Will anyone see me this far back???
ok, it's been said before, and I'm pretty sure no one will see this post way back here, but...
1 - NO FEE FOR FLASHKIT! PLEASE!!!!! I love this site, but being independent makes it hard to float a site subscription.
2 - 2 versions of flashkit... one all in flash for us hi-speed no drag users, and an HTML one for when I (oops, I mean everyone) has to dial in on a laptop or some such.
3 - Go ASX! Let those who don't understand technology pay for our playgrounds.
4 - Get in touch with the Director OnLine Users group, they are all moving to flash anyway...
5 - Finally, HELP US NEWBIEES LEARN! We promise we won't take over your site traffic, and we have some great ideas too!
Just my humple onion...
-=SlavedHeart=-
All flash is the only way....
XML driven flash is the way to go. Flash doesn't necessarily=broadband (I think the above post touches on this). With sexy and Dynamic XML underneath...is there any other way? I'm certain that this is possible, adventageous, and must be the way...
Browsing Downloadable files
I hate downloading just three sound loops or just ten fonts at a time. It takes too long for those of us with high latency connections. Instead, you should offer a way to view files in large amounts (say, fifty at a time) or to view all in a catagory at once. I'd rather have it take five minutes to load a page than ten to load multiple.
==============================================
<!DOCTYPE pompousjerk PUBLIC
"-//PJERK//DTD PompousJerk 1.0//EN"
"http://www.crosswinds.net/~oriondigital/pjerk.dtd">
==============================================
Reality check for the Flash obsessed.
I honestly think that the Flashkit team is intelligent enough to know this already, but how about a reality check for anyone suggesting that every HTML site on the web can be replaced with Flash: There is a LOT of functionality in HTML that Flash simply doesn’t have, nor should it need to because it was designed to compliment HTML in most cases and only replace it when a site contains entirely “rich content”.
Take these forums for instance. Look at all of those radio buttons and checkboxes. Tab through them. Scroll up and down the page using a mouse-wheel. While some of that functionality can be parroted to a certain degree in Flash, it’s only done with a good deal of effort and even then often there are problems (use a Form field in Flash 5 with Netscape 6, type for a bit then hit backspace and watch the browser go back to a previous page!).
Flash finally has somewhat usable tools for server-side control with Flash 5, but that end is still very immature, relying on parsing POST/GET requests to exchange data, which seems absolutely archaic to those of us accustomed to nice server-side languages like PHP combined with SQL servers, etc.
Flash is a great tool when used appropriately, but maintaining a text-filled content site with Flash makes as much sense as trying to create sweeping animations with server-pushed HTML pages. It’s moronic. Use the right tools for the job.
Ever notice that Macromedia doesn't use 100% Flash?
Man, you´re owned by INTERNET.COM
dudes at FLASHKIT:
You´re looking for ways to make the site more financially viable to generate sufficient revenue to support the operation??
Are you kidding? You´re owned by INTERNET.COM: this "Internet Holding" has enough M1 to support 1000 Sites like this one (..and pay my rent in the meantime....!.
If you´re willing to start making an additional profit source I find that Cool (I come everyday here and I´ll have no problem to pay a fee), but making an argument like "we´re growing way to fast and we need money" sounds silly to your loyal members...
btw, This site is the number 1 Flash resource on the Net!!
KUDOS for your awesome work & Vision ,and I´ll be very happy to pay for a membership (..but please without bull****)
CASTHIGH
Re: Why not write a book?
Quote:
Originally posted by Rog
The collective authors/editors of Flashkit could easily take their experience and write a Flashkit book on using Flash. I'm certain that would be very well recieved. For myself and I'm sure others as well, it's easier to go through a tutorial with hard-copy in front of you while you work on the screen rather than hoping back and forth between your own work and a tutorial on a website. Not that I'm dissing the website's usefulness, far from it, just that a hard copy of some of this material would be a very welcome addition.
Sounds like fun, that's a good idea, I'm sure the book would be sold good, but I don't think collective authors/editors of Flashkit could easily find their time to write a book together, especially at this point when FK is under heavy load and many other new things are under construction. Keep that in mind.
cheers
Re: FlashKit v2.0 - 100% Flash
Ultrashock is a good example why you should NOT use flash for a resource-site. I saw it, waited, waited, waited, waited. Patience gone, closed browser, will probably not go back again because I HATE WAITING on webcontent. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. Yes, I've got a broadband connection but here's yet another example when flash should NOT be used. There are only a handful flashdesigners out there that know how to make a cool, streaming flash-website under 15 K, which IS possible. That's the way Flash should be used if you create a resource-site, not this way.
Sander
Lollibomb