Bryan Stevenson wrote: > From: "Adrocknaphobia Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>- Requires a plug-in > > Ya there sure are tonnes of folks without it ;-)
Well, it would be about 4 times as expensive for me to buy a PDA and phone that support Flash as a PDA and phone that support HTML. The bottom line is that a very small minority of alterative access technologies support Flash. Apart from the fact that resizing and rearranging elements in a canvas is quite a bit more natural and readable in (X)HTML as in Flash. > -no more corss browser nonsense You mean that if IE works Opera works too? ;-) > -far greater control over UI This is something I don't understand. Why would a developer want control over the UI? Traditional designers for papers had a tremendous control over the look and feel of what they produced. But then they had a fixed medium. Everybody got a piece of paper that was the same size and the same color so it made sense to give it the same layout. But now, with all the new media available, I don't think a developer *can* make a choice of how the look and feel should be. He hardly knows whether I am using a PDA or a computer, he doesn't know if I am inside or out in the sun, he doesn't know if my screen is 72 or 96 dpi, he doesn't know anything. There is an increasing number of sites where I switch of the loading of images and set my browser to overrule the colors and fonts set by the website developer. And as more and more browsers implement the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines, I expect that it will be increasingly more common that people will claim control over the look and feel of a site they are visiting. Besides, people love it if they can tweak a site to look exactly like they want ;-) The bottom line of a move towards a semantic web is that no longer a developer chooses the look and feel, the visitor chooses the look and feel. Flash goes directly against this trend, and it will be interesting to see how that plays out. > -ablity to build Flash apps that connect to a DB WITHOUT a scripting > langauge (no remoting) Mozilla talks to databases directly and natively. All major browsers support talking to databases that enable SOAP access. I don't think this is an advantage of Flash. > I'd say RIAs should be looked at for new types of web apps we haven't seen > yet. There are certainly alot of common web apps today that it doesn't make > sense for. Basically anything that you've had to come up with > workarounds/hacks/kludges to get to work interface wise may be an RIA > candidate. I'm sure we've all pulled off something in HTML that we just > didn't feel good about...but it worked...kinda ;-) That's were RIAs step > up. I think Flash applications could make killer remote database administration tools for databases that have a SOAP interface. The downside of using Flash for this is that XML is rather inefficient for data that is as structured as a resultset, but when building an administrative interface you are not dealing with large resultsets anyway. You could do this in a browser too, but I think Flash would be much nicer for this. Same goes for universal LDAP clients, and maybe eventually even universal mailclients. Jochem ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
