blech:
posted on 2003/09/12 22:10
Well, yes it is. On the other hand, a web free of crappy Flash plugins (but not necessarily Flash content; nothing wrong with a standalone player when you decide to watch badgers and mushrooms) doesn't look so bad from here.
Ah, I see slashdot also picked up on it.
[ 0 days, 18 hours later ]
As did Tom, although I wonder how he makes out that a web without Flash is 'less accessible and useful' than one with.
[ 0 days, 21 hours later ]
jerakeen:
Ah, ok, his point is that a web with flash is more accessible that a web full of broken pages with 'flash goes in here' placeholders. Fair enough.
hitherto:
I haven't seen any real commentary on how this is going to affect Macromedia, and they don't seem to have press released anything.
But you'd have thought they must be pretty gutted. Whilst I'm sure people will adjust to using Flash as an externally-viewable format, if people can't embed Flash for navigation and stuff, it's going to rip a bit of a hole in Macromedia's customer base.
We hate you all. Yes, especially you. Sod off and DIE