im supposing they are for people stopped at intersections.

oop.. that too.

bah.... unnecessary distraction. Your passenger starts watching one and starts hitting your leg going "Oh look how cool that is!!!" and pretty soon you're in a wreck with a minivan carrying 9 blind children on there way to a charity cookie sale to raise money for underpriveleged kittens.

And of course, you'll blame it on the passenger, when it's really the owner of the animated billboard you should track down and kill.

So, I conclude: Animated billboards = needless blanket death and mass murder.

now that i think about it ...

maybe we should have the road construction crews do a rendition of 'Cats' while we're waiting to get through the line too....

it's all about entertainment value right.... anywhere and at any cost...we must be entertained 24/7.

Flash blows. After the advent of animated GIFS, and then the saturation on the net of animated GIFS (which have trained the web user to aggressively block them out of their interest field), Flash simply ups the ante on having people loathe whatever presentation the Flash is trying to conjure up or dazzle them with. It's bad marketing, plain and simple.

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20001029.html

Flash is completely anti the web browsing experience: i.e., the surfer being in control of their web trawling and the pace and interest level they want to devote to the experience.

:ak47: As soon as I hit a site that's Flash heavy I groan and then hit my back button. I'm sure millions of other folks do the same.

thats your opinion. tell the makers of the dialerking ass fucking flash ad it was bad marketing.. everyone loved and remembered it. if flash was such a bad marketing decision then all the guys in mainstream delivering higher CTR's with flash block ads must be wrong :)

the flash 99% bad thing has been refuted many times - mainly because jacobs obsessively overreacted but still managed to couch his diatribe in the "tends to encourage bad design"
if jacobs had his way EVERY site would have the same layout and navigation.. now obviously thats not going to work.. i've got one of his books.. some of the research is very good, but his personal views get a bit much.. and he's got one of the worst ego's i've seen.
most flashers agree with his points.. his article is a very good deconstruction of bad flash.. however one of his first lines he also says it can add value. it just has to be done right.

Earlier I said that Flash is a great tool for influencing designers to think in the added dimensions of time and action sequences. This is in no way a statement that Flash is the next and entire evolutionary step on the Internet. You're starting to sound like my ex taking what I say and blowing it FAR out of proportion. =]

whenever there is a 'skip flash' intro button, i use it.

And here you say something similar to the entire LUMYR design philosophy... and that is:

Doesn't matter how pretty or impressive a site is, you build an adult site to MAKE MONEY. So if a Flash element increases conversion or retention you better damn well believe it's going in there. If not, then it's out. But my opinion, your opinion... don't mean shit. The only opinion I want is what % of visitors whip out their wallet and why!

okay, well.... didn't mean to do that.

But my feelings on it stand. I choose not to use flash for any reason at this particular time because from my experiences with it across a range of different types of sites... I feel it's a waste of time, energy, and money.

Now see, here is a good example of someone looking past their own freaking point of view! Guess what guys... SOMETIMES you're not the only freaking one in the car or looking at a website. SHEESH!

question Mark....

(no pun intended there.... lol)

since you're so pro flash, why not use Director for Shockwave instead? It's got far superior power to Flash.

Now see here ya go taking a soft statement of mine and turning it into some grand position point.

I did not say I was pro Flash or non Flash. I have simply stated where I think it helps with the evolutionary direction of the net and that we use it when it makes sense from a PROFIT standpoint. So that should answer your question...

If there comes a time when I need to develop media content THAT rich to turn profit for my clients, I will up the ante on the design and design tools used to meet the needs. So far we've found some Flash to help conversions pretty well. That's as far as it goes for now...

flash files are generally smaller than director files.. director was developed for multimedia CD's, flash was developed for the web and hence is better for web use. besides the "more powerful" features of director would probably be the same ones people would call a useless waste of time :) - 'cept for the newish shockwave 3d engine which has it's place in games and product show cases.. flash is the standard for web based multimedia no point in using something else unless you've got a very specific need for it.. (a 3d game for instance)

okay, then let me rephrase so as not to mistakenly twist anything you've said, but rather simply ask a question...

if Flash is good, and I agree than for certain elements it can be.... then wouldn't Shockwave logically be better? Isn't the point of using Flash to create a richer experience for the end user in order to boost sales by touching their senses a little deeper than standard graphics can do? And if that's the case, then why wouldn't Shockwave be an even BETTER tool for accomplishing even greater results?

You can't argue that Flash is superior for achieving a greater experience and then discount Shockwave as being TOO rich. Is there such a thing as being TOO rich in this ever evolving environment? Shockwave is not new. In fact it existed before Flash. Flash is the vastly trimmed down Outlook Express version of Shockwave.

hmmm.... Macromedia disagrees:

why not create a virtual 3D environment with controllable players that the end user can manipulate into various sex acts with a joystick? Wouldn't that be the ULTIMATE in end user experience?

You could do it with Shockwave you know....

But I CAN argue just that. Some salt is good on my rice... makes the rice tastier than without. Too much salt and I'd rather go back to the plain rice. So it would seem to me that designers overusing Flash had driven you back to plain white rice. =]

And I'll reiterate... My design decisions for client sites are based on profit results and solely profit results. LUMYR stands for, Let Us Make You Rich... not Let Us Make You something so cutting edge it only impresses your mom. =]

We've seen no data nor received any positive testing for anything other than minor Flash elements. On the LUMYR site itself I used a complete Flash design and then asked if I should go with an HTML version only too... that's how this whole conversation got started. This because I spent all my time collecting data for paysites and other adult projects I neglected to get data on a webmaster site. =] Seems the 55 to 32 result gave me that answer or at least the beginning of it though.

Probably would be good, probably would get a good user response. Question is would the increased profit from sign ups and retention for having said plug-in on your site make up for the development cost?

Probably something that would best come from a third party plug in who stands to make recurring income on it and more easily recoup that investment cost.

nothing in that sales pitch "disagreed" with what i said

?

but how can you say that? Do you HAVE any data collected from interactive Shockwave porn site attempts? Are you saying that it wouldn't be more profitable? Or that you have no idea.

nevermind.... that line tells me you have no data on a Shockwave porn site attempt.

Might wanna consider trying it..... could be cutting edge $$$ making stuff. :winkwink:

technically.... but you insinuated that Flash is for the web and Shockwave is not. And in that you'd be wrong.

Let me ask you a question if you don't mind, Amputate...


If you ran a paysite and saw people talking about Flash "bricks" like us and seeing many sites using them would you give them a try to see if they make more profit for you? Despite your personal preference would you try different things and compare the results?

Do you wanna be right or do you wanna be rich?

Fuck 5 minute long intros....
Fuck not being able to use my 'right click' like it was designed....
Fuck trying to find the 'music off' button....
FUCK FLASH

probably the #1 reason to use flash over director is the plugin base. hard to argue with flash's total dominance.

That's correct. I don't get to try everything I'd like to try simply for the reason in the above post. Alot of clients like to be right, not rich. =] So you generally have to see a proliferation of something to a high enough degree that I can convince a client to give it a try when we go through the variable elements of the design.

I said flash was developed for the web and director was developed for CD's.. very different.. i've known many colleagues using director for webuse over the years.. but flash was always smaller and better to download over the internet.. not to mention everyone has the plugin so it REALLY IS BETTER for web use currently even though director now streams just as well..

i have always though that once everyone has broadband director will be the better solution... it is more powerful than flash.. and when file size isn't an issue...
the thing here is that at that point we don't know whether they'll have merged into one product or not.

hard to answer that though.... because I can't deny that I find 99.9% of flash to be extremely annoying. And if I find it annoying, odds are that the surfer of my fictional paysite would too.... so, I'd almost have to say no, I wouldn't try it. But that'd be based on the fact that I understand flash alot better than the average surfer does too. If I was clueless to the world of Flash, I might be tempted to try it out.... so in that sense, the answer would be yes. But more likely than not, I would go into with the frame of mind that it is a novelty.... not a sure fire way to increase profit.

No matter how you slice it.... it's still overcooked eye candy. And the chances of it driving your surfer away are probably better than the chances of it being the factor that pushes him to finally pull his credit card out.

here is a perfect example... (and I'm not picking on Platinum Bucks, it's just an example)

http://www.platinumbucks.com/main.html

This is a site that is NOT entirely made of Flash... yet there is flash in it.

Do you find this to be somehow compelling? Is the spinning, whirling crap in the center there making you want to join the program?

I find it distracting and annoying. Much like I find a midi file embedded into a page to be distracting and annoying.

Maybe that's just me.... who knows.

and what about the spinning, whirling flash banners?
Do they call out to you to click them? They're not working on me. Maybe I have some sort of disorder or something, but I think the whole flash thing is way overrated.

Totally agree. Fuck all the non-sense. Just keep it simple. Flash is all about trying to impress and it doesn't It's annoying when you want to see a site and you can't even when you have the latest labtop and using fiber optic connection.

I SKIP FLASH INTRO

I would bank that most flash sites have a worse signup ratio than nice html designed sites. You almost feel compelled to keep looking at the flash...maybe it'll say something important. When usually it's just a bunch of slogans one after another and neat graphics. It's a waste of time and effort for the designer and the surfer.

I've done over 2600 sites including three current Max Cash sites of which one runs an animation "brick." Different sites call for different uses and presentations. SOmetimes the Flash works, sometimes not. You don't think sites as visited as anything MAx Cash does would have Flash up long if it hurt conversion do you? My whole point guys... well... I'll make it in th enext post since I need to quote Amputate...

My point is... 9 times out of 10, what YOU (meaning anyone, not just you Amputate) think works is not the BEST answer for converting sales. That's why we created the variable element technology in our designs. I have lots of opinions that I don't understand how any "sane" person could disagree with but the fact is they do. Money talks guys... our opinions are worth no more than a guess...

the best use of flash is to integrate it so that it isn't readily identifiable as being flash for the PURPOSE of it being flash... which is what the platinum bucks site and others like it say to me as soon as I see them. As soon as I go there, I am washed over with "Oh fuck... another stinking piece of flash crap", and I just wanna close it before I even see anything else..... so why is it there....

I'll tell you why..... that whirling spinning piece of flash is sitting dead center on the page for the sole purpose of showing you just how cool they are because they have a piece of flash on their site. And that's the wrong way to use flash.

the flash should be quietly enhancing the site.... not the other way around. Your site shouldn't be just a showcased frame for the flash. Unless you're Macromedia and you're actually selling the Flash tool itself. (yes, theirs is pretty obnoxious as well)

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head well.... I doubt I'll ever be convinced that Flash is a revolution or anything even remotely close.... it's primarily eye-candy. And it can be nice when used properly as such.... but there isn't anything out there that REQUIRES flash to accomplish its needs. I think backend programming/databasing type interactivity is far more important than flash will ever be. So, that's my assessment.... eye candy. Nice in moderation, but all too often badly overused. I got into Flash when it first appeared, and I made some amazing shit with it too.... but then I got bored with the new toy and put it away in 1999.

Amp, look at this:

www.ego7.com

Flash does a lot more than create "spinning gadgets". The entire website is essentially a program interface. Imagine that. Keep in mind, the Big Boys are heading towards leased Operating Systems and Productivity Software. If EGO7 was a porn site, it would be killing 'em dead. And you cannot reproduce that effect with HTML no matter how hard you try.

1. It took over my screen. Reason enough for me to close it out immediately and never go back.

2. Alien environment. I now have to sit and learn how to operate this thing because it's unlike anything I'm used to. Not many surfers are willing to do that.

3. The first thing I clicked on at random, (since I'm not familiar with their alien environment) locked up the whole works. Had to Taskman my way out of it

Knocking 'em dead huh? Who...? The owners in lost revenue?

One great example of something being done with Flash that made the owner tons of money...

http://www.joecartoon.com

Try that withouth Flash on the net....

well, if it's working for him, then great... I personally don't visit such sites. I prefer information oriented type sites like MSNBC. I don't have time for stupid cartoons and crap like that... I'm glad it's making someone money. I'll never be a part of it though.

more power to ya Mark... but that's not a direction I ever care to go in.

popups galore on that site too mark.