Posted by Brendan Gillatt on 10/09/07 15:09

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:32:22 +0100, Brendan Gillatt
> <brendanREMOVETHIS@brendanREMOVETHISgillatt.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> *snicker*
>>>>
>>>> You retard! That won't even work on IE 5 on teh Mac!
>>>>
>>>> Not to mention:
>>>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/_test_platform/URAMORON.swf
>>>>
>>>> LOL, you can achieve the same effect in Flash with NO HTML or CSS code
>>>> and it's ONLY 280 bytes...that's a nearly FORTY PERCENT reduction in
>>>> size from yer idiot bloat code! 100 Kilobytes, what the fuck are you
>>>> thinkin, Sunshine? All you stupid ass gawd damn poser, wannabe,
>>>> college flunkie, halfass retards are all alike...runnin the fuck at
>>>> the mouth about shit you don't know about and then getting BITCH
>>>> SLAPPED for it.
>
>>> Oh wait, sorry, my bad. Did I say 280 bytes? Silly me, using default
>>> object names. *alters object names* There we go, now it's 270 bytes!
>>> ^_^
>>>
>>> One should probably also mention the fact that Flash allows for
>>> custom, embedded font types and proper font anti-aliasing, both of
>>> which HTML is wholly incapable of achieving.
>
>> Sure it is - I know for a fact it can do so on a Solaris graphics
>> workstation. Can flash do that? Ummmm.....
>
> You don't have any fuckin cl00 as to what you're babbling about, do
> you? Tell us, how ~exactly~ is it that your HTML code is magically
> embedding fonts into itself? Show us the code, Goober! LOL, this
> should be good for a laugh or six.
>
> And as for the anti-aliasing...um, that has nothing to do with the
> operating system directly so much as it has to deal with the browser
> and no browser I'm aware of has proper font-antialiasing (mostly cause
> it's seen as being too resource heavy, so they simply don't support
> it). In Flash you have the option to turn on and off anti-aliasing
> not only on the Flash file as a whole, but individual objects within
> the Flash construct can be dynamically set for anti-aliasing.

Ah I see where you're comprehension is failing. The font that a website
is displayed in should be up to the users to decide - why shouldn't
they? Their is no way that flash gives a user choice. And anti-aliasing?
That's also the user's choice.

Flash does one sort of ant-aliasing - grayscale. It doesn't have support
at all for sub-pixel anti aliasing which is far, far more powerful on
lcd monitors. It is up to the operating system and the user to choose a
display method that is most suited for them. If flash _did_ attempt to
use something as nice as sub-pixel rendering (which is included in
Windows under the brand of ClearType), it wouldn't know which type of
screen the user is using. Putting cleartype on a CRT is horrid.

> It
> should be noted though that I haven't checked on IE7, so it's possible
> that, that browser has support. But again, the problem there is
> inconsistency and cross-incompatibility. With Flash, the way it
> looks/works on one set will be exactly the way it looks/works on
> another setup, even under a different OS and browser.

Which should be the user's choice. How do you go about providing for
people with poor eyesight and people browsing on their PVRs like I do?

> And, once
> again, Flash is smaller.

No, not always.

> with a greater level of cross
> compatibility.

Did you really just say that? Did you actually say flash has a wider
cross-compatibility than plain HTML?

Yet again I am astounded by your unbelievable short-sightedness.

- --
Brendan Gillatt
brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk
http://www.brendangillatt.co.uk
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBACD7433
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFHC5nFkA9dCbrNdDMRAjOVAKDHgHqmb1F/jy17d3ZVgTa6+1Z3OwCghf5n
nwRGsjQjAVdPxQFrfdreZ7Y=
=2zzT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Back to original message]