Ahab raises a decent point, but I think that the real paradox facing the web and the hinderance to Flash is the need to create for the lowest common denominator. Just because I make a DHTML menubar on a corporate website doesn't mean that I plan on doing the entire site in DHTML, and more often than not, I will have a plain HTML navigation system to fall back on in case a browser is not DHTML enabled.

Its this sort of dillema that faces all design on the web right now, and leaves us stuck in a cycle of boring designs. How many tabbed-folder e-commerce sites can we stand? The reason that these designs are used is because they set a prescedent which makes it easy for the user to interact with a site. It is familiar. Therefore, the only place we are going to see innovative design is on the art and design sites, where expression is more important than instant recognizability and bowing to corporate pressure.

It *is* important to remember that content is king. Flash is but one tool in any number available to web designers, and definately one of the more robust ones. Even this site isn't done entirely in Flash. (I, too, have seen way too many "WOW! Zooming text and thumping techno intro! Now I know the future of the web has arrived!" sites).

I apologize for being long-winded in my posts, but I think that this topic is as good as any to perhaps make a call to all of the great designers and content creators to continue "evangelizing" Flash, but also to show what can be done by putting out outstanding sites. I think its good to have a dialogue open to both sides of the debate (of course a site like Flashkit will have a lot more pro-Flashers), and only through a debate like this will we begin to see what needs to be done come into a clearer focus. So, while we don't necessarily have to agree with dack.com, I'd say that the opinion is important, if onlt to create this sort of debate among the people who are making the goods.

--Chris