Posted by Brian Cryer on 09/06/07 12:26

<saneplanet22@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1188958207.327868.55650@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> I am building a website that requires capability of users zooming in
> to examine perhaps hundreds of images. On every page there will be
> dozens of thumbs. By clicking each thumb, the user would be able to
> see a larger image and then "zoom-in" to see details.
>
> I have examined two technologies so far:
>
> One is flash-based, from http://www.zoomify.com/express.htm
> see my draft here: http://samsonhairrestoration.com/scratch/zoomify/1.htm
>
> The other is java based:
> http://www.xio.biz/htm_en/applets/XIOview/XIOview.htm
> see my draft here: http://samsonhairrestoration.com/scratch/xio_view/1.htm
>
> What we are trying to figure out is which technology provide the best
> balance between bandwidth requirement (time it would take for average
> user to see each image) and likelihood of the code running smoothly on
> the user's machine. It is very important to us that user does not have
> to download and install anything to see these images.

In my opinion Flash is a clear leader.

> Right now, i am leaning toward the java-based option. I have been able
> to reduce the size of each image to as little as 150kb (like the 1st
> image from right in my draft), while the flash option takes upward of
> 1.35mb and there's no ability to increase compression.
>
> The java code is also highly configurable, which the flash platform
> has virtually no options and I haven't been able to get any support
> from the manufacturer. I don't know Flash myself and wouldn't have the
> time to learn to write my own swf file.

Do you know Java? If you can maintain and adapt the Java solution yourself
then that for me would make Java the choice. Otherwise Flash remains the
better of the two options.

> Also my totally unscientific impression is that Java is more likely to
> be available than Flash, despite what Adobe would want one to
> believe.

I've not seen any figures on it, but I think Flash is more likley to be
available than Java.

> Or am i wrong? I don't want to invest the many hours it would take to
> build this site and then realize I bet on a loser.

I think both will be around for the foreseeable future, so if you make the
"wrong" choice you won't be backing a looser just second best.
--
Brian Cryer
www.cryer.co.uk/brian

[Back to original message]