Comments on: Project: CNN Image Gallery http://www.kennybunch.com/blog/2007/07/project-cnn-image-gallery/ Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:45:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Kenny Bunch http://www.kennybunch.com/blog/2007/07/project-cnn-image-gallery/comment-page-1/#comment-147 Kenny Bunch Wed, 11 Jul 2007 13:54:17 +0000 http://www.kennybunch.com/blog/?p=58#comment-147 PJ, I think it's based on a few things. First, Flash is a lot quicker to develop and get the look and feel right. Also, you have the notion that a Flash asset is a single instance. It makes it completely portable. For instance, if you want to snap that into a viral widget, it's already ready and will work everywhere (a lot of sites disable js code). The code is also lot more manageable and debugable too. Some of the js engines are getting better at catching issues, but due to the complete dynamic nature of the language it's harder to find bugs up front. Could the gallery be done in DHTML? Certainly. You can do a lot more complex apps than that with DHTML. So this one could have been an either or situation, but it was just simpler in Flash I agree with you on using DHTML when needed. I was a DHTML wizard before doing Flash and still use it when it's the better solution. If you look at the rest of CNN, you will notice a LOT of DHTML going on. In these places it makes more sense. The functionality screams for it and would be a bad choice for Flash. It's about picking the right technology for the job. PJ,
I think it’s based on a few things. First, Flash is a lot quicker to develop and get the look and feel right. Also, you have the notion that a Flash asset is a single instance. It makes it completely portable. For instance, if you want to snap that into a viral widget, it’s already ready and will work everywhere (a lot of sites disable js code). The code is also lot more manageable and debugable too. Some of the js engines are getting better at catching issues, but due to the complete dynamic nature of the language it’s harder to find bugs up front. Could the gallery be done in DHTML? Certainly. You can do a lot more complex apps than that with DHTML. So this one could have been an either or situation, but it was just simpler in Flash

I agree with you on using DHTML when needed. I was a DHTML wizard before doing Flash and still use it when it’s the better solution. If you look at the rest of CNN, you will notice a LOT of DHTML going on. In these places it makes more sense. The functionality screams for it and would be a bad choice for Flash. It’s about picking the right technology for the job.

]]> By: P.J. Onori http://www.kennybunch.com/blog/2007/07/project-cnn-image-gallery/comment-page-1/#comment-146 P.J. Onori Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:25:24 +0000 http://www.kennybunch.com/blog/?p=58#comment-146 It is indeed very nice work - my only question is why their decision for Flash. As someone who develops Flash applications, I definitely understand the appeal and benefits of Flash/Flex, but I am beginning to think that the basic slideshow paradigm, is more suited for implementation in advanced Javascript. There are definitely times where Flash would be the better solution (i.e. high motion, rich interaction models, etc.) but for 90% of slideshows out there, Javascript can take care of it. This is by no means a knock on your work - it's great. Rather, it's a question on why you think the client decided to go the Flash route? Any thoughts on that? It is indeed very nice work – my only question is why their decision for Flash. As someone who develops Flash applications, I definitely understand the appeal and benefits of Flash/Flex, but I am beginning to think that the basic slideshow paradigm, is more suited for implementation in advanced Javascript. There are definitely times where Flash would be the better solution (i.e. high motion, rich interaction models, etc.) but for 90% of slideshows out there, Javascript can take care of it.

This is by no means a knock on your work – it’s great. Rather, it’s a question on why you think the client decided to go the Flash route? Any thoughts on that?

]]>