Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Jim Allman <jim AT ibang.com>]

On Feb 8, 2005, at 8:50 AM, Colleen McCarthy wrote:
> If someone who has been doing Web design and development for a while
> can could give an opinion of how Flash allowed them to create better 
> Web
> pages I'd really appreciate it.

Flash-based websites are obviously a bone of contention. I should say 
at the outset that I make a living building Flash apps, among other 
things.

In the right hands, Flash can provide both functional and 
"experiential" benefits (unavoidably squishy, sorry). Certainly it 
provides serious eye candy on many sites, but I'll try to stick to 
functional benefits here.

I typically use Flash to build visual displays that can't be done (or 
would be a nightmare) using other tools--drag and drop selection and 
"assembly" of a product or data structure, vector-based views that 
scale and zoom, that kind of thing. (Note that this is very 
script-intensive, and not "out of the box" behavior.) This is very hard 
to match if the items you're interested in are inherently visual and 
configurable.

Flash also offers a lightweight, consistent platform for streaming 
audio and video (including real-time chat, with some server-side 
support). With a decent family of UI widgets, it can also be a 
lightweight client GUI for client/server apps--similar to a Java 
applet, but with less overhead (see Laszlo or the emerging Flex for 
some good examples).


Regarding the "purist" objections to Flash, some of these are legit and 
some are overblown IMO:

Flash is so widely included in modern browsers that it has arguably 
crossed the gap from "just another plugin" to mainstream browser 
technology. Where it's available, the Flash runtime environment is more 
reliable and consistent (across browsers and platforms) than the 
"standard" method of building dynamic web pages, called DHTML (HTML DOM 
+ CSS + Javascript).

Yes, the Flash Player is missing or outdated on some flavors of Unix, 
and each site must decide how much this weighs into the choice of 
tools. (Hey, I'm a Mac user, so I sympathize.)

Comparing Flash to PHP, ASP, etc is kind of apples-and-oranges, since 
those are server-side languages. Flash needs a smart server to do many 
things, and that's a separate decision. Instead, think of Flash as a 
very nimble net client, which can be hosted in a web browser or 
distributed as a standalone app. Flash is wonderfully indifferent to 
your server-side technology; I often pair it with a Zope server and 
XML-RPC.

Accessibility in Flash is largely a matter of forethought, and taking 
advantage of its supporting features (exposing Flash UI components to 
assistive technologies, etc). It can be done, but it doesn't happen 
unless people take the time--just as with accessible HTML.

Hope this helps,

  =jimA=

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Jim Allman
Interrobang Digital Media
http://www.ibang.com/
(919) 649-5760