To flash or not to flash?

[Conk]

No, no flash at all? When is it ok? When is it not ok? What are your thoughts? Vote in the poll and tell your reason for choosing your vote.

I think they are ok even in an intro page but it had better be fast. That goes for the web pages themselves. Any type of flash animation should be quick. Personally I don't mind music but some is too overwhelming. Sounds are ok as long as they are pleasing and relaxing sounds, but there should be the option to turn it off.

[ssim]

To flash or not to flash, conjures up thoughts that should go to a whole different forum board :oops: .

Serioulsy though, I don't mind flash intro pages as long as they have the option to skip. I see little value in them other than to catch the audience's attention which really is the author's intent. I find myself avoiding sites that use flash to heavily as I find it takes too long (generally) to get the info I want.

[Scottes]

I voted "absolutely not" but this isn't a case of being "allowed" or not. It's what I choose. If I hit a site that starts loading flash then I leave. I'm gone. Poof. If people wish to use Flash that's fine - just don't expect me to visit the site. Ever. Not in a million years. If I had a T3 connected to my desktop I would not visit. I don't like it.

But "allowed" is silly.

[stopbath]

I agree with Scottes.

No flash. Flash is for well... flash... All flash and no content.

When a site has flash, to me, it means that they figure glitz is more important than content and helping users get to the information they need quickly. While, I may not 'go away' as quick as Scottes, some users can not access flash sites even if they wanted too (they use a device where flash is not supported, or they have or will not spend the bother to download it.)

If you must hinder your site with flash, make it an option: [Normal] [Flash Enhanced] and let the user deside.

And not even on the splash screen. I think splash screens themselves are a hinderance. Go right away to the real home page with real navigation on it, not just [enter]...

[Conk]

I voted "absolutely not" but this isn't a case of being "allowed" or not. It's what I choose. If I hit a site that starts loading flash then I leave. I'm gone. Poof. If people wish to use Flash that's fine - just don't expect me to visit the site. Ever. Not in a million years. If I had a T3 connected to my desktop I would not visit. I don't like it.

But "allowed" is silly.

What I'd like to know is why? What is it about flash that bothers you?

[Scottes]

All download, no content.

They get in my way, and give me nothing that couldn't be done faster through some other means.

I have no patience (many of you know that) and won't wait just to find that I wasted my time and got nothing.

It's all glitz & lies - Flash to me is the same as a politician or a lawyer.

If one considers the usefulness of Flash to it's bandwidth requirements then I truly don't think that there is a worse thing on the Internet. There is nothing else that takes so much and gives so little.

Chances are *very* good that I didn't visit website X to be impressed with graphics - I visited for content. Thus it just wasted my time.


All "click to enter" pages should also be removed from the planet. Another stupid useless waste of time.


May the Internet gods have mercy on my soul, but even DHTML has a use.


I hate Flash.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Two sites.. a flash site and a non flash site..

Main page is timed to enter flashsite in 5 seconds..

Main page has a logo or graphic.. and a large visible button saying entering "flashsite click here to skip flash" or some such thing.

Best of both worlds.

[Scottes]

PHP page that queries the browser to see if Flash is installed. If not it goes right to the HTML site....

[Nana]

I like flash sites...but only for 2 minutes then it gets annoying. :)

[stopbath]

PHP page that queries the browser to see if Flash is installed. If not it goes right to the HTML site....
Not really the best way... Since my son uses a lot of childrens sites and they seem to thrive on flash, I need it installed, but I prefer hands down, the non-flash versions. I prefer to opt in to having flash waste my time.

Also maintaining two versions requires careful coordination of documents as it would be so easy to 'forget' about one side or the other...

Best option:
Forgo the glitz, and rely on content, and good design to keep the site informative, accessable, and enjoyable.

Other web site nasties that provide users with reasons to leave: pop up/under ads, pornography ads, hijacked pointers, spy ware, pointless silly java programs.

[Sketcher]

I'll piggyback on CDS' mention.

If a site uses Flash, I think it should also provide a non-Flash version of the site as an option; that option should be the first thing you are prompted to decide upon entering the site (prior to being assaulted). I prefer to let the prompt stay until selected rather than default into one or the other style of page.

Some like it, some don't. Some have implemented Flash well, some (most IMO) have not. Offering an option to choose a non-Flash version of a page keeps everyone happy.