4 ms·

I don't think that without knowing why a given person will opt for Flash over conventional technologies, be it a photographer, restauranteur or auto manufacture

I don't think that without knowing why a given person will opt for Flash over conventional technologies, be it a photographer, restauranteur or auto manufacturer, it would be impossible to address a solution for them, never mind require them to abandon the use of a certain technology that many other [successful] players in their industry are using. It's not like photographers demanded Flash as a presentation layer from the begininning. Obviously, they saw something in it that would allow them to control how the user views and interacts with their work while eschewing alternatives. These are people who have invested not just thousands of dollars on equipment, travel and education, but who have also dedicated their lives and sometimes livelihoods on their art. To ask them to further invest in the ever-changing landscape every time a technology falls out of favor may be too much for them to bear. Just like a simple camera and film, Flash has been there, relatively unchanged, for many years.

lemming 15y ago
Just like a simple camera and film, Flash has been there, relatively unchanged, for many years. Except that, unlike a camera and film, Flash no longer works for some fairly important use cases.
- jsavimbi 15y ago
  You're making the assumption that photographers are concerned about the same use cases as you are. Without addressing their need for using Flash, you cannot begin a conversation about why it's a horrible and obsolete choice, never mind provide an adequate solution moving forward.
  - chc 15y ago
    If you have an objection to using standard technologies, why don't you voice it instead of just berating people because objections might exist?
    - jsavimbi 15y ago
      I'm not berating anyone. What I'm voicing is neither an objection nor an approval for one choice of technology over another. What I'm saying is that the author of the post, without any admitted experience or knowledge deems themselves so adept as to ask an entire industry segment to abandon the use of a technology without providing any sound logic behind their request or viable alternatives. I know they shouldn't be using Flash; I've been berating people about that for over a decade. But even so, as a technologist I cannot offer a solution to that particular segment without knowing the root cause of their particular choice, their present requirements nor the necessity of a photographer engaging in a venture that for all I know won't provide them any return or benefit. I find it presumptuous to know what's best for someone else without even knowing the root causes of their alleged problem, especially artists who by virtue of their business model have more to lose than gain by presenting their work in an inferior portfolio format. There will be some who'll find a solution that fits them best and other who'll keep paying the hosting and update fees until they've become tired and lose interest. It's the nature of the beast. All told, there will be less developers with Flash abilities moving forward and the public will become more educated, so who knows, maybe the problem will solve itself.
  - lemming 15y ago
    I didn't say it was horrible or obsolete, or anything about my use cases. What is clear is that the OP, who is clearly a photographer, can't use Flash for perfectly valid use cases for him, as a photographer. I think his article is a little OTT since the solution to his problem is simple - don't use Flash. In fact, the whole article is about how he doesn't actually have a problem because he doesn't use Flash, and I'm not sure why he feels the need to exhort all other photographers to do the same, but each to their own. But his reasons for not using it are perfectly valid and based on a valid use case for photographers.
melling 15y ago
Adapt or die. Mobile is already big and it will get much bigger. 2012 is the year of the tablet. Android should finally produce some great tablets, the iPad 3 will be great, and we might even see some interesting tablets from Microsoft.
- mfringel 15y ago
  I've often seen "Adapt or Die" mean "Adapt (to my specific use case) or Die (in my eyes, i.e. someone who was never in your addressable market in the first place)." This may be one of those cases.
drzaiusapelord 15y ago
Every changing? We've been complaining about Flash on sites like these for years. We wanted a way to view their menus on our phones. We wanted to be able to see their hours without waiting for a 10 megabyte flash object to load. We wanted to make a reservation online, etc. I'm not sure why these Flash interfaces exist. More than likely someone who's good at running a restaurant isn't going to be know a lot of technology and will get roped into the most expensive flash-based design they can afford. Items like usability, mobile friendliness, etc never come up because the owner doesn't know or care about it and the designers are too invested in Flash to try anything else. Is this hurting their business? I'm not sure. I never go to restaurant sites. I visit yelp instead. I only do takeout from places that have good systems in place. Its a competitive advantage now to take online reserverations and have a menu I can view on my phone. Considering something like 80% of all new restaurants go out of business after their first year, it might make sense for these owners to stop being so pigheaded about technology and ask themselves if that slow non-mobile $20,000 Flash site is really serving their customers. This is the same battle we had with restaurants being cash only 15 or so years ago. The ones that embraced credit cards seemed to have flourished and the cash-only place is either gone or has degenerated into a dive. I think the lower tech your industry is, the most room there is for disruption. These blue-collar places really need to consider the big picture here.
- dlsspy 15y ago
  > I never go to restaurant sites. I visit yelp instead. I've tried and I let them know when I do. When I want the experience, I'll go to the web site. When I just want to know if they have food that fits within my dietary constraints, I'd like to find out easily. That's not necessarily available via yelp (or whatever is awesome this week).
  - justincormack 15y ago
    It is hard to find the restaurant sites as the flash only ones often have no content that is indexed by google, like a blank one I visited yesterday to see if it was open.
- jsavimbi 15y ago
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

lemming 15y ago

Just like a simple camera and film, Flash has been there, relatively unchanged, for many years. Except that, unlike a camera and film, Flash no longer works for some fairly important use cases.

jsavimbi 15y ago
You're making the assumption that photographers are concerned about the same use cases as you are. Without addressing their need for using Flash, you cannot begin a conversation about why it's a horrible and obsolete choice, never mind provide an adequate solution moving forward.
- chc 15y ago
  If you have an objection to using standard technologies, why don't you voice it instead of just berating people because objections might exist?
  - jsavimbi 15y ago
    I'm not berating anyone. What I'm voicing is neither an objection nor an approval for one choice of technology over another. What I'm saying is that the author of the post, without any admitted experience or knowledge deems themselves so adept as to ask an entire industry segment to abandon the use of a technology without providing any sound logic behind their request or viable alternatives. I know they shouldn't be using Flash; I've been berating people about that for over a decade. But even so, as a technologist I cannot offer a solution to that particular segment without knowing the root cause of their particular choice, their present requirements nor the necessity of a photographer engaging in a venture that for all I know won't provide them any return or benefit. I find it presumptuous to know what's best for someone else without even knowing the root causes of their alleged problem, especially artists who by virtue of their business model have more to lose than gain by presenting their work in an inferior portfolio format. There will be some who'll find a solution that fits them best and other who'll keep paying the hosting and update fees until they've become tired and lose interest. It's the nature of the beast. All told, there will be less developers with Flash abilities moving forward and the public will become more educated, so who knows, maybe the problem will solve itself.
- lemming 15y ago
  I didn't say it was horrible or obsolete, or anything about my use cases. What is clear is that the OP, who is clearly a photographer, can't use Flash for perfectly valid use cases for him, as a photographer. I think his article is a little OTT since the solution to his problem is simple - don't use Flash. In fact, the whole article is about how he doesn't actually have a problem because he doesn't use Flash, and I'm not sure why he feels the need to exhort all other photographers to do the same, but each to their own. But his reasons for not using it are perfectly valid and based on a valid use case for photographers.

melling 15y ago

Adapt or die. Mobile is already big and it will get much bigger. 2012 is the year of the tablet. Android should finally produce some great tablets, the iPad 3 will be great, and we might even see some interesting tablets from Microsoft.

mfringel 15y ago
I've often seen "Adapt or Die" mean "Adapt (to my specific use case) or Die (in my eyes, i.e. someone who was never in your addressable market in the first place)." This may be one of those cases.

drzaiusapelord 15y ago

Every changing? We've been complaining about Flash on sites like these for years. We wanted a way to view their menus on our phones. We wanted to be able to see their hours without waiting for a 10 megabyte flash object to load. We wanted to make a reservation online, etc. I'm not sure why these Flash interfaces exist. More than likely someone who's good at running a restaurant isn't going to be know a lot of technology and will get roped into the most expensive flash-based design they can afford. Items like usability, mobile friendliness, etc never come up because the owner doesn't know or care about it and the designers are too invested in Flash to try anything else. Is this hurting their business? I'm not sure. I never go to restaurant sites. I visit yelp instead. I only do takeout from places that have good systems in place. Its a competitive advantage now to take online reserverations and have a menu I can view on my phone. Considering something like 80% of all new restaurants go out of business after their first year, it might make sense for these owners to stop being so pigheaded about technology and ask themselves if that slow non-mobile $20,000 Flash site is really serving their customers. This is the same battle we had with restaurants being cash only 15 or so years ago. The ones that embraced credit cards seemed to have flourished and the cash-only place is either gone or has degenerated into a dive. I think the lower tech your industry is, the most room there is for disruption. These blue-collar places really need to consider the big picture here.

dlsspy 15y ago
> I never go to restaurant sites. I visit yelp instead. I've tried and I let them know when I do. When I want the experience, I'll go to the web site. When I just want to know if they have food that fits within my dietary constraints, I'd like to find out easily. That's not necessarily available via yelp (or whatever is awesome this week).
- justincormack 15y ago
  It is hard to find the restaurant sites as the flash only ones often have no content that is indexed by google, like a blank one I visited yesterday to see if it was open.
jsavimbi 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]