Eric Miller on Fri, 19 Apr 2002 18:24:01 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] RE: <nettime> Generation Flash thread |
and lemme throw in a few thoughts here as well... > The Flash format spec is open-source, and has been for some time. There are alternate ways to create Flash files via other authoring applications or from server-side scripting. "proprietary" is not a valid descriptor. > I simply don't get the breasts-and-biceps tangent. Simply because Flash can have a visually pleasing aesthetic, that's the only reason for its success? You're saying that a poorly designed HTML 2.0 page is inherently superior to a well-designed Flash site by virtue of the fact that the HTML page is ugly but at least familiar? > Granted, a lot of Flash 'designers' misguidedly try to reinvent the user interface by having a lot of creative-yet-user-hostile interface metaphors. But there's a balance to be struck between Jakob "all links must be blue and underlined" Nielsen and building on the increasing savvy of the Web user base to explore new frameworks for navigating and comprehending content. > Just as radio was originally "wireless (telegraph)" and cinema was "motion pictures", we build our understanding of new media within the context of previously existing media, a subject that Mr. Manovich has ably explored in his recent book. Dismissing the format simply because it doesn't precisely match the functionality of previous formats is a bit short-sighted. > Flash is more cross-platform nowadays than DHTML or other "open" standards. Try using a DHTML menu in Konqueror sometime, or running CSS-P on your Casio PDA. > Check out Flash MX. This new release of Flash addresses many of the accessibility and usability concerns. hugs n' kisses, Eric At 01:17 AM 4/19/2002 -0400, Christopher Fahey [askrom] wrote: >Zak wrote: > > > The seemingly endless backlash against Flash can, in many ways, be > > > traced to a simple dislike for the "Flash aesthetic" or the > > > predominance of that aesthetic. > > > > Rubbish. The backlash against Flash is more to do with its inherent > > un-openness and baulky, unwieldy, proprietary specification. > >"Rubbish"?!? Simmer down there, pilgrim, this ain't a debate over the >Middle East, it's just a file format. Anyway, please note that: > "in many ways" != "the sole reason" <snip /> _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold