Macromedia Flash3 question

[flowersource]

I have put a Flash3 'movie' (.swf file) on my index.shtml page http://www.flowersource.net/index.shtml

I have also put the same 'movie' on an empty page here http://www.flowersource.net/Untitled-2.shtml thinking that maybe some java script or graphic on the index.shtml might be causing this.

The whole file is only 5K-6K in size and just looks weird when loading. I feel like it should load faster and 'cleaner'.

I have seen many Flash3 enhanced pages that loaded fast and clean.

It looks the same to me in IE5 and Netscape 4.51

I would appreciate you guys with Flash3 experience taking a look and let me know if this is the way it should look or maybe I need to change some settings or something when I export the .swf to Dreamweaver2.

It does seem to look better on a re-load (after it has been cached)

I want to learn to use Flash3, but not if the file size savings is going to make the files look like this. I load 30K+ .jpg or .gif files faster and cleaner than this in either browser.

Thanks,

Mike
[This message has been edited by flowersource (edited 05-17-99)]

[Justin]

Hey Mike,

I think it loaded pretty good for me - honestly I was surprised at the load time - it took about 2 seconds (on a 56k, not a cable modem or anything) and was playing.

Nice job, BTW :)

PS - as much as I HATE java applets, that banner thing is kinda cool hehe :)[nbsp][nbsp]I also was thiniking about how much smaller the Flash banner is than a comparable GIF would be - 5-6 k is pretty small for a banner with smooth animation like that :D

------------------
Justin Nelson
FutureQuest Support
[This message has been edited by Justin (edited 05-17-99)]

[flowersource]

Thanks Justin, :D
I think I found the problem. I had simply used Dreamweaver2 to insert the .swf file into the html.

I found out that to set ALL of the parameters, I needed to use "Aftershock" to generate the complete code which includes all of the parameter settings. Once I did that and inserted that code into the html, all was well.

I discovered one other thing...if you right click on a .swf running in the browser, you get that little menu which includes..."high quality". Well apparently my browser was not automatically loading in that mode (sometimes yes, sometimes no).

Now if I can learn enough about Flash3 to decrease the size of some more of the graphics and banners, I'll be in good shape. I'm not worried about compatibility with browsers, the newer versions have the plug-ins for shockwave files and I never have worried about the viewers that I lose because they use browser versions 3 or earlier. (Browsers are free, what's up with viewers using ver2 and win95?) seems to me that if the 'box' can handle win95, they need to upgrade their browser.

I didn't used to like banners either, but it seems that is all I do now is make banners. I got into the nasty habit of making free banners for my paid advertisers...hey, whatever it takes! Those advertisers pay 6 months or 12 months in advance...I feel an obligation to help get them traffic from my site. I don't do 'by the month' ads...I also slide in my Clicketrade banners which pay nicely.

So if it looks like I'll be able to get any real functional use out of Flash3, I'll trade in my trial copy for the real thing.

later,
Mike

[hearts]

what good is this "flash" for?

I have this habit if leaving a site if it requires a plugin.[nbsp][nbsp]*really*

Does anyone know the percentage of users? Is this worth it? I suppose my questions would be annoying, however, i really want to know what is so good about it. Does it work with all browsers? How does this effect webtv (not that it really matters) -- and is this compatable with older browsers and AOL users?

---- no more questions your honor ----

-----------
hearts
-----

[Charles Capps]

Well, as it's a plugin, any browser after the 2.0 days can use it, even Opera, unless I'm mistaken.[nbsp][nbsp]It's included as a standard feature with some Netscape distributions now, and can be obtained with IE...[nbsp][nbsp]I'd make an uneducated guess that between 50 and 67 percent of users have Flash or Shockwave...[nbsp][nbsp]Pretty good.
------------------
"Okay, so I'm not "SANE" so to speak, but uh... I'm the lovable kind of psycho"
http://solareclipse.net/

[flowersource]

This is an excerpt from the http://www.macromedia.com/ website:
While Flash is designed to display blazingly fast and beautiful Web designs, interfaces, navigation, and animation, Shockwave is used to display more complex Web applications, such as online games, and other interactive entertainment and applications.[nbsp][nbsp]They say that 79.8% of browsers are compatible. Flash is used to create animated vector-based Web sites, streaming audio and video.

Some people don't like banners, some people don't like movies or music/sound on a website. I personally don't like inappropiate music or audio on a website, but if it loads faster than I can leave the website, I will stay there. Flash does what it does...FAST. That is, provided the designer or creator intended to use the product to make smaller files.

Just about any player plugin will run a .swf and if the browser won't, you have an alt image pasted in place.

Looks like fun to me, and a major improvement over animated gifs.

Mike

[Justin]

I am extremely picky about plugins - I almost NEVER download them. But Flash is the only one I have downloaded, and it's definately worth having :)[nbsp][nbsp]Considering the smooth animation on your banner at only 5k, that's incredible - a GIF would take probably like 15 or 20k to get that kind of animation.

What I cannot stand is Java. I think it was a stupid idea to begin with and it is totally worthless IMHO. I hate Java buttons and banners, etc - Shockwave can do so much better and smaller, although you can usually get the same button effect with JavaScript rollovers (minus any sounds the applet might make, which I hate sounds I didn't ask for - especially MIDI files... grrr... but I'm getting into a whole different subject here in these parenthesies, so I'll kill it now hehe :))

Where was I? Oh, yeah. Flash is cool :D

------------------
Justin Nelson
FutureQuest Support

[flowersource]

Actually, it was about 38k!!! And a lot more work to do...in flash you only draw the first and last graphic...then the 10-20 graphics in between the start and end are 'tweened' for you. I use Fireworks for animated gifs, it doesn't tween (I don't think it does, did I miss something?) and the lines/edges are not smooth and the animation is 'jumpy'.

Easy is a good thing.

Mike