|
|
Posted by SpaceGirl on 10/08/07 21:04
Travis Newbury wrote:
> On Oct 8, 4:25 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> So are you saying it is NOT faster to develop in HTML/CSS/PHP? Or are
>>>> you just blowing hot air?
>>> I am saying since he is not a flash developer his statement is
>>> irrelevant. Answer this, who can run a 5K faster? You or me?
>> No, it's not irrelevant. And you didn't answer my question. So, from
>> the hot air you're blowing, my only assumption is he is correct.
>
> Of course it's irrelevant. He has no clue how to create a Flash so
> how could he possibly be able to compare the time to create a site
> using both methods?
>
> It is exactly the same as answering my question who runs a 5K faster,
> you or me. You can not answer that because you have no idea how fast
> I can run.
>
>>> I never said it was not a lousy application for Flash. (I do think it
>>> looks nice though)
>> CSS/HTML can look nice, also.
>
> So what. Again, irrelevant. "Is that Blond pretty? Redheads can be
> pretty too...
>
>
C'mon guys, keep this light :) This is an interesting discussion so
far. Yes of course CSS+HTML sites can look pretty... so long as you
stick with the page metaphor. It rapidly gets complicated if you try to
do anything a little different. Which is also fine; that's where Flash
sits perfectly.
--
x theSpaceGirl (miranda)
http://www.northleithmill.com
-.-
Kammy has a new home: http://www.bitesizedjapan.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|