I fall directly on the side that says that the sites usefullness is far more important in most cases than what it looks like from a micro level. Do I advocate ugly sites? Not at all, just a judicious use of Flash as an accent, or as a tool for development. Flash (and Flex) are excellent tools for developing parts of a site, but as a total platform it is a bust on many levels.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
A discussion of Flash as a Web platform
I cannot see the post that instigated this discussion (looks like the fame was too much for his servers), but it is interesting to see the diversity of opinion on Flash as a platform for a total site. There are those (designers) who feel that what it looks like is far more important than what it does and those on the other side of the fence: what it does is more important than finely kerned typography.
I fall directly on the side that says that the sites usefullness is far more important in most cases than what it looks like from a micro level. Do I advocate ugly sites? Not at all, just a judicious use of Flash as an accent, or as a tool for development. Flash (and Flex) are excellent tools for developing parts of a site, but as a total platform it is a bust on many levels.
I fall directly on the side that says that the sites usefullness is far more important in most cases than what it looks like from a micro level. Do I advocate ugly sites? Not at all, just a judicious use of Flash as an accent, or as a tool for development. Flash (and Flex) are excellent tools for developing parts of a site, but as a total platform it is a bust on many levels.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment