MB you do certainly make a good point, and I’m finding very hard to disagree with you…Probably because I like flash so much.
I guess the model you’re endorsing is something like:
if (desktop) then flash else simple html +js
And overall, I imagine websites out there that need to look cool are on the decline in any case. Even so, when dealing with client the word ‘flash’ is so taboo. God even seasoned programmers look at you like you’re a leper.
I mean Flash AS3 is a fully fledged OO language, and you get ‘the roll of eyes’ from those so called HTML +css + jquery hackers… I had a telephone interview not so long ago, and I mentioned flash… that didn’t go down well at all, even though I was merely using it to prove I had good OO designs.
Off topic, MB I got a little project I’m working on (AS3) and wanted some feedback from you about the UI and stuff, but it’s kinda private. Can I shoot you an email?
MBMedia saidSorry again man if you make a flash website with great look and user experience then back it up with HTML just in the name of mobile capable, this have no logic in my opinion for the ordinary client ,its simple way to much work on the modification from client end perspective
That’s actually the point I’m trying to make. If you make flash websites that aren’t mobile capable, then that’s why you see an enormous lack of work in the area of flash, because no one wants to use you. People want mobile capable websites and if you’re not putting
It doesn’t make sense because you’re applying it to situations where it wouldn’t. That’s why I talk about discernment and it being so important: not everything should be flash. If you’re building a site for the express purpose of making it’s underlying code as editable as possible then the right choice was never flash. And if you’re building a site so that it’s content is as editable as possible then the right chose was never to hard code content into the front end, but instead to draw it from database or XML , making content editing not dependent upon the front-end.
But the point that is being COMPLETELY missed is that different designs for mobile/desktop front-end layouts is a choice important for design not tech. Google, twitter, facebook….none written in flash, all with completely different mobile front-ends, just driven by a common set of data. Not just a responsive layout: a completely different interactive process and design for the mobile touchscreen user. This is a fact you need to accept whether you stick partly with flash or go to HTML5 full time, because it’s gonna follow you there as well
I’ve just already accepted the fact that any good site needs 2 designs, and I’m just taking it one step further and saying that when the mobile and desktop designs/code are separated like that, it does give you the freedom to then choose the rendering techs for the mobile/desktop versions separately, and gives you the freedom to choose the best one for each.
Hey MB you know Barca` is playing tonight so I hope we are not going to do this all day, and I notice it’s not the first time we talk so long on Barca day . .
Flash can’t be available to all platform you are strict manly to desktop and that is a huge bummer.
All respect on the private sector most users and even small business that just want a website if it’s flash or html they don’t know crap about the web or how to modify stuff and they are your majored business as a freelancer in most case ….. You are ignoring some majored factors regarding flash, not you or me can change things we are not on the Hero show “if you save the cheerleader you will save the world “ .
A good example you should look at Silverlight how it just fade away instantly after Microsoft shift to html 5 same as Adobe doing right now .
I am the biggest flash defender but i know when i am defeated and i already move on ,i think most flasher where cut by 60%-70% in flash work look around man we are lonely There is a great guy here a master flash developer for many years, told me not to long ago he dump everything regarding flash and now he planning to teach English, that’s stuff always amaze me
The essence of my argument is to:
1) learn all techs so that you can always make the right decisions for every device
2) think of mobiles and desktops as separate experiences so that you always give each the best experience possible. For most average sites this is simple responsive design, for higher-end sites sometimes it means completely different designs for desktop/mobile.
I see no possible way to argue that those two points are limiting anyone to desktop in any way, in fact: it’s the exact opposite, they are points specifically made to make sure mobiles always get thought of and catered to, even if the original site design would have sucked on a mobile
My personal addition to those is that when it is best to separate the layouts of desktop completely (for interactive sites, that’s most of the time) and when flash is the better choice for the desktop tech (some of the time). Then don’t be scared to use it.
That’s all. I honestly have a hard time seeing how anyone can argue against it. Any valid reasons against it are a paradox because the points themselves say that if it’s not the best option then don’t do it!
Such as if there’s no need to separate the desktop and mobile: then don’t! Use responsive html! If the desktop version design would be faster to build in HTML5 : then do it in HTML5 . If you can build it in flash CS6 and output HTML5 and it works better than .swf format: do that! If the mobile and desktop are separate and desktop version runs better and more cross-browser in flash than html5…do that!