I sort of find it amusing sometimes everyone always referring to yahoo as the most succesful site while not meriting it's gargantous marketing budget and "first to market" appeal. I think it is a bit skewed when people reference it as the most used simply for lack of graphics. Although it may prove that consumers don't demand graphics...Additionally when referencing the internet people mention sites like google, yahoo and such - yet the engines and directories are a completly different animal than the commerce sites and internet "apps" people are building. To me it is comparing apples to kumqwats(little fruits)
I happen to be one of those "different breed" graphical guys who uses and learned coldfusion to substantially increase my designs and offer better dynamic solutions. While so enthralled at it;s sheer simplicity - now write every site dynamically. As for the flash part - it does and will have major advantages as internet applications. With flash remoting one of my clients was tired of opening the browser to get to his admin section to update tracking information and product information. Made a dynamic icon for him that opens a flash file - in milliseconds - he makes requests or/and or updates database information and site is modified real time. In that case the client could careless about browsers, compatibilies and such - it made him more productive. So often everyone thinks about one side of the puzzle without realizing just a little thought brings out a whole additional side and possibility - Flash does not mean graphical. The app above has one rotating arrow to show it is getting data - I also beleive that this is what others on the list have mentioned and MM is pushing - death to intro's. as for the bandwith thing- "Flash applications do not inherently save bandwidth. " " I see where this is heading. Obviously if flash's interface can be downloaded once - and only the data (content) is being sent back and forth - of course you will save bandwith. Additionally - you ever notice how small flash can compress images. Obviously if a designer chooses to design a new interface or graphical heavy screen or LoadMovie commands - completly loading new .swf's at each user interval - that can be bandwith heavy... BUT if you took the same poor design and converted to html and cfm - I would bet the flash would still be lighter. So from my experience- flash is lighter on bandwith. Jay Miller jon Hall wrote: >The way of the future? I remember seeing my first image on a web >page on yahoo ages ago...must have been 94-95. Seven years later we >just have a bunch more pictures on the web page, and the most >successful web site in existence right now still has just one. > >I'd love to play with Flash...it's a different paradigm than the >programmer in me is used to (unlike svg *cough*) though. Flash is >successful, and will continue to be, but I think rich clients are just >part of the future, and the present, by no means will they be >prevalent though. > ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
