Sorry John I hadn't read this post, seems like you've got a work around already and were just trying to gain some insight into the matter.
On 4/17/06, John Grden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > sounds like a very rare edge case to me - but first I have to point > > out that this isn't an issue with FlashObject, it's an issue with the > > way ExpressInstall works. > > > > There's just too many variables that have to be in place for this to > > actually be an issue. > > > Yes and no, but I think we'd just go round and round, and it doesn't > matter. i'd agree that it's NOT a vast majority. > > But there is a way for this to be worked around - when i built > > FlashObject, I allowed the user to be able to bypass the plugin > > detection, just add ?detectflash=false to the url and it skips it. > > This is documented on the FlashObject page and has been a feature > > since version 1.0. > > > we love FlashObject btw - and yes, we know about that flag. > > If that really did happen to 5 people in a row, I would think that it > > may be something specific with that website: > > > > Maybe you put it in a popup window, and the page that launched the > > popup window already had a Flash movie playing in it? > > > at first no, then yes, then no. LOL, they decided on a popup, but then > switched back. But I don't remember it being an issue at the time we > were > dealing with the popup. > > It seems to me that this should be a fairly easy issue to work > > around, and if it's not, then it should be taken up with Adobe > > through their developer relations people. > > > Still doesn't answer my question and it's an IE/windows problem more than > Flash. I mean, you can't help it if the user has MSN open and it's using > the Flash OCX or some othe program. It might be an edge scenario, but we > had 5 people in a row do it AND those same 5 wouldn't let up on us until > we > had a site working around that IE bug. That solution, unfortunately > didn't > include the use of FlashObject. They said "make it work no matter what > happens with IE", and when it was all boiled down, there were no other > options. > > Thanks Geoff, you're points are well taken, > > John > > On Apr 17, 2006, at 7:56 PM, John Grden wrote: > > > > > Hey Geoff, thanks for the response. > > > > > > I have a question though, and it's not me being a smart-ass or > > > anything > > > -honestly! > > > > > > Ok, open IE6, load a flash site with version 6 of the flash > > > player. Open > > > another instance of IE6, load a different site and do the upgrade > > > to flash 8 > > > (without closing the other browser). After its all said and done, the > > > upgrade never completed and now IE can't create an instance of the > > > FLash > > > object to do version detection OR show the site. The only way to > > > show it, > > > is to hardcode the object tag in an html page - then IE will > > > display the > > > content. Mind you, it doesn't have to be another instance of IE > > > open, it > > > can be anything using the FlashOCX. > > > > > > So, I guess what I'm missing here is the part where JS can't make > > > an object > > > and FlashObject works anyway. Huh? > > > > > > I mean, give me the technical reason *why* I should just use > > > FlashObject > > > anyway, despite the fact that it failed during the Hilton journey's > > > site. > > > There's a fortune 500 company, and it no worky. Now, for the vast > > > majority > > > of users, there probably wasn't a problem, but with the 5 > > > executives who > > > went home to show off their new site to the family, it happened to > > > 100% of > > > them. So, there's no trying to talk them out of what they > > > experienced. In > > > their eyes, 100% failure rate amongst themselves means big problems > > > elsewhere etc. > > > > > > I feel like either I'm missing something fundamental here, or I > > > haven't > > > articulated the problem well enough. > > > > > > Thanks Geoff > > > > > > John > > > > > > On 4/17/06, Geoff Stearns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > > >> Since nobody really answered this, here you go: > > >> > > >> Neither one is really 'better' - they both do pretty much exactly the > > >> same thing. Some people like the syntax used in FlashObject, some > > >> people like the way UFO works instead. Check them both out and pick > > >> the one you like better. > > >> > > >> I'd also like to address some of the concerns about FlashObject: > > >> > > >> 1) Jim said "My only reservation with FlashObject is that it's > > >> written in a style that makes it pretty un maintainable." > > >> > > >> First, I guess I'm not sure why you would need to 'maintain' it. The > > >> script is basically just an API for writing the HTML to embed a swf > > >> file into an html document. This probably won't change significantly > > >> any time soon, so the need to 'maintain' a script like this is non- > > >> existent. Second, maybe you were looking at the compressed version? I > > >> include a version of the 'source' code that is much easier to read if > > >> you are into that. > > >> > > >> As far as the misc. accusations about FlashObject not being Object > > >> Oriented, (Jim said: "IMHO, the code is very procedural, not object > > >> oriented. The cues for this are the endless conditional > > >> statements. A good, encapsulated architecture can greatly minimize > > >> these...") > > >> > > >> I say this: WTF? FlashObject is about os OOP as you can get with > > >> Javascript. (and where are the 'endless conditional statements' you > > >> speak of?) It's not some compiled language that gets compressed and > > >> translated into machine language. FlashObject is also meant to be a > > >> *very* small file with one specific task. Comparing it to dojo or > > >> other js libraries makes absolutely no sense to me at all. That said, > > >> it's very easy to add more functionality to FlashObject because it > > >> *is* in fact written in an object oriented fashion (in the style of > > >> ECMA script, using prototype). I've written an extension for it for > > >> Flash/JS communication and it works great - I haven't officially > > >> released it yet, but if anyone is interested in seeing how to do > > >> this, you are welcome to grab the source code here: example page: > > >> http://blog.deconcept.com/code/intkit/fo_integrationkit.html > > >> source: http://blog.deconcept.com/code/intkit/fo_integrationkit.zip > > >> > > >> 2) elibol and I have discussed the ExpressInstall functionality in > > >> FlashObject very thoroughly, and he has a lot of very good points and > > >> had a couple of requests to make using ExpressInstall a bit easier, > > >> but I decided to not change how it works because I like giving people > > >> the choice of custom upgrade messages. During the exchange with him, > > >> I did realize that forcing people to use AS2 for something like that > > >> was a bad idea and have since changed it to a simple AS include file > > >> instead of an AS2 class. > > >> > > >> As for the need to couple your Flash content with FlashObject if you > > >> use ExpressInstall - this is just wrong - All of the scripts I've > > >> seen that use ExpressInstall pass in the same 3 variables (and they > > >> have to) - take any Flash movie that is set up to support > > >> ExpressInstall and it will work with any of the other javascript > > >> embed solutions that also support ExpressInstall. > > >> > > >> 3) Kevin suggested using his Player.js script - while his other stuff > > >> is really awesome (HistoryKeeper, dang) the Player.js code doesn't > > >> support all the stuff that FlashObject or UFO provide. So really I > > >> think that Kevin should just use FlashObject ;) > > >> > > >> 4) John Grden says: > > >> "ummm, that's the problem - no JavaScript worky - no write out object > > >> at all = screwed. He's got a great point that we've been dealing > > >> with as well. We are using the FlashObject code, but if a user has > > >> JavaScript disabled, there ain't no party. So, flash dectection is a > > >> bit more than just FlashObject." > > >> > > >> and > > >> > > >> "You don't just go and tell a fortune 500 company "um, sorry that it > > >> failed on your lame computer at home." > > >> > > >> To this I say: Dang, man. I work with those same fortune 500 > > >> companies (I work at Schematic - we use FlashObject in all of our > > >> Flash sites) and we never have issues with it. Assuming you create > > >> your pages to degrade gracefully (which FlashObject encourages), your > > >> users will be just fine if they don't have Flash or JS installed. I > > >> personally don't feel that embedding Flash *without* JS an option > > >> anymore. With all the different vesions of the Flash player out > > >> there, and all the benefits you get from using Javascript in search > > >> engines, it seems like a no brainer to use Javascript. > > >> > > >> If you have doubts about using FlashObject on a 'big' site, then you > > >> can rest assured that it's already being used an many many huge > > >> websites. > > >> > > >> Like what? oh how about: windows.com, youtube.com, and the library of > > >> congress: http://www.loc.gov/bookfest/ (and thousands more) > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> Ok, I think I've covered most of the issues - if anyone wants to > > >> discuss this further, or has suggestions on how to make FlashObject > > >> better (or just feature requests), you are welcome to join the > > >> mailing list I have set up, which is here: > > >> > > >> http://lists.deconcept.com/listinfo.cgi/flashobject-deconcept.com > > >> > > >> (or of course reply to this thread, whatevs) > > >> > > >> Sorry for the delayed response on this one - as Jim said, it was > > >> awesome in NYC this weekend, and I was lounging in the sun in Central > > >> Park :) > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > > >> To change your subscription options or search the archive: > > >> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > >> > > >> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > > >> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > > >> http://www.figleaf.com > > >> http://training.figleaf.com > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > John Grden - Blitz > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > > > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > > > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > > > > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > > > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > > > http://www.figleaf.com > > > http://training.figleaf.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > > http://www.figleaf.com > > http://training.figleaf.com > > > > > > -- > John Grden - Blitz > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com > http://training.figleaf.com > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
