Memo to web designers: Everybody hates Flash!

[spectrum]

Flash, the tool, lends itself far easier than other web-design tools to horrible usage. And Flash fanatics refuse to listen to usability criticisms.

Take, for instance, the old website for my fraternity’s alumni. The guy who did the site did it in Flash. Why? Because “Flash is cool.” The whole fucking thing was a big Flash program. And like most Flash sites I’ve encountered, hitting the back button took me not out of the “page” I was on… but out of the whole damn site. And it had sound. SOUND. I FUCKING HATE SOUND. There is never any legitimate use for SOUND on a website, unless it’s a valid animation… and animations that “introduce” corporate websites are NOT VALID.

I want to hear what’s playing iTunes, dammit – because I chose that. I never, ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever want to hear a cute little jingle or swish or swoosh or crash or smash when I go to a fucking webpage and the Flashified logo swings in on a jungle vine, yoddeling like fucking Tarzan to remind me that the company I’m visiting isn’t just on the web – it’s “cool.”

In the end we had to take the website away from Eric in order to strip out all the Flash shit and make a sight that is actually… gasp… logical to navigate and usable.

Any sight that uses sound is bad (aside from sites that let you choose to watch an animation with sound or click to hear a sound). Any site that throws you into an animated intro is bad (unless its an animation site). Any site that won’t let you navigate with the standard browser navigation buttons is bad. Most Flash sights I have suffered through on the Net… and I’ve been on the Net since well before Flash… suffer from these usability conundrums.

Therefore, most Flash is bad. Unless your site’s name is Homestar Runner, throwing Flash at me is a good way to make sure I click away. Usually the back button works for that… because like an idiot, you’ve broken it.

Flash is the BLINK of the modern Internet.

[Avalonian]

*Originally posted by spectrum *
**Flash is the BLINK of the modern Internet. **

No, that would be Swish.

Seriously, BLINK had no good usage, while there’s plently of good examples of Flash use. Methinks you’re overstating a bit, to say the least.

And again, you’re complaints re: your frat brother are more related to bad usage than a bad tool. It’s possible to use Flash for far more, but many people choose to use it for it’s dumbest features. In this, it’s no different than Photoshop, in which the filters are massively overused, or Dreamweaver, in which the ubiquitous popup window is hugely overused. Some people just go for dumb shit… that doesn’t make the tools that create the dumb shit bad. That makes the user dumb.

As for sound, it can be used well, but subtlety is everything. Generally speaking, looping background music is bad. Loud, repeated moises are bad. Voice recordings are generally unnecessary. However, subtle sounds to key users into clickable areas work well, or low sounds keyed to specific events in the animation. And an OFF button is always a good thing.

You sound like you’ve experienced some pretty crappy Flash, spectrum. I have as well. However, having used the tool myself, and seen others use it for good rather than evil, I can only say that it’s not the tools fault that it gets used badly.

Frankly, it’s like blaming the hammer when nails get pounded in crooked.

[spectrum]

*Originally posted by Avalonian *
Seriously, BLINK had no good usage,

I can think of one or two good uses for having one or two words, at most a line, of text, blinking in an emergency.

Such as:

<blink>Warning, don’t click link: site uses Flash!</blink>

And again, you’re complaints re: your frat brother are more related to bad usage than a bad tool.

I would argue that the fact that the preponderance of bad usage of Flash would indicate that the tool lends itself to bad usage.

In this, it’s no different than Photoshop, in which the filters are massively overused, or Dreamweaver, in which the ubiquitous popup window is hugely overused.

Heh, I use Safari. No pop ups for me.

As for sound, it can be used well, but subtlety is everything.

I disagree. I don’t want buttons to make sounds when i mouse over them. Buttons should be clearly buttons, and not need a sound cue to distinguish them. My Mac doesn’t make sounds every time I mouse over the Dock. If it did, it would piss me off. Just like sounds on web pages piss me off. I want it quiet. I want to hear my music. Unless I click on a link asking for sound, for a video or for an animation, I want the pages I go to to be absolutely silent.

Generally speaking, looping background music is bad.

Not generally. Always.

Voice recordings are generally unnecessary.

Unless its like at Webster’s, where they tell you how words are pronounced. That’s a good use of sound.

And an OFF button is always a good thing.

Macromedia should require all Flash animations with sound to have a (discreet if necessary) button for muting them.

You sound like you’ve experienced some pretty crappy Flash, spectrum. I have as well. However, having used the tool myself, and seen others use it for good rather than evil, I can only say that it’s not the tools fault that it gets used badly.

Frankly, it’s like blaming the hammer when nails get pounded in crooked. **

But if the hammer is poorly balanced or weighted, it is the hammer’s fault. A poorly designed tool, or a tool that lends itself to poor use, is at fault when people use it poorly.

[Avalonian]

*Originally posted by spectrum *
**But if the hammer is poorly balanced or weighted, it is the hammer’s fault. A poorly designed tool, or a tool that lends itself to poor use, is at fault when people use it poorly. **

Fair enough. May I ask if you’ve ever actually used Flash (the building tool, not the Player) yourself? It seems to me that, if you haven’t used it yourself, it’s hard to say whether or not it’s poorly-designed.

I have used both Flash and Swish (though, to be fair, I’ve used Flash more extensively), and I can say that the poor design and functions of Swish makes it a far more “dangerous” tool. Swish really caters to people who like dumb shit. Flash, on the other hand, has a relatively steep learning curve, but once you’re there, it’s just as easy to make “good” Flash as bad. The difference is really the thought that goes into the project beforehand, rather than the tool itself. As I’ve already said.

To put it simply: Bad planning = bad design. Strong planning = good design. That’s a general rule for any design project, Flash or otherwise.

I’m not ignoring your other points, either, but since they’re more aesthetic principles than usability principles, I’ll just agree to disagree. I happen to like a little sound in some interfaces (not all)… others don’t. shrugs That’s what I said an on/off switch should be used when sound is implemented.

I would argue that the fact that the preponderance of bad usage of Flash would indicate that the tool lends itself to bad usage.

That’s an argument I’ve heard before, from Jakob Nielsen among others. In general, let me ask you this – does the preponderance of poorly-designed HTML websites mean HTML is a poor tool? There are far, far more poorly-designed HTML-based websites than well-designed ones, both in terms of poor usability and just flat-out ugliness. Does the same rule apply to HTML as applies to Flash? Or is it simply user ignorance in the case of HTML? If so, why the difference?

I think you know my answer. If not, I’ll be glad to give it to you.

[BlackKnight]

One could argue that although there are, as a strict count, far more bad HTML sites than bad Flash sites, that the ratio of bad Flash sites to total Flash sites is much larger than the ratio of bad HTML sites to total HTML sites.

[Trigonal_Planar]

Guess what. I’m another Flash hater joining the fight for easy access to information. Anything that slows my access to whatever it is I am after only results in me leaving your page. Anything that messes up standard browser usage (the Back function, opening new windows) will result in me leaving your page. This stuff is standardized for a reason. Why do Flash users think they’re actually doing anything useful by interfering with them?

Why do Flash users think that links consisting of obscure symbols improve navigation? With a straight text link I know exactly where it’s going to take me. I don’t have to hover over a bunch of fancy graphics to find out whats available on your page. If I can’t see immediately where your main page links to, I will leave.

I have used Flash fairly extensively, but ONLY for animations. And these were linked to with HTML that specifically says “this is a link to a flash animation”.

As for sound, it can be used well, but subtlety is everything.

Absolutely not. If I’m listening to music on my computer and your webpage invades my speakers, your page will be X’ed as fast as humanly possible with much swearing on my part.

[Avalonian]

*Originally posted by BlackKnight *
**One could argue that although there are, as a strict count, far more bad HTML sites than bad Flash sites, that the ratio of bad Flash sites to total Flash sites is much larger than the ratio of bad HTML sites to total HTML sites. **

Could one? Care to prove it?

Bear in mind, there’s an awful lot of really bad HTML sites out there, and precious few really good ones. Mind you, I have nothing against HTML. I love it, and I teach it to new employees in my department. I use it every day. And, as a part of my job, I see bad, ugly, unusable uses of HTML every day. Car dealers are famous for their poor taste and their lack of design principles. Don’t even get me started on HTML generated by MS Word…

Trigonal, fair enough. Like I said some users like sound and some don’t. Trust me, however, most of the sounds I’ve used as navigation highlights wouldn’t interfere in the least with your music. I do the same thing, listening to music while on the web.

When I was still learning web design and multimedia, we looked at a site (now defunct, and this may be a reason), that yelled “MEGACAR!!” every time you rolled over a button. I use that as an example of what not to do.

[spectrum]

*Originally posted by Avalonian *
Fair enough. May I ask if you’ve ever actually used Flash (the building tool, not the Player) yourself? It seems to me that, if you haven’t used it yourself, it’s hard to say whether or not it’s poorly-designed.

I have not. However, I can judge based on the folks who have. I’d say the entire Flash format is problematic. It has way too many openings for annoying behavior. I could handle short intro animations, frankly, if it weren’t for the sound stuff. God, I fucking hate sounds in the interface. And any designer that uses them, ever. Buttons should never make so much as a fucking peep.

Even the imbeciles at Microsoft let you turn that shit off in Windows, and they know next to nothing about usability.

To put it simply: Bad planning = bad design. Strong planning = good design. That’s a general rule for any design project, Flash or otherwise.

I don’t care how much planning you put into it. If you break browser navigation, have long intro videos, and an interface that includes sound, it will suck. Even if it were ten years in the making. If you have one of those three, it’ll be an unpleasant viewing experience, and I won’t be coming back.

I happen to like a little sound in some interfaces (not all)… others don’t.

My problem is that it’s fucking arrogant. They assume I want to hear it. That I’m not listening to music. Or that I don’t prefer a quiet environment. So much as one fucking sound can ruin my opinion of a site. I want to hear my music, not a “click” when I push a button. If your buttons make a “click” when I push them, I will not be coming back to your site.

In general, let me ask you this – does the preponderance of poorly-designed HTML websites mean HTML is a poor tool?

HTML problems are generally not annoying. They don’t make sound. They don’t break browser navigation. Bad HTML is far less destructive than bad Flash, and in terms of the proportion of Flash that’s crap and the proportion of HTML that’s crap, there’s no comparison.

Homestar Runner. Weebl & Bob. Those are the two examples of good Flash usage I can think of. Every single other time I’ve ever encountered Flash has either been annoying crap, or used to replicate something that could be done in HTML, and thus superfluous and wasteful.

There are far, far more poorly-designed HTML-based websites than well-designed ones, both in terms of poor usability and just flat-out ugliness. Does the same rule apply to HTML as applies to Flash? Or is it simply user ignorance in the case of HTML? If so, why the difference?

I don’t think Flash can be used well outside of animation. I have never seen it used well anywhere else. HTML, even when its bad, doesn’t make noise (generally). Is there more bad HTML than bad Flash? Yes, because there are several orders of magnitude more HTML in the world than there is Flash (praise be to God).

However, given that the percentage of HTML that is bad is, in my experience, far less than the percentage of Flash. Therefore HTML may be a flawed tool, but it is far, far, far better.

[Evil_Captor]

Bad Flash (and Javascript) have a way of making navigation slow to a crawl or even crashing your browser or windows itself. Bad HTML doesn’t do this. And there’s a LOT of bad Flash and bad Javascript sites out there.

[World_Eater]

*Originally posted by spectrum *
**I have not. However, I can judge based on the folks who have. I’d say the entire Flash format is problematic. **

The people that use it are the problem, same as any other format.

**

It has way too many openings for annoying behavior. I could handle short intro animations, frankly, if it weren’t for the sound stuff. **

Sounds like you have a problem.

**

God, I fucking hate sounds in the interface. And any designer that uses them, ever. Buttons should never make so much as a fucking peep.**

Ok, you seriously have a problem.

BTW I almost never add sound because it bloats the file and hogs the bandwidth.

**

Even the imbeciles at Microsoft let you turn that shit off in Windows, and they know next to nothing about usability.

**

I’m sure you’ll be switching to Linux any day now.

**

I don’t care how much planning you put into it. If you break browser navigation, have long intro videos, and an interface that includes sound, it will suck. Even if it were ten years in the making. If you have one of those three, it’ll be an unpleasant viewing experience, and I won’t be coming back.
**

Sounds like youll be missing out on lots of flash and html sites.

**

My problem is that it’s fucking arrogant. They assume I want to hear it. **

God forbid someone tries to enhance the user experience.

**

That I’m not listening to music. Or that I don’t prefer a quiet environment. **

We ain’t Miss Cleo dude.

**

So much as one fucking sound can ruin my opinion of a site. **

This is just fucking stupid.

**

I want to hear my music, not a “click” when I push a button. If your buttons make a “click” when I push them, I will not be coming back to your site.**

This might not be a bad thing.

**

Every single other time I’ve ever encountered Flash has either been annoying crap, or used to replicate something that could be done in HTML, and thus superfluous and wasteful.**

Not wasteful, because a flash site would have a smaller filesize, which in the webworld almost makes up for the drawbacks.

**

I don’t think Flash can be used well outside of animation. **

I don’t think you are capable of rational thought.

**

I have never seen it used well anywhere else. **

So of course it has no use then. :rolleyes:

**

HTML, even when its bad, doesn’t make noise (generally).
**

You seriously have to let go of the sound thing.

**

Is there more bad HTML than bad Flash? Yes, because there are several orders of magnitude more HTML in the world than there is Flash (praise be to God).
**

This is a pretty stupid comment.

**

However, given that the percentage of HTML that is bad is, in my experience, far less than the percentage of Flash. Therefore HTML may be a flawed tool, but it is far, far, far better. **

There have been some very good points made against flash in this thread, however none of them have come from you.

[World_Eater]

*Originally posted by Evil Captor *
**Bad Flash (and Javascript) have a way of making navigation slow to a crawl or even crashing your browser or windows itself. Bad HTML doesn’t do this. And there’s a LOT of bad Flash and bad Javascript sites out there. **

This can usually be remedied by upgrading to a Pentium 2 or above.

[Avalonian]

sigh I suppose nobody even bothered looking at the links I provided in my first post. Ah well.

One last thing and then I’ll quit banging my head against this brick wall of anti-Flash hatred.

For those of you thinking Flash doesn’t adhere to the Web as envisioned by Tim Berners-Lee, consider Curl, a new content delivery platform specifically for the Web, founded by Lee and others.

Curl integrates HTML, Java, Javascript, and other languages. Not surprisingly, it also supports Flash. From this description:

The Curl content language enables the development of full application-level functionality and a substantially richer, more interactive Web experience for the user, including 2-D and 3-D graphics.

<snip>

Developers say Curl technology brings the hodgepodge of approaches—ASP, JSP, servlets, HTML with embedded scripts and Flash, etc.—into a single cohesive environment.

According to Lee, as he stated in his book Weaving the Web, the single biggest problem with the development of the web was – wait for it – the browser. Or rather, the competing way in which browsers have been developed.

"Anyone who slaps a ‘this page is best viewed with Browser X’ label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network."
– Tim Berners-Lee in Technology Review, July 1996

spectrum, I’m sorry you hate me so passionately, especially for such a silly reason, and without even ever having seen my work. To prevent you having a seizure, I’ll now be bowing out of this discussion. Guess I shouldn’t have expected reason in the Pit.

[World_Eater]

Good posts Avalonian.

[spectrum]

Avalonia, I don’t hate you, personally. But I do hate sound in Flash, which is the main reason I hate Flash (that, and animated intros and breaking my beloved Back button). You have not said anything to justify the use of sound.

Why should I have to put up with sound in an interface? What does sound give me that I don’t already have? None of the buttons on my Mac make sound. Why should they? Most buttons I push in real life don’t make sound, either.

I want to listen to music. Sound on websites interrupts this. That is rude on the part of the developer. Or I want to not listen to anything. Sound thus breaks the quiet I was enjoying. Either way, it’s a distraction. Unless I’m looking for animation, I’m on the web seeking VISUAL information. Sound has no place.

Sorry I lost my temper and flew off the handle, but usability is, to me, the most important thing in the world. I don’t care about technology, I don’t care about power. I don’t think animation or Flash makes a site look more sophisticated, and it certainly is the antithesis of cool. I care about consistent UI, unobtrusive interfaces. Flash is never consistent and almost always involves noise, which is utterly obtrusive. It’s the telemarketer call of the Internet. This thread has made me angrier about Flash, because it’s made me think about it for an extended period of time. I’m sorry if I went astray in terms of my behavior.

[Trigonal_Planar]

Imagine reading a book in your nice, quiet room and every time you turned the page you were forced to hear a lovely chime? Well, that would be fucking annoying. Just like it is in webpages.

As for your websites, Avalonian:

http://www.brokensaints.com

This spawned two websites. One featuring a Flash intro, and another featuring 4 floating heads. There was no indication as to what clicking on the heads would do, and doing the “Skip Intro” STILL resulted in me having to deal with annoying fades and morph graphics. All in all, very confusing to figure out “what is this site all about and where can I go with it”.

http://www.ninjai.com/

The main page had no Flash on it. The links were clear and obvious. I could immediately see what the page is “all about”. I liked this page.

http://www.thetruthiswhatyoubelieve.com/

Wow! Can you say confusing? No indication of what the big rotating “Click” graphic does; no indication of where the links along the top will take me. Clicking on the big rotating “Click” graphic pulled up a bunch more annoying fades I had to sit through with NO indication of where all this was taking me AND just as several people have mentioned before, it destroyed my use of the Back button to get back to page before!

http://ps2.praystation.com/pound/v4/

Not as bad as the others but still annoying. It suffers from the bookmark fallacy that several others have mentioned wherein it becomes impossible to point a certain person to a particular page. Another example of a site overriding a standard feature for no useful purpose.

[Larry_Mudd]

My default browser is as pared-down as can reasonably be–

No javascript, no flash plugin, no additive bells-and-whistles at all-- only subtractive ones. No imbedded sounds.

I like a controlled, secure browsing experience.

I like flash movies plenty-- generally, I’ll copy the link and open it in the standalone flash player-- or sometimes in IE, which I just use for frivolity.

People who use flash for basic web-content should be shunned.

Same goes for morons who use javascript for basic hypertext/navigation, without making use of the <NOSCRIPT> tag to provide functionality for non-java browsers.

A good web-page should be navigable with a text-only browser-- there’s plenty of provision in the HTML spec for backwards compatibilty.

If you rely heavily on client-side capabilities for things that can be done with HTML, you’re asking too much of people. Chances are, if you feel you’ve got to have layered animation with synchronised sound to make the buttons on your weblog/whatever look cool, I can’t be bothered to look at anything you’re going to say.

[system]

Well, it rather looks like Sam’s wise intervention has been entirely overlooked.

Pity that because Sam gets to the heart of this issue.

I personally could care less about “Flash” per se - however I too have noted that when I do notice it in use, it is almost invariably as an annoyance, a barrier to my getting to what I want to get to.

Sam rightly pointed out that in large part the most used internet sites are those that do not feature animations etc. as a consisent part of their offering. Rather there is content, which largely means text. As noted elsewhere, sometimes imagery is content, although that seems rare enough.

What I find appaling in the run of commentary here is the tech heads, for lack of a better word or phrase, strangely demanding attitudes toward the consumer.

Frankly, the consumer has choices, and the consumer need not have installed whatever “improvement” or advance. The consumer is the customer, and the customer in general needs to be served on his or her needs and wants, not what’s neat.

[Cervaise]

*Originally posted by Collounsbury *
…in large part the most used internet sites are those that do not feature animations etc. as a consisent part of their offering. Rather there is content, which largely means…

…pictures of nekkid women.

[system]

*Originally posted by Cervaise *
**…pictures of nekkid women.

**

Well, true, but… that’s a different market.

[system]

By the way Sam, this was classic:

*Originally posted by Sam Stone *
Me: Your design is attractive, but why did you use Flash?
Her: It’s really cool.
Me: What made you decide to put a splash screen for the web page?
Her: It looks really cool.
Me: Let me try again - What benefit does your splash screen offer the customer?
her: Uh… They’ll think the company is cool?
Me: What about customers that can’t support Flash?
Her: Wel, I designed a total non-Flash site too!
Me: Were you on contract?
Her: Yes.
Me: So the business will have to maintain a flash site as well as an HTML site, and you won’t be there to help them?
Her: Uh, I never thought about that.

What is cool versus what gets us, the business user going.

Drop the bells and whistles, and learn how to do real interaction design.

Bingo.