[Rant] Why do people still abuse flash?

[jsebrech]

I love flash. I think it's a great product. And so it really bothers me when it's abused in ways that it really, really shouldn't be.

Case in point, the latest redesign to samsung's website. They used to have a site that was basic html, a little boring, but functional, and now they remade it into a fancy flash site, with background video and animations and hover effects everywhere. The result is that the site is broken for me in Safari and Firefox/mac. It's unresponsive, very difficult to navigate, and very, very slow. The main menu is undescribably awful in its lack of navigability. I've seen this happen over the years to a number of other major corporate websites that I frequent. They decide to "sexy up" a site that is perfectly functional, and the result is that the site becomes unusable. And everytime I ask myself: why?

I just wish someone could give a sensible explanation to me how designs like these manage to happen when there is almost a decade of prehistory on why you really, really, really shouldn't do them that way. Is it the customer who doesn't know what's good for them, or are there really webdesign firms out there who think these sorts of designs make sense?

This is the offending site: http://www.samsung.com/be/

[ASWC]

Good point! But I'm confident in the internet users smartness and I believe they will just turn away from these ugly, unaccessible, unusable websites. Flash should be like the mustard on the hotdog, just the right amount and no more.

[asf8]

Is it the customer who doesn't know what's good for them, or are there really webdesign firms out there who think these sorts of designs make sense?

This is the offending site: http://www.samsung.com/be/

I think the customer is generally persuaded/sold by the agency to use "these technologies" (aka: Flash, Ajax kits, etc..) now days as a means for the agencies to charge more, and try to upsell the said technologies as some high-end stuff. Sadly you would think such large corporations would have internal people that know enough to advise and make more sound decisions. At a minimum at least check and make sure the updated site works cross browser before launching the darn thing ;-)

But yeah sometimes its sad to see tools being used for the "uh, ah" factor without reason. Kind of like the gausian blur in PhotoShop that remains to this day over used :-(

I have nothing against Flash or Ajax or any of the other stuff that is currently storming the web makeover, and agree there must be purpose when using any of these technologies otherwise the purpose is lost.

Good point! But I'm confident in the internet users smartness and I believe they will just turn away from these ugly, unaccessible, unusable websites. Flash should be like the mustard on the hotdog, just the right amount and no more.

Ummmmm hotdogs.... Ummmm mustard....

[ten90jwhite]

I actually prefer these sites. They let me know that the particular company cares a lot about how it's customers see them. It also increases bandwidth requirements which pushes ISPs to constantly upgrade their networks =). For the functionality that they've lost through that new site, they're indirectly helping the internet grow.

[Cota]

I have nothing against Flash or Ajax or any of the other stuff that is currently storming the web makeover, and agree there must be purpose when using any of these technologies otherwise the purpose is lost.


Notice you didnt say you had nothing against the guassian blur. :o

The reality is, the agencies do upsell this stuff. But a good agency can upsell it, make it pretty and functional. Now, given that I have worked with samsung in the past on some of their microsites, I can tell you, its all them! They are one of those companies that believes they know better than the agency they hired.

Flash is abused, I do agree. But we cant blame flash or adobe, we must blame the junkie...uh I mean the client...doh...I mean whoever!

[asf8]

It also increases bandwidth requirements which pushes ISPs to constantly upgrade their networks =). For the functionality that they've lost through that new site, they're indirectly helping the internet grow.

Interesting outlook and an optimistic one at that, but yes indeed some truth to that, technology pushes technology.

Notice you didnt say you had nothing against the guassian blur. :o

Thought it was implied :p

blame the junkie...

I am well pleased there is such a Flash market and that with new features come new markets. But what is it they say...

function over form.... or is that ham on rye ? Anyway we like Flash so its always nice other people do also, especially if they are willing to buy dinner and pay the bills, or atleast make you feel like your gonna get paid and then never do... or change so much that you lose money... or...or...

ahhhhhhh Flash, we love you.

[BernzSed]

This is the offending site: http://www.samsung.com/be/

What the hell??


First of all, how did they even manage to break Flash in Firefox and Safari? How is that even possible in a platform-and-browser-independent medium like Flash? Were they trying to do this?


Second of all...
Browsers come with a lot of overlooked built-in functionality, like searching text, tabbing to links, selecting/copying text, right-clicking, using the scroll wheel and middle button, support for screen readers, etc. Oh, yeah, and clicking, Samsung, clicking.
Flash gives you a lot of power over the content. But, just like everywhere else in software development, if you're going to go with the powerful over the simple, you damn well better reproduce . Every . Single . Piece . Of . Functionality or else. It's just like how if you choose C++ over Java or C#, you need to handle your own memory management. It's the same basic principle.


But the worst part about the site is not just that clicking doesn't work, it's that it looks like a lot of time and money went into that thing AND clicking still doesn't work. And in Opera/Mac, content doesn't even display! Seriously, what the hell?

[maskedMan]

How did they break it? Well in Windows Firefox what happens is that the div holding the swf that "tears away" never actually goes away. It just keeps hanging around overtop the pretty video content, but with full transparency. Naturally, since it hasn't gone away it is in the way of your mouse when it rolls over the pretty video and therefore you cannot click it, nor trigger any of the rollover functions.

Check it out with firebug and delete the tag containing the tearaway swf and it magically starts to work. I can't say anything about other browsers or OSs, but it's probably the same problem.

[ASWC]

I actually prefer these sites. They let me know that the particular company cares a lot about how it's customers see them. It also increases bandwidth requirements which pushes ISPs to constantly upgrade their networks =). For the functionality that they've lost through that new site, they're indirectly helping the internet grow.
Interesting opinion but I'm not sure it works in this situation, I mean to try to push the limits you should first be able to make something work correctly!:rolleyes:
Funny, there was a lot of time and money put into this and I can imagine a big marketing director guy behind that, probably paid over $100k/month, and coming out with this ... thing! LOL

[BernzSed]

Huh, didn't realize there was a second swf in a div.

I hadn't actually checked out the versions of the website for other countries (like samsung.com/us (http://www.samsung.com/us)).


Guess some idiot in Belgium thought it would be a good idea to ruin what was otherwise a pretty decent site. I mean, aside from tabbing not working right.

Seriously, tab order has got to be the most overlooked part of GUI design, and not just in Flash either.

[jsebrech]

Interesting opinion but I'm not sure it works in this situation, I mean to try to push the limits you should first be able to make something work correctly!:rolleyes:

Exactly. I don't care how fancy a design is, it has to be functional first. Style should add to the experience, not subtract from it.

This is why flash gets such a bad wrap from the average internet user. They see sites like these, and they blame flash. Maybe the good thing about the popularization of ajax is that we're going to see the same lousy designs happening in the ajax world (i've seen a few disasters already), and people will start to realize that it's not the technology that's at fault, but the person using it.

And by the way, BernzSed, I disagree that the site is decent aside from the broken landing page. The use of flash for site navigation is a big no-no in my book. Something I do a lot is middle-click a bunch of links in the site navigation to make them open in tabs for later perusal. Flash menus don't allow that, so for me they are broken.

[Colin Campbell]

I think Flash has plenty of proper uses, but for a full-fledged site I'm beginning to change my opinion. A microsite is where Flash really shines, where it can be used to market its subject with an engaging experience. But as for a proper, information and navigation heavy website such as this one, I think it would be better as at least a hybrid, if not a pure HTML site.

I can tell you how it was made though. The agency responsible wanted to create an experience to better drive sales for the company, and then they told the Flash designers to build it and have it done yesterday. So the Flash designers, capable or not, hammered it out and didn't get the chance to see things through.

[evride]

This is the offending site: http://www.samsung.com/be/

ooo, sparkles, I love sparkles. I found my new homepage.

anyways, i too hate shiznity flash sites. too often are flash sites and other flash work done by very very inexperienced programmers/designers. it seems like these design firms are full of average html coders and photoshop designers that had a two week lesson in flash in high school computer graphics class and think they are the shiz with it. then when the job requires it, they take the project by the horns, get run over and come on here asking for "URGENT HELP! PLEASE PLEASE!"

[newblack]

when it comes to huge sites like samsung, it's a delicate ratio of target audience, deadline and competence. i defer target audience to marketing folk, but the latter 2 are absurd and lacking at best, respectively, in EVERY client I've ever worked with. a lot of that can fall on my company's account management, for sure, but it's a volatile equation from the start. to at that point attempt such a flashy site with the expectation of at least maintaining functionality is an exercise in futility.

my point- why do people still abuse flash? the web/tech firms get paid to do so and a target audience is... well, targeted.

maybe that samsung site will be brought down... but who's to say that it would be brought down for the reasons you've identified? maybe it will be singularly diagnosed as ineffective because of its file size, or dimensions, or color combination- and the horrible process would start all over again. 10 years isn't a very long time and i think the general opinion is that the internets are a shapeable thing- not something we're CERTAIN how to do properly. mix that with an overly ambitious marketing team, some poor project management and voila, samsung.