More Debate of Flash Usage for Clients

Just only yesterday I was talking about When to Use Flash? since every client or arrogant designer/company thinks Flash is the future, its the norm and its a necessity in the Internet world today.

All I can say to that is, “Bah! Humbug!”.

I came across an interesting article written by Eric Webster and he was talking about how his team now has a solution to not only limit themselves to replacing titles with Flash text.

If you’ve never heard of it before, Scalable Inman Flash Replacement (sIFR) had become the best solution to replace old Verdana or Tahoma looking fonts as titles with more appropriate looking fonts in accordance to the theme of a website. In other words, if the website was about kids and you’re bored of using Comic Sans MS then this was the solution for it.

Version 2.0 of sIFR was released on 27 April 2005 and you read all about the history and what’s news with it over at Mike Davidson’s website.

So in conjunction of when to use Flash, the commenters over at Eric Webster were complimenting the breakthrough yet some opened up and questioned the need of Content Injection in Flash With XHTML and sIFR.

If all Malaysian Flash designers knew this, I think the problem of already non-existant value of Flash usage would be heightened due to the excuse they could use in protection of saying that they did a website in xHTML though it’s fully Flash based.

There’ll be no end to this and no one in Malaysia will be able to grasp the actual value needed to be contribute into the website.

Comments

Have something to say? Leave a comment