Bandwidth is dirt cheap for commercial sites, and even cheaper for non-rural consumers. I can get multi-meg Ethernet for less than a T1 cost 4-5 years ago.
It's not about stealing photo's, it's about ensuring that your site looks the way you designed it. The easiest way to make sure your site renders the same in Firefox and IE is to ensure that browser rendering qwirks are irrelevant. Hence Flash. Also Flash allows the designer absolute control over the rendering, unlike HTML+CSS, which can be overriden by the user, or affected by certain popular browser's issues with not following the RFC's correctly (IE, I'm looking at you). And Flash isn't anything resembling an actual security risk. -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: > On a freeking commercial website? If someone wants to steal photos of > Leica Products with their name blazoned across them I'd let them. It's > free advertising. Bandwidth isn't that cheap and Flash is a decided > security risk. > > Adam Maas wrote: >> Bandwidth is cheap, and flash is better than HTML for presentation control. >> >> -Adam >> >> >> P. J. Alling wrote: >> >>> <rant> >>> I mean what the F***. What is it about current web design and Flash! All >>> this talk about Leicas gave me the idea that I might like to know more >>> about current Leica offerings so I decided to visit the Leica web site. >>> It's bad enough when there's a Flash into taking up bandwidth on a >>> website, and Flash based menuing systems do look kind of cool until >>> you've seen your third one. But why the hell does a web designer have to >>> use a flash image where a simple static jpeg will do. I mean holy c*** >>> are you so proud of your new tool that you have to do everything with it! >>> </rant> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
