BellaOnline Forums Computers Web Design To Flash or Not to Flash

I'm not particularly fond of Macromedia's Flash. It's a difficult program to use - the Action Script that is. It can do some neat things on the web, if you don't mind waiting and waiting and waiting. Unfortunately, it seems to be all the rage and a necessity if you're going to make web design your living.

My question is, if you have the choice of visiting a Flash version of a website, knowing that it will be a longer wait for pages to load, and more often than not, just a bunch of swirling words that fade in and out, or an HTML version, what do you choose?

As a webdesigner, I completely agree with you.

However, my boss does NOT. Categorically. To a lot of people not intimately involved with web design, "Flash" is just a synonym for "flashy." Which, again, is a synonym for "good web design."

To them. Not me.

<img src="/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

So how do we use Flash, keep the file size small, make it entertaining without all the gaudiness?

I would make everything in layers and timelines except for the nagging problem of 'sound' associated with buttons (that clients insist on).

I've tried a few javascripts for roll-over button sounds, but have failed to get any of them to work.

Any suggestions?

I think, screw flash altogether. Put in a couple of rollovers and overlibs, usually it'll make it flashy enough.

In my opinion Flash just makes a web page look more smoother.

You can always just use flash buttons too which only take up reall litle space

Personally, I don't see much point in using Flash for buttons, navigation, etc. But I love Flash as an intro and as a teachihg tool. It has amazing properties and if done right, doesn't become a whale in byte size.

True, it does take time to master, but to me, it puts the full capabilities of the web - visual, auditory and literary all together in one neat package.

Agreed. But for most websites (ones not specializing in graphical representation, i.e. galleries), the place of flash is mostly restricted to three things:
- rollovers
- splash page
- loading placeholders.

Rollovers you already said it about.

Loading placeholders can be done with other technology (animated gif+script), which takes less space and time to make.

Splash page -- eh, okay. But the splash page is not even there half the time.

Hi All,

I'm new to this forum and would like to add my comment as well...yeah I agree with you all...
An HTML version website is fast to access than Flash website...The more appealing is Flash website due to it's animations...So the user will definitely remember the site he/she visited to...
If the Website is Combination of Flash and HTML then it will add more advantage..As you all mentioned..

Thanks n Regards
yashmax

I would choose the html over flash do to the following reasons. Flash if not done properly can be bulky and slow loading. Seconds compatibility with some browsers or surfers , they don't have the macro media flash plug in.

Flash cannot be indexed with Search engines, so for the client that MUST have it, they should know that they might not get any online traffic because of it. Can you tell I'm not a Flash fan. LOL!

HTML hands down. Flash, if used at all, a minimum.

Lets not forget about W3C

I have to agree with those that prefer HTML over flash.
I usually go to sites to get information and not be entertained. When a Intro page with flash comes up I usually hit the skip button (when available). I admire those that design in Flash because I know the work and planning that goes behind it but I like the HTML because of the load time.
Grace

Most Search Engines ignore Flash, but lots of people like it, at least the first time they visit your site.

My suggestions are:

1) If you use Flash for an intro, ALWAYS include a skip intro option.

2) If you insist on having an ALL FLASH website, ALWAYS include a non-flash, HTML version of all the important pages.

3) If you choose to use Flash for navigation buttons, always include HTML text links, on the same page, to all the same urls that the flash navigation goes to, so the site can be easily indexed by the search engines.

--------------------

Hurricane Graphics - Custom web design, flash animation and search engine optimization

As a web designer and researcher, I can tell that I always skip the flash intro and get right into the meat of what I'm looking for. I think the majority of surfers feel that way too. Bells and whistles tend to slow you down, and I totally agree with Rose's comment above (on 2/6).

I realize this is an old post, but as I was reading the replies, I was wondering when someone was going to mention the fact that search engines have difficulty reading text within flash content (most can't read it at all).

That being said, I still think there is a solid place on the web for flash, if used properly.

1) Pages with Flash splash screens should ALWAYS have a "skip intro" option to allow users to get right to the info they were looking for without waiting for the intro to end.

2) Pages with Flash navigation should also incluse standard html text links for the search engine spiders to crawl. Without these text links, the spiders hit a "dead end" and are unable to crawl to the rest of the pages on your site.

3) Sites created ENTIRELY in Flash should also have the same info available on a non-flash site.

If you are determined to use Flash, then make two sites. One that is mainly Flash orinented and the ther is HTML. Though many sites are going over to a complete Flash base, you have to remember that not everyone has a fast modem. Many are still on dial-up (argh! I hate dial-up), so I'd be more inclined to create something for the slow majority than the fast minority.

Just remember what they taught you learned in web design class

YLnn is right, i don't suggest to use a flash site because it cannot be indexed with search engine. A flash header could be fine if the loading is fast and if the animation is attractive. you need need to have a plug-ins as to work well and test in a browsers.