Flash VS No Flash website

[Young_Warrior]

I dont know about you but I hate flash in websites.It used to be cool and people used to be like wooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww the couple first times we saw it but now I hate it. Especially when I have to download extra things for it to work, It takes time to load and then when its loaded the functons arent working properly and usually a flash presentation lacks info and has a bad layout. I especially hate flash on car websites.

What you guys think?

 

[DuckRacer]

I can care less.

 

[CDailey]

If it is well implemented, I'm all for it.

 

[donbenni]

I can care less.

How much less?

@ Young_Warrior:

You should have an option there for HTML based sites implementing flash in small parts like the top bar and the links for instance. I'd vote for that.

Some flash websites are cool. Usually the personal ones and the unique variety.

In terms of practicality, search engines generally struggle to create a good match with flash sites and some users can't be bothered to spend the time navigating something that keeps moving 'all over the shop'. Sites created entirely out of flash isn't something that businesses like for this reason. Either K.I.S.S or get something static.

 

[smellysocks12]

Bad flash is awful.




Sound in flash websites is horrible when sound=on is the default value.





Slow animations and huge processor use by flash are frustrating.






Huge amounts of content to be downloaded in flash sucks.




Long delays from one page to another are annoying.




....but when made the right way, flash can be awesome.

Flash on a website is usually great when a site uses a couple of flash components within a html context. It should be subtle, not a show-off of whatever capabilities flash has.


http://www.heineken.com is a good example of a site that pulls it off well.

http://www.ign.com is a good example of a well designed site, which works QUITE well... but might be a bit too much of it. It is quite slow, especially once you loaded more screens of that website.

http://www.gamespot.com recently renewed their website, I think the site lay-out sucks.... but on this website flash isn't to be blamed. There is simply too much info on the main pages to be loaded.

 

[Shannon]

Good Flash

Sites that add Flash just to add pointless animations and sounds annoy me though, especially if the animations and sounds are crap.

 

[tait]

some sexy flash sites:

http://www.dunun.com/index_old.html
http://conclaveobscurum.ru/ (very sex)
http://saintsandsoldiers.com/
http://www.junglegym-mdv.com/flash.htm
http://tenbyten.org/10x10.html (navigation on the right is genius)

take what these guys have done and apply it in your own site and you will have a successful flash oriented domain, just keep it clean and simple (with a bit of innovation); otherwise go basic.

 

[kart.no.38]

All of Audi's flash sites are IMO brilliant.

 

[niky]

Flash adds loading time without adding much content. Unless of course the website is all ABOUT graphics. A website with a simple interface and quick loading gif graphics is often better than a flash site that offers the same thing.

Of course when we're all on 10mbps plus internet, it won't be an issue anymore.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

It's not the load time that I object to. It's the time taken to render the page - especially if it's a repeat visit. So often Flash contributes nothing to the browsing experience, and it delays moving from page to page. It's all cost and no benefit.

The only exception to this is where you are going to the site to be entertained - almost to watch a movie. Have a look at www.barf1.com as a good example, and their offshoot site www.bonneville400.com.

 

[Young_Warrior]

Yeah I like that BAR site and this one was weird but cool http://conclaveobscurum.ru/ but when I was talking how I hate car manufacturers websites with flash I especially ment the Audi ones and Im a audi fanboy.

 

[skip0110]

I don't even have the Flash plugin.

If a webdesigner can't do it in straight HTML, his/her site isn't important enogh for me to look at. Thats my stand.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

I don't even have the Flash plugin.

If a webdesigner can't do it in straight HTML, his/her site isn't important enogh for me to look at. Thats my stand.

Well, yes. From a coder's standpoint, a good HTML/CSS site is much more impressive than one built in Flash. Almost always faster too.

Besides, trickery is for the server side

 

[smellysocks12]

Yeah, lately a lot of nice things can be done with php or jsp in combination with css / html. You have to keep in mind that when html was more simple, flash definitely did make a site look better. Flash actionscript is a lot harder to understand than either java or php as well. Not because it's complex / deep, more because you have to pay attention to all the different layers and frames.

 

[Blake]

One of the other annoying thing about flash websites is the inability to use the browsers ‘back’ button. This entirely ruins the browsing experience for me.

Blake