Neato Torpedo
Ben Woodward
http://www.vectorlounge.com/04_amsterdam/jam/wireframe.html
Ben
Don Harris
TheDon
"Ben Woodward" <b...@perpetuainteractive.com> wrote in message
news:B83FDC77.B270%b...@perpetuainteractive.com...
Drew
>
> Quick, Dan... uncheck that plug-in box...
Forget it Ben. Dan's too stubborn to do it or too proud to admit he
looked at it.
Drew
Giuseppe Carmine De Blasio
Pepe
Milano, Italy
"Ben Woodward" <b...@perpetuainteractive.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:B83FDC77.B270%b...@perpetuainteractive.com...
andrew
Dan
>>> Forget it Ben. Dan's too stubborn to do it or too proud to admit he
looked at it.<<<
Oh no, I'm very open to reviewing Flash content. If people are raving about
how good something is (i.e. this thread goes on and on), I'm there,
especially if it's a commercial site, and especially if real *content* is
being delivered in a way that couldn't otherwise be achieved. But after 18
months or so of this, I've seen it. And it's *never* been worth it. Flash is
currently going down a very predictable road. Unless there's a major shift
in thinking among the people "designing" with it, simple common sense
indicates that Flash is never going to get off the ground.
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
"Drew" <dr...@nobodyimportant.com> wrote in message
news:3C1A6E22...@nobodyimportant.com...
Madman
it, some of the most heavily trafficked entertainment sites feature it. It
just got intergrated into the front page of cnet.com.
Dan ya nut.
Madman
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:aLxS7.222978$3d2.10...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Carol Ott
issue with). A lot of Flashed sites contain next to nothing in useful
content. Cnet.com, however, is chock full o' content. On the other hand (I
have three hands, dontcha know), now that I've looked at the Flash on
cnet.com, I think it's the most useless piece of design doo-doo I've ever
seen. An ad for AT&T? Come on you guys.....you can do better than that!
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Madman" <madma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3yyS7.7070$bs2.1...@news02.optonline.net...
Mike C.
Dan wrote:
>
> Oh no, I'm very open to reviewing Flash content. Unless there's a major shift
> in thinking among the people "designing" with it, simple common sense
> indicates that Flash is never going to get off the ground.
http://www.artistmike.com/ADGPeople/Danny&Drew.01.html
--
Mike C.
* Logo Design
* DHTML & GIF Animation
* Custom Graphics for YOUR Site!
Stop by and see if my skills and talents are up to your standards.
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
Brian Mays
Mike C.
Madman
indicates that Flash is never going to get off the ground".
Flash is off the ground, good or bad, its a reality of any web designer who
does this for a living, even I have started getting more into it as of late.
The boat has sailed luv! Good, bad, or indifferent. To think otherwise is
er.. and im not name calling, but silly!
btw, the flash on the front has been swapped out and I agree, it was a bad
use. :) I do however like the large explorable flash ads, im more likely to
look around them then an animated gif banner. Pity they are usually so
poorly implimented.
Madman
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:PczS7.5148$mF.4...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Don Paolo
> Flash is currently going down a very predictable road.
Replace "Flash" with "Dan".
> ... simple common sense indicates that Flash is never going to get off the
ground.
>
> Dan
Oh man! You stepped right into that one. Flash is off the ground! Ask a
Macromedia rep how much they've made in sales off of it. Better yet, ask the
many stores that stock it. Oh- oh! Maybe ask the designers, like Brian, if
the software has paid for itself yet. No! Wait! Ask the droves of web
surfers that vote for best Flash in competitions if Flash will ever get off
the ground. You could also write the critics at How magazine or I.D. or any
other design mag what they think about Flash. Go on! Get out of ADG and do
some digging, man!
Dan
>>>A lot of Flashed sites contain next to nothing in useful content.<<<
Flash has become synonymous with "no content."
Of COURSE this is not the tool's fault. Let's be clear. I think we can all
agree that incompetent designers, writers, developers, clients, amateurs and
anyone else involved in publishing bad Flash sites are to blame.
Unfortunately, this is the group that is the MOST attracted to Flash. In a
weird way, that's sort of good, insofar as bad sites can be easily
identified -- and avoided -- before the viewer is subjected to someone's
"kewl" idea. There's a signpost up ahead: If it's Flash, it's Trash.
Naturally, this really cripples all of the "good" developers wishing to use
Flash. Will they be able to overcome the obstacles inherent in the
technology and eventually capture large enough audiences to prove Flash's
worth? Or will Flash forever be relegated to the niche markets on the
backroads of the web?
I predict neither scenario will play through. Designers, even the good ones,
are not getting the results they want with Flash. Viewers are clicking out
in droves. They're not complaining, they're just clicking out. The killer
app on the Internet is STILL email, designers would do well to remember
that. Something better is coming down the pike, and it will be very
UN-flashlike.
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:PczS7.5148$mF.4...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Don Paolo
actual data to support such claims.
I don't begrudge you for your opinions at all. But you use the term "they"
quite a bit without any substantiation.
You don't speak for the masses until you have some way of proving that is
what the masses are saying.
The saying goes, "Put up or shut up" and so far Brian has just "put up" in a
big way. He's sharing relevant data on the subject and you're just claiming
to know what the real deal is. You're so busy trying to teach the class that
you don't realize that you're still just a student. We all are.
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:2hBS7.223290$3d2.10...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Dan
time to vote for "Best Flash Site" are a very small percentage of people who
have access to the Net. Most people who have web access couldn't even tell
you what Flash is. You may be able to interest the Flash community into
supporting itself, but the general population is having none of it. They're
clicking out.
Why does that scare you? Your income is not dependent on whether Flash lives
or dies. What do you gain or lose either way?
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:weAS7.17929$a5.8...@wagner.videotron.net...
Don Paolo
"Dan" wrote ...
> Most people who have web access couldn't even tell
> you what Flash is. You may be able to interest the Flash community into
> supporting itself, but the general population is having none of it.
They're
> clicking out.
Speculation. You argue but you don't do any research on a topic that clearly
interests you. Since when does the "general population" check in with Dan
Turner to let him know how they're feeling about Flash?
> Why does that scare you? Your income is not dependent on whether Flash
lives
> or dies. What do you gain or lose either way?
These questions are actually *far* more relevant for you to ask yourself.
Flash doesn't scare me, it scares you and though you've chosen not to learn
about it or from it you behave as though *your* income is dependent on it. I
couldn't have asked you better questions myself. I beg you to consider them.
Mike C.
> > Flash is currently going down a very predictable road.
>
> Replace "Flash" with "Dan".
>
> > ... simple common sense indicates that Flash is never going to get off the
> ground.
> >
> > Dan
>
> Oh man! You stepped right into that one. Flash is off the ground! Ask a
> Macromedia rep how much they've made in sales off of it.
Irrelevent. Aggregate revenue, and even popularity, doesn't translate to
longevity, or quality of application. (I have a mint condition dotcom to sell
you--cheap)
Chuckle.
> the software has paid for itself yet.
Irrelevent. Faulty correlation. My microwave paid for itself after six months,
and the damn thing still can't make a decent pot roast.
> surfers that vote for best Flash in competitions if Flash will ever get off
> the ground.
Irrelevent. Biased sampling. Ask one hundred internet savvy non-designers if
they've ever voted in a flash competition.
Chuckle.
Whether you know it or not, you're making Dan's case for him.
Here, let a pro show you how it's done.
Dan, your opinion is irrelevent.
Mike C.
"Fake Mike C." wrote:
> Irrelevent.
So are you back to have some fun?
I hope so.
":^) ®
Mike C.
Fake Mike wrote:
> Path:... !bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com.
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (WinNT; U)
> X-Complaints-To: ab...@GigaNews.Com
Few differences.
":^) ®
Dan
>>>I beg you<<<
Has that ever done you any good?
Brian Mays
> Most people who have web access couldn't even tell you what Flash is.
This is what I enjoy most about being a Flash developer. I don't normally
label my Flash work as Flash work (my experiments are not counted in this
grouping...this is my commerical work only). If people come in and use it I
want them to do it and enjoy it and THEN *IF* they find out it's Flash they'll
realize, "Oh, that was fun! I'd like to use more stuff like that."
That's my way of going around the road sign Dan mentions earlier.
Brian
Madman
old? Things will undoubtadly mature but Vector graphics look to be a part of
it, regardless of your personal fealings. Maybe not flash, maybe SVG in the
future. But motion graphics of one sort or another aren't going away. Motion
is communication that fills a gap on the web, get used to it.
Flash done well provides a user experiance that is much smoother then html
pages, it has advantages in usability when properly applied. You'll start
seeing more utilities done completely in flash as times go by. I recently
used a totally flash based message board, and enjoyed the sharp response
times on clicking and its uses as a ratings tool on a music site. Flash
gives better feedback in those areas. It simple does things javascript and
html can't do.
Madman
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%HBS7.20006$cm.10...@weber.videotron.net...
Madman
usually a flash animation or experiment. Its a medium that has a strong
following, they may not know the name, but they played flash games, used
media players with flash components, watched banners with flash interaction.
Your so wrong its not funny :) You've got the idea that flash isn't mature,
and your right, but you ignore the progress and saturation levels, your
blind my friend, your narrow view is blinding you and makes you less
competant if you work on a project who's best solution is flash. (they do
exist smarty pants).
Paolo isn't scared, he's most likely annoyed at your obsinance to a fact of
web design, wishing it wasn't around makes sense at this point in the game.
Madman
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:OKBS7.223315$3d2.10...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Dan
>>>Flash done well provides a user experiance...<<<
Flash done well is not the objection. It never has been. Read the posts.
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
---------------------------------------------
"Madman" <madma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0nKS7.16666$bs2.3...@news02.optonline.net...
Dan
>>>Your so wrong its not funny :) <<<
Don't look now, but I believe that is a smiley face right there in your
post.
Mike Gastin
> Madman wrote:
>
> >>>Your so wrong its not funny :) <<<
>
>
> Don't look now, but I believe that is a smiley face right there in your
> post.
>
> Dan
I have seen this type of thing before. Might want to look into that. Left
untreated I can grow into a full blown chuckle.
Mike
Antony
Ant
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:aLxS7.222978$3d2.10...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Don Paolo
"Antony" wrote...
Dan
>>>Dan, what's your problem with Flash?<<<
Poor results. Poor execution. Flash is currently the most misused tool in
the designer's/developer's toolbox. Whether Flash is a poorly designed tool
or whether the abysmal results point to amateur users is at the heart of the
debate. Feel free to add your thoughts.
Madman
Madman
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:0CMS7.165334$WW.10...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Madman
You stated flash is going down "a very predictable road. Unless there's a
major shift
in thinking among the people "designing" with it, simple common sense
indicates that Flash is never going to get off the ground."
Thats saying flash in general as a tool, I'm refuting it based on its
positive uses and what most people think the long term applications will be.
Read the posts :) The shift is happening, look deaper.
Madman
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:iyMS7.165319$WW.10...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Madman
"Madman" <madma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dSQS7.20801$bs2.4...@news02.optonline.net...
Don Paolo
> >>>Dan, what's your problem with Flash?<<<
>
> Poor results. Poor execution. Flash is currently the most misused tool in
> the designer's/developer's toolbox.
Actually, I think typography and colour are the most misused tools. Unless
you consider them more elements of style rather than tools. Still...
More so than Flash, poor design is rampant in typographic spheres.
Antony
final examination on?
A
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f2RS7.27063$a5.13...@wagner.videotron.net...
Carol Ott
to your question.
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Antony" <ant...@skinny.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9vgpp4$7as$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
Don Paolo
"Carol Ott" wrote ...
> I'd guess that "years of experience in the industry" would be a good
answer
> to your question.
>
> Carol
Years of experience in any industry doesn't always prepare us for new
technology and methods. That's why many companies believe in continuously
educating their work force- to keep them on top of the ever changing
environments that we work in. As freelancers it is our own responsibility
(as you have proven) to keep up with the times and make ourselves aware of
how to deal with emerging trends and technology.
In some cases, being in graphic design for several decades might actually
work against coping with new information. Old habits die hard and age does
not define expertise by default.
Drew
> In some cases, being in graphic design for several decades might actually
> work against coping with new information. Old habits die hard and age does
> not define expertise by default.
I can vouch for that!
Drew the semi-retired
Antony
at all. I have had years of experience in this industry and would never
make such a sweeping statement.
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:gE3T7.8815$mF.9...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Carol Ott
skills? I thought Antony was complaining about your statement about
typography....
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:K74T7.2534$8c2.1...@weber.videotron.net...
Don Paolo
"Carol Ott" wrote ...
> Actually, I was referring to you....isn't typography one of your stronger
> skills? I thought Antony was complaining about your statement about
> typography....
>
> Carol
Yes, type is one of my tools I keep available in my handy-dandy skillbag. ;)
Though, I stand by my opinions given that you and I both have experienced
certain personalities that believe graphic designers are like fine wines-
they get better with age. It brings to mind a funny coffee mug I was given
years ago... it said, "Photographers never grow old, they just go out of
focus". :)
Drew
> Yes, type is one of my tools I keep available in my handy-dandy skillbag. ;)
> Though, I stand by my opinions given that you and I both have experienced
> certain personalities that believe graphic designers are like fine wines-
> they get better with age.
Paolo, I sincerely hope that you don't believe this with all your heart.
Take a serious look around you and note how many quality 55+ designers
are out there compared with the quality 30+ designer. You, Carol, and
all the others with such naiveté are in a fantasy world that can only
set you up for a rude awakening in due time. True there are those few
who break the barrier, but they are the exception and not the rule.
> It brings to mind a funny coffee mug I was given
> years ago... it said, "Photographers never grow old, they just go out of
> focus". :)
Loss of focus is not limited to the profession of photography. In my
local area I can list 5 photographers off the top of my head that quit
the biz before they were 50. And these were quality craftsmen!
Drew
nw@work
thought I'd take a peek through Google to see what you're all up to.
Anyway, about Flash...
For you Flash designers out there:
When a potential client contacts you, do they ask for web design or
Flash design? Do they know the difference? Do you explain the
difference?
Of the sites you have built, how many were informative or
entertainment versus commercial (retail and other sales). Of the
sales type how do the figures of Flash based sites stack up against
their HTML counterparts?
My guess is that the figures do not compare well at all. When I see a
flash site loading on my *ancient* 56K connection at home, I kill the
window. I don't have the time or bandwidth to waste. If I'm at work,
or at my business office, both of which have broadband and I see a
Flash site loading, again I kill the window. The reason is simple, if
even broadband has to take a few minutes to load the site; it's way
too big and poorly designed. What do some you expect? I understand
designing for the next step to a point, but that's too far for me.
When I am willing to wait, it's for information or entertainment. I
myself designed a sub-site in flash that was geared for information.
It went well and was well recieved, but the visitors were from a very
specific list and were invited to the site. They were also polled
beforehand to see what formats they liked and how they would like to
have the info presented to them. None of them said anything about
Flash as a medium to get the information to them, but Flash was
determined to work best for our needs -- it was the best tool for the
job.
As far as entertainment, I bet even Dan has gotten a chuckle or two
from Flash generated mini-movies or experiments. There are thousands
of sites that make you laugh or at least say "ooooo, that's cool".
But that really seems to be it. There's no hook to keep you to the
site and explore other things on it or even to actually look at any
products they may be offering. It's a gag promotion and people view
it as such (at least I do).
...and then move on.
In the business world I see flash as occupying two distinct
categories: training and online ads. Flash can be used for training
and other informative uses and very well. But I don't think that will
make people buy stuff. And in the near future I can see flash
generated pop-up ads pissing everyone off. They'll be more flashy and
glitzy than the current ones, have more animation (movement) to lure
people in. But this also does flash a disservice as a tool and will
get it labeled as a gimmick. Another obvious online marketing engine
that people will flee from in droves.
And as far as Flash today? Well, I haven't run across any Flash sites
on secure servers trying to sell products and accept credit cards.
I'm sure they exist, but I bet the people who market to me realize I
wouldn't risk it. Flash is still very unknown, especially for
security.
All this said, Flash does have a lot of potential, but I do agree that
most of the sites generated in Flash are inappropriate. They could be
done much better and faster in HTML. This is not the fault of Flash,
but rather those who misuse the tool.
-Rand
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message news:<FEPS7.165719$WW.10...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
Don Paolo
> Take a serious look around you and note how many quality 55+ designers
> are out there compared with the quality 30+ designer. You, Carol, and
> all the others with such naiveté are in a fantasy world that can only
> set you up for a rude awakening in due time. True there are those few
> who break the barrier, but they are the exception and not the rule.
Forgive my confusion but exactly what are you taking issue with here? I
think we've got some crossed wires. I just want to be sure what you're
pointing at so I can better respond. :)
Don Harris
they get older. His logic, however, is faulty.
There may be more quality 30ish designers than 55+ designers, but if so it
is simply because there are a lot more of them. Graphic Design hasn't even
been a recognized profession for that long. The 55+ designers were
trailblazers.
TheDon
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nEcT7.7124$8c2.4...@weber.videotron.net...
Drew
>
> I believe he's disagreeing with your statement that designers get better as
> they get older. His logic, however, is faulty.
>
> There may be more quality 30ish designers than 55+ designers, but if so it
> is simply because there are a lot more of them. Graphic Design hasn't even
> been a recognized profession for that long. The 55+ designers were
> trailblazers.
Subtracting 20 years for the designers maturation and education, my math
tells me you believe graphic design has only been around 35 years? I
offer up the following to the contrary:
"Graphic design has existed from its inception in Mesopotamia 4000 years
ago."
http://www.sessions.edu/courses/intrograp.html
"...that graphic design begins in the late nineteenth century with the
development of the poster which combined word and image.
http://www.mantex.co.uk/reviews/hollis.htm
"The extraordinarily rich history of German graphic design is the
subject of Print, Power, and Persuasion: Graphic Design in Germany, 1890
- 1945."
http://www.bgc.bard.edu/exhibit/press.html
"From its humble origin in the industrial revolution to its vital role
in today’s mass media, graphic design has had a spectacular rise."
http://www.allworth.com/Pages/PR_DW200.htm
"By 1922, when the term "graphic designer" first appeared in print,
design professionals had created a discipline that combined art with
mass communication."
http://www.si.edu/ndm/exhib/berman/intro.htm
The pure and simple reason there are more younger designers than older
ones is that the later get in a rut and wash out, find other revenue
streams, or move up into administration positions.
Drew
Drew
> Forgive my confusion but exactly what are you taking issue with here? I
> think we've got some crossed wires. I just want to be sure what you're
> pointing at so I can better respond. :)
My issue is that the majority of designers don't as a stead fast rule
get better as they get older. Yes, better at 35 than at 25, but the
curve levels out beyond that. Sometimes dropping to mundane.
Drew
Don Paolo
info!
On the matter of the post I questioned you on... I was not saying that I
believed or disbelieved that designers get better with age. I was making
remarks about the type of people who use age as an excuse not to do
research. "I've been in this business for X amount of years and therefore do
not need to learn this doohickey to know that it's crap". That's at the core
of what I was saying. 'The Designer is a fine wine' statement was me being
sarcastic. I believe the only thing that makes an older designer a good
designer is the willingness to keep learning and improving their craft.
Simply being 55 years old and a designer does not make one great. That takes
talent, perseverance, experience and a willingness to keep up.
Flash is a great example! Presently it has had a rather large impact on our
trade, just as the Web has. Many designers face the challenge of deciding
whether or not to learn these new mediums or to stick to what they know. If
Flash thoroughly integrates itself into our profession it becomes a take it
or leave it scenario where those that leave it ignore a tool. You run the
risk of being left behind.
I understand that a graphic designer isn't required to know all aspects of
design. It is reasonable to specialize. It just occurs to me that times
change and people have a tendency not to. We get stuck in ruts. The "bold"
steps in life are to accept challenges, learn new methods and keep up with
the herd. Otherwise, it becomes time for such people to move on to other
professions.
A great little book my father recommended to me is called "Who Moved My
Cheese?". Cute little story with a large impact.
Who Moved My Cheese?
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0399144463/qid=1008599117/sr=1-1/ref
=sr_1_6_1/10 7-8727156-3543760)
Don Paolo
"Don Harris" <dpha...@mentalsoup.com> wrote in message
news:u1qvp6p...@corp.supernews.com...
> I believe he's disagreeing with your statement that designers get better
as
> they get older. His logic, however, is faulty.
>
> There may be more quality 30ish designers than 55+ designers, but if so it
> is simply because there are a lot more of them. Graphic Design hasn't even
> been a recognized profession for that long. The 55+ designers were
> trailblazers.
> TheDon
I was under the impression that this was true also but Drew has dropped some
rather interesting info. Especially the part about graphic design having
existed "from its inception in Mesopotamia 4000 years ago". I have my doubts
about this but I'm intrigued. :)
Carol Ott
of experience do come in handy where typography is concerned. It takes
skill and experience to choose the appropriate fonts, font sizes, and make
sure they're set correctly. I certainly didn't mean for my one comment to
be applied to the entire industry and every aspect of it.
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Drew" <dr...@nobodyimportant.com> wrote in message
news:3C1DA354...@nobodyimportant.com...
Mike C.
Don Paolo wrote:
>It is reasonable to specialize.
> learn new methods and keep up with the herd.
"Chuckle ® " is a registered trademark of
ArtistMike.com
":^) ®
--
Mike C.
* Logo Design
* DHTML & GIF Animation
* Custom Graphics for YOUR Site!
Stop by and see if my skills and talents are up to your standards.
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
Mike C.
Drew wrote:
> My issue is that the majority of designers don't as a stead fast rule
> get better as they get older. Yes, better at 35 than at 25, but the
> curve levels out beyond that. Sometimes dropping to mundane.
More generalized BS from Drew.
Stan Wojda
> Wow, Drew! Some very juicy stuff to sink my teeth into. Thank you for the
> info!
>
> On the matter of the post I questioned you on... I was not saying that I
> believed or disbelieved that designers get better with age. I was making
> remarks about the type of people who use age as an excuse not to do
> research. "I've been in this business for X amount of years and therefore do
> not need to learn this doohickey to know that it's crap".
The successful designers that make it into their fifties are always open to
change and open to new ideas and techniques. Exept for the basics of
drawing, anatomy, color theory, etc. everything I learned in Art School has
changed. Not once but a couple of times. High tech was a Poloroid camera,
and the big debate was if Photo typeseting was equal to linotype for
quality.
The ones that were open to new technology survived. The others are selling
frames at the shopping mall.
That's at the core
> of what I was saying. 'The Designer is a fine wine' statement was me being
> sarcastic.
I personaly see myself as Jack Daniels Select aged in oak casks. Just as
good as a fine wine but with a little more kick.
I believe the only thing that makes an older designer a good
> designer is the willingness to keep learning and improving their craft.
> Simply being 55 years old and a designer does not make one great. That takes
> talent, perseverance, experience and a willingness to keep up.
Exactly!
>
> Flash is a great example! Presently it has had a rather large impact on our
> trade, just as the Web has. Many designers face the challenge of deciding
> whether or not to learn these new mediums or to stick to what they know. If
> Flash thoroughly integrates itself into our profession it becomes a take it
> or leave it scenario where those that leave it ignore a tool. You run the
> risk of being left behind.
>
Flash is simply a new tool. Nothing more, nothing less. I remember back in
the early 80's getting a betta copy of what latter became Quark. We were
trying to figure out what use this program was. You couldn't do anything
much with it. I remember sending in a critique of the program with a list of
the things I'd like to see it be able to do. That list is a monument to my
lack of ability to understand the full potential of computer graphics.
Todays Quark is vastly superior to anything I could have imagined then.
> I understand that a graphic designer isn't required to know all aspects of
> design. It is reasonable to specialize.
Agreed.
It just occurs to me that times
> change and people have a tendency not to. We get stuck in ruts. The "bold"
> steps in life are to accept challenges, learn new methods and keep up with
> the herd.
The "bold" step is to stay in the lead of the herd. To not just stay with
new trends but to explore new media, new techniques, and apply them to the
area you specialize in.
Otherwise, it becomes time for such people to move on to other
> professions.
>
Art schools have produced a huge number of burger flippers.
> A great little book my father recommended to me is called "Who Moved My
> Cheese?". Cute little story with a large impact.
My problem has always been that my cheese is on roller skates. It keeps
moving just that little bit faster than me. I have spent a lifetime chasing
it. (and enjoyed almost every minute). The quest is not so much in catching
the cheese as pursuing it.
Drew
> More generalized BS from Drew.
Call it what you will.
Drew
Mike C.
I just did.
Drew
>
> Wow, Drew! Some very juicy stuff to sink my teeth into. Thank you for the
> info!
Though I was defending my position with TheDon, glad I could help
> On the matter of the post I questioned you on... I was not saying that I
> believed or disbelieved that designers get better with age. I was making
> remarks about the type of people who use age as an excuse not to do
> research. "I've been in this business for X amount of years and therefore do
> not need to learn this doohickey to know that it's crap". That's at the core
> of what I was saying. 'The Designer is a fine wine' statement was me being
> sarcastic. I believe the only thing that makes an older designer a good
> designer is the willingness to keep learning and improving their craft.
> Simply being 55 years old and a designer does not make one great. That takes
> talent, perseverance, experience and a willingness to keep up.
I'm with you on that though it's hard for this feeble mind to keep up
with written sarcasm.
> I understand that a graphic designer isn't required to know all aspects of
> design. It is reasonable to specialize. It just occurs to me that times
> change and people have a tendency not to.
It's human nature to snuggle up with what you know.
> We get stuck in ruts. The "bold"
> steps in life are to accept challenges, learn new methods and keep up with
> the herd. Otherwise, it becomes time for such people to move on to other
> professions.
Frankly I've grown bored with the industry and my part in it. I'm
currently learning new methods and accepting the new challenges of
furniture refinishing and retail. Got this great desk I'll sell ya.
Drew
Drew
> I was under the impression that this was true also but Drew has dropped some
> rather interesting info. Especially the part about graphic design having
> existed "from its inception in Mesopotamia 4000 years ago". I have my doubts
> about this but I'm intrigued. :)
I just did a quick search for Design History and these publication/class
reviews popped up. But it surely makes sense that graphic design in some
form has existed since early civilization. How did the Greeks get the
masses to the amphitheaters? The Romans to the Coliseum? You can surly
move up through time and note the designs of the crusaders and scribes.
Skipping through the centuries we can see evidence in fabric and craft design.
Drew
Carol Ott
alternative!
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Drew" <dr...@nobodyimportant.com> wrote in message
news:3C1E0F8E...@nobodyimportant.com...
Drew
>
> Furniture refinishing?? You're so lucky......what a great career
> alternative!
I'm really enjoying it. My wife started the biz about 6 years ago and we
have booths in 3 of these mall type stores (think antique mall, but with
home furnishings). 2 here in town and one up in Asheville. We also have
a permanent space at the big monthly flea market up the Interstate. I
started going out at the flea market and buying neglected and forgotten
furniture and mantels. Bringing it back to the space and painting it
with our palette (barn red, sage, black, cream and metallic gilt),
sanding it down again and rubbing it with some handmade wax (not our
recipe). Stuff is selling *real* good!
Drew
Don Harris
> tells me you believe graphic design has only been around 35 years? I
> offer up the following to the contrary:
Why is it nobody ever reads what is written, but only what they want to read
into it?
I did not say graphic design has only been around for 35 years.
What I did say is that it has not been a recognized profession for much
longer than that.
TheDon
Carol Ott
the Art Nouveau period. Think of all those wonderful posters!
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Don Harris" <dpha...@mentalsoup.com> wrote in message
news:u1sl9oa...@corp.supernews.com...
Drew
> Why is it nobody ever reads what is written, but only what they want to read
> into it?
>
> I did not say graphic design has only been around for 35 years.
> What I did say is that it has not been a recognized profession for much
> longer than that.
The, I did read what was written and my footnoted simple countered that
graphic design *has* been around much longer than that.
From: http://www.bgc.bard.edu/exhibit/press.html
When graphic design emerged as a profession in the early 20th century...
Thus I was pointing out that 55+ year olds were not trendsetters. If the
Bauhaus boys were still alive I'd send you to them for some more history.
Drew
Carol Ott
up.
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Drew" <dr...@nobodyimportant.com> wrote in message
news:3C1E510D...@nobodyimportant.com...
Mike C.
old ads in catalogs. Line drawings of "New" time
saving devices for the home...
Think of flyers for vaudeville shows. Think of posters
for circuses.
Come on Don...
":^) Ž
--
Don Harris
I need drugs... or maybe I had too many.
Who knows?
TheDon
"Drew" <dr...@nobodyimportant.com> wrote in message
news:3C1E510D...@nobodyimportant.com...
Drew
>
> Gee...I wonder how Milton Glaser would feel knowing that he's old and washed
> up.
I believe I did note that there are exceptions, but they are a minute percentage.
Drew
Drew
>
> Early 20th century. I don't know what I was thinking.
> I need drugs... or maybe I had too many.
> Who knows?
> TheDon
Hey The, tomorrow we'll discuss why those South Carolina jokes are so
damn funny.
Drew
Mike Minovski
Well said, Paolo.
I'd add only one thing - all this is true not only about design but about
*any* profession. Of course, just like in any profession, in design you can
reach a level where you feel comfortable enough and don't see a point in
moving forward. In a world that is more and more dynamic, such a decision is
quite a setback - but some people still do it.
A freelancer can't afford to, anyway ;)
Mike Minovski
The difference that makes design what it is, is mass production. In spite of
having (almost) the same goals of aestheticizing (even optimizing) human
environment and communication, every similar activity before it was not
design, but applied art.
In this sense I'd say design actually appeared after the beginning of
industrialization, and graphic design - after the implementation of the
printing press. Mind it - not after the *invention* of the steam
machine/printing press, but after the point where industrial
production/publishing were developed enough to show that they had brought in
new problems - ones which required an approach different from that of
applied art.
For those interested, here is the official defintion of design promoted by
ICSID. It was initially formulated with industrial design in mind, but its
latest (AFAIR, actually second) revision has been changed in view of design
in general.
http://www.icsid.org/iddefinition.html
Frankly, I liked the older one better - it was more concise and IMO said the
same things with half the words. But the changes in the apprehension of
design in the end of the 20th century has obviously urged theoreticians to
go wordy :)
mike m.
Steve
news:3C1AC661...@artistmike.com...
>
> Dan wrote:
>
> >
> > Oh no, I'm very open to reviewing Flash content. Unless there's a major
shift
> > in thinking among the people "designing" with it, simple common sense
> > indicates that Flash is never going to get off the ground.
>
>
> http://www.artistmike.com/ADGPeople/Danny&Drew.01.html
I can see a tremendous amount of thought went into your reply, huh Mike?
Mike C.
It seems to have been just enough for someone like you.
":^) ®
Steve
>
>
> Steve wrote:
> >
> > "Mike C." <mi...@artistmike.com> wrote in message
> > news:3C1AC661...@artistmike.com...
> > >
> > > Dan wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Oh no, I'm very open to reviewing Flash content. Unless there's a major
> > shift
> > > > in thinking among the people "designing" with it, simple common sense
> > > > indicates that Flash is never going to get off the ground.
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.artistmike.com/ADGPeople/Danny&Drew.01.html
> >
> > I can see a tremendous amount of thought went into your reply, huh Mike?
>
>
> It seems to have been just enough for someone like you.
Oh, please explain.
Dan
followed by, "Okay, now what?"
I may want to quote you in a future newsletter (I'll contact you for
permission first!)
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
"nw@work" <rmcc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123432b.0112...@posting.google.com...
> My damn news server has been down for two days and counting but I
> thought I'd take a peek through Google to see what you're all up to.
> Anyway, about Flash...
>
> For you Flash designers out there:
>
> When a potential client contacts you, do they ask for web design or
> Flash design? Do they know the difference? Do you explain the
> difference?
>
> Of the sites you have built, how many were informative or
> entertainment versus commercial (retail and other sales). Of the
> sales type how do the figures of Flash based sites stack up against
> their HTML counterparts?
>
> My guess is that the figures do not compare well at all. When I see a
> flash site loading on my *ancient* 56K connection at home, I kill the
> window. I don't have the time or bandwidth to waste. If I'm at work,
> or at my business office, both of which have broadband and I see a
> Flash site loading, again I kill the window. The reason is simple, if
> even broadband has to take a few minutes to load the site; it's way
> too big and poorly designed. What do some you expect? I understand
> designing for the next step to a point, but that's too far for me.
>
> When I am willing to wait, it's for information or entertainment. I
> myself designed a sub-site in flash that was geared for information.
> It went well and was well recieved, but the visitors were from a very
> specific list and were invited to the site. They were also polled
> beforehand to see what formats they liked and how they would like to
> have the info presented to them. None of them said anything about
> Flash as a medium to get the information to them, but Flash was
> determined to work best for our needs -- it was the best tool for the
> job.
>
> As far as entertainment, I bet even Dan has gotten a chuckle or two
> from Flash generated mini-movies or experiments. There are thousands
> of sites that make you laugh or at least say "ooooo, that's cool".
> But that really seems to be it. There's no hook to keep you to the
> site and explore other things on it or even to actually look at any
> products they may be offering. It's a gag promotion and people view
> it as such (at least I do).
>
> ...and then move on.
>
> In the business world I see flash as occupying two distinct
> categories: training and online ads. Flash can be used for training
> and other informative uses and very well. But I don't think that will
> make people buy stuff. And in the near future I can see flash
> generated pop-up ads pissing everyone off. They'll be more flashy and
> glitzy than the current ones, have more animation (movement) to lure
> people in. But this also does flash a disservice as a tool and will
> get it labeled as a gimmick. Another obvious online marketing engine
> that people will flee from in droves.
>
> And as far as Flash today? Well, I haven't run across any Flash sites
> on secure servers trying to sell products and accept credit cards.
> I'm sure they exist, but I bet the people who market to me realize I
> wouldn't risk it. Flash is still very unknown, especially for
> security.
>
> All this said, Flash does have a lot of potential, but I do agree that
> most of the sites generated in Flash are inappropriate. They could be
> done much better and faster in HTML. This is not the fault of Flash,
> but rather those who misuse the tool.
>
> -Rand
>
>
>
> "Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:<FEPS7.165719$WW.10...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> > Ant asked:
> >
> > >>>Dan, what's your problem with Flash?<<<
> >
> > Poor results. Poor execution. Flash is currently the most misused tool
in
> > the designer's/developer's toolbox. Whether Flash is a poorly designed
tool
> > or whether the abysmal results point to amateur users is at the heart of
the
> > debate. Feel free to add your thoughts.
> >
> > Dan
Don Paolo
> When a potential client contacts you, do they ask for web design or
> Flash design? Do they know the difference? Do you explain the
> difference?
I always explain the difference and advise them when it is and isn't
appropriate.
> Of the sites you have built, how many were informative or
> entertainment versus commercial (retail and other sales). Of the
> sales type how do the figures of Flash based sites stack up against
> their HTML counterparts?
That may be considered a leading question considering that Flash is also
being used on CDRoms, kiosks and Television and not just websites.
> My guess is that the figures do not compare well at all. When I see a
> flash site loading on my *ancient* 56K connection at home, I kill the
> window. I don't have the time or bandwidth to waste. If I'm at work,
> or at my business office, both of which have broadband and I see a
> Flash site loading, again I kill the window. The reason is simple, if
> even broadband has to take a few minutes to load the site; it's way
> too big and poorly designed. What do some you expect? I understand
> designing for the next step to a point, but that's too far for me.
I agree. Unless there is something irresistible on the other side of that
load bar I'd click out too. The trick is not every piece of Flash is
noticeable. I'll bet you've encountered a lot of Flash without realizing it.
When I design I don't expect my audience to say "Oh he used Photoshop on
that!". The idea is to impress them with design not applications and
software.
> As far as entertainment, I bet even Dan has gotten a chuckle or two
> from Flash generated mini-movies or experiments. There are thousands
> of sites that make you laugh or at least say "ooooo, that's cool".
> But that really seems to be it. There's no hook to keep you to the
> site and explore other things on it or even to actually look at any
> products they may be offering. It's a gag promotion and people view
> it as such (at least I do).
>
> ...and then move on.
I find it interesting that you refer to "people" in such a general way and
then catch your slip with the "at least I do". I think there's much to be
ironed out on the topic of Flash as a viable tool in our business but first
some of us have to stop making huge assumptions about what people want with
a tool that 'some' of us aren't even clear on. :)
Is Flash a web only tool? No.
Is Flash meant for intros only? No.
Are load times a strictly Flash related problem? No.
Time and time again the argument boils down to the designer and that
designer's responsibility to use any tool wisely.
> In the business world I see flash as occupying two distinct
> categories: training and online ads. <snip>
I'll cut in here. Authorware from Macromedia is used for training and Flash
has already gone beyond simple online ads. Besides isn't XML the leading ad
annoyance technique right now? All those annoying objects that now free
float over the browser... ugh!
> And as far as Flash today? Well, I haven't run across any Flash sites
> on secure servers trying to sell products and accept credit cards.
> I'm sure they exist, but I bet the people who market to me realize I
> wouldn't risk it. Flash is still very unknown, especially for
> security.
Which brings us back to the designer or professional in charge of the site.
To use or not to use...
> All this said, Flash does have a lot of potential, but I do agree that
> most of the sites generated in Flash are inappropriate. They could be
> done much better and faster in HTML. This is not the fault of Flash,
> but rather those who misuse the tool.
So true.
Don Paolo
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.net> wrote ...
> Good observations, Rand, especially about the "oooouuu" factor,
immediately
> followed by, "Okay, now what?"
>
> I may want to quote you in a future newsletter (I'll contact you for
> permission first!)
>
> Dan
"Blessed is the man, who having nothing to say, abstains from giving wordy
evidence of the fact."
- George Eliot
Dan
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HucU7.13690$4f2.1...@wagner.videotron.net...
Don Paolo
> So, Paolo: Am I doing it to you or are you just doing it to yourself?
>
> Dan
You're well aware of what you do and how you come off. I doubt you're as
ignorant of your behavior as you let on. On the other hand, I feel you have
a lot to offer when the subjects being discussed are in your area of
expertise.
I just find it too hard to pass up an opportunity to badger you about Flash.
You make such a huge stink about it every chance you get- you've even said
you would be writing all about how people don't need Flash but you don't
back up your statements, especially the ones that include the mass public-
you have no facts. You've become perfectly transparent on the subject.
You've spent far more time being sarcastic and evasive than actually
defending your argument, which is what you always do when you don't have the
answers.
If this were about print or freelancing you wouldn't have hesitated to fill
me in on the details. I'm sure you're full of interesting information on a
great deal of design issues but you really ought to learn about Flash and
the issues surrounding it before you step up on a soap box and spearhead the
anti-Flash parade.
For the record, I'm neither for Flash nor against it, as you've mentioned in
the past. Simply, being contrary to your opinions does not automatically
place me on the opposite side of the fence. If you recall, I've taken issue
with you on the subject since your first comments about 99.9% of *all* Flash
being crap, which seemed a very broad thing to say. As I see it, you invite
criticism with things like that. You're incredibly vocal when someone agrees
with you, using their facts to further your arguments (poorly) but become
arrogant, sarcastic and evasive when questioned by opposing opinions.
Get a grip, Dan. It's just a debate- not a war. You want people to
understand your point of view? There are two simple solutions to this
problem of yours, then. Either, be more clear in your posts that you're
speaking for yourself and not the entire Internet OR collect some data, do
some research and enlighten us. It took Brian all of a day to layout some
interesting ground work on this topic. Can we expect to hear anything from
you besides pointless "I know you are but what am I" posts?
Last question: Have you ever, in the history of ADG admitted to being wrong-
just once? I'd really like to know, as the answer would likely shed a lot of
light on what's really going on here.
Carol Ott
Carol
http://home.earthlink.net/~csott
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:aDiU7.233393$3d2.11...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Don Paolo
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sEmU7.3875$PO5.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
LOL oh gross!
Ben Woodward
>
> For you Flash designers out there:
>
> Flash design? Do they know the difference? Do you explain the
> difference?
If they're leaning one way or another (usually, if in the Flash direction),
I'll explain to them the goods and bads, and what we may want to do to round
things out and make it accessible.
>
> Of the sites you have built, how many were informative or
> entertainment versus commercial (retail and other sales). Of the
> sales type how do the figures of Flash based sites stack up against
> their HTML counterparts?
I'm not sure there's a difference between informative, entertainment, and
retail. It all depends on the company and their target market. You seem to
draw a line between them, but if I'm designing a site for a toy store,
there's gonna be some entertainment in there, and there's certainly gonna be
some information in there. And as for how they stack up, there's no way to
tell... there are tons of HTML sites out there that are complete failures
when it comes to selling a product, and I've actually seen some neat retail
shops communicate what they need by using Flash (the Land's End (I think)
catalog that used Flash was an interesting application and could never have
been done in Flash).
>
> My guess is that the figures do not compare well at all.
Try not to guess when you have so much content riding on that guess. If
you're gonna base such a weighty argument on a guess, there's no point to
the argument.
> When I see a
> flash site loading on my *ancient* 56K connection at home, I kill the
> window. I don't have the time or bandwidth to waste. If I'm at work,
> or at my business office, both of which have broadband and I see a
> Flash site loading, again I kill the window.
The box you live in must get horribly boring. To have that little patience
when sitting by yourself at a computer, must make waiting in line at the
grocery store or the bank a real treat. You don't have a concealed weapon
permit, do you?
>The reason is simple, if
> even broadband has to take a few minutes to load the site; it's way
> too big and poorly designed.
This is new: a digital bigot. How in God's name can you judge the design of
something just because of the tool that was used to create it? It's not even
worth comparing the number of horrible HTML sites out there to the number of
Flash sites. Or can you predict the design of HTML before it comes up to? Is
that a plug-in I can get?
> What do some you expect? I understand
> designing for the next step to a point, but that's too far for me.
>
> When I am willing to wait, it's for information or entertainment.
What else is there on the web? Just about everything can be classified as
either information or entertainment. Can it not?
> I myself designed a sub-site in flash that was geared for information.
> It went well and was well recieved,
They must either have more patience than you or have that clairvoyant plugin
you mentioned earlier installed in their browser.
> but the visitors were from a very
> specific list and were invited to the site. They were also polled
> beforehand to see what formats they liked and how they would like to
> have the info presented to them. None of them said anything about
> Flash as a medium to get the information to them, but Flash was
> determined to work best for our needs -- it was the best tool for the
> job.
Glorious. So here, you admit that Flash can sometimes be appropriate for the
job. So then why earlier did you state "If I'm at work, or at my business
office, both of which have broadband and I see a Flash site loading, again I
kill the window." Do you not see the issue here? Flash has its place, and to
judge *every* use of it based on some schmuck who can't design on a napkin,
much less in Flash, is to do yourself and your industry a disservice.
>
> As far as entertainment, I bet even Dan has gotten a chuckle or two
> from Flash generated mini-movies or experiments. There are thousands
> of sites that make you laugh or at least say "ooooo, that's cool".
> But that really seems to be it. There's no hook to keep you to the
> site and explore other things on it or even to actually look at any
> products they may be offering. It's a gag promotion and people view
> it as such (at least I do).
>
> ...and then move on.
There are *infinite* opportunities to take those little cartoon clips and
evolve them into new ways to reach customers, sell products, deliver
information, and anything else that has become commonplace on the web. If
you see something done in Flash that fails to do what you think it should,
then move on. News flash: There are both good and bad applications of Flash.
There's also good and bad uses of garlic in recipes. Good and bad
applications of glitter on Halloween costumes. Good and bad ways to
discipline a dog for chewing up your couch. That's life.
>
> In the business world I see flash as occupying two distinct
> categories: training and online ads.
That's a pretty narrow view. Open your mind, and you'll see many more
opportunities.
> Flash can be used for training
> and other informative uses and very well. But I don't think that will
> make people buy stuff.
Once again, open your mind. Upon what do you make this judgement? What
exactly is the magical formula we can follow to "make people buy stuff?"
> And in the near future I can see flash
> generated pop-up ads pissing everyone off. They'll be more flashy and
> glitzy than the current ones, have more animation (movement) to lure
> people in. But this also does flash a disservice as a tool and will
> get it labeled as a gimmick. Another obvious online marketing engine
> that people will flee from in droves.
I'd place bets against these predictions. It's what *you* might want to
happen, but as Flash gets more and more polished as an application, it'll
allow the responsible designers to build smarter apps and consider better
uses for it, and it'll allow the users to become more apt to see it. Sorry,
I don't share your view on this one...
>
> And as far as Flash today? Well, I haven't run across any Flash sites
> on secure servers trying to sell products and accept credit cards.
You haven't been looking. I'll find some later today and post them for you
in the NG.
> I'm sure they exist, but I bet the people who market to me realize I
> wouldn't risk it. Flash is still very unknown, especially for
> security.
Who says you can't serve Flash content from a secure server? And if that's
an issue, why can't you have a hybrid site that sends users to a secure
server with an HTML order form? Like I said, *there are always ways* to
accomplish these things, if you can crack your brain open to think about
things.
>
> All this said, Flash does have a lot of potential, but I do agree that
> most of the sites generated in Flash are inappropriate.
Aha! Finally, something we agree on! I'll take that one, as I believe too
many amateur designers get caught up in the glitz and glamour of the tool,
knock out some spinning logos and zooming text, and make themselves a
MasterFlasher button to wear to school the next day. But does that mean that
the software is worthless? Nope. Does that mean it's going to fall to these
guys and will never become an accepted form of communication? Nope. For
proof, check HTML a few years ago. Didn't see any breathtaking design coming
out of the web community when Netscape hit its second generation browser,
but that didn't stop the medium from evolving.
> They could be
> done much better and faster in HTML.
That's a blanket statement, and not true at all.
> This is not the fault of Flash,
> but rather those who misuse the tool.
And I'll agree with that as well. The problem is that, although you make
this statement in the end of your post, the content leading up to it says
something entirely different.
>
> -Rand
>
Rand, I don't necessarily disagree with some of your comments that Flash
carries a stigma wherever it shows up these days, especially in certain
fields, but to have zero tolerance for content developed in Flash is
ignorant, to some degree. There *are* positive ways to use the technology,
beyond delivering tutorials or ads, and it's our jobs as designers to
develop successful applications of these pieces. You said yourself that
certain applications may call for the use of Flash - why not take those
situations and figure out ways to bring them into the mainstream? Why not
experiment to reach as many customers as possible for your clients? Why not
learn about how to use Flash to accomplish tasks that you didn't think
possible, all without the knowledge of the user regarding the use of the
technology?
Flash is still in it's baby stages. Designers are still cutting their teeth
with the tools, and it'll grow nicely, I believe. The fact that so much more
backend capability is introduced with each new version of the app says
they're shooting for something much more capable than an animation tool for
the web. It's up to us, as designers, to use those tools to service our
clients and enrich our field.
Ben
Giuseppe Carmine De Blasio
<quote>
"Last question: Have you ever, in the history of ADG admitted to being
wrong-just once?"
I've just asked the same question to my boss at work. His answer:
"I don't recall ever being wrong"
:-)
He was dead-serious...
I just have to share the fun.
Pepe
Milano, Italy
"Don Paolo" <blackpen...@hotmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:lbmU7.1435$tP.4...@wagner.videotron.net...
Don Paolo
"Ben Woodward" wrote...
> The box you live in must get horribly boring. To have that little patience
> when sitting by yourself at a computer, must make waiting in line at the
> grocery store or the bank a real treat. You don't have a concealed weapon
> permit, do you?
This is exactly what pops into my head when I hear the same old complaints
about load time that ends up 1 second too long.
"Oh there's a line a the bank- I'm leaving."
"Oh there are trailers before my movie- I'm leaving."
"Oh there are explanations of safety before we take off- Let me off the
plane."
We wait all the time but never has there been a stronger need to bitch than
when it is about websites.
We have to wait for our computers to load up. We have to wait for our coffee
to brew. We have to wait for dinner to cook. We have to wait in traffic. We
have to wait for the hot water to warm up for a bath or shower. But wait!
This webpage is taking over 15 seconds to load? This is unheard of and I
won't stand for it.
It's mentalities like this that created the 5 second bacon product.
Hellooooo! Not only is that gross but do we really need bacon that cooks in
the microwave in 5 seconds? ;)
> This is new: a digital bigot. How in God's name can you judge the design
of
> something just because of the tool that was used to create it? It's not
even
> worth comparing the number of horrible HTML sites out there to the number
of
> Flash sites. Or can you predict the design of HTML before it comes up to?
Is
> that a plug-in I can get?
If so, I want that plug-in too!
> There are *infinite* opportunities to take those little cartoon clips and
> evolve them into new ways to reach customers, sell products, deliver
> information, and anything else that has become commonplace on the web. If
> you see something done in Flash that fails to do what you think it should,
> then move on. News flash: There are both good and bad applications of
Flash.
> There's also good and bad uses of garlic in recipes. Good and bad
> applications of glitter on Halloween costumes. Good and bad ways to
> discipline a dog for chewing up your couch. That's life.
So true. I've seen more sites that have poorly chosen fonts and colours than
sites that have Flash. I've been nearly blinded by sites that use disgusting
background textures and deafened by the ones that use MIDI music. You know
the ones I'm talking about... "Wind Beneath My Wings"...
Dan
>>>For the record, I'm neither for Flash nor against it, <<<
My position, on the other hand, is clear. That is the major difference
between you and I.
Dan
>>>Why not learn about how to use Flash to accomplish tasks that you didn't
think possible, all without the knowledge of the user regarding the use of
the technology?<<<
The current objections stem from the user being VERY aware of the
technology. As soon as that disappears, the objections will also disappear.
Good post, Ben.
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
---------------------------------------------
"Ben Woodward" <b...@perpetuainteractive.com> wrote in message
news:B8476966.BBDE%b...@perpetuainteractive.com...
Don Paolo
> >>>For the record, I'm neither for Flash nor against it, <<<
>
> My position, on the other hand, is clear. That is the major difference
> between you and I.
>
> Dan
I see. You believe my having an open mind is a bad thing.
Of course your revelations about our differences does little to clarify
where you get your information about the general public's disapproval of
Flash that you so confidently flaunt in many of your posts.
My only issue on this subject to date is the way you present your arguments.
I hope this 'clears' things up for you.
Ben Woodward
if the user isn't aware Flash is being used. Hmmm...
Ben
Drew
>
> That's a good point, Dan. The stigma can't be attached to the use of Flash
> if the user isn't aware Flash is being used. Hmmm...
Flash has a stigma? In the general populace? Give me a break.
(This is too funny. Checking Websters I found this first definition "a
prick with a pointed instrument". Mike C has a new name!)
Drew
Dan
>>>This is too funny. Checking Websters...<<<
Were you subjected to a Flash animation before you could look up your word?
Would you like to be?
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
"Drew" <dr...@nobodyimportant.com> wrote in message
news:3C226AF2...@nobodyimportant.com...
Ben Woodward
within this forum for the last few weeks at least hints that there is some
social stigma attached to the use of Flash. And yes, I believe there is a
some sort of stigma attached to the use of the technology, and that claim is
backed up by the number of people in this NG (and in my day to day internet
dealings) who claim they close browsers when they learn something's done in
Flash or at least groan and expect the worst to come from their browser when
you mention a Flash-based website. I've run into more than one individual
who abhors anything done in Flash. Does that mean I'm not going to use it?
No. But it does mean I should be aware of the preconceived opinions of the
technology and design with those opinions in mind, if it's relevant.
Ben
> From: Drew <dr...@nobodyimportant.com>
> Organization: RoadRunner - Carolina
> Reply-To: dr...@nobodyimportant.com
> Newsgroups: alt.design.graphics
> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:49:09 GMT
> Subject: Re: Neato Torpedo
>
Brian Mays
> That's a good point, Dan. The stigma can't be attached to the use of Flash
> if the user isn't aware Flash is being used. Hmmm...
This is why I try to find creative ways of letting people know they have a Flash
site ahead of them, or giving them a choice. For instance, on one site I did we
have a "standard" and "enhanced" version. The standard version, I don't
remember what it says, but the enhanced version says something like, "For
prettier flowers, click here."
I'm currently working on a Flash piece for a football bowl on our site and we
don't mention Flash at all. We're walking a razor's edge by not planning any
static version of it yet (more a "knowledge" thing, duplicating what we've
planned in HTML...doable, but not just yet for me...), but if the user goes and
doesn't have Flash they get a message that tells them something like "False
Start. Make up lost yardage by clicking here." If they succeed they go to a
"Kickoff...all players are on the field" message...no mention of Flash. We give
them info beforehand about the site and how it will be a step up in terms of
audio and visuals on the net (not doing it justice...this is NOT the exact
wording it will have.) It will be an interesting test to see how many will
upgrade when we ask them to.
We've been putting Flash 5 pieces from syndicators on our site for awhile. They
syndicator grew too quickly, though, and couldn't sustain their production so
now we're making some of our own little pieces. They're in our sports section
and those got hit a lot previously, so we're counting on the audience for these
already being built in.
Brian Mays
Don Paolo
I think a few people have mentioned that the secret to helping Flash along
is to make no mention of it, while still offering alternatives. Perhaps
there's a lot to be said about this 'stigma' that is supposedly attached
with the name "FLASH".
Can't wait to hear more Brian!
> I'm currently working on a Flash piece for a football bowl on our site and
we
> don't mention Flash at all. We're walking a razor's edge by not planning
any
> static version of it yet (more a "knowledge" thing, duplicating what we've
> planned in HTML...doable, but not just yet for me...), but if the user
goes and
> doesn't have Flash they get a message that tells them something like
"False
> Start. Make up lost yardage by clicking here." If they succeed they go
to a
> "Kickoff...all players are on the field" message...no mention of Flash.
We give
> them info beforehand about the site and how it will be a step up in terms
of
> audio and visuals on the net (not doing it justice...this is NOT the exact
> wording it will have.) It will be an interesting test to see how many
will
> upgrade when we ask them to.
> Brian Mays
Ben Woodward
things. Even when people *don't * have the plugin, they still aren't bonked
over the noggin with "YOU DONT HAVE FLASH - GO GET IT". Very creative, and
I'd bet very successful. Please keep us all informed as to how this thing
turns out for you.
Ben
> From: Brian Mays <bma...@swbell.net>
> Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
> Reply-To: bma...@swbell.net
> Newsgroups: alt.design.graphics
> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:04:48 GMT
> Subject: Re: Neato Torpedo
>