begin quoting Todd Walton as of Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:08:41PM -0500: > On 4/11/07, Christian Seberino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Not always. Think of Flash as just sucking less than Java and Javascript > >regarding ease of use then. Flash doesn't have to be perfect. It just > >has to be better than the alternatives to win. > > Since I generally hate platitudes, I tweaked at this last sentence.
Heh. > In tweaking, I thought of a response: > > It's not true. If Flash is only marginally better than the > alternatives but still leaves features or stability or compatibility > to be desired, then the demand for something better will still remain. This is the optimal situation so far as I am concerned. > That demand translates into people willing to try the alternatives > even when they're not necessarily better. It causes technical types > to want to develop something better, and leaves a hole for an agile > competitor to come and stomp on Flash. ...thereby quelling future improvement? :( > Flash, or anything, doesn't "win" by being just better than the > alternatives. It would "win" by filling its role so near to > completely that nobody *needs* an alternative. Why must "win" be couched in terms of "everyone else loses"? "Win" should be "proved useful enough so that people don't let it die". -- Some people think that they're happy when they're less miserable than you. Stewart Stremler -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
