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 
 > 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,

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