Comments on: Flash is un-webby?

By: flamik

flamik — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:05:10 +0000

I completely agree with you about the abilities of flash-based applications and that the problems occuring due to its implenetation I am sure will dissappear in a couple of years when people adopt in their mind and financial issues to that far-developing technology though i think it will inevitably give birth to another bunch of serious obstacles. Since there is no limits in perfection.

By: John Dowdell

John Dowdell — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 03:05:13 +0000

Thanks for the reality-check, Neil. I can rationalize those positions, based on what I’ve read from Jeff and Joel in the past.

Talking about “bookmarking” or “copy/paste” here in 2008 shows that the person speaking hasn’t listened to others in the past — and they’ll now instruct others upon such scant knowledge.

“How do you bookmark a JavaScript app’s state?” is the same question as for a SWF app (although bookmarking isn’t the only way to serialize application state). “Copy/paste” is at the creator’s discretion.

Same with the “browser rectangle” call but to lesser degree… WMODE has enabled irregularly-shaped compositing and event-handling, but it’s been the browser variances which have confused so many about this since Netscape 3. Player has always taken advantage of these browser connections as they’ve become available, but it’s a long, slow, uneven road to wait for congruency in browser implementations.

I agree with you 100% that we now have a variety of network-aware types of client runtimes. The odd thing about this debate is that in-browser runtimes and desktop network runtimes both date back to the time of Netscape 2.0. I think many of the browser-supremacists have a briefer experience, just in-browser, and so don’t know that both technologies have been growing over time. Mobile/embedded experience will help expand that worldview too.

Jeff and Joel both have good things to say. But we have to sift the wheat from the chaff. If they’re objecting with vague “unwebby” based on bookmarking, copy/paste, and redraw areas, then I wonder if knowing the truth would change their opinion.

tx, jd/adobe

By: noelb

noelb — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 03:05:04 +0000

I agree with the argument that the ““un-webby”-ness of Flash and Silverlight make them unsuitable for certain applications. What I don’t agree with is that AJAX represents an alternative that solves these problems. Most advanced AJAX apps suffer from all of the same issues as Flash and Silverlight (bookmarking/back button issues, lack of “spider”-ability, etc.) and I find it disingenuous on the part of many AJAX proponents to argue otherwise.

By: Jon Rose

Jon Rose — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 02:57:13 +0000

On the Flash side, Flex 3 has deep linking support to allow for traditional bookmarking and history management. Also, Flash 10, recently released into beta, promises much improved text management. I would assume Silverlight has also addressed these items, or will very soon. So, to the main points of theirs you provide, they seem seem like a non-issue.

In terms of what is “webby,” I think it is users and stakeholders demand’s that will shape what the web looks like in the years to come. For my money, I am betting on client side runtimes, like Flash and Silverlight, as this provides them with “richer” experiences than traditional browsers technologies can provide.