Slashdot Mirror

No, that would be far from the truth. HTML is more widespread at the moment.

HTML isn't a programming language. Nor does it have a unified VM.

HTML5 + Canvas + Video tag. There you go.

Proves once again: You, as every other person here ragging on Flash, do not know what you are talking about nore have you spent 3 minutes thinking about the subject. And I'm not being offensive here, I'm just stating the facts as they are.
There is no way that HTML5 + Canvas + Whatever can deliver the functionality of a unfied ubiquitous VM. Show me how to do this with any other technology in a feasable way and in such a way that it runs in all modern browsers hassle free. That includes the version of Chrome running on my HTC Desire HD. Which, btw., runs afore linked example without any problems aswell.
And, btw., that example is from 1999. In words: It's from Nineteen-F*CKING-Ninety-Nine!
And it still runs without a hitch on the newest version of Flash.

If you've managed to do that, then try this or this, or this , or, or ...

Bottom line:
You don't know what you are talking about. Seriously. Now you and the others can go ahead and mod this comment into the ground aswell if you so desire to embrace congnitive dissonance and supress the facts as they are.

I'll take you up on your challenge and visit each site to see what I think about it. Note that my laptop has a 10" screen so I'm not expecting many of these sites to work at this resolution.

1 Moodstream

Yep, didn't fit in my screen. The controls were cut off on top and bottom.

2 monoface

Top of the person's head was cut off but the site was still usable... and hilarious. Thanks for that.

3 WATERLIFE

This site nicely provides the scroll bar on the side so I can still see any content that has gotten clipped off of the screen. Fonts on the bottom are too small and because it is flash I either lean forward and squint or choose not to read the text.

4 Mark Ecko

I just about barfed all over my laptop. That is an awful site. Everything is moving around following my cursor, menu will drop down over my cursor when attempting to move the screen to the top because there appears to be content out of reach. I attempted to contact them to share my opinion but I clicked on a link which downloaded a pdf and so I gave up. Maybe it isn't flash that should die but flash developers shouldn't be allowed onto the internet.

5 HBO

In my opinion this site could use html5. I don't see how this site uses flash that couldn't more easily be done in html5.

6 Get the Glass

This looks cool but again, it cuts off at the bottom the screen so I can't read the button labels (although I know that they are there) and going fullscreen doesn't help for some reason as the portion of the words that is off of the screen doesn't get drawn even when the screen size changes.

7 http://www.agencynet.com/

This one is especially bad on my small screen. Half of the text is missing unless I'm viewing it in full screen. Links are overlapping. And even after everything is loaded, getting anywhere is slow. And I hate the design.

8 2Advanced Studios

I had hope for this one when I saw the scroll bar but the font is too small, annoying sound effects mean that I leave this site even though I can see some nice looking art

9 SectionSeven

Well that is a mesmarizingly useless loading bar. And navigation is hidden unless I go to fullscreen. I hate the navigation and again with the overlapping links.

10 Dave Werner

Hey they have scroll bars! So at least I can see everything if I try. However, fonts are too small and at least one of them looks quite a bit worse than Comic Sans and the navigation is annoying. There is no way to quickly see what options are available. To get to know all of the options I would need to carefully move my mouse over the entier area, starting from the left and mentally creating a grid on the screen and making sure that I mouse over everything. That is just plain stupid.

And my conclusion is that flash should die. Of course, I'm hardly unbiased. I'm on a netbook so nearly every flash site breaks. I'm on a slow internet connection so I always need to wait to view the site. I don't have good eyesight and I regularily make use of my Ctrl+ and Ctrl- keyboard shortcuts to read text. That is obviously imopssible on flash sites. I use keyboard shortcuts a lot and flash sites break my browser based keyboard shortcuts like page up and down, f11 for fullscreen, Ctrl t for n

1 Moodstream
2 monoface
3 WATERLIFE
4 Mark Ecko
5 HBO
6 Get the Glass
7 http://www.agencynet.com/
8 2Advanced Studios
9 SectionSeven
10 Dave Werner

Source: Top 10 Best Flash Websites of 2010

But "Drop Dead Gorgeous" is what the Web designer's customers want. They don't care what technology you use, they want "Hollywood". Currently, Flash is what can deliver that to most of the customers' customers. See 2Advanced Studios for examples of what "Customers" want. It truly doesn't matter what the developer wants. It REALLY doesn't matter what a few end-users with an obscure operating system want (from the customer's point of view). It's possible that the lack of Flash abilities on the iPad/iPhone could begin to change this attitude. It might even happen quickly.

It's important to remember that the customers pay the bills which let them dictate the terms of the work. If you offer them the same Flash-based site in HTML5, then tell them that all of their clients browsing with IE won't be able to see it the same as say, their clients browsing with FF, I'd say it's a safe bet that some of those bills aren't going to get paid.

Yeah, go tell 2advanced what charlatans they are, and make sure you tell their clients like Ford, Nintendo, and Motorola too. I'm sure they'll be really interested in hearing what plain text can do for them in capturing the market of Lynx users.

Ok. Adobe support for Linux, despite their claims otherwise, is flaky and always late. No news here. They failed to completly convince opinion leaders (read: Linux users) in the field of web developement that they are serious, and my comitment to open source flash projects has rather dimished than grown since MX 2004 Pro / Flash 7. Right now I'm earning 60k/year as a Flash9/ActionScript 3 developer and still I don't trust them farther than I can throw them. Adobemedia has been doing to much bullshitting about their commitment to the Linux camp, and consitently delivered late ever since I went all-out Flash with a larger RIA project when Flash 7 for Linux finally came out.

However, what you are describing most certainly is a Linux problem. Aside from playing video, Flash on youtube doesn't do much, and I've watched a lot of youtube videos with Linux and have had no problems at all doing it. And if you run into a site that uses lots of Flash and doesn't render correctly, chances are you've met with a bunch of idiots who are to freakin' dumb to build a truly x-plattform RIA in Flash. Despite them possibly claiming to the the RIA Kings of the Interweb. Like these people for instance. (Linux users with working Flash, please let me know in a reply if any of you can reach the Flashsite ... I'd like to know if they've caught on yet ...)

Developing in Flash requires lots of skill and often some old-school hacks for high performance applications such as this and a solid knowledge of the target client plattforms. For example, a particle system I'm working on/with buckles by 25% on WinXP when run under Firefox+Flash then if run under IE+Flash. And while it's nearly a no-brainer to watch out for those two or three showstoppers that can prevent a Flash App from running correctly on x86 Linux (correct Font embedding for instance), I have to admit that good Flash/AS developers are rare. You have to be firm in graphics, typography *and* programming and then you have to be open-minded enough (read: not have your head up your arse) to try out a semi-proprietary plattform like Flash. Rare ingredients indeed.

Bottom Lines:
1) You have a Linux problem, not a Flash problem.
2) Most Flashers are mediocre at best. Guess where all the Flash crap comes from? The one or other RIA not rendering in FF/Linux is for the same reason.
3) Yes, Adobe's commitment to Linux *still* hasn't reached the level it needs to convince opinion leaders.
4) Where the *f*ck* is an open source RIA plattform allready? Webrunner/Prism will take another decade or so, guessing from the speed in general, and animated SVG doesn't even exist. JavaFX has come further than any other attempt from Sun - which has me very suprised - but I wouldn't be suprised if they'd stop dead in their tracks once again. Until the sky falls and the rivers run red with blood and Sun finally gets it's RIA going, Flash will be exactly what opinion leaders in the field still reluctantly have to account to it: The most prevailent RIA-enabled zero-fuss deployment plattform on the planet. Apparently Adobe can still dick around for another 10 years, since nobody is really challenging them yet.

I just have to remark that one of the websites linked on that page, http://www.2advanced.com/ -- is the most astounding and complete piece of flash work I have ever seen on the web. Seriously. I'm floored.

I just have to remark that one of the websites linked on that page, http://www.2advanced.com/ -- is the most astounding and complete piece of flash work I have ever seen on the web. Seriously. I'm floored.

Not only does the hidden frame + named anchors work with AJAX, it also works for other browser-button-challenged technologies, like full flash sites. Case in point, one of the better known design studios (apparently does work for Ford, Motorola, AOL, Disney, Bacardi, etc) just relaunched, so click click click for working browser buttons.

The website was made a few years ago by 2advanced

You probably haven't heard of them, but their portfolio is pretty impressive: AOL, Warner Brothers, Ford, Bacardi, Pittsburg Penguins, KBHome, SpaceX, and many more.

The site is definitely dated, but it's definitely a 2Advanced site.

2ADV.net have some insanely powerful deals from around 12$ a month, to their 300$ a month dedicated server. They run both types of server (Linux/Windows) and the site and company was created by 2ADV.com, a successful webdesign team.

I'm not going to post my play-by-play analysis, but suffice it to say, I agree with you about one thing. Anybody who's interested should indeed do their own research. (and have a few good laughs and amazed slaps of the forehead while they're at it)

A few months back I remember seeing that 2Advanced did some flash for them. If you know about 2advanced, you will know they aren't cheap. Anyway, I was watching the forums and waiting for this thing to come out. Needless to say, I forgot about them, so I think this is just a way to drum up some publicity, I know they are probably getting slashdotted to hell by now.

Humm, also some sites that might be considered art, but its really webmasters or design firms, so they are filled with artists. (Most are flash based.)

http://www.lo9ic.com/v4/
http://www.2advanced.com/ (some really awesome flash on this site)
http://www.plotdev.com
http://www.freefordesign.com
http://www.nakedworlddoc.com (Just visually neat)
http://www.itcatmedia.com

Good collection of links at http://www.phong.com/tutorials/archive.php

Here's something I'll toss out and see if it sticks.

One of the qualities Gnome has is language bindings.

So why not have a Flash binding?

Tools more powerful than Glade, combined with a wellspring of experienced designers to draw upon.

And the programmers can do what they do best, while the "UI" experts can do what they do best.

A lot of graphic designers I know have invested a lot of time and effort in courses and education, learning flash and earning money from it. Also, not all flash is bad... its misuse is fairly widespread, but have a look at this for an example of what I mean...

800x600 is a relic of the past. With 1024x768 being the new de-facto minimum, most prominent web design firms are designing for 1024x768 as the MINIMUM.

This was discussed at length during the recent launch of the new version of 2advanced (warning: slashdot users may absolutely hate flash, but it's their specialty), and the consensus was basically: if your market will let you get away with designing for 1024x768, you've got more flexibility, so you might as well use it. Incidently, that site also requires a p4 or equivalent, or you won't ever see the transitions of most of the 3D rendering.

No *kidding*. The *point* of HTML is that the author should *not* care or try to force a font size on the end user -- the end user should be free to choose whatever's most convenient for them.

Unfortunately, the market got flooded with "web designers" who came straight from print magazines or got all their ideas from print magazines.

Hi-Ho, a trolling we go, eh?

Look, I'll make this very simple. Plain text webpages are ugly. XHTML compatable pages are ugly. HTML 1.1 compatable pages are ugly. Leaving the border around your image link is ugly. Not using tables is ugly.

Why do you think people hire webdesigners? Because they know how to create an eye catching site. Why do you think magazines look like they look? Because, through trial and error, they have found what works.

People want webpages to seem alive. People want an interactive web. This is something that's a foreign concept to most linux users: You are all used to seeing pages like CGIwrap's webpage that is an assault to the eyes at the expense of being compatable with all browsers including lynx and mosaic. Or, you might get as advanced as the apache webpage which is not as much an assault on the senses, but is still boring.

I don't care what this loser says, he needs to get out of the ninteys and give people what they want. It's all about target marketing. Linux geeks are content to see pages like the cgi-wrap page. HOWEVER, normal people are impressed by things that move, things that make noise, things that interact. You're suggesting we should give people a bycicle because it'll get them from a to b and it's easy to use. But there will always be a market for flashy sport compacts, and if you ignore these people in favor of backwards compatability, you're going to alienate a good section of the population.

Take a look, for example, at the 2 Advanced Studios webpage. Tell me you've seen a cooler webpage, and I'll tell you you're lying. Or, take a look at some of the work they've done.

Making a good looking, interactive page, with javascript menus, flash animations, etc, means "I have taken an interest in my work, and I care what it looks like". Some of you may have seen his XHTML bullshit at the top of this page and thought, "Oh, wow, this guy is great. This page is so readable, and so well organized." But, what most of the rest of us that live in reality said was "Jesus, that's aweful. It looks like he made it with an old copy of Frontpage 98 that was included with his windows 98 install". It looks aweful.

For example, this guy is claiming that flash intros suck. Some of them do, but done right, it definately adds to the "wow" factor of the website. And the "wow" factor makes you money, or gets you accolades, not the "this will work in every browser ever, including my cell phone and my command line" factor.

Get with the times. There are graphic designs artists and webpage designers for a reason. The reason is because they know how to make a page look better than you do.

This guy's just a douche that's to stupid to smell the change and know he's obsolete. People like him are the reason it's ok to have a website that looks like shit, and I say I've had enough.

~Will

Sure there are a lot of sites that have no content and try to make up for it with flash, but there are so many out there that just make you drool.

http://www.2advanced.com/
http://www.oddcast.com/