I don't see the experience of top 10 luxury brands as particularly relevant in the long term. Large companies spend an awful lot of time and money on websites and are always going to be a little behind the curve, often by several years. Smaller more agile companies are where to look in terms of what people are doing currently.
Also, cast your minds back to only a few years ago. How many leading websites, banks in particular, worked flawlessly on 'other' browsers such as Firefox. Virtually none for a long time. This isn't because Firefox and other modern browsers were either inherently bad or, as it transpired, doomed to failure. It was merely because websites were built poorly to the 'standards' that their staff believed were relevant at the time. These were make-believe Microsoft 'standards' at that time and Flash in the present could be exactly analogous. Both after all are/were non-standard paths that led off from agreed open standards of the time. Those standards eventually won over MS' attempt to own a proprietary alternative and maybe Flash will follow the same path.
Sure, it's potentially bad for Flash developers - or rather, Flash developers who aren't prepared to budge and adapt - but if HTML 5 comes to maturity and delivers a compelling alternative (and there is an 'if'), then maybe we'll be looking back at Flash in a few years' time and amusing ourselves over the funny little proprietary plugin that was needed just to make fully interactive sites. Just as we look back now at the IE-inspired abortions that graced many a monitor a few years ago and failed to work properly in anything other than 'IE 5 or above'.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see the experience of top 10 luxury brands as particularly relevant in the long term. Large companies spend an awful lot of time and money on websites and are always going to be a little behind the curve, often by several years. Smaller more agile companies are where to look in terms of what people are doing currently. Also, cast your minds back to only a few years ago. How many leading websites, banks in particular, worked flawlessly on 'other' browsers such as Firefox. Virtually none for a long time. This isn't because Firefox and other modern browsers were either inherently bad or, as it transpired, doomed to failure. It was merely because websites were built poorly to the 'standards' that their staff believed were relevant at the time. These were make-believe Microsoft 'standards' at that time and Flash in the present could be exactly analogous. Both after all are/were non-standard paths that led off from agreed open standards of the time. Those standards eventually won over MS' attempt to own a proprietary alternative and maybe Flash will follow the same path. Sure, it's potentially bad for Flash developers - or rather, Flash developers who aren't prepared to budge and adapt - but if HTML 5 comes to maturity and delivers a compelling alternative (and there is an 'if'), then maybe we'll be looking back at Flash in a few years' time and amusing ourselves over the funny little proprietary plugin that was needed just to make fully interactive sites. Just as we look back now at the IE-inspired abortions that graced many a monitor a few years ago and failed to work properly in anything other than 'IE 5 or above'.
From what I understand, these machines only have control of things that can affect money
Whoa, 1983 called etc...
I think we've all seen the Terminator.
Apple+arrows now work for back and forward pages..... I just hate having to reach for the mouse when browsing 'with one hand'.....