Comments on: Ahem http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/ Web design news and insights since 1995 Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:54:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Jeffrey Zeldman http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52376 Jeffrey Zeldman Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:24:03 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52376 Discussion closed. Discussion closed.

]]> By: notANoob http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52362 notANoob Wed, 17 Feb 2010 03:11:40 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52362 You gave me attention and thus I feel compelled to interact with you. Hello Mr. Zeldman, my name is notANoob, oh, I am so happy to be on here, typing to you now, thank you for your time. This would have been more fun had the letters I'm typing animated in from random 3 dimensional vectors, but alas, no Flash here. Hey let me tell you about open source... Microsoft & Apple. That is it. Nothing else to say. They are so far from open anything. In fact my hat wearing bearded friend, the internet is indeed built upon lots of closed source technology. It starts at the hardware. And many of the web's biggest players in open source have loads of proprietary code, like Yahoo and Google. Because you still have to hire someone to build something and not share it with the world in order to have a competitive advantage. The bottom line is that money is the difference. Whether a company implements a "free" solution, or a proprietary one, money is the difference, and as long as money is the difference, company's will continue to spend money... And frankly, Flash is cheap, and free, you can develop AS3 in a variety of open source IDE's. Tell me something... does silverlight run on Linux? No? When will we be graced by an anti-silverlight "HTML 5 will wax yer nipples and hold the cigarette in your mouth afterwards" kind of rant directed at the big mean Microsoft? That Bill Gates! He has money! But attacking Bill is passe' I guess... Not the kind of thing the masses get riled up about anymore. You gave me attention and thus I feel compelled to interact with you. Hello Mr. Zeldman, my name is notANoob, oh, I am so happy to be on here, typing to you now, thank you for your time. This would have been more fun had the letters I’m typing animated in from random 3 dimensional vectors, but alas, no Flash here.

Hey let me tell you about open source… Microsoft & Apple. That is it. Nothing else to say. They are so far from open anything. In fact my hat wearing bearded friend, the internet is indeed built upon lots of closed source technology. It starts at the hardware. And many of the web’s biggest players in open source have loads of proprietary code, like Yahoo and Google. Because you still have to hire someone to build something and not share it with the world in order to have a competitive advantage.

The bottom line is that money is the difference. Whether a company implements a “free” solution, or a proprietary one, money is the difference, and as long as money is the difference, company’s will continue to spend money… And frankly, Flash is cheap, and free, you can develop AS3 in a variety of open source IDE’s.

Tell me something… does silverlight run on Linux? No? When will we be graced by an anti-silverlight “HTML 5 will wax yer nipples and hold the cigarette in your mouth afterwards” kind of rant directed at the big mean Microsoft? That Bill Gates! He has money! But attacking Bill is passe’ I guess… Not the kind of thing the masses get riled up about anymore.

]]> By: Jeffrey Zeldman http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52359 Jeffrey Zeldman Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:17:02 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52359 @notANoob: Stop shouting, you'll hurt your throat. @notANoob:

Stop shouting, you’ll hurt your throat.

]]> By: notANoob http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52349 notANoob Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:57:41 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52349 LIES! Flash is going to be on every device out there soon. Every major platform will have flash support EXCEPT apple. They're the only holdout and they're about to cave. So give it up Zeldman, your HTML is old fashioned and boring, Flash is everywhere, you can't stop it. LIES! Flash is going to be on every device out there soon. Every major platform will have flash support EXCEPT apple. They’re the only holdout and they’re about to cave. So give it up Zeldman, your HTML is old fashioned and boring, Flash is everywhere, you can’t stop it.

]]> By: Andy Foulds http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52345 Andy Foulds Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:45:03 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52345 Everyones talking about accessibility and HTML5 but ignoring the legacy browsers; 10 - 15% are still on IE6 ferchrisake! Everyones talking about accessibility and HTML5 but ignoring the legacy browsers; 10 – 15% are still on IE6 ferchrisake!

]]> By: Ahem | Tulle's Web Design Blog http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52309 Ahem | Tulle's Web Design Blog Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:54:22 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52309 [...] strange post here: Ahem AKPC_IDS += [...] [...] strange post here: Ahem AKPC_IDS += [...]

]]> By: Jeff http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52232 Jeff Mon, 08 Feb 2010 11:07:22 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52232 Ugh. The problem is that web development is stuck abusing HTML to try and use it for something it wasn't designed for. It's a markup language for displaying text and navigating content, but we are trying to provide a rich, multi-media experience with it. So when someone like Adobe or Microsoft comes up with a solution that is better designed for writing and delivering applications, people shoot it down in the name of accessibility and standards. I agree that HTML is the only way to write web sites that are truly accessible, but I don't think it's a good thing. Maybe Flash and Silverlight aren't the ultimate answer, but they are a step in the right direction. At some point, we are going to have to come up with a standard designed from the ground up for writing web applications, and anything based on HTML is always going to suffer the clunkiness of being built on a markup language. Ugh. The problem is that web development is stuck abusing HTML to try and use it for something it wasn’t designed for. It’s a markup language for displaying text and navigating content, but we are trying to provide a rich, multi-media experience with it. So when someone like Adobe or Microsoft comes up with a solution that is better designed for writing and delivering applications, people shoot it down in the name of accessibility and standards. I agree that HTML is the only way to write web sites that are truly accessible, but I don’t think it’s a good thing. Maybe Flash and Silverlight aren’t the ultimate answer, but they are a step in the right direction. At some point, we are going to have to come up with a standard designed from the ground up for writing web applications, and anything based on HTML is always going to suffer the clunkiness of being built on a markup language.

]]> By: Ben http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52229 Ben Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:46:56 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52229 @John Dowdell I'm not interested in Flash-bashing. I use Flash when the project requires, and most problems I have with it come down to big ad agencies using it to impress clients rather than users, not the plug-in itself. I'm not an iPhone user, but viewing it as a passing fad that's just <i>popular with coastal techies</i> is a big old head/sand combo. When you say <i>today's World Wide Web</i>, do you mean to say that all of these manufacturers' devices support Flash, Silverlight, Windows Media, Quicktime, any other plug-in I can use to access content in 2010? Up until now, the web on mobile devices was the domain of business users and the tech-savvy. The iPhone brought the mobile web to everyone, and unfortunately everyone is who I make websites for. So back to my original question: Given that mobile bandwidth is apparently still worth more than gold here in Australia, and given that blocking Flash does reduce bandwidth consumption, <b>even if every single mobile device decides to support Flash</b> I don't think "click to enable Flash" is going anywhere. How do we give these users a decent experience? @John Dowdell
I’m not interested in Flash-bashing. I use Flash when the project requires, and most problems I have with it come down to big ad agencies using it to impress clients rather than users, not the plug-in itself.

I’m not an iPhone user, but viewing it as a passing fad that’s just popular with coastal techies is a big old head/sand combo.

When you say today’s World Wide Web, do you mean to say that all of these manufacturers’ devices support Flash, Silverlight, Windows Media, Quicktime, any other plug-in I can use to access content in 2010?

Up until now, the web on mobile devices was the domain of business users and the tech-savvy. The iPhone brought the mobile web to everyone, and unfortunately everyone is who I make websites for.

So back to my original question:
Given that mobile bandwidth is apparently still worth more than gold here in Australia, and given that blocking Flash does reduce bandwidth consumption, even if every single mobile device decides to support Flash I don’t think “click to enable Flash” is going anywhere.

How do we give these users a decent experience?

]]> By: John Dowdell http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52214 John Dowdell Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:29:42 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52214 @"Ben" <em>"What we are saying is that the group accessing websites on devices other than desktop PCs (many of which don’t support Flash) is growing rapidly."</em> Oh, sorry, I didn't get that from "None of the Flash player penetration stats people are bandying about take into account 'click to enable Flash' plugins". ;-) Yes, the Pocket Web is increasing. First one was Nokia 700 Internet Tablet with Adobe Flash Player. iPhone has gotten popular with coastal techies lately, and your content is restricted in that garden, agreed. Fortunately 19 of the other Top 20 manufacturers are all supporting today's World Wide Web. Quite massive. The stats for deficient devices may have grown through 2009, but in 2010 will swing back towards viewing all web content regardless of device size. jd/adobe @”Ben”
“What we are saying is that the group accessing websites on devices other than desktop PCs (many of which don’t support Flash) is growing rapidly.”

Oh, sorry, I didn’t get that from “None of the Flash player penetration stats people are bandying about take into account ‘click to enable Flash’ plugins”. ;-)

Yes, the Pocket Web is increasing. First one was Nokia 700 Internet Tablet with Adobe Flash Player. iPhone has gotten popular with coastal techies lately, and your content is restricted in that garden, agreed. Fortunately 19 of the other Top 20 manufacturers are all supporting today’s World Wide Web. Quite massive. The stats for deficient devices may have grown through 2009, but in 2010 will swing back towards viewing all web content regardless of device size.

jd/adobe

]]> By: Peenoh http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52207 Peenoh Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:01:47 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52207 I don't understand WHY all these standard guys haven't ever done their interactive animations using SVG/SMIL! Moreover, I don't see any of these gurus talking about the Open Screen Project: do you really know what are you talking about or yours is only ignorance and hate mixed up? I don’t understand WHY all these standard guys haven’t ever done their interactive animations using SVG/SMIL! Moreover, I don’t see any of these gurus talking about the Open Screen Project: do you really know what are you talking about or yours is only ignorance and hate mixed up?

]]> By: Whither Flash? | Interactive Design Lab http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52196 Whither Flash? | Interactive Design Lab Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:17:19 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52196 [...] http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/ (No Ratings Yet)  Loading ... Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010 Passions [...] [...] http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/ (No Ratings Yet)  Loading … Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010 Passions [...]

]]> By: dernino http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52137 dernino Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:09:20 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52137 Very probably right! Very probably right!

]]> By: Ben http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52135 Ben Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:01:36 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52135 @John Dowdell I'd argue that requiring users to play "click the mystery box" every time they load a new page on the site is less than ideal at best. The Millward-Brown audits are conducted via online surveys, not a focus group consisting of a random sample of society sitting in a room(<a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/methodology/" rel="nofollow">via</a> ). The penetration statistics <a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/version_penetration.html" title="Adobe - Flash Player Version Penetration" rel="nofollow">here</a> are for PC Penetration (according to the sidebar). People who complete online surveys probably already spend quite a bit of time online on their desktop PC, probably have the Flash player installed, and probably completed 5 other surveys in that sitting (I know - I, like most of my friends, did it for the occasional free iTunes voucher while we were studying.) As far as I can tell, nobody is questioning the ubiquity of Flash on desktop PCs. But I don't believe the online survey crowd is an accurate representation of the entire range of internet users. What we are saying is that the group accessing websites on devices <i>other than desktop PCs</i> (many of which don't support Flash) is growing rapidly. I haven't seen any compelling penetration stats showing Flash player penetration across the entire range of web users - that is, a survey sample that includes a representative number of users with iPhones, Opera Turbo and Flash blocking plugins. @John Dowdell
I’d argue that requiring users to play “click the mystery box” every time they load a new page on the site is less than ideal at best.

The Millward-Brown audits are conducted via online surveys, not a focus group consisting of a random sample of society sitting in a room(via ).

The penetration statistics here are for PC Penetration (according to the sidebar).

People who complete online surveys probably already spend quite a bit of time online on their desktop PC, probably have the Flash player installed, and probably completed 5 other surveys in that sitting (I know – I, like most of my friends, did it for the occasional free iTunes voucher while we were studying.)

As far as I can tell, nobody is questioning the ubiquity of Flash on desktop PCs. But I don’t believe the online survey crowd is an accurate representation of the entire range of internet users.

What we are saying is that the group accessing websites on devices other than desktop PCs (many of which don’t support Flash) is growing rapidly. I haven’t seen any compelling penetration stats showing Flash player penetration across the entire range of web users – that is, a survey sample that includes a representative number of users with iPhones, Opera Turbo and Flash blocking plugins.

]]> By: John Dowdell http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52133 John Dowdell Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:02:22 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52133 To "Ben" from Melbourne: I saw a site last year with all navigation done in Flash. I just clicked the icon to access it, no big deal. (The Millward-Brown audits of consumer support levels ask people "Can you see this content? How about this? this one?" It measures what raw consumer focus groups can actually view.) jd/adobe To “Ben” from Melbourne: I saw a site last year with all navigation done in Flash. I just clicked the icon to access it, no big deal.

(The Millward-Brown audits of consumer support levels ask people “Can you see this content? How about this? this one?” It measures what raw consumer focus groups can actually view.)

jd/adobe

]]> By: Karl Jacobs http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/03/ahem/#comment-52128 Karl Jacobs Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:27:56 +0000 http://www.zeldman.com/?p=3614#comment-52128 Speaking as a grunt-level developer and team of 1 for a corporate web development group, video is the key. People are going to want to see their video content on the iPad. If the solution is HTML5 like Vimeo is experimenting with, then we'll see a big push. Users can live without fancy animated banners and such, but, they'll want their video. The lack of Flash video on the iPad will either handicap it, or push adoption of a new standard. Speaking as a grunt-level developer and team of 1 for a corporate web development group, video is the key. People are going to want to see their video content on the iPad. If the solution is HTML5 like Vimeo is experimenting with, then we’ll see a big push. Users can live without fancy animated banners and such, but, they’ll want their video. The lack of Flash video on the iPad will either handicap it, or push adoption of a new standard.

]]>