when will Adult Webmasters embrace flash?
 

we all know flash is the future of the web
almost every adult sponsor site ive visited has used flash in someway.....yet there is prolly only 2%(a very rough estimate) of the adult sites ive visited have used flash in part or in whole.....

obviously, the adult community has not embraced flash yet when it comes to implementing the technology in free sites, pay sites, or all other adult sites designed for surfers

what is keeping you from utilizing flash? when will you implement it into your sites? is the adult surfer ready for the benifits and negatives that a flash website would bring? is the internet in general ready for widespread use of flash technology?

are you still embracing your girlfreinds strap on?

haha
you guys are real funny :Graucho
i know it may be hard, but try and stick with the topic greenjizz 8)

What would a visitor rather see ? a normal page or a page telling them they have to go download and load a plugin to see some half ass flash design? that should answer your question

so when will visitors be ready for flash? The 2 biggest reasons for not using flash currently is internet speed, and compatibility
when will that change?

Maybe you misunderstood greentea, what he meant to say was, "Are you still embracing your girlfriends 14", studded, Pink strapon?"

Don't forget the fact that search engines hate it.

oooooohhhhhh
thats what he meant? i thought he was talking about your wifes size 40 panties stained with your mailman's jizz

yes, very true
one way to somewhat get around that is to integrate flash and html on the same site
but as far as search engines go, a full html site would prolly fair better then a flash/html site

To me.. Flash is something that should only be done by people that are fully capable. I hate half assed flash movies. They're pathetic, and serve no purpose.

The second thing is obviously the current speed of the internet. The majority of people are still on dialup. I try to keep my sites as small as possible. But then again, there are some funky things you can do with flash that are very minimal in size...

Thirdly, your rough estimate. I reckon only about 2 percent of adult webmasters can actually use flash. Fuck, over half can't even design static html pages.

wrong IMO

flash pages have problems getting indexed on se's. i don't really see what the benefit of flash is. if u want to make a nice lookin website sure, but for everyday use html is much better. i doubt flash will ever replace html completely in webpages.

only flash i currently use are maxcash's new flash ads :winkwink:

gonna be rollin that out on all my free sites galleries in my surfer trap.

surfers only want to see the pussy...they don';t want flashy gimmicky shit, they want to see the pussy...they don't give a shit about your 3 books on "groovy html design" or "how to do blinking text in flash 3.666", they only want to see the pussy....

movies, stills and stories, they have come for the pussy...if they want to experience the wonders of flash, they'll play your flash games in your members area, but that's only AFTER they've seen the pussy...........

96 - 97% of users already have the plugin.. the 3 or 4 percent that don't get re-directed to a non-flash page automatically.. thats also a 3 or 4 percent that aren't internet savvy and aren't aas likely to get their cc out.

flash has it's place.. but i don't think full flash pages are neccessarily the way to go.. im a flash freak.. but i acknowledge, and do personally prefer to use flash for it's strengths - low file size, streaming control and interactivity in integrated features of a html page, rather than a full blown production.. but im planning a few things and we'll see how they pan out..

1. it's not free software (lost money)
2. it slows down the site loading (lost money)
3. wasted bandwidth (lost money)
4. it crashes browsers (lost money)
5. no SE indexing (lost money)

i am in the biz to make money -- not lose money.

selling porn is about mucho focus and attention... Flash is just distracting...

the best design is no design -- and take a look at where the traffic is and my point is proven.

i love partial flash, but i havent really learned how to do it yet. If I am not making sense, I just woke up. So gimme a break :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TheFLY
1. it's not free software (lost money)

yeah but neither is photoshop.. or any one of the dozens of other programs most people use..

2. it slows down the site loading (lost money)

pfft.. only if you've designed it to be slow..

3. wasted bandwidth (lost money)

wasted? harder to quantify.. what parts exactly and what of it's myriad of uses do you consider a waste? IF you've designed an element that has no function but to look pretty, then yes thats a waste of bandwidth.. if however you didn't do anything as silly as that then what the problem? thats like saying animated gif's are a waste of bandwidth.. yeah they can be if it's a "flaming logo" but not if it's a sponsor's ad..

4. it crashes browsers (lost money)

? sack your flasher.

5. no SE indexing (lost money)

there are ways around this..still won't stack up as good as html though.. but once again im not going to argue that a full flash site is the way to go.. i think a full flash porn site would be a little silly really..




selling porn is about mucho focus and attention... Flash is just distracting...

thats good in an ad.. and bad design if you've put it next to something more important which is the fault of the designer not flash..
and no more so than the blank html page loading screen....


the best design is no design -- and take a look at where the traffic is and my point is proven.

lol it depends what you're selling! your point has no merit when they click to one of your sponsors and it looks cheap through poor design and you don't get any signups lol.. of course free porn is going to have cheap design...

Actually, well done flash can be fairly valuable. Have a look at
http://www.kindafreaky.com/tgp/. The little "Free Online XXX Magazines" menu is flash (Flash 6). I did the same thing a couple of months ago with a regular HTML dropdown and didn't see any impressive results. This little flash menu is bringing them in like mad. Flash has its place. I don't think those goofy little intros are necessary, but as for forms and interactive features, it can't be beat.

see any flash on the hun com? In fact I think that there are just standard fonts....

he must be doing something right

I have a fast connection, a large monitor, pretty fast computer... but when I see that button, I press it

"skip flash intro"


when I review galleries I turn active x off, and when I surf around after... it doesn't bother me at all that I cannot see any of the flash banners on this bbs or any other page i visit ;)

just the problems with flash arise more out of the people using it than the technology itself (other than the se thing which they're working on).. i hate to see people ripping on a cool technology when 90% of their problems are with the people that created it, and for what purpose they did it for.

i have refused to do flash intros for the past 2 years. i skip them also.. and if there is no skip me no go site.

i can't see what you're talking about.. also using flash 6 probably isn't the best idea.. it's market penetration is no where near 4 0r 5 with which you can do most everything you need.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rip
see any flash on the hun com? In fact I think that there are just standard fonts....

he must be doing something right[quote]

it's called using a technology for it's correct purpose.. flash doesn't have a place on tgp's other than ads. well.. i don't think it would be worth the effort anyway.. be a hassle to update too..

Sounds like it's time for you to download that massive 383K Flash 6 player. According to the latest stats I saw on Flash 6 (posted on flashkit.com), 53% of internet users had upgraded to the latest version. The HTML version of the menu I had in pace did not attract visitors. This new flash menu does. I noticed a fairly large increase in the number of signups since implementing it so the answer to the "Flash or not" question is quite obvious to me.

i was part of the beta team.. i have the plugin.

what im asking is why force the user to download the plugin when im fairly sure you could do the same thing but export to v4 or v5 and reach 95% and 86% respectively? it's still pushing the download on 30-40% of viewers.

of course SOMEONE has to push it on them otherwise we have to wait until they download the updates of the browsers themselves.. still.. i'd rather that person wasn't me.

we've always waited until a clear majority of the market has the product before using the latest plugin as default, and i still output to the lowest version possible.

i don't see it either. if u use flash 4 then u'd get even better results since more ppl would actually see it.

if 53% have upgraded to flash6 that means 47% of ur surfers aren't see'n the ad. so using flash 6 is plain dumb

well i wouldn't say "dumb".. thats not exactly going to elicit a constructive outcome is it? he obviously saved some time doing it in f6 rather than sending variables to an asp file in f4 or whatever he's doing.. im just saying sometimes it's worth using the slightly more archaic method if it nets you a few more %..

I think Flash has its time and place, such as Http://www.innervisionmusic.com
They did a real nice site with flash, and the vistors won't mind the DL wait, cause they are out to listen to some music or watch some concert videos, they are not sitting with dick in hand waiting for the pics to come up.

maybe if it was flash anime....

they need to set a fixed size for thesite to be shown at. resizing bites the llama's ass.

Thats something that I didn't like either, they spent an insane amount of cash on that site and like 8 months designing, I think they got ripped but my point was that flash is much better suiteeed for sites like that

oh i see it now.. hmmmm.. wonder what was going on..

yeah.. a qualified broadband user..

resizing sucks because you have no control over how your bitmaps are viewed (they look ugly as hell when blown up, and almost as ugly when shrunk) and also things like processor hungry alpha (like in the background of the text boxes) hog more cpu the larger they are..

it's a 30 second change though.. just change the embed values from 100% to whatever size it should be..

theres something wrong with the preloader.. i get it each time i go there and have to wait again.. it should be cached.. also the "portal" button does nothing more than load the site again (taking you back through the loading)

if it took eight months i hope it was part time.. this shouldn't take more than a few weeks.. im assuming there was lots of project managment issues if it took that long. or late delivery of information from the client.

Ok well I got to give Flash some credit -- once it was included w/ Netscape and MSIE it was pretty much guaranteed a short future -- but do you remember all the hype about VRML? Yeah that shit faded away too... I remember when Netscape supported VRML in the default browser and they had VRML navigation on their site...

Also if you look back in to the past of the PC and Internet -- any software that is not free to create with will not have staying power... Do you think people would use .ZIP files if pkzip was not a shareware program? Would we still use it today? Shit no we would still all be using ARC or ARJ or LZH ;) Good memories ;) HTML is free to create and view -- as long as Macromedia has ultimate control over Flash you have doomed the shit IMHO... For now Flash is a fad for preppy designers to play with and dream about in Barnes & Noble...

If HTML adds support for some vector type animation, etc. then you will see Flash disappear very quickly...

Any time the browser has to pull in some foreign code (ie: plugin) you overly complicate things -- and the OS or browser will often become less stable... machines crash all the time because of this -- I've experienced it first hand on several machines... I've even seen Javascript crash a browser -- you turn all that shit off and you have happy surfer...

Windoze sucks.

I think it was a little of all of that. they used a friend to design the site, and i believe he did it part-time. those guys are big money wasters anyway. I know thier webhosters love them though, I can only imagine the bandwith bill on that site.

Flash will get bigger and bigger and our orders for it seem to be increasing..

I think as webmaster programs and adult webmasters realize that basically the only surfers who seem to get the signups to go thru on credit card are U.S.A. surfers.. So programs do not have to worry bout 28.8 surfers as much anymore cause if that is the only internet connection they have then they probably cant get the credit card to go thru for 49.99 a month anyway!

I think pretty much every program now does funny things to foreign surfers.. I believe some dont even let foreign surfers go to the regular site anymore.. they are redirected to dialer before they even see the design.. and I think Microsoft controls about 85% of the browser market and that handles flash easily now.

Our site is done completely in flash.. if you dont have flash.. then you probably cant afford our design work anyway!

:)

Chris

I think people are afraid to commit to flash cause they worry about every conversion they can possibly squeeze out of the hits now..

Remember when a simple banner or text link did 1 in 50?

Shit now you must massage them, give them full page ad with pricing.. and hope for 1 in 500+

FLASH MX KICKS ASS. FUCK HTML.

I've been in this business longer than most of you guys, and I'm telling you, everyone loves flash!

Except the ordinary surfer.

We implemented flash in our tour over a year ago and the results are good. When used correctly I see flash as a great tool to spice up any stale internet page. It can bring that extra edge you need to get the attention of any bored porn surfer.


Take care

ChrisL / http://www.thaichix.com/

but flash ads are way more engaging.. well they can be when they're done right..

Precisely.

these days, everyone is trying to set themserlves apart from others. people are tryong to push the envelope when it comes to designing.....my personal opinion is that more and more people will start utilizing flash in their designs,,,,,,i think in 2 years from now you will see a great many people utilizing flash technology.....i bet more then half of all sies will utilize flash in someway

the reason for this would be internet speed.....internet speeds are only getting faster, and in a couple years, the number of broadband users will prolly be bigger then the 56kers (in the u.s. at least).

html is for the most part static, and i believe most users prefer interactivity and motion to static....just like most people would prefer to watch a movie of a naked girl, rather then picture of her. I dont know how this would relate in the adult world, but in main stream, i definetly think that flash will become more popular then HTML in 2 years

only way that i see flash failing is if a superior technology comes out sometimes in the next year or two.

done properly the average surfer doesn't even notice..

you're talking about flash as though it only has one function... done correctly it's no more annoying than animated gifs.. and less so then javascript..

I dont know how this would relate in the adult world, but in main stream, i definetly think that flash will become more popular then HTML in 2 years

heheheh flashers have been saying that since '97 '98 and the "flashpad" board days.. lol.. i don't think it will happen..

only way that i see flash failing is if a superior technology comes out sometimes in the next year or two. [/QUOTE]

like SVG? :)

And, about how often do you see something as easy and cheap as even HTML done "properly"?

I, for one, almost instantly hit the BACK button when I find a flash page, unless there is a link allowing me to bypass it.

I think most surfers view it as Musac: someone else's taste shoved down your throat, like it or not. At least static HTML doesn't waste your time.

You are aware, for example, that the average surfer will hit the back button or start looking through his bookmarks if a page doesn't load in about 13 seconds?

If Flash is going to work, for one thing, we need to get past these "Flash Loading" screens, because it's just a notice to the surfer that "we are going to waste an unspecified period of your time."

To those who are promoting the idea that surfers want video more than stills, their druthers might be fairly irrelevant to you as a business person. To the business person, the question is one of income from signups and rebills vs. bandwidth and content costs, isn't it? The point being that even if the surfer would rather watch a movie, giving him what he wants is vastly more expensive with video (and here I'm talking about digital video, not Flash graphics) than with a site built primarily on stills.

I, for one, almost instantly hit the BACK button when I find a flash page, unless there is a link allowing me to bypass it.

i do a lot too.. depending on the purpose of the site...i've also been conditioned by the amount of bad full flash sites..... thats why i go for integrated flash/html a lot more.

I think most surfers view it as Musac: someone else's taste shoved down your throat, like it or not. At least static HTML doesn't waste your time.

depends.. ANY site HTML, VRML, etc is just someone else's tastes shoved down your throat.. what do you think that pepsi sign is.. that bank ad.. that news website... you seem to be refering to the essentially useless flash wank sites..

You are aware, for example, that the average surfer will hit the back button or start looking through his bookmarks if a page doesn't load in about 13 seconds?

more like 10... yes i am VERY aware of user interaction/perception.... not many other flash designers have read jacob nielson :)

If Flash is going to work, for one thing, we need to get past these "Flash Loading" screens, because it's just a notice to the surfer that "we are going to waste an unspecified period of your time."

i totally agree.. this is often a case of the author not knowing how to deliver the information smoothly, and going nuts on a all out design without even thinking of optimisation..

the problem is that flashers have to repair the damage that has been done to surfers in the days of 800kb swfs and preloaders for intro movies.. you should be able to get a flash page to operate as fast as a html page.. unless you have a very high end reason for using flash (in which case you could just use it as an integrated console in html)
im almost to the point where i think NOT putting a "flash loading" preloader will make the user think it is going to load faster.. users are conditioned to waiting 5-10 seconds for a html page to load (longer for image rich ones) but if you had a preloader on a flash site that lasted 10 seconds you'd still think the html loaded faster..
one of the great things about flash is that i can load ANY one of the content behind the navs anytime i want regardless of when the user is going to click on it.. so if they eventually do it's already at least partially loaded for them.. a definate head start over HTML.. of course that only applies for the content of the site... hell i can even track the user's mouse and start loading the content before they even get to the button..

i can find out how fast your connection is and dynamically deliver an appropriate level of detail.. i can find out how fast your CPU is and scale down the heavy effects.. i can break up the movie and play slight of hand so it seems like it's loading faster than it is and deliver it to 97% of the audience, automatically providing a flat site for the other 3%..

it's the author not the technology..
it's also the purpose of the content and the target market that states how much "WOW" you can get away with by default..