SpeedDemond29
Does anyone know of a cheap, good, easy software I could use to create a Flash website? Prefferably for Mac? If not, then Windows version will work. Cheap as in $30-$70.
Inviato Mon 18 Jun 07 @ 7:23 pm
sbangs
http://www.trendyflash.com/
easy advanced site and intro builder
easy advanced site and intro builder
Inviato Tue 19 Jun 07 @ 12:31 am
SpeedDemond29
Thanks Skyfxl.... I had this big feeling you were going to answer this question
Inviato Tue 19 Jun 07 @ 1:47 am
digimixer
Also consider Swish Max ($90)
http://www.swishzone.com
i used it to make my site..
http://www.angelpulse.co.uk/home.html
http://www.swishzone.com
i used it to make my site..
http://www.angelpulse.co.uk/home.html
Inviato Tue 19 Jun 07 @ 11:25 am
PFD50
I would go with Swish.
To be honest just buy something from www.templatemonster.com and tweek it
To be honest just buy something from www.templatemonster.com and tweek it
Inviato Tue 19 Jun 07 @ 3:56 pm
Andrew87
Personally I can't stand flash websites. I don't mind the odd flash application here and there but prefer sites to use javascript.
Inviato Tue 19 Jun 07 @ 6:37 pm
digimixer
Andrew87 wrote :
Personally I can't stand flash websites. I don't mind the odd flash application here and there but prefer sites to use javascript.
Although i respect you opinion i'm not sure how you can be so general with your hate for flash sites? Flash can easily be used to to the same effect as plain html sites with or with out java script, it's all a matter of how the sites are desgined and implemented. It may be that you've visisted flash sites not even realising that they were flash?
It is tendancy that most flash sites have lengthy animations and load times, but that is down to the designers preference, not a limitation of flash.
I feel you also tend to find that many sites which have content changing frequently will normally plump with html where as sites whose content changes only occasionally will fairly often opt for flash. Obviously it also depends on the company / product(s) in question.
Ultimately i feel flash gives you extra options, you can use it and be as subtle or as bold as you you want to be.
Again, this is my opinion, not fact, just my thoughts.
Inviato Wed 20 Jun 07 @ 10:14 am
Andrew87
Flash sites for a start require the adobe flash plugin. Not great for browsing sites on all devices, however most Windows and Linux (not sure about MAC) computers have flash. Browsing flash sites on other portable devices is generally a no go, some very tight networks won't even have the flash plugin installed and the content won't be accessible.
Most amateur flash sites are bandwidth hogs. People get too carried away with adding images and sound, not understanding what the different compression options are about and just making things too bloated. I don't like bloated, I even disabled the sidebar in Vista (I would have kept it if I had 2gb of ram).
I do know that the lengthy animations and load times are direct influence of a designers creation, but I wouldn't call it their preference. Once again, amateur designers will probably be working with local copies and cached copies - they will also feel that everything is relevant and get excited by features which aren't neccessary but will increase loading times. There's no need for it. A pre-load can be added, but then you're just wasting your audiences time.
It's a shame that flash video players have become so popular too. The image quality is far inferior compared to the h264 codec. Consequently, Youtube have entered an agreement with Apple to convert the whole site to offer h264 videos in the future. This is good news as we'll experience better image quality with he-aac support at lower bitrates. Saves bandwidth, also saves time streaming as buffering times can be shorter.
Where flash is great is scalable vector animations and graphics interactivity, but how many people seriously need those. For examples of community interactive sites, take Digg for example. In general, I prefer sites to be to the point. PHP/MySQL is a nice approach, there are so many amazing open source scripts available which cator for every need. It's undoubtedly more server intensive than flash but offers so many more options. Html also allows for very easy RSS integration which is something that most modern websites are utilising. What's not to like about a DJ having an RSS feed of his/her latest mixes and news? You're also not going to get very good rankings on search engines if your site is entirely flash.
Flash sites are exactly as the name suggests, flash. Often too fanciful and horribly slow. It's not just your average joe sites which suffer these problems but larger ones too as I learned when looking through houses for rent, terribly unprofessional even if it doesn't look so.
Most amateur flash sites are bandwidth hogs. People get too carried away with adding images and sound, not understanding what the different compression options are about and just making things too bloated. I don't like bloated, I even disabled the sidebar in Vista (I would have kept it if I had 2gb of ram).
I do know that the lengthy animations and load times are direct influence of a designers creation, but I wouldn't call it their preference. Once again, amateur designers will probably be working with local copies and cached copies - they will also feel that everything is relevant and get excited by features which aren't neccessary but will increase loading times. There's no need for it. A pre-load can be added, but then you're just wasting your audiences time.
It's a shame that flash video players have become so popular too. The image quality is far inferior compared to the h264 codec. Consequently, Youtube have entered an agreement with Apple to convert the whole site to offer h264 videos in the future. This is good news as we'll experience better image quality with he-aac support at lower bitrates. Saves bandwidth, also saves time streaming as buffering times can be shorter.
Where flash is great is scalable vector animations and graphics interactivity, but how many people seriously need those. For examples of community interactive sites, take Digg for example. In general, I prefer sites to be to the point. PHP/MySQL is a nice approach, there are so many amazing open source scripts available which cator for every need. It's undoubtedly more server intensive than flash but offers so many more options. Html also allows for very easy RSS integration which is something that most modern websites are utilising. What's not to like about a DJ having an RSS feed of his/her latest mixes and news? You're also not going to get very good rankings on search engines if your site is entirely flash.
Flash sites are exactly as the name suggests, flash. Often too fanciful and horribly slow. It's not just your average joe sites which suffer these problems but larger ones too as I learned when looking through houses for rent, terribly unprofessional even if it doesn't look so.
Inviato Fri 22 Jun 07 @ 11:59 pm