Firefox+Flash

[Chuck Swiger]

On Sep 15, 2006, at 10:29 AM, George Allan wrote:
>>> I can't think of a single site that I use that needs Flash; I don't
>>> install it even on a Windows or MacOS X box.
>>
>> I don't normally use it either, but there are sites that do videos  
>> programs
>> that are all in flash and others that use it for graphic  
>> demonstrations.
>> So, it is a feature that is desired by many.  It pains me to have
>> to reboot to Microsloth to see something on those sites.
>
> You can visit www.linuxcbt.com (cue the Linux jokes) for an  
> illustrative
> example.  All the videos are in swf format, most likely generated  
> using
> vnc2swf (available in ports, FWIW) or something similar.  As a side
> note, mplayer doesn't support the swf format either.

That site seems to be selling instructional videos for $200 a pop.

While I suppose some people would pay that much to watch something in  
Flash like how to configure sendmail, rather than read the docs that  
come with the sendmail source tarball (or buy the O'Reilly "Bat"  
book, or subscribe to comp.mail.sendmail and ask there), and they are  
welcome to make such a decision, it would not be the decision I would  
make myself.

Responding to another point made in this thread:

On Sep 15, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Robert Huff wrote:
> 	I am running into an increasing number of web sites - including
> those of mega-corporations - where the home page is 100% Flash,
> leaving no way to get inside if you don't do .swf.

The major problem with such an approach is that pure-Flash-based  
sites prevent critical aspects of browser functionality from working  
as designed-- things like bookmarks, the back button, and so forth.

Once in a while, I send a polite message to  
<webmaster at some.corporate.site> indicating that a pure Flash site is  
a problem for those people who do not have Flash, and that if they  
decide to exclude potential customers (or partners, or investors,  
etc) as a result, well, doing so is their loss.

-- 
-Chuck