November 9, 201015 yr Aside from the Open Source perogative to avoid proprietary languages should I be wary of using Flash in my sites? I don't want many people to be presented with a notice saying they have to download extra software to see my site. I would guess that the majority of web users have Flash installed but don't know how many people would be excluded from immediate access to my site if it requires Flash. One idea is to use a Flash-based main menu but provide at least all the same links in standard HTML format in another part of the page. I know that mobile devices don't parse Flash but is there much of a problem with using Flash for desktop/laptop-using visitors?
November 9, 201015 yr Flash has a very deep penetration, it used to be on around 97%+ devices but it's not really suitable for key elements such as navigation. Also bear in mind that the new generation of Apple devices won't have Flash preinstalled, many mobile devices don't support flash. My advice is to use traditional HTML/CSS based navigation, you can't beat it!
November 9, 201015 yr Flash-based navbar IMHO is more suitable for 100% Flash site. Totally agree with BlueDreamer: My advice is to use traditional HTML/CSS based navigation, you can't beat it!
November 9, 201015 yr I would love to be able to do fully flashed built websites. The way I look at it, if people come to you looking for you to design something for them and they dont even have something as basic as flash installed, then they will be far too much hassle. Imo, its something that you need for browsing through the web. www.2advanced.com I think that site is awesome, much better than most html/css layouts, just how the hell would you do that
November 9, 201015 yr Although already discussed above, I thought I would enforce what has already been said. Flash should not really be used for navigation, you can't run the risk using something that could ruin the experience of browsing your website for a user on a phone or who does not have flash installed. Even if you did have another way to navigate elsewhere on the website why compromise? Why not get it right first time! Flash is fine to use for website banners etc, but wrap it in a div tag with a background image of a JPG or PNG so that if flash isn't installed they at least get a static version of the banner that should be there. Another negative to flash is it needs to be done properly otherwise it will not help SEO for the site one bit.
November 9, 201015 yr If it's important that your website is foudn easily and therefore ranks well in search engines then you may want to reconsider the flash based site. Google still can't read flash in the same way as html and so you are risking visibility. If it's not important, fine. If it is though, I would recommend using html/css, some clever javascript to animate menus (so that the menus still appear on each page and Google can read them) and then use a little flash where you need it to liven the site up a bit. A guy who used to be an SEO client of mine, recently had his site redesigned by someone else and he built a flash based site (much to my protest) and the site looks great. However, I'd spent 8 months getting him a page one ranking and it bombed within 2 weeks. Not impressed!! But he pays me a monthly fee so who am I to worry if he undoes much of my good work! What it also shows is that on-page optimization still matters too!
November 9, 201015 yr Well after reading all of that, its pretty obvious for me: - Business use with potential high traffic: Bad Idea for using flash as not all users will have it (maybe due to restrictions or not being very knowledage about computers). - Personal use, maybe for portfolio or freelancing: Good idea if it looks slick, it really shows off your talent and the people who dont have flash (for some weird reason) are missing out.
November 9, 201015 yr (apart) Is it true that any PNG or JPG picture loads faster if it is used in HTML/CSS/JavaScript animation, than if it would be a part of the Flash movie?
November 9, 201015 yr Flash suffered from what every new technology suffers from. It became the IN thing and people used it for everything and anything. This has made people sick of it but Flash itself is a perfectly usable tech. The advent of HTML5/CSS3/AJAX etc has meant that there are more open and flexible ways of implementing certain things that people would have used Flash for in the past but it still does remain a useful development tool.
November 9, 201015 yr Author That gives me some more background to make a decision. Specifically I was thinking of using a commercial Joomla! extension to provide the Flash menu (here: http://www.myjoomlaplace.com/joomla-15-extensions.html) to use in the new design of a website which my client wants to change from a mysql/php setup to a CMS-managed site. I actually thought that Flash might be better for page load time than Jquery or Mootools menus since the majority of menus which use these inject JavaScript into the page and likewise CSS-based menus which work as add-ons to Joomla! use a lot of inline or internal style sheets. At least Flash doesn't seem to add as much clutter to the source code & I was planning to include at least every item in the main menu (potentially Flash-based) in at least one other menu which search engines and people without Flash installed could read. The problem was initially that Joomla! doesn't natively allow for image-based menus and I couldn't find an extension which gives me satisfactory images and roll-overs for menu items, so I thought: why not Flash? I don't program in Flash or actionscript so it would have to be an out-of-the-box extension.
November 9, 201015 yr this thread has been sponsored by Steve Jobs lol haha. i think it might be Steve himself
November 9, 201015 yr Author Also can't help but noticing that jobs requiring Flex (a Flash-based framework) seem to command higher salaries than those requiring php, asp.net and most other web technologies. Am I right in thinking that Flex is used exclusively to build Flash sites? If so, Flash must still be definately in, especially for high-end corporate sites (I assume these companies point to a mobile-friendly version when accessed via phone).
November 10, 201015 yr Also can't help but noticing that jobs requiring Flex (a Flash-based framework) seem to command higher salaries than those requiring php, asp.net and most other web technologies. Am I right in thinking that Flex is used exclusively to build Flash sites? If so, Flash must still be definitely in, especially for high-end corporate sites (I assume these companies point to a mobile-friendly version when accessed via phone). No not really, the higher salary might just be because some companies still have a Flex system in place and it's much cheaper to hire someone to maintain that system instead of developing a new one. The high salary level could purely be down to the lack of talent in that industry. If flex/flash was still 'in' as you put it, salaries would be lower because every tom dick and harry will be applying for them.
Create an account or sign in to comment