Quote:
Originally Posted by NoWhErE
Well, the computer game industry also makes low tech games for cell phones and other mediums. They also produce pretty shitty video games as well for those that don't have gaming computers.
Why?
Because there's a market for it.
You may think that the guy that doesn't have broadband can't affoard 29.95$ to gain access to a site, but maybe you've forgotten that not in every country in the world has broadband. Hell, some parts of the USA still doesn't have broadband.
It doesn't mean they won't buy. Just means they might join the site to look at pics or they just might order DVDs online.
So once again I come back to saying : Flash is not yet ready for gallery use because you'd be cutting off a demographic for nothing. Once it has become truly universal like mpeg, then why the hell not?
|
Ok now you are saying someone is able to download a .wmv or .mpg file but wont be able to handle a flash file. Flash is a smaller file size as we both know. It normally takes less cpu to play a flash video of smaller size than a .wmv or mpeg as windows media player is the norm most users that have crappy computers would use. So if flash is a smaller file size and less resource intensive why would it not be of an advantage to someone that uses an older computer on a slow connection?
Im pretty sure flash is more distributed than windows media player since flash works on pretty much all os's universally.