Re: FLASH: Flash & eCommerce

[Russell E. Unger]

Michael...


> So let me get this straight, your saying that MS

> random breaking of a previously supported feature of

> the .swf format is simply a business opportunity for

> those with 'full site development skills' in your

> view?


Nope, not saying that.  I'm saying that there are other ways to handle the

situation and there are other ways around this.  There always are.  I told

you before that I'm not trying to offend you.  I'm trying to say that you

should not limit your view of things, and that is all.  I'm not siding

either way; I'm not a huge fan of MS or of MACR at this point in time.


> Futhermore, 'how fairly' and 'how simple' a fix

> this is obviously depends on how much information was

> formerly printable in the .swf format, how much

> running these new scripts will impact server

> performance and download time. Elsewhere, I spend a

> good deal of time promoting and justifying the use of

> Flash, thanks, and the former ability of the client to

> print exactly and EASILY (without having to click a

> button, open a new window, wait for an often dog slow

> .asp or .pl script to run) what they saw on the screen

> was once one of the benefits of swf, and one I frankly

> hate losing.


I've never really had a "dog-slow" asp script; I've had slow database

servers and over-usage of connections that have slowed pages down, but I

don't think you're pointing the right blame...at least in that part.  I've

seen small .swfs load up slower than a lot of .asp pages.  Promoting and

justifying the usage of Flash is your own perogative.  I wouldn't recommend

promoting to really ANYONE; most people will know as to whether or not they

need it or want it.  This is actually a bit incorrect, but they will come to

you and ask you what you recommend, etc.


This is rapidly turning into a "this and that" argument.  I don't think

you're going to see that I'm fairly ambiguous here.  I'm not siding with MS

or MACR; I'm simply suggesting there are other solutions.


> My problem is that a site which was done, signed,

> sealed, delivered, now no longer works as it did, and

> now needs more work to fix the problem with printing.


Yes, and that's not an issue for MACR or MS; it's an issue for you and

perhaps the way you write your contracts.  Are you saying that you do not

have a stipulation regarding "technology changes"?  Technology is changine

for us every single day and there are competitors all over the place, just

like there are for you and for me.  If someone changes something on me (ie

MACR or MS), I have a clause in my contract that states that I will not be

liable for those changes in technology and should they change the scope of

the project I will let my client know asap and we will sit down and revist

the project.


> As far as using .swf as an e-commerce format, I think

> that it will not be ready until MACR can assure

> developers that the next upgrade in MSIE will not

> randomly break previously supported .SWF features.


I've not seen the Generator 2, but I would hazard to guess that it would

assist a bit.


Of course, MACR has conveniently forgotten the nice PR people like all of us

on this list have given them and they've gotten heady thinking that we'll

all continue to track them down.  Why, just today Adobe contacted me wanting

me to Beta some of their new product that will be out shortly...and I'm

guessing it to be a competitor with some sort of .swf format...



------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managerchinwag [dot] com

.  Problems to:

helpchinwag [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managerchinwag [dot] com