5 ms·

because flash sucks?

amichail 18y ago
Could you elaborate? Maybe it's not convenient for developers, but the result is better for users than an ad hoc mix of old web technologies that is seriously lacking in features and plagued with compatibility problems.
- wmf 18y ago
  It appears that AJAX cross-browser compatibility problems can be solved using infinite money. Besides video, what compelling Flash features aren't available in JS+HTML?
  - amichail 18y ago
    Which would be better for building a word processor or illustrator service? And even if it is not necessary (e.g., for an email service), users still like to use a more professional looking site.
    - DougBTX 18y ago
      Even if we take your first question as true (and that is highly doubtful) it is far from clear that users prefer sites which "look more professional", cf: plentyoffish.com It's also far from obvious that an all-flash site looks more professional than a flash-free one: if you want to make a site look tacky, just throw in some gratuitous flash or animated gifs and you're away.
  - gus_massa 18y ago
    Flash is useful for single player, little games, that you can play in the browser without installation.
    - Hexstream 18y ago
      In other words, flash is an awkward adaptor (plugin) to support a form of media (fully interactive games) on a platform (web browser) that was never really intended to support it.
    - nostrademons 18y ago
      Like Tetris? http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~jdtang/tetris/ http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~jdtang/tetris/ FWIW, I'm using mixed Flash & JavaScript for my startup (Flash for embedding, JavaScript for the site itself). I've got Asteroids, Pong, and Brickbats all working in pure JavaScript. And I'm just hooking up code right now that lets you edit the games in real-time, no need to reload anything. That ranges from very-difficult to impossible with Flash.
- baha_man 18y ago
  From the Google Webmaster Central Blog: "Try to use Flash only where it is needed... this makes you[r] site accessible to a larger audience, including, for example, blind people using screen readers, users of old or non-standard browsers, and those on limited low-bandwidth connections such as on a cell phone or PDA." http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/07/best-uses-of-flash.html http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/07/best-uses... I can think of a few good examples of web sites which use Flash effectively, e.g. the BBC 'Get Cooking' site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/get_cooking/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/get_cooking/ However, Flash normally seems to be used for displaying pointless, obnoxious splash screens which add no value for the user.
  - aneesh 18y ago
    > I can think of a few good examples of web sites which use Flash effectively Youtube!
    - amichail 18y ago
      But why not use Flash for the entire site rather than just the video player?
      - technoguyrob 18y ago
        http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=164464 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=164464
      - sunkencity 18y ago
        you gotta be trolling...
      - xenoterracide 18y ago
        because flash isn't always cross platform. those of us on linux had to wait 2 or more years (I really don't recall) for adobe to roll out a flash 9 from flash 7 for linux. It took another year after that to get it stable. Also if you are blind how do you view flash websites? it has serious problems with usability for those who are disabled. it also has usability problems for those who aren't disabled. I don't like flash websites because I can never find my way around. I can't run them through translator's either (an artist I like, who's native language is spanish, website is in flash, I can't read or translate the spanish because of that, and the english version has been coming soon for 2 or more years).
- CPops 18y ago
  To some extent, you can ameliorate these concerns, but using Flash for a website generally leads to usability issues. Here's an article from me explaining why, if you're interested. http://informationrain.com/2007/07/25/why-i-dont-make-flash-websites/ http://informationrain.com/2007/07/25/why-i-dont-make-flash-... In my opinion, flash should mainly be used for what it's great at....making games, some types of interactive tools, and a decent quality cross-platform video solution.
- Goladus 18y ago
  Actually it's not always better for users. There are usually tradeoffs when choosing technologies and this is no exception. There are two (maybe three) fundamental issues with Flash. The vast majority of internet content is conveyed with text, links, and images. Even a with a site like YouTube, there's a host of information related to each video that is best conveyed using text, links, and images. And apart from the rendering part images are essentially just links. Flash has a whole lot of overhead and does not perform basic text and linking tasks very well. The second is that it has limited access to the underlying operating system. The third is that it's a proprietary environment controlled by Adobe.
flashgordon 18y ago
actually flash may "suck", but the flex (and air) sdk is not half bad... even I could learn it in about half a day and managed to put together some pretty sophisticated tools at work (game development stuff).. the real reason i would say google would not want to use flash is due to its not-so-openness and thereby prepping itself for more uncertainity in the future.

Could you elaborate? Maybe it's not convenient for developers, but the result is better for users than an ad hoc mix of old web technologies that is seriously lacking in features and plagued with compatibility problems.

wmf 18y ago
It appears that AJAX cross-browser compatibility problems can be solved using infinite money. Besides video, what compelling Flash features aren't available in JS+HTML?
- amichail 18y ago
  Which would be better for building a word processor or illustrator service? And even if it is not necessary (e.g., for an email service), users still like to use a more professional looking site.
  - DougBTX 18y ago
    Even if we take your first question as true (and that is highly doubtful) it is far from clear that users prefer sites which "look more professional", cf: plentyoffish.com It's also far from obvious that an all-flash site looks more professional than a flash-free one: if you want to make a site look tacky, just throw in some gratuitous flash or animated gifs and you're away.
- gus_massa 18y ago
  Flash is useful for single player, little games, that you can play in the browser without installation.
  - Hexstream 18y ago
    In other words, flash is an awkward adaptor (plugin) to support a form of media (fully interactive games) on a platform (web browser) that was never really intended to support it.
  - nostrademons 18y ago
    Like Tetris? http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~jdtang/tetris/ http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~jdtang/tetris/ FWIW, I'm using mixed Flash & JavaScript for my startup (Flash for embedding, JavaScript for the site itself). I've got Asteroids, Pong, and Brickbats all working in pure JavaScript. And I'm just hooking up code right now that lets you edit the games in real-time, no need to reload anything. That ranges from very-difficult to impossible with Flash.
baha_man 18y ago
From the Google Webmaster Central Blog: "Try to use Flash only where it is needed... this makes you[r] site accessible to a larger audience, including, for example, blind people using screen readers, users of old or non-standard browsers, and those on limited low-bandwidth connections such as on a cell phone or PDA." http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/07/best-uses-of-flash.html http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/07/best-uses... I can think of a few good examples of web sites which use Flash effectively, e.g. the BBC 'Get Cooking' site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/get_cooking/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/get_cooking/ However, Flash normally seems to be used for displaying pointless, obnoxious splash screens which add no value for the user.
- aneesh 18y ago
  > I can think of a few good examples of web sites which use Flash effectively Youtube!
  - amichail 18y ago
    But why not use Flash for the entire site rather than just the video player?
    - technoguyrob 18y ago
      http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=164464 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=164464
    - sunkencity 18y ago
      you gotta be trolling...
    - xenoterracide 18y ago
      because flash isn't always cross platform. those of us on linux had to wait 2 or more years (I really don't recall) for adobe to roll out a flash 9 from flash 7 for linux. It took another year after that to get it stable. Also if you are blind how do you view flash websites? it has serious problems with usability for those who are disabled. it also has usability problems for those who aren't disabled. I don't like flash websites because I can never find my way around. I can't run them through translator's either (an artist I like, who's native language is spanish, website is in flash, I can't read or translate the spanish because of that, and the english version has been coming soon for 2 or more years).
CPops 18y ago
To some extent, you can ameliorate these concerns, but using Flash for a website generally leads to usability issues. Here's an article from me explaining why, if you're interested. http://informationrain.com/2007/07/25/why-i-dont-make-flash-websites/ http://informationrain.com/2007/07/25/why-i-dont-make-flash-... In my opinion, flash should mainly be used for what it's great at....making games, some types of interactive tools, and a decent quality cross-platform video solution.
Goladus 18y ago
Actually it's not always better for users. There are usually tradeoffs when choosing technologies and this is no exception. There are two (maybe three) fundamental issues with Flash. The vast majority of internet content is conveyed with text, links, and images. Even a with a site like YouTube, there's a host of information related to each video that is best conveyed using text, links, and images. And apart from the rendering part images are essentially just links. Flash has a whole lot of overhead and does not perform basic text and linking tasks very well. The second is that it has limited access to the underlying operating system. The third is that it's a proprietary environment controlled by Adobe.

flashgordon 18y ago

actually flash may "suck", but the flex (and air) sdk is not half bad... even I could learn it in about half a day and managed to put together some pretty sophisticated tools at work (game development stuff).. the real reason i would say google would not want to use flash is due to its not-so-openness and thereby prepping itself for more uncertainity in the future.