"Evolution, Criticisms, and Debate"

It seems like everyone’s a critic these days. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. In the past the only opinion we were able to hear about products were from journalists that we never met. With the technologies of today we are able to access thousands of opinions of any product with the Internet (with a strong emphasis on blogs). Granted, you have no idea who the people are who are writing these opinions, but the key here is the consumer aspect. Who better to hear the pros and cons than straight from the person who is using these products for hours upon hours, day in and day out? We need to have more opinions to construct greater debate into what will and what will not be suitable for the market of tomorrow. There is no reason to cling onto a specific method if there is a better way of doing it. There is no reason to look at it any other way. Then again, that’s just my opinion.

A current debate is over the future of HTML, and the possible threat of Flash becoming the industry standard. One of the key elements to this argument is over the complications that can arrive with HTML coding. For instance, it is almost impossible to determine what the final product on your screen is going to look like on another. A webpage that fully operates on Microsoft’s Internet Explorer may look completely different on Apple’s Safari, or Netscape. Many would side with Flash due to the aspect of vector imaging. Whenever something is based from a mathematical equation, it is virtually impossible to have inaccuracy. Another argument is over the actual speed of an HTML page compared with a Flash based webpage. If a webpage is properly constructed with Flash, it can run just as smoothly as a page that was designed with HTML. Some factors that need to be considered of course, is the size of the elements that goes into the design, and naturally Internet connection speed. But, with dial-up connections basically becoming non-existent, there is almost no dispute on this issue.

Critics of Flash claim that if their technology was everything it is cracked up to be, why doesn’t someone like Amazon utilize their technology instead of embracing the simple layout of their current website. There is a simple solution to this: it takes time. Everyone is paranoid in the beginning of starting something new. Just look at television. None of us today can even imagine a world without the tube. And pretty much everyone born these days will be able to say the same thing about the Internet. In the early days of both of these standard household features it was a slow start like anything else. Just because Amazon hasn’t jumped on the wagon in the early stages doesn’t mean that it won’t become the standard. Take a look at a website like www.comcastic.com. It’s a bit ironic that Comcast is namely know for it’s accelerated cable television and it’s high speed internet, but it is nowhere near being the only one who has a website that is completely structured from Flash.

Currently we find a lot of HTML websites that contain pieces of Flash related constructions. One of the key elements to a website is to make people want to actually enjoy being there, giving reasons to come back just like you would at a restaurant. If you go into a fancy restaurant and have an obnoxious waiter or waitress, chances are you’re never going to visit there again. Whereas a trip to your local McDonald’s you’re going to expect to sit next to a family with a few screaming children, but it’s not going to affect you from visiting within the near future. The same thing can be said about a website. If you’re looking at your bank records you are certainly not going to enjoy an audio/video clip randomly coming on and tearing your face straight off. But if you’re going to look at a website for Nickelodeon you’re going to expect animations to pretty much greet you at the door. It’s all about time and place.

It seems from the research I’ve gathered the only people that are really arguing in favor of HTML based applications are the same people that have been using the program for years and are a group of those people that just do not want to accept change. That’s not necessarily a bad thing either. If a certain group of people didn’t refuse to put their books down whenever T.V. became the norm, books would be non-existent. I happen to love books and reading myself, so I wouldn’t want to imagine a world like that. So for technology to successfully push forward, there has to be at least a few pulling it back. Can anyone debate that?

For any further reading on this debate, be sure to check out http://www.uservision.co.uk/usability_articles/usability_flash.asp