Toby A Inkster wrote:
> Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> > WRONG! You need a browser to view a website and a computer to go
> > online and an Internet connection to visit a site, so really, out of
> > all that, installing Flash is pretty much the EASIEST part of the
> > equation and the one that requires the LEAST amount of effort.
> WRONG! You don't need a computer to go online. Any vaguely recent mobile
> phone has web access. One could argue that modern phones are actually
> low-powered computers, but then you need to accept that there are a huge
> number devices capable of connecting to the Internet but incapable of
> running Flash.
> While there are about 850 M people who access the Internet via traditional
> computers, there are 750 M who use their phones. (Yes, there is an
> overlap!) But guess which group is growing fastest? The cross-over is
> expected to happen later this year or early next year. That is, in twelve
> months, more people will access the Internet through their phones than
> through traditional computers.
> And there's room for a lot more growth. There are a lot of phones out
> there which aren't now being used for Internet access, but will do as the
> prices come down, data speeds go up, and it becomes more socially "normal".
> There are 2.7 *BILLION* mobile phones out there! That's more than the
> number of televisions and cars in the world *ADDED TOGETHER*!
> In Western Europe, mobile phone per-capita penetration is at over 110%.
> Hong Kong and Taiwan are nearing 150% per-capita penetration. Per-capita:
> yes, that includes newborn babies and deaf old women.
> Mobile phones do not support Flash. Yes, there are one or two edge cases:
> Windows Mobile-based phones that support Flash Lite, but by and large,
> mobile phones do not support Flash. You effectively need an Intel
> processor running Windows, Mac OS or Linux. (There is also a Mac PowerPC
> version of Flash, but performance on it sucks.)
> We desktop users are becoming dinosaurs; old fuddy-duddies. In 2-3 years
> time, a web page that requires a desktop computer to view will, to many,
> seem as bizarre as a fast-food drive-through that requires its customers
> to use a horse and cart.
> Flash currently works on a small majority of Internet devices, but that
> will soon become a large minority.
> Pretty much anything that has an Internet connection supports XHTML 1.0
> Strict and HTML 4.01 Strict, and that's not likely to change at any time
> over the next 5-10 years.
> Learning and using HTML, and server-side technologies that serve HTML to
> clients is a valuable skill, and will stand you in good stead for the next
> decade against a changing and unpredictable online landscape.
Ahh yes, the entire mobile phone / PDA audience will soon grow over
the next year or so and as per usual it's the adult industry that's
began the trend toward it.
That and dam reality television!. Mind you I have just recently been
watching the latest series of Big Brother over here.
> > Um, hello, the only time you would be using a screen reader is IF YOU
> > WERE FUCKING BLIND! And if you were blind...why in the fuck would you
> > have Flash enabled?
> A blind person may share a computer with a fully sighted person.
Or have to do rediculious (um rediculous) communications units as a
part of his university course (actually the stuff on new technology
last year was quite good and guess where it's pritty much heading, yep
towards the growing use of mobile devices (even my BrailleNote has web
access, well it would if I got a new motherboard for it.
> > And everything else being Flash based. Really, the problem isn't with
> > Flash, the problem is with those third party software developers who
> > are simply lazy fucking antediluvian bastards. I mean if Google can
> > setup their search engine to spider all the text content in a Flash
> > file...yeah, anybody can do it, there is no excuse.
> It doesn't *spider* Flash content. It *indexes* it. There's a key
> difference: it cannot follow links embedded in Flash.
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz