digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

See the original image at arstechnica.com

Google, Yahoo spiders can now crawl through Flash sites

arstechnica.com — Adobe has announced that it is working with Google and Yahoo to finally ensure that Flash SWF files are indexable by search engines. Google has already gotten a jump start on this feature that designers have been asking for since the late 90s, too.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mikephimikephi, on 07/01/2008, -1/+151FTA: "Either way, with searchable SWF files down, usability experts can now focus all of their attention on other Flash-related concerns, like blatant design perversion and excessive animation abuse."
    ...I'm glad they said it before 100's of diggers
    • maninalift, on 07/02/2008, -1/+7Any progress also on making flash sights behave nicely when I want to open a link in a new tab or bookmark a particular part of the site (that has the same address as the rest of the site but is in a different state).
      • geoken, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4Yup, it's called SWFAddress.

        Basically what it does is allow the developer to trigger functions based on a hash appended to the URL. So when you navigate to mysite.com/#home I'll receive 'home' as a variable as well as having an event fired that will allow me to act on the variable 'home'. Basically this lets me trigger state change code based on the current address. So if you bookmark mysite.com/#gallery, when you click the bookmark you'll navigate to mysite.com, then the 'gallery' variable will be acted upon and my page will display the gallery. If you navigate away from 'gallery' the browser URL will change to whatever page/state you navigated to. This produces the side effect of allowing your browser's back and forward buttons to work within the flash page as you would expect them to work on an HTML page.

    • ganus, on 07/02/2008, -3/+9This doesn't change the fact that I hate almost every flash website I've been to.
    • TenaciousDan2, on 07/02/2008, -2/+0Thousands of diggers actually :D
  • sghimire, on 07/01/2008, -8/+32This is great news for developers and web marketers. However, I will still caution you to not go overboard with the use of Flash on your website. Pay attention to where you visitors are coming from and the type of connections they have.
    • willynilly, on 07/02/2008, -12/+31"Overboard"?

      Let's make it simple: FLASH SITES SUCK ROYAL ASS.

      Any time you go to a company's Internet portal and see "LOADING"... you know to bail. IMMEDIATELY.

      It is amateur hour at its worst. And certain kinds of companies are universal offenders. Fashion-related companies tend to be the worst.
      • paaaaaaaaaa, on 07/02/2008, -7/+12People seem to think that the only way to sell your product/service is to write a million lines of text about it. Sometimes it is better for a website to have more of a brochure style website with large images and or video. Flash would be the best choice for this.

        However the main reason some of these "fashion" sites like to use flash is for individualism. Html sites all look very samey. Fashion sites are trying to say we are one of a kind and there no easier way to do that than flash.
      • SSUK, on 07/02/2008, -3/+16While I agree that some websites use Flash unnecessarily, not ALL Flash websites are bad. Application-based websites allow for wonderfully interactive websites which are designed to 'wow' users, not bore them to ***** with some weak AJAX and text-html/CSS. If you cannot see the point of application websites, that's your loss but content-rich websites delivered in an interactive format are a very viable website choice for designers so long they make the site accessible and usable on lower-powered PCs/mobile devices (that support Flash).
      • jamesdew, on 07/02/2008, -2/+10fasion web sites are not marketed at you
      • blackbookdesign, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2They just don't know what they're doing... optimizing just like html and images is something alot of people don't know how to do in flash.
    • mcmlxxii, on 07/02/2008, -3/+5Yes dad
    • daengbo, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Great news for marketers... bad news for any other search engine but G and Y. The little guy in the search game now has even less of a chance. The only good news is that Adobe didn't help MSN.
    • haxcorner, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2I think it's great news for website owners who care more about user usability than flashy designs (pun intended). This advancement will undoubtedly give some website owners/web designers what they consider to be a "green light" to go nuts with flash - and by annoying their visitors it'll hopefully give those of us who are against flash-based websites a bigger share of the irritated user base.

      I'm not totally against flash - but it's annoying when the header and menu of a site are flash-based and it's even more annoying when a site is comprised entirely of flash. I'm glad that search engines are able to read the files now, but I think that usability will suffer to an extent.
    • DanardVincente, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1 Well said, design your site with your visitors in mind. How they react and use an navigate your site is important to learn...

      "To Air is to Customers" Danard Vincente ^_^
  • DanQuist, on 07/01/2008, -11/+5:D
  • MavRevMatt, on 07/02/2008, -6/+20I've never liked Flash for this along with other reasons. Glad to see one's fixed since some of the others will never be. i.e. It being proprietary owned by Adobe.
    • geoken, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2It's an open spec now (like pdf). Although Adobe has the only viable player, anyone can make one based on the spec (similar to how multiple PDF readers exist).
      • MavRevMatt, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1While that's true no one has which is where I see the problem. For example it took Adobe forever to make a Flash player for Linux that even worked. You can't rely on one company to do everything now with such a wide variety of platforms.
      • geoken, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Yes they have. They're not at the level of the official player, but they're useable.
  • JNudda, on 07/02/2008, -11/+4Finally :)
    And no surprise at the apparent lack of involvement from Microsoft, they are probably more concerned with pushing Silverlight.
  • mooseontheloose, on 07/02/2008, -20/+4YES! BEST NEWS EVER! WOOOOOOOOT

    this is seriously so awesome. im so ***** excited. hopefully this means sights can move into the future by using more flash-based web experiences
  • SmellyFingers, on 07/02/2008, -9/+4Did you get that thing I sent you?
    • burton3660, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4Im starting to deny that there is a thing that you sent me.
  • watklax, on 07/02/2008, -3/+31Spiders creep me out.
  • willynilly, on 07/02/2008, -26/+122Want to drive people away from your site? Make it a Flash-based one. In 2008, no one should be sitting there looking at "Loading..." every time they click on a link.

    FLASH SITES SUCK. We were better off when they DIDN'T show up in search results. Including them simply constitutes pollution.
    • antoncox, on 07/02/2008, -3/+5absolutely
    • digitalpencil, on 07/02/2008, -4/+14i've never understood all the hating on Flash. It's the most pervasive plugin on the planet and as such, has brought robust streaming video to practically every browser config, bypassing player/codec incompatibility.
      Granted it's often used in situations where it's not warranted and there are many examples of bad design executed through it but couldn't the same be said of every platform? It is limited by varying factors but thanks to AS3, it's really pushing the boundaries and has evolved from a simple vector animation suite, into a powerful system capable of delivering rich, cross-browser compatible, data-driven media.
      People often seem to complain about it being closed-source but there is a huge OS-Flash community and it's the dev's decision if he/she doesn't want you butchering their code. After all, having a skillset that sets you apart from other designers all creating the same template-based crap as everyone else is kind of important in finding employment.
      • Me1000, on 07/02/2008, -1/+5he isnt talking about Flash as in the plugin, he is saying whole websites that are made using flash! Where the whole thing is one big flash file!

        Flash has a purpose, but it is overdone by most everyone!
        "Hey look everyone, the water droplets follow my cursor! Im going to add this to all my websites!"
      • digitalpencil, on 07/02/2008, -3/+3^ i gathered that but thanks for the clarification.
        My point is that Flash is bad when it's poorly executed, the same as all design on all platforms and i've never understood blanket statements like 'FLASH SITES SUCK'. You can't be arguing that just because a site uses it throughout makes that site bad.. it's all in the execution.

        Allow me to explain through the following links what good Flash design is:
        http://www.firstbornmultimedia.com
        http://www.jonathanyuen.com/main.html
      • HigherLogic, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2Both of those sites are prime examples of why all-Flash sites suck. You were even kind enough to link past the splash screen on the second link, which I can almost see why, I couldn't figure out what I should be clicking on. Then I'm taken to a page where my mouse is being recreated and replaced. Just horrible, horrible stuff. The first site had me waiting like 6 seconds just to get stuff to come up on the screen, and when it did finally come up, I sat around for 10 seconds clicking on one of the (assumed) navigation links and nothing happened. Things were still loading apparently.

        Flash is great, as an individual component of a site (banner ad, game, video player, etc.), but not as the _entire_ website. I don't use a giant PNG image to display text and everything else for my website, and Flash shouldn't either.
    • troyfoley, on 07/02/2008, -0/+9Flash doesn't kill web sites. People who use Flash kill web sites.
    • kiubo, on 07/02/2008, -3/+3"Want to drive people away from your site? Make it a Flash-based one. In 2008, no one should be sitting there looking at "Loading..." every time they click on a link."
      What is this based on? What, are you Jacob Nielsen? But I guess we will see if its true or not soon enough.

      And why so much hyperbole? Im sure you are capable if giving more nuanced arguments. At least try.

      Its like the Mac vs PC argument. Flash is good for certain things. HTML based sites are good for certain things. There is no reason to categorically disregard a technology just because you personally don't like it for whatever reason.

    • geoken, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3I don't understand why people complain about flash loading? When I visit HTML sites I need to wait for them to load, the only difference is that the browser presents the loading bar and not the site itself.

      It isn't difficult to create a flash site that displays a blank page for half a second, then presents an unfinished page with graphical elements that are being progressively loaded in and a menu that won't have it's sub-menus populated for a second or so.

    • s0merand0mdude, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2You would have a point if HomestarRunner.com didn't exist.
    • Fubeman, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Yeah, Flash sucks! PCs rule! Macs suck! Linux rocks! Vista sucks! Your mom wears army boots, blah, blah, ***** BLAH!

      Did I miss one? Sorry, just wanted to make sure I got all the other ***** & stereotypical comments out there. People who say ALL Flash sites sucks are the same tools who make the same ***** comments on how "this" sucks and "that" rocks. Yes, there are a lot of Flash sites that stink, are bloated, are designed like *****, yadda, yadda, yadda. But you know what? There are just as much HTML sites that are just as *****. There are plenty of sites out there that are breaking the barriers in all kinds of areas (technology, design, user interaction, etc.) both HTML and Flash. Just because YOU go to ***** sites, doesn't mean the rest of us do as well. Hate the creator of the site, not the technology. I've seen a lot of ***** photos. Does that mean we should all hate cameras?

      Gimme a break.
    • nortago, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Dude... either you're looking at some incredibly badly design sites or you're rocking a 56k connection... which is it?
  • chesss, on 07/02/2008, -19/+70Flash sucks.
    Searchable indexable Flash still sucks
    • sodade, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1If I could just right click and open links in a new tab, flash would still suck, but I wouldn't bother bitching about it.
  • umbrellainabin, on 07/02/2008, -29/+84BAN FLASH SITES NO ONE LIKES THEM ESPECIALLY ON THOSE WHERE YOU HAVE TO CLICK ON THE STUPID ***** "SKIP INTRO" BUTTON TO STOP WATCHING SOME ***** 30 SECOND VIDEO ABOUT THE WEBSITE YOU WANT TO SEE
    • cbartlett, on 07/02/2008, -3/+50Dugg for appropriate use of caps.
      • ZGambit, on 07/02/2008, -14/+2Buried because flash still has it's uses across websites - at times they can be very entertaining
    • mm911, on 07/02/2008, -3/+12Stupid use of Flash is not Flash's fault. That's like saying LET'S BAN PAINT BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF PAINTINGS ARE UGLY.
    • billbillbilly, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1worse are the ones that dont have a skip button, or the ones that take 15mins to load with out an option to skip
    • supermansuper, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3BAN PHOTOSHOP! IT LETS PEOPLE CREATE ANIMATED GIFS THAT WILL KEEP FLASHING IN BRIGHT COLORS AND CAUSE A HEADACHE
    • EvoPsy, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3my ears
  • tama00, on 07/02/2008, -9/+4Did all of you miss this:
    http://digg.com/tech_news/Adobe_Google_Yahoo_Team_ ...

    it hit the front page about 4 hour ago....

    i swear digg stories are moving faster now !!
  • sfacets, on 07/02/2008, -14/+41Terrible idea. This will herald the return of flash-based websites, do we really want that? Lean, clean html+css with optional JavaScript is all you need to create a great functional website. Why weigh it down with bloated and unnecessary Flash animation?
    • keeneyedgirl, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2i don't think it's unnecessary.

      you want keeping the way of making websites? more than that..
      all people want their websites just to be high ranked
      if people are not focused on the rank, the way of making websites is not any problem.
      even you don't need to say about google and yahoo's new tech of web crawling.
      isn't it?
      • analograbbit, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Even some Flash animation on sites (not saying the entire site is Flash) are used for tutorials, and interactive learning modules.
        This would be useful to be searchable, and not be unnecessary as far as awful interface for site design.
  • GeorgeStone2, on 07/02/2008, -9/+4Time to go back to using Ask.
    • jamesdew, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I've got a question for you Jeeves, why do you suck?
  • duggdowncatisad, on 07/02/2008, -11/+3What's the point of indexing something that doesn't even work on anyone's iphone?
  • VoidTemplar, on 07/02/2008, -21/+0┏┫　　｜　｜　　┣┓　 ┏┓ Copy and paste
    ┗┫━━　┃　━━┣┛　　┣┫ if this video
    　┃　━━━━━　┃　┏┳┫┣┳┓ wasted your
    　┗━━┳━┳━━┛　┃　　　　┃ time
    ━━━━┃　┃　　　　┗━┳┳━┛　
    ━━━━┃　┗━━━━━━┛┃
  • spyd3rweb, on 07/02/2008, -9/+36Please stop using flash to make entire sites, they're slow, ugly and look outdated really fast.
  • keeneyedgirl, on 07/02/2008, -6/+3good news anyway!
  • lcmatt, on 07/02/2008, -4/+17Flash can have it's uses (custom fonts on web pages etc) or games however creating a full website in Flash is plain overkill (see 2advanced.com for an example)
    • mitch37, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1Exactly. Worse case: http://wa007.com/2003/

      Nice art, but come on...
    • ktheddon, on 07/02/2008, -2/+2I thought both of those site were awesome. Its not practicle for EVERY site to be in flash, but in certain genres "the wow factor" delivered by flash catches the attention of the audience. These sites aren't created to satisfy web developers, or tech savvy users. They are created to entertain.
    • Light11, on 07/02/2008, -1/+4i agree with ktheddon..

      the wa007 guy is trying to put his image out to clients. if i wanted to hire that guy i would look at it and go "wow, thats cool". if i saw some ones plain html boring page, that's just one of the million people like them. its good to stand out.
  • estacado, on 07/02/2008, -0/+7They are working on it. The title implies that it is already running.
  • max777, on 07/02/2008, -2/+2Macromedia has been creating dll's for search engines to extract text etc from flash content for years.
    • shinkou, on 07/02/2008, -2/+5Being able to do something doesn't mean we should do it however.
  • MetallicaBand, on 07/02/2008, -8/+3Oh my, am I the only one who thought it said "spiders can now crawl through flash lights"?
  • sfacets, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3Can you imagine the nightmare for Stumbleupon users? Bad enough with self-playing media on websites such as Myspace etc.
  • cadmiumpaint, on 07/02/2008, -11/+26Very cool. I know all you web developers hate it, but thats life. Adapt with the technology or get a new job. Clients and designers like things that look like money was spent on it. We like things that no one else has. We HATE being limited by technology.

    If you want to get rid of something, get rid of boring 3 column layouts. The problem with the internet is that for the most part it looks like complete crap. Flash is another tool that can be used effectively if restrained. Just making something functional and data centered in HTML and CSS isn't enough for most people. There are alot of designers out there who see the internet as an interface that needs good design..not just another boring 3 column layout with "web 2.0 buttons", on it.

    However when you become that guy who has the site that takes internet days to load, then you've overdone it. I hate those sites too.
    • guybrush58, on 07/02/2008, -6/+4Hey, I've never designed or programmed anything in my life and I still hate flash sites. They are bloated, annoying and slow. If I click a link it should be instant, I shouldn't have to watch some stupid animation.
      • blackbookdesign, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3They just don't know what they're doing... optimizing just like html and images is something alot of people don't know how to do in flash.
      • mauso, on 07/02/2008, -1/+1"If non-flash sites loaded the same content flash sites do, you would see the same delay."

        That's the point.
    • jaythree9, on 07/02/2008, -1/+11Flash is just a tool, and you can't blame the tool for the stupid crap people do with it. It's actually an incredibly versatile tool at that, and when used properly can provide some pretty amazing immersive experiences. For anyone who likes to experiment with data/content visualizations, it's essential. Processing and Director are awesome but for the web, Flash is the *****. Check out anything done on Digg Labs and tell me it's not cool. You may digress into "yeah but why?"...well why is anything made? Experimentation is the aorta of life.
  • shinkou, on 07/02/2008, -5/+2I see that Flash contents are no different from Java applets, with the only exception that Java is now 100% open source. I thought web crawlers were only interested in HTML contents, but it doesn't seem to be the case. If they're to crawl all the flash contents on the web, why not other non-HTML contents? swf, flv, mov, wmv, wav, mp3, ogg... GEEZ! THAT'S RIDICULOUS!

    Maybe we'll have to celebrate for a complete pollution of our web search results one day. It shouldn't take too long. Just try to imagine that all related videos from YouTube are going to pop up all over your screen when you go to google... YUCK!
  • FelixDeluxe, on 07/02/2008, -6/+23FTA: ...developing an algorithm that "explores Flash files in the same way that a person would,"...

    What, you mean closing the tab and never going to the site again, ever?
    • geoken, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3I think they meant 'a normal person', the type who doesn't even know what Flash is and just thinks some sites look good and some look boring.
  • haentz, on 07/02/2008, -7/+1In fact, Google has been indexing SWF files for years...
    http://www.google.com/search?q=filetype%3Aswf&btnG ...
    • ktheddon, on 07/02/2008, -1/+0of course its gonna find results for "filetype:swf". no end user is ever going to search like that
      • haentz, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Fact is: In contradiction to Adobes latest claims Google has been indexing Flash files for quite a while...
  • starblazer13, on 07/02/2008, -5/+3As a designer working in a big company... business gets to drive design decision a lot. When they do a comparison between prototypes/design based on web2.0 "regular webpage" vs "flashy wow wow" site... they don't care too much about html/css standards. They want their "wow".

    It sucks, I know, but hey... I just work here. I hate flash/silverlight type site as much as the next person, but what can I do if the execs want their wow? I am just regular Joe Blow looking toward the next paycheck so I can get out of the rat race eventually....

    • RickyTheRiot, on 07/02/2008, -2/+0Sorry forgive me, I was under the impression that "WOW"(tm) was not a concept solely owned by Flash/SL. If you can't create a design that works under HTML/CSS/JS that has the "WOW" then you are in the wrong job.
  • fLUx1337, on 07/02/2008, -3/+7And in one big swoop....this startup is basically dead:
    http://mediawombat.com

    Bit of a shame to put in all that work into a new site, only for it to be dead overnight...
  • dengzhi, on 07/02/2008, -2/+2one step closer to google to taking over the universe (earth, moon, sun, etc)
  • dengzhi, on 07/02/2008, -9/+8***** flash
  • snow1, on 07/02/2008, -0/+14I agree that it's a shame that Flash has been misused for so many years to make bloated, overcomplicated sites. However, I have to say that as a designer, Flash does offer far more creative freedom over layouts than any other solution I've seen.

    CSS is all very well, but I would gladly do away with the cross-browser issues, the limitations of 3 column layouts, and the cookie-cutter websites that we've been seeing for years.

    This news makes me happy.
    • analograbbit, on 07/02/2008, -1/+4This is a great example of much more than cookie cutter things you can create with CSS

      http://www.csszengarden.com/

      One of my personal favorite sites, and just looking through the different style sheets for the site make me grin and hop right into messing with styles more. Brings a little cascading faith to web design for me.
    • pnunn, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I love the zen garden too- however- I think it is a shame when people trash talk one in favor of the other. We do several sites with a mix of CSS, Flash elements and (on larger sites with changing content and applications) we often tie it all together with php. Me? I do the flash and the CSS- and personally I think too many flash users are using it to get around learning other things. Solid knowledge all around is best for development with regards to usability as it frees you to make the best decision for the client/site/app's needs.

      I think the most important thing missing from any css or flash based designer's repertoire in too many cases is a solid knowledge of photoshop and when and how best to deal with media compression (be it image, audio or video.)

      The most amateurish of flash sites to me are often the ones where everything has been done in flash when a couple of flash elements might have loaded better and been more stable in a css based design. The most amateurish css sites are the ones that stubbornly insist on using css where another method would do the job quicker and with more stability.

      It disturbs me when I see people on digg acting like flash is anything but a godsend for web based media as it often belies (and this is not aimed at you analog rabbit) a lack of experience with:

      A) clients- who will ask for flash specifically because they saw it implemented well on sites like the one they are paying to develop. Try telling the client how much flash sucks in the face of the other three departments in their company who have successfully driven more users to their site with flash based content and apps...

      B) real world web design problems- Like inclusion of rich media content in a site that needs to reach lower bandwidth users (for example, we do a lot of healthcare company work and often site accessibility for seniors is a concern- sometimes audio instructions and pics are the only thing that will do. Nothing better than a few kb's of swf action to whittle a complicated streamer into a quick, informative, lightweight, interactive slideshow! Which, while it may seem passé- these are the jobs we have when we aren't pushing the envelope and are simply paying the bills- and flash is a great time saver and essential convenience. )

      C) Drafting a proposal- face it kids- programming adds to the payroll- if you can whip it up in actionscript and get the job done without taxing the load time- you should. You might win the job just for the decrease in overhead it allows when competing against other proposals.

      There is a difference between bad flash and good flash- and there is some super ***** css out there too- I just hope people aren't slagging off on one because they can't personally use the other that well.
  • deathbybearz, on 07/02/2008, -4/+3I'm not sure how I feel about this. I find flash to be a lot of clutter for the sake of a smooth transition. I like my links BLUE, and UNDERLINED. Perhaps in light of this, flash scripters will start making sites that are actually easy to navigate? We'll see I guess.
  • Zounas, on 07/02/2008, -2/+18Then Google can put "View as HTML" next to the results... in my fantasies
  • TBBucs, on 07/02/2008, -5/+9I was seriously hoping that Flash would just...I don't know...disappear. This development doesn't help make my dream come true.
  • Nextrix, on 07/02/2008, -2/+3Personally I feel Flash is only useful for object based items on a page only, to give it that extra spice. It should never be something that is required to view the website, and if the user does not have it the developer/designer should have a automatic image replacement to provide to the user instead. But don't worry, in the end the only users really pushing it will be the dedicated Flash developers that only know and are only willing to learn flash stuff, and idiot clients that have no clue about the internet and just want something that sells with eye candy (which will not, as we will be all pointing and laughing at there sites). Now don't get me wrong as there are a lot of very impressive flash sites out there that I have to give some credit towards the work needed to make the sites. Just that they lack the usefulness if I want to view the site on a hand held phone. XHTML and CSS or XML and XSLT are the much better ways to go.
    • tattoojoo, on 07/02/2008, -2/+1Personally I feel like you're an idiot.
  • analograbbit, on 07/02/2008, -4/+1Alright, I know not everyone likes Flash based site. Agreed. But any web designer knows that just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should.
    I think the only good thing about having Flash on a site is for content that you wanted to spare from searching and spiders, and this is just one more step towards making every web design application prone to natural selection of the web. If they all have the same properties or flaws, they will all have the same problems.

    I just wished they left one alone that can keep from the prying eyes of Google.
  • Groady, on 07/02/2008, -5/+14Christ stop bitching about Flash sites. Yes there are plenty of badly designed Flash sites but this is no different than the multitude of badly designed HTML/CSS sites. Flash is a web technology to be used alongside HTML, yes some sites use it excessively but then there are plenty of sites that use it well. And some sites would be ***** without it... hello youtube. Ultimately, if you really hate Flash so much uninstall the ***** Flash Player from you browser and then see how far you get. Flash has been around for some years now and is not going anywhere so deal with it.
  • theutopian, on 07/02/2008, -3/+1As a search marketer I skeptical about this. Sigh. One more argument against the flash happy design guys down the tubes. Thanks Adobe.
  • silver26, on 07/02/2008, -3/+19Complaining about Flash sites is the hip thing to do.
    • pnunn, on 07/02/2008, -2/+2And it also shows off the fact that you don't know how to use it and are demonstrating an unwillingness to adapt in the face of handicap- so there's a bonus! Diggers love balking and bitching!
    • jpkeisala, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2I am so hippie
  • brosef, on 07/02/2008, -1/+10I think people are missing the point. Flash != crappy annoying intro animation. Flash DOES equal a client side, web distributable application engine. Flash is used by most video websites to serve video seamlessly across platforms. So crawling of Flash means better indexing of online videos.

    On top of that FLEX is a very powerful and robust framework for developing real rich internet applications. That means flash player is not just playing flashy animations, it means its playing applications like the ones people are trying to create with AJAX, but without the need to use reams of hackish javascript libraries. HTTP was never designed to run applications, it was designed to host pages.

    With this move from Adobe and the search engines, you'll actually have fewer of the annoying flash intros that you don't want, and more of the real online applications that you do want.

    Assuming Flash only plays annoying animations makes you sound like luddites, and if you've never heard about FLEX, (or Microsoft Silverlight for that matter), stop pretending you know what your talking about, and go educate yourself before posting.
    • brosef, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3P.S. Here's an example of a FLEX application, this one written by Google.

      http://www.searchmash.com/flash/search/

      Is it 100% better than googles current interface, no, but then again, it's only a proof of concept. Do notice there's no annoying animations, but there is a snappier and more intuitive interface. Clicking tabs to switch between image, video, and text searches is ultra fast, because you don't need to refresh the entire page. Even something as simple as clicking to the next page of results is quicker. Amazing what you can do when you don't need to transfer HTML and HTTP requests and responses for every single action.
      • javaroast, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1And hey it replicates the old wonder of a frame sticking with you once you navigate to the site that you searched so if I want to bookmark the site here is what I see initially http://www.searchmash.com/flash/search/#external

        It also eliminates the wonder of right click open in new tab for results I searched so that I can quickly open search links maintaining the original search.

        Anyway this is a great example of why Flash sucks. The loss of functionality on this site compared to google is simply too much for me to use something like this on a regular basis.
      • brosef, on 07/02/2008, -1/+0You're argument is whats called "ignoratio elenchi". Your thesis that Flash sucks because the site has some poor UI designs is illogical. For example, a frame sticking to a page after clicking a link is annoying (yes I agree with you there). However it's actually easier to accomplish with HTML than it is in Flash. So does HTML suck then? Or maybe we should abandon HTML because it has a blink tag http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/_BLINK.html Doesn't make much sense does it?

        Also, you've learned how to right click to open new tabs because most websites operate as separate pages. Instead why not create a more intuitive paradigm where you can save links and/or constantly save the state of your searches within the application. (in fact searchmash does this for you, if you mouse over to the left) How many of your other desktop apps suck because you can't open the next action in a new tab? "Gee, Outlook sucks because I can't open every email in a new tab." Again.. doesn't make much sense does it?
  • YoureNu, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1ROFL

    Ever heard of the NOSCRIPT tag?
    • GhostFreeman, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I have. Its not standards compliant, is it?
    • Pherdnut, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Not sure about that but I think he means the tag that doesn't change automatically when some other guy changes your flash content.
  • nazsco, on 07/02/2008, -6/+2What's the point?

    you can search the content, but you CAN'T LINK TO IT!

    it's impossible to link to content on a flash. FLASH SUCKS. get over it.
    • MrTsLoveChild, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5except you can. you 'tards complaining about Flash sites being outdated and ***** might want to update your Mosaic browsers, get a screen with more than 32 colors and check out the thousands of Flash sites that have deep-linking and are standards-compliant.

      who the ***** even has Flash intros anymore? do y'all exclusively surf the web on archive.org?
  • popfly, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3You can link to it. There are several ways to pass parameters to SWF file with a stateful design. Are you really bitching about flash because someone put an intro animation on their website? That is insane. Do you hate HTML because you ran into a "Skip this Ad" segway? Come on. How many of you haters have actually used flash past the point of moving a circle from one end of the screen to another? None of you? Damn. Read up on AS3, AMFPHP, and any of the physics engines and tell me that Flash and Actionscript have no use for seriously useful web applications.
  • bushwa, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2A well planned site incorporating swfObject with Flash already accomplishes this. Get on board the fun train lame-os!
  • doctordiggler, on 07/02/2008, -0/+61995 called, they want there arguments for why flash suxors back.
  • kiubo, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3It seems most of the people commenting here about flash dont much of what they are talking about. I agree that flash used poorly can yield some horrible results. And it has. But it has evolved a lot on the past 5 years. It seems the concept that most people have of flash isnt up to date. Like i said before in some other post... flash is good for some things. HTML is good for some things... There are some things that flash does that just can't be replaced as easily by CSS (e.g. data visualization). The content should determine the technology, not the other way around.
  • pnunn, on 07/02/2008, -0/+6Seems like the people talking ***** about flash here just don't know how to use it. These arguments are a bit long in the tooth and uninformed.

    I do flash, I do CSS- and by being well versed in each I am not making decisions based on limitations- and if I do run into a limitation I hand off to our programmer. WTF? Why does everything on digg always turn into a war between apps, browsers, methods and OS's? This is good news- if you are afraid flash users will get ahead of you because of it- then go learn flash.
    • knuvue, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4I wasn't even going to comment, but I think you're spot on. Flash is just a "cool" thing to complain about on digg. As a flash and css designer/dev I know that skillfully designed flash elements used in moderation can be highly effective for both usability and aesthetics on the web.
  • davecachia, on 07/02/2008, -6/+1FLASH FTL! (waits for Mac fanboys to digg me down)
    • waluigi14, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1MAC FANBOYS? Are you kidding me? Flash is HORRIBLE on Mac OS X!
  • Jdawg2k, on 07/02/2008, -0/+0Awesome news. All I can say is, it's about time Adobe.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.