|
|
Posted by philiptdotcom on 10/18/07 16:48
On Oct 17, 6:06 am, "www.jrdesignstudio.com" <i...@jrdesignstudio.com>
wrote:
> Cheers guys,
>
> So the Green Man is definitely going! the London bit will be
> shortened, and will ask for either html or flash. that's the way
> forward.
> Many thanks for the comments.
> Any more comments apart from the green man will be most appreciated.
>
> On 17 Oct, 16:41, Bernhard Sturm <sturmnixs...@datacomm.ch> wrote:
>
> >www.jrdesignstudio.comwrote:
> > > Hello everyone,
>
> > > We have just created a Flash website, and are about to launch an html
> > > version of it. I would greatly appreciate all the specialists'
> > > comments on this work! Please fire away with all your remarks and
> > > suggestions, whatever harsh they are. I will be thankful for all
> > > posts.
>
> > >www.jrdesignstudio.com
>
> > it tells me that I need a plug in (whatever that is, I just an ordinary
> > customer who would like to spend some money on good web design, and I
> > don't want to be bothered by techno-speech). So you are telling me that
> > I need a plug in? How dare you! I believe you don't need customers, dude.
>
> > :-)
> > bernhard
>
> > --www.daszeichen.ch
> > remove nixspam to reply
The "way forward" is to present the HTML page. If I were presented
with a choice between HTML and Flash, I'd simply forget about it and
go somewhere else. PRESENT THE CONTENT in HTML *immediately*. Don't
make people make a choice before they get to the content. Then, you
say, if users already have the content, why bother to create the Flash
at all? Funny thing; I say that, too...
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|