[Stealth]

Originally posted by Lonestar


Thanks for the info, i dont contend to know all about asp or VBscript. im a designer more then a programmer. Ive only recently learned VBscript and im surprised at the ease of its use.

As for Flash vs non-flash its like comparing apples and oranges.

I can take any Flash design you have, and make a site that will look almost exactly like it, which will animate like it and work like it in everyway.

So for animations and funky looks Flash is the way to go. I dont care what anyone says, if your going to make animations flash makes it better everytime. I dont know how many GIF's ive converted to flash to reduce its size and make it look nicer.

Flash is the best animator tool for websites around today nothing even comes close to it. If your a true designer though, you know deep down every programming language, tool and database has its place, its up and downs. Dont knock what is brought to us, but also give kudos to those that have changed the face of design today (Flash). [/B]

are you for Flash or against Flash?

[Lonestar]

Im pretty sure those quotes say it. But ill repeat to ensure you get what im saying.

Flash is awesome, yet everything has its place and deserves respect. however flash has changed the industry.

I can take any Flash design you have, and make a site that will look almost exactly like it, which will animate like it and work like it in everyway.

Only difference you will see is in the actual animation itself. Flash is at heart an animator more then a site development tool. So you could make a flash site in HTML/DHTML/Any scripting language for DB's and it will work the same way as the flash site.

Theres the full quote. I contend everything you do in flash can be done in DHTML and HTML, however it looks better in flash.

Im not really for or against everything i just prefer certain things over another, yet give respect to all aspects of the web.

[Stealth]

a few posts above this one i have posted about 15 links to Flash sites.

try to make a site that looks even remotely close to any of them... you make the choice

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Lonestar

im a designer more then a programmer. Ive only recently learned VBscript and im surprised at the ease of its use.

You'll grow to hate VBScript very quickly when you start doing anything more than trivially complex. The supreme lack of error handling will drive you insane. Your only error control mechanism is "On Error Resume Next" followed by some error check. This is fine for simple things, but is absolutely terrible for handling a situation where multiple things can go wrong. Javascript, I think, has reasonable exception handling, which makes flexible and powerful error handling almost trivial in itself. Python too.

[Stryke 9]

*sigh*

Flash is pretty, Flash has decent compression, but Flash is completely unneccessary. I've done mapped-GIF pages that are as fancy as any Flash page, and will do so again. It has some nice functions, but claiming it's the end-all format for all things internet reflects a lack of understanding of things not Flash. It's convienient, nothing more, nothing less.

That said, convienience is important online, of course. That wasn't a criticism of Flash so much as a summary of its functionality. The only problem I have with Flash is the excessive reliance some people put on it- the Zuxxez mainpage being an example. There's such a thing as too much Flash, and it seems a growing number of people don't cross that line so much as book a flight for six billion miles beyond it.

Also, lots of people don't include non-Flash alt pages anymore, which pisses me off.

[Stealth]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
*sigh*

Flash is pretty, Flash has decent compression, but Flash is completely unneccessary. I've done mapped-GIF pages that are as fancy as any Flash page, and will do so again. It has some nice functions, but claiming it's the end-all format for all things internet reflects a lack of understanding of things not Flash. It's convienient, nothing more, nothing less.

That said, convienience is important online, of course. That wasn't a criticism of Flash so much as a summary of its functionality. The only problem I have with Flash is the excessive reliance some people put on it- the Zuxxez mainpage being an example. There's such a thing as too much Flash, and it seems a growing number of people don't cross that line so much as book a flight for six billion miles beyond it.

Also, lots of people don't include non-Flash alt pages anymore, which pisses me off.

right... Flash is unnecessary... we could live without Flash, but then again, we could live without PHP, DHTML, XML, ASP, etc.  i mean c'mon... all we REALLY need is HTML!  But all these other languages are made to make a page more efficient, as is Flash.

Plus, (www.moock.org) some websites use flash for other uses other than just design... check moock... see if you can see what i'm talking about

do anything (cool) and i'll bet it can be matched and bettered in Flash

EDIT:  I agree that for some people on slow computers/connections it's good to have an alternate HTML page... i believe all the sites i posted (above) have alternate versions except for like 3.

[Lonestar]

Like i already said earlier and will repeat, flash is awesome however all the programming languages are good and used with flash make a great site.

Just like having too much flash you can have too much DHTML and everything else. You can never, however, have too much HTML.

[Stryke 9]

Stealth: What I meant is, name one thing Flash can do that nothing else can. PHP has special functions HTML can't handle, Javascript does, well, everything, and I'm sure XML isn't there just 'cause it's more convienient. Flash is a faster, marginally better way to do the same things other formats already can do, nothing more. That was all I was saying, as far as that goes.

And you're forgetting that many computers have security setups and firewalls that don't allow for Flash- it's all too easy to get virused with it, so many highly secure comps can't even SEE Flash pages.

[ZylonBane]

Originally posted by mikhael
Sorry, when you declare XML to be something, and someone says you're wrong, its something else, that's not semantics. That's correcting your error.

And when you declare XML to be a database standard (an intentionally nebulous statement), and someone interprets that according to their own very specific idea of what that expression means, that's mikhael.

XML is a standard.
XML is used to store and transmit databases.
Therefore, it can reasonably be called a "database standard".

[mikhael]

Originally posted by ZylonBane
....and someone interprets that according to [the current industry definition] of what that expression means, that's mikhael.
 

Its okay to be wrong, ZB. It happens to the best of us. But with time and experience, you too can learn to deal with it.

[ZylonBane]

Originally posted by mikhael
Its okay to be wrong, ZB. It happens to the best of us.

Then you can apply your mastery of being wrong to this document.

To quote the relevent portions--

...it may be possible to use an XML document or documents as a database in environments with small amounts of data, few users, and modest performance requirements...
...
Examples of more sophisticated data sets for which an XML document might be suitable as a database are personal contact lists (names, phone numbers, addresses, etc.), browser bookmarks, and descriptions of the MP3s you've stolen with the help of Napster.

And this is from a fairly ivory-tower author who barely considers anything below the enterprise level to be a "true" database.

[Stealth]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Stealth: What I meant is, name one thing Flash can do that nothing else can.

very true Stryke,

but then again... name anything that can do as many things as Flash can...  there is no language... Flash is the most flexible program there is

[mikhael]

Originally posted by ZylonBane
Then you can apply your mastery of being wrong to this document.

Talk about "[interpreting] according to their own very specific idea of what that expression means".  You've undermined your own point by citing someone who did precisely that of which you accused me!

Were I wrong, I'd at least have the balls to admit it. How about this: I'll stick to the correct, generalist definition, and you can stick to your (only correct in special circumstances) definition, 'kay?

[Stryke 9]

WWF ain't got nothin'.

Woah...I was kinda wondering before about what would happen if Mik and ZB were ever in the same room together...

Actually, my theory was that they'd either kill each other, cancel each other out, or the universe would come to an abrupt end. Kinda dissapointing, come to think of it.

[Stealth]

...

Flash 0wns

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Stealth
...

Flash 0wns

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by ZylonBane
And when you declare XML to be a database standard (an intentionally nebulous statement), and someone interprets that according to their own very specific idea of what that expression means, that's mikhael.

XML is a standard.
XML is used to store and transmit databases.
Therefore, it can reasonably be called a "database standard".

No, it lacks many of features required for a database standard IMO - no indexing (no sorting of key values for binary searches, no DBMS functionality, read only structure, XSL is volatile and complex and there is no SQL style query language).

 Database implies it would have to be ideally designed for storage, querying and retrieval of data - it is not.  It's more of a general purpose content definition language.  If XML can be called a 'database standard', then so can SGML, Java, C, C++ and any other language which can be used to roughly define data and it's meaning.

[Thorn]

Originally posted by Black Wolf
English - far enough into the future you'll just say "Make me a cool webpage...With blue bits on it".

You mean you cant do that now? No wonder my webdesign skills suck... I've been yelling at Homesite this whole time expecting it to do something...

[Kamikaze]

Originally posted by Thorn

You mean you cant do that now? No wonder my webdesign skills suck... I've been yelling at Homesite this whole time expecting it to do something...

Doing html in a text-based editor is gooo'....

[ZylonBane]

Originally posted by aldo_14
No, it lacks many of features required for a database standard IMO - no indexing (no sorting of key values for binary searches, no DBMS functionality, read only structure

I think I see what's happening here. Don't confuse the minimum definition with the minimum practical definition.

It's like if you ask someone to define "car", and they come back with "a 4-wheeled conveyance with an engine, a steering wheel, seatbelts, airbags, power steering, power brakes, headlights, windows, and a radio." Those are all nice, but it's far in excess of the baseline definition of a car.

And so it is with databases. Back in the stone age databases didn't have most of what's considered standard now. But that doesn't retroactively make them not "databases".

Sheesh, and to think I was slinging MODI STRUs and SELECT TERTIARYs while some of you were in diapers.