On Aug 1, 6:27 pm, Onideus Mad Hatter <use...@backwater-
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 09:37:29 -0700, Chaddy2222
> <spamlovermailbox-sicur...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >On Aug 2, 2:30 am, Travis Newbury <TravisNewb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Aug 1, 9:47 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-sicur...@yahoo.com.au>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Or comercial sites for that matter I mean most comercial
> >> > sites useing it use a combonation of HTML and CSS, why cause they work
> >> > and provide a much better user experience then Flash.
> >> Interesting most commercial sites I visit have flash. DAMN the web
> >> big
> >> >http://webpagesthatsuck.com
> >> This is an opinion of the author. If you read about about flash on the
> >> web, then you will get that author's opinion... The web is WAY too
> >> big to be worrying about this. A company has to find the right mix of
> >> bland and shazam. It is different for everyone.
> >This is very true. I was just stateing that it is just plain wrong to
> >believe that one tool will be perfect for all things on the web.
> >I mean if that was not the case then google would be useing Flash for
> >everything on the site. But they don't.
> ...uh, I would enjoy that point while it's still relevant. Given some
> of the features of ActionScript 3 (like the net.socket) coupled with
> the fact that Flash Lite is gearing up to be the development platform
> of choice for mobile hardware...yeah...Google probably isn't too far
> off from switching over a lot of their stuff to Flash...especially if
> they want to get more into the whole web application field.
We're not going to see google search itself replaced with Flash any
time soon (if ever). But it would be nice to experiment to see if it
is possible to produce something as usable as google in Flash.