Z
@danixdefcon5 said:@CapitalT said:The real problem of flash is just a liiitle thing: it's ass to navigate.
You are rarely able to select or copy anything, the context menu is fucked up, scrolling rarely does what it should do, it's fixed layout (ever gone to a site "optimized" for 640x480?), shitty artistic fonts, clever navigation, et cetera.
I'm not against using flash, but I'm against flash sites. And if you could prove the existence of a usable flash site please do.
In short, unless you are the brother chaps, don't make a flash site.
Seconded.
I absolutely HATE those sites full of flashy flash stuff for all the reasons stated above! Unless you're actually putting multimedia stuff in the flash frame, don't use it. Some freaking sites don't understand though, and they're rendered unreadable from, say, my BlackBerry. They're also impossible to aggregate, bookmark, and do anything web-related to them. Might as well have the entire site inside a Java applet!
Flash-only sites are a sign of a lazy or useless webmaster. Usually some graphical designer that has no idea of how the web works. At least one of the few good things for Web 2.0 is that its taking the web developers away from Flash.Yes, I agree. And there are other problems as well. One thing it can take up memory and slow, also, I don't have flash on my computer, and it won't render using options that I have configured into my browser, and many other things missing as well.