Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: New!

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    77
    Purely as an FYI - the 98%+ installed stats Macromedia pushes are for Flash 2 content. That content can be viewed by anyone who at one time in the past downloaded the Flash 2-6 players. It does not imply the same people are using the most recently released plugin. The stats only cover domestic US viewers.

    Flash 5 is running about 60% last time I checked. The recently released MX (and the V6 player) have pretty much only been downloaded in the developer community. Since IE auto-installes the Active-X control, these stats will continue to uptrend.

    Tailoring the site to the needs of the anticipated audience is quality advice.

    Good luck with your site!
    2112 FX :: RELOADED :: www.2112fx.com

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    .dk
    Posts
    1,691
    Originally posted by cell-gfx
    offering an HTML alternative, though a good idea, can be time-consuming.
    How is a maintaining a plain HTML site (with or without server-side scripting) harder than doing it all in Flash? Wouldn't the site (if it was dynamic) feed on the same database?

    Originally posted by cell-gfx
    Also, the stats for the percentage of browsers with the Flash player installed is in the high 90's, so alienating people is going to be fairly difficult!
    Yes, but the fact that 90% of all browsers have it doesn't mean that 90% of all websurfers are willing to use it. I have no idea how huge the 'Flash boycotting' segment is. I know, however, that a site such as Amazon would shoot itself in the foot if it went Flash-only.

    Originally posted by cell-gfx
    At the end of the day, it boils down to who your intended audience is. If you intend to reach absolutely everyone, then, yes, you will have an HTML, a Flash and a plain text version of your site with only web-safe colours, running at 640x480 and in every language out there. It will also run on all IE versions, Netscape versions and Opera, etc.
    Agreed. It isn't that hard to cater to a broad audience though.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In a country with dyks tulps and windmills
    Posts
    72
    There are a few good statements of using flash or none flash in a site.

    In the beginning of flash most people made there site full flash.
    But it's crazy to put a page with simple content and pictures in flash.
    because it's faster to do it in html.

    But if you want to show off you can do that in flash. Never use flash for a simple information site. Or shopping site.
    (amazon).

    But for a presentation site you can use flash.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Inconsistent.
    Posts
    2
    The window on window start is annoying, the first time I started it I thought it was a popup ad and closed it.

    The main navigation window was a bit too small for me, I like to have large windows where I don´t need to scroll much to get my info. Also the background image tends to blur the text, this could be a result of the poor piece of equipment i´m hunkered over though.

    Still, as a showpiece of graphical prowess it is very nice. It just lacks a bit in userfriendliness.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •