From: Woody on
On 26/03/2010 09:30, Pd wrote:
> Adrian Tuddenham<adrian(a)poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you can afford to lose a few customers; but if you can't, the
>> website needs to work both with and without Flash.
>
> I still see websites that are utterly broken without Flash, and take
> ages to load and full of pointless animation that adds very little to
> the overall message if you enable Flash.
>
> For example,<http://www.acorngardens.co.uk/> is the Flash equivalent of
> a MySpace page with<blink> and<marquee> sprinkled liberally
> throughout. Utterly devoid of content without Flash, distractingly full
> of visual flummery with Flash.

Thats not true. There is a text link to the website creator if you look
at it with flash off!

But yes, that is horrible isn't it. One of the things I hate about an
entirely flash website (and I have honestly never found a reason for
that), is you can't send a link to an item.

this site:

<http://www.schecterguitars.com/domestic.asp>

again, can't use it without flash (I was sent a link to it which I
picked up on my iPhone, which I replied to with 'look at what?' as it
was a big grey blank page!), but someone wanted to send me a link to a
guitar there, but unlike any other manufacturer, they couldn't, they had
to send me a link to the site and a list of instructions how to get to
what they were telling me about.

> If I was looking for a garden services
> company, I'd be hesitant to use a company that has spent that much money
> on a website that doesn't actually provide much information, because
> their rates would have to be high enough to cover that kind of expense.

I may not even know about them as I may have looked on my iPhone, which
means I would have seen a grey page with a pink link!

I am not against using flash for some things that are very hard to do
without it, but if you do a whole page with it you are really missing
the point and trimming your market

--
Woody
From: Woody on
On 26/03/2010 09:48, Chris Ridd wrote:
> On 2010-03-26 09:30:29 +0000, Pd said:
>
>> Adrian Tuddenham <adrian(a)poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps you can afford to lose a few customers; but if you can't, the
>>> website needs to work both with and without Flash.
>>
>> I still see websites that are utterly broken without Flash, and take
>> ages to load and full of pointless animation that adds very little to
>> the overall message if you enable Flash.
>
> The Crumpler (laptop/camera bags and so on) site is similarly
> Flash-encrusted. To their credit they've created an HTML version of it
> as well.

I don't have a problem with that - if they want to show off that they
can do flash, fine, as long as there is an accessible site too

--
Woody
From: Chris Ridd on
On 2010-03-26 09:56:19 +0000, Woody said:

> On 26/03/2010 09:48, Chris Ridd wrote:
>> On 2010-03-26 09:30:29 +0000, Pd said:
>>
>>> Adrian Tuddenham <adrian(a)poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps you can afford to lose a few customers; but if you can't, the
>>>> website needs to work both with and without Flash.
>>>
>>> I still see websites that are utterly broken without Flash, and take
>>> ages to load and full of pointless animation that adds very little to
>>> the overall message if you enable Flash.
>>
>> The Crumpler (laptop/camera bags and so on) site is similarly
>> Flash-encrusted. To their credit they've created an HTML version of it
>> as well.
>
> I don't have a problem with that - if they want to show off that they
> can do flash, fine, as long as there is an accessible site too

It seems like a waste of money to me to produce two versions of the
same website.
--
Chris

From: Geoff Berrow on
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:01:47 +0000, usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk (Woody)
wrote:

>> PC fans don't change speed.
>
>What PC have you got that doesn't control its fan speed? Presumably
>nothing made in the last 20 years!

It's quite new but it's sitting next to a noisy old box. Are you
talking about processor fans? I never hear them anyway. Certainly
never heard any change with the PSU fan.

I /am/ a bit deaf.
--
Geoff Berrow (Put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs www.4theweb.co.uk/rfdmaker

From: Woody on
On 26/03/2010 10:01, Chris Ridd wrote:
> On 2010-03-26 09:56:19 +0000, Woody said:
>
>> On 26/03/2010 09:48, Chris Ridd wrote:
>>> On 2010-03-26 09:30:29 +0000, Pd said:
>>>
>>>> Adrian Tuddenham <adrian(a)poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you can afford to lose a few customers; but if you can't, the
>>>>> website needs to work both with and without Flash.
>>>>
>>>> I still see websites that are utterly broken without Flash, and take
>>>> ages to load and full of pointless animation that adds very little to
>>>> the overall message if you enable Flash.
>>>
>>> The Crumpler (laptop/camera bags and so on) site is similarly
>>> Flash-encrusted. To their credit they've created an HTML version of it
>>> as well.
>>
>> I don't have a problem with that - if they want to show off that they
>> can do flash, fine, as long as there is an accessible site too
>
> It seems like a waste of money to me to produce two versions of the same
> website.

Its their money.

Mind you, not always a waste of money doing another version. I was doing
a phone accessible version of my shop. Ideally I should be able to do
the same by a clever use of CSS, but it turns out it is easier to write
a version for the iPhone (or other phone) that works in a different way.


--
Woody