Scott comes back from the dead with "rocks" in his hands.
I've spent "allot" of time with FLASH, in fact we used to use it "to much".
We left it for the right reasons. Pages look "deadish" with Flash, the
anti-aliasing creates a visual look that is just not sharp and snappy.
While it may include JS, it's not 100% ECMA compliant and the language is
incomplete.
We get a far greater approval rating when displaying our hybrid DHTML/FLASH
over straight flash. FLASH is also an <embed> object so any desire to view
other <embeds> require the use of pop-ups, lots of clients don't want or
like these.
While FLASH has a wondrous IDE it also "dummifies" the user. I know this
for a fact, because any discussion on Were-Here that has "depth" results in
low hanging jaws embracing the faces of Neanderthals. The XML area of
Were-Here only has 300ish posts, the "Coolsites" section has ten's of
thousands. Says allot about the tool users of FLASH.
The beauty of DynAPI/DHTML is getting your hands dirty in "real code"
(please remember your roots Scott, you grew up here at DynAPIville). Take
two like minded individuals and put them on differing paths to wisdom; one
starting with a FLASH program and the book "The New Flash Gods" [insert any]
and one starting with Textpad and internet link to DynAPI and reference
material to fill the "desire" that grows out of "dirty finger nails". I'll
wager my house that in two years you have an "animated line wiggler" that
had his mind numbed by "framed animation" in FLASH and another individual
worth far more in overall value and ability to deliver a diversified set of
core-competencies to an organization.
FLASH is "static". Since FLASH is an "encapsulated object" [the browser
doesn't even know what it is] it cannot offer 25 different versions of
itself. We do it all the time with a simple file addition and code change.
While this could be done in FLASH the file size would be HUGE (include all
art) or it would require the hand creation of 25 of each instance of every
movie used in your site, no thanks.
FLASH is 100% introspective. Since it's an <embed> your forced to look at
the web thru it's eyes, and the view is limiting. While FLASH supports XML
so does every browser. Tag parsing and definitions that create "action"
happens on the server-side or within smart "thin-client" that rely on COM+
or RMI-OPII remote objects (try squeezing any of these inside a FLASH
movie).
FLASH has no home in Enterprise. If I just spent $25 million installing
Oracle 9i's within our corporate infrastructure I have little interest in
FLASH if it comes at the expense of dynamic web objects delivered via .NET
or the J2EE. Web sites tend to mirror the legacy systems that live behind
Oz's screen. Name me "one" serious site that uses FLASH for it's interface
and content delivery system?
Walmart went with Broadvision and CORBA power on the server side because it
allows them to dynamically hook up their clients vendors and vendors
databases to make e-commerce more economical. Their final products put
FLASH dynamics to shame integrating real-time personality filtering and
content modification built on the fly. Vignette and Art Technology Group
empower 1,000's of fortune 5000 companies.
In the end FLASH looks compelling til you wear the "skin-tight nylon
leotards" that comes with the software for awhile. Maybe it may will grow
up some day. Maybe someday it will "merge" with the web rather then laying
on top of it as an <embed>. Maybe the users will find the inspiration to
expand their intellectual horizons beyond the "framework of tendency" that
FLASHING tends to create within them.
Maybe...
Till then leave us to our expanded education and higher worth while we diry
ours nails over here.
May this "rock" find you.
Ray
