Python - Web Display Technology

[Roel Schroeven]

SamFeltus schreef:

Here is a visual argument, I would love to see a list of AJAX and SVG
sites that display excellent graphics.
http://bacardimojito.com/main.swf
http://tokyoplastic.com/LF.swf
http://coolbreathpower.com/
http://www.peterjoel.com/flash8previews/candleFlame.html
http://shiroganeya.co.jp/main_en.html
http://samfeltus.com/swf/contact_globes.swf
http://justforthefofit.com/
http://mochiland.com/
http://obleek.com/iraq/index.html
http://www.flashbum.com/v4/
http://spaceinvaders.de/ (example of antiquated graphics simply handled
by Flash)

In my humble opinion, those sites are an argument _against_ the use of
Flash on websites. They may look pretty (I don't think they do, but I
can imagine there are people out there who like the looks of those
sites), but they fail as websites: long load times and especially such
horrible navigation is a big no-no.

I guess there is a place for Flash, but it's certainly not appropriate
as an alternative for websites. I admit that they _can_ be useful as
objects on a pages, for example the games on the last site you mention.
But please don't use Flash to design the website itself.

 

[Edward Elliott]

Flash also behaves consistently cross-browser, cross/platform -- and
features cannot be disabled by the user.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And that's a good thing? Maybe for Macromedia, not for us. This smells
like astroturf.

Flash can load and play external MP3 audio.
Flash can render text...
Flash can load/parse/serialize/send XML.
Flash can access you webcam, allowing you to create your own video
chat/IM app.
Flash can programatically-build vector shapes, gradients, and fills.

It dices! It splices! Flash can heat your coffee, walk your dog, and
change your baby! It's the stupendous, miraculous, fantabulous app you
can't live without!

Flash can #animate# stuff!!!

Flash is like a 2 MB download that works in almost *every* browser out
there. ...it's pretty phenomenal that all those features could have
been crammed into it. (like: a built-in interpreter for a
late-version-EcmaScript-compliant scripting language -- that, in many
ways, is far more capable than what is available w/ JavaScript in most
browsers!)

*** This feature can be used for a web-based CMS! It would blow-away
anything (non-Java) now available for managing and uploading assets.
- Show quoted text -

Ugh, definitely astroturf.

 

[Edward Elliott]

SamFeltus schreef:

Here is a visual argument, I would love to see a list of AJAX and SVG
sites that display excellent graphics.

[snip]

In my humble opinion, those sites are an argument _against_ the use of
Flash on websites. They may look pretty (I don't think they do, but I
can imagine there are people out there who like the looks of those
sites), but they fail as websites: long load times and especially such
horrible navigation is a big no-no.

A quote regarding web usability comes to mind:

"If you're website starts winning design awards, be afraid. Be very
afraid."

Unfortunately I can't locate proper attribution. It may have been Jakob
Nielsen.

 

[SamFeltus]

Hmmm... It is interesting how something is terrible to one person, and
great to another, and vice versa.

I keep trying to understand why people like HTML/JS, I don't think I am
gonna understand. I guess for better or worse, Flash is a very
different mindset and approach to the web.

Oh well, I love the simplicity of Python on the server. I just won't
hold my breath waiting for anything cool and Flash-content related to
arise in the Python world.

 

[=?iso-8859-1?q?Luis_M._Gonz=E1lez?=]

IMHO, there's nothing more annoying that a website showing me a
progression bar, indicating how much time it will get to provide the
information I'm looking for...
And when the progression bar ends, I have to wait until the flashy
graphics and stupid presentation shows me the "go to html site"...

I use the web for working. I work in international trade and I'm all
the time looking for new products, searching for information, technical
specifications, etc, etc...
Flash, when using sparingly, could give an elegant touch to a web site.
But when abussed, it is very annoying. It makes me waist my time and my
patience....

And finding a website that uses Flash apropiately, is very unusual.
Most of the times, they are loaded with heavy animations (most of them
boring).
The more I see it, the more I like the old fashioned html style...

And now with "Vista", "Avalon", and all those new buzzwords coming
soon, I don't know where we are going...all I know is that we will need
1 GB of ram just to keep on seeing the same stupid animations that get
on my way when I'm working...

 

[Ben Finney]

I keep trying to understand why people like HTML/JS, I don't think I
am gonna understand.

It's fairly simple: HTML, CSS and JavaScript have all been
standardised independent of any single corporation, and are freely
implementable, resulting in competing free software
implementations. We can choose or improve upon the implementation we
like, or make our own, and share the result with others.

I guess for better or worse, Flash is a very different mindset and
approach to the web.

One that shares none of the above qualities.

 

[SamFeltus]

As a final thought, seperate from the whole open source/search issue,
which has obvious merit, it does seem Flash has many excellent ideas as
a language/tool for creating/expressing non written ideas that are
lacking in the HTML world.

 

[Dennis Lee Bieber]

I keep trying to understand why people like HTML/JS, I don't think I am
gonna understand. I guess for better or worse, Flash is a very
different mindset and approach to the web.

How well does Flash work in Lynx? Or better -- in a system rigged
with text to speech translation for access by the blind?

99% of the sites using Flash won't run my home machine without
opening the site up wide in my firewall... And that only works for some
-- I don't have time to track down the URLs for the page internals to
open those up in the firewall too. If the site won't run when I've
allowed "mobile code", "third party cookies" and "web bugs" for the
domain listed at the top of the browser, the site has lost me...
--
Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG
(e-mail address removed) (e-mail address removed)
HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/
(Bestiaria Support Staff: (e-mail address removed))
HTTP://www.bestiaria.com/

 

[SamFeltus]

"I guess for better or worse, Flash is a very different mindset and
approach to the web."

I do find it interesting that Flash folks readily will acknowledge that
Flash has shortcomings, yet anti-Flash folks seem to have great
difficulty acknowledging Flash's positive features over HTML. Such
situations always make me suspicious Ludditism is at work.

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

SamFeltus enlightened us with:

I do find it interesting that Flash folks readily will acknowledge
that Flash has shortcomings yet anti-Flash folks seem to have great
difficulty acknowledging Flash's positive features over HTML.

I must say I've never seen a pro-Flash person acknowledging that 99.9%
of the Flash usage is done badly.

Google Video is a nice example of more or less good Flash usage,
although it's a shame they say "Download for Windows/Mac" instead of
"Download as AVI" - but that's got nothing to do with Flash ;-)

Such situations always make me suspicious Ludditism is at work.

If you suspect that, you didn't understand a single thing about the
usability drawbacks I told you about. Not being able to use a
scrollwheel, loss of the backbutton-functionality, and fonts that
don't scale along with the browser's font, are all too common practice
with Flash websites.

I love new technology, as long as it's good technology. I've had my
mouse with tiltwheel for a short time, and I'm completely hooked to
the new functionality.

Sybren

 

[Paul Rubin]

I do find it interesting that Flash folks readily will acknowledge that
Flash has shortcomings, yet anti-Flash folks seem to have great
difficulty acknowledging Flash's positive features over HTML. Such
situations always make me suspicious Ludditism is at work.

Nobody doubts that Flash has positive features. The question is
whether the positives are worth the negatives. For many of us, the
answer is no.

 

[SamFeltus]

I don't agree with 99.9%, but the majority of Flash sites are done
poorly. Mine is certainly sub-optimal,

1. Loss of back button
Isn't this really a myth? A page with a time dimension, be it Flash,
HTML/JS or whatever, breaks the back button. A page without a time
dimension doesn't break the back button. Should we now and forever
more give up the time dimension to avoid breaking the back button.
Perhaps for non-text sites, the back button is an anachronism?

Fonts are problematic in Flash, this is a weakness of Flash. Scaling
Fonts is even more problematic, but, fonts are an issue in any precise
design on the web.

I wouldn't argue Flash is better for text sites at the moment, due to
Search Engine shortcomings.

As for the blind issue,that makes no sense to me. Is the suggestion
that we should give up using images in web sites since some people
can't see them. Might as well throw out the use of the img tag while
we are at it?

 

[SamFeltus]

Perhaps the my question should be this, and don't get me wrong, I
REALLY like Python.

Perhaps Python is not a great language to focus on for someone with a
strong interest in Flash and little interest in HTML?

 

[Paul Rubin]

As for the blind issue,that makes no sense to me. Is the suggestion
that we should give up using images in web sites since some people
can't see them. Might as well throw out the use of the img tag while
we are at it?

Img tags should always have alt text describing the image, for those
unable or unwilling to view the image ("unwilling" might be because of
the download time). That bypasses the need to view the image. A heck
of a lot of flash sites have no way to bypass the flash.

Perhaps Python is not a great language to focus on for someone
with a strong interest in Flash and little interest in HTML?

Shrug, I don't see much relation, except that Python programmers tend
to be tasteful and not care about Flash much. Maybe if you stick
around here, you'll see the light ;-).

 

[Blair P. Houghton]

Heiko Wundram enlightened us with:

And: the web is a platform to offer _information_. Not to offer
shiny graphics/sound [...]

Many would disagree...

Not me, but I know a lot of people that would.

I would. Most people would, once they realize that shiny/flashy is
information too.

High "production values" affect value-determining centers of the brain,
bypassing the linguistic and logical centers. They make you understand
that the thing you're being presented is "worth something".

Most of the time, it's only worth a fat cash profit to the person doing
the presenting, who is giving you a piece of junk at an inflated price.
But your brain doesn't care. It's got a shortcut to your wallet, and
the information on the screen is accessing that.

--Blair

 

[dingbat]

Here is a visual argument,
http://samfeltus.com/swf/contact_globes.swf

Here's a text-based argument.

If I search Golge for "gardener, Athens, GA" then Google's spiders
won't have recorded your contact page. So I don't find you as a local
gardener, so I don't hire you for my mansion in Athens.

Your contact page is arguably pretty, but pretty just isn't selling for
that particular sort of page.

 

[Edward Elliott]

1. Loss of back button
Isn't this really a myth? A page with a time dimension, be it Flash,
HTML/JS or whatever, breaks the back button. A page without a time
dimension doesn't break the back button. Should we now and forever
more give up the time dimension to avoid breaking the back button.
Perhaps for non-text sites, the back button is an anachronism?

A time-based push model of content delivery, that would be television. One
of the web's defining features is it lets you retrieve information in your
own order at your own pace. Pages with an unalterable 'time dimension' are
nothing more than interactive tv at best.

Flash is a fine technology, just not a good one for the web. It's
appropriate for games and video clips embedded in a page and that's about
it. Other content has no business being in Flash. Usability problems
aren't just an artifact of the implementation, they're part of Flash's
design.

 

[SamFeltus]

This has all been very helpful. I've been struggling for awhile on
which direction to go with computer programming. I realize the problem
with HTML and the P language family is that although it makes sense to
me, it doesn't really resonate with my perspective. Flash definitely
does. I finally realize what it is that bothers me about
HTML/JS/Python/Perl/PHP...

I am uncomfortable with the seperating of the code from the visual/time
element, as well as the lack of emphasis on the visual/time element.

Perhaps that is related to years of being a gardener?

Anyways, this question no longer vexates me. HTML is for one
ecosystem, Flash is for another. There is room for both.

Next question...

I am not a big Perl/PHP fan, I find Python with SimpleJSON, SQLObject
and the included Python batteries pretty well does all I want to do
server side. Is it correct to think that is gonna be a solid, simple
solution for a Flash coder to use server side? Or, is there something
better and easier? (In advance, I find XML irritating compared to
JSON)

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

SamFeltus enlightened us with:

1. Loss of back button
Isn't this really a myth?

No, it isn't a myth. Pressing the back button is the action second
most performed in a browser, clicking a link being the first. People
want to go back from where they came.

A page with a time dimension, be it Flash, HTML/JS or whatever,
breaks the back button.

No it doesn't. If something is interactive and lets the user go
somewhere by performing an action, they expect to be able to go back
using the back button.

People want to be in control over their computer, their time, and
their attention. If they aren't, they go away.

Fonts are problematic in Flash, this is a weakness of Flash.
Scaling Fonts is even more problematic, but, fonts are an issue in
any precise design on the web.

Websites shouldn't be designed to be pixel-perfect. They should be
designed to scale and stretch, and to accommodate a user's wishes. If
you want something exactly like you envision it, go direct a movie.

I wouldn't argue Flash is better for text sites at the moment, due
to Search Engine shortcomings.

And due to being incompatible with the browser's own search
functionality.

As for the blind issue,that makes no sense to me. Is the suggestion
that we should give up using images in web sites since some people
can't see them. Might as well throw out the use of the img tag
while we are at it?

Go and read some usability studies, and get acquainted with the HTML
standards, before commenting on them. The 'alt' attribute is
mandatory, and should describe the image for those who can only
interpret text.

Sybren

 

[Paul Rubin]

I am uncomfortable with the seperating of the code from the visual/time
element, as well as the lack of emphasis on the visual/time element.

Maybe you should buy a camcorder and make movies, instead of doing web
sites.

I am not a big Perl/PHP fan, I find Python with SimpleJSON, SQLObject
and the included Python batteries pretty well does all I want to do
server side. Is it correct to think that is gonna be a solid, simple
solution for a Flash coder to use server side? Or, is there something
better and easier? (In advance, I find XML irritating compared to
JSON)

Well, you won't find many Perl/PHP fans here, though PHP is (for now)
probably simpler than Python to get started and do basic dynamic Web
sites with. Python beats PHP once the backend logic gets complex
enough that PHP's language deficiencies outweigh its ease of
installation. I don't know if that applies to what you're doing.