean, then sure.

 

[yoda291]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: yoda291

Originally posted by: rh71
Can I ask WHEN would it be proper to have an intro/animation that would suit your taste then ? Is the answer NEVER ?

What I'm seeing is people who want only info vs. people who have time and like a little flavor.

The real feedback should come from someone ONLY in the middle of that spectrum. Otherwise, you don't realize (or care) what the web is entirely about.

it is within the programming capabilities of flash to not play an intro if a user's browser indicates it has already seen it.

Actionscript alone ? Tell me how. The browsers get closed and the movies terminated.

You can do it by setting cookies and have AS pull some variables from there. If that's what you mean, then sure.

there's that or if you like making things harder than they need be you can call a server-side script to store a hash of user's information in a database from AS. B4 playing an intro, you'd need to call another script to query the database to check if the user had already visited, parsing in the output from the script and verifying.

 

[ohtwell]

I like it!

Is that your picture on the main page?


: ) Amanda