« 'Who's Blogging?' — The Washington Post hooks up with bookofjoe | Home | 'What makes a hacker' — by Steve Wozniak »
April 11, 2006
'The Power of Flash' — Taschen's new book is not a practical joke, it turns out
When this came in via email 20 minutes ago I thought it was a joke.
I mean, Taschen produces some of the most amazing books on the planet, with eye–appeal that dazzles.
So I figured it had to be an April Fool's joke, April 1[1] or some such riff.
But no: they're serious about Flash being the greatest thing to hit the web since sliced bread — to mix a metaphor — and they've just published a book (above and below)
to tell you all about it.
Here's what the email said:
- The power of Flash
Many of the web's most eye-popping sites are created using Flash, a program which allows for total creative freedom and maximum interactivity.
In its early years, Flash was used mostly for artistic and design sites, but more recently large corporations - even Citibank - have turned to Flash.
This guide rounds up the very best and most innovative sites using 100% Flash navigation, including Nike, Adidas, Bacardi, Shrek, Nintendo, Playstation, Ford, and Honda.
You may have heard this before here but in case you're a newbie let me state my opinion in no uncertain terms:
Flash is a disaster — always.
No exceptions.
It makes websites slow, annoying, ultimately frustrating and oh-so-pleasant to leave and avoid in the future.
If the world's best web designer offered to add Flash to bookofjoe I'd pay him to go away.
And that's all I have to say about Flash.
You can buy the book for $9.99.
April 11, 2006 at 03:01 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c5dea53ef00d834b77ba369e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'The Power of Flash' — Taschen's new book is not a practical joke, it turns out:
Comments
>Flash is a disaster — always.
>No exceptions.
D00d, yer an ignorant fucking retard. I bet I could take ANY site
that you designed and I could rebuild it EXACTLY using Flash with at least a 50% reduction in overall site size...oh wait, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO DESIGN...well unless you think plain text and a green rectangle
is design. LOL, if it were THAT simple EVERYBODY would be a designer.
^_^
The bottom line is that Flash doesn't NEED to be flashy and even if it is kinda flashy it DOES NOT have to be slow loading. Take my blog site for example:
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog/
All the base graphics of the site take up less than 150 kilobytes...that's GOD LEVEL image encoding methodology though, mixed in with some split form, image replication and stretching techniques. So you see, Flash is like anything, with enough skill it can be done to perfection. And why use Flash? Simple, cross compatibility. The way it looks on your system is EXACTLY the way it will look on someone else's. It takes ALL the guesswork out of building sites. And hey, for the luddites like you, all a web designer has to do is include a plain text fall back version, then the people using like Lynx who wish they were blind can still get all the relevant content, like on my main Backwater site:
http://www.backwater-productions.net/
All the old arguments are dead...search engines can now spider flash files...with the advent of Flash8 there's now precision pixel alignment (allowing you to make use of split form designs and to build perfect liquid websites)...you can directly access php files and send and receive variables between the two...50% faster than Javascript...direct use of PNG alpha transparencies without the use of bloatcode and OS/browser detection...the ability to use JPEG image compression on imported alpha transparent PNGs...use of the On2 VP6 codec (beats the fuckin shit out of Xvid as far as retaining color quality)...alpha transparent video...the list just goes on and on.
And again, as I said, a designer can still include a plain text fall back version for all the "simple folk" like you who wish they could retard the Internet back to 1996.
Posted by: Onideus_Mad_Hatter | Apr 12, 2006 1:57:15 AM
