Various thoughts on Flash, past and present.

Friday January 4, 2008 - 7 months ago

Posted by James Ellis / Filed under Code, Software, Web

I’m not sure you can be a Flash designer/developer here in 2008 and not have mixed feelings about Flash websites. Understand: I have been working with Flash for ten years. I like Flash a lot. It does one million things. But I think everyone has realized that all-Flash, all-the-time, makes no sense. Specifically, I’m talking about “Flash-world” websites, or websites that load all site content into a single Flash shell.

Before web browsers were any good, before CSS worked well, before AJAX Javascript noodlery, before blogs and RSS hit, before Google ruled the earth, a lot of people thought Flash might be the answer to everything. During this time (1999-2005ish) the Flash-world approach dominated among designers and ad agencies. Unlike HTML, Flash offered designers exacting control over the visual experience. In particular, designers were lured by Flash’s ability to render fonts. Ad agencies were seduced simply by Flash’s ability to render the Photoshop “boner-boards” they sell to clients. (This is why ad agencies are still obsessed with Flash.)

However, even as early as 2000, Flash-world sites were receiving a lot of criticism, particularly regarding usability (See: Flash: 99% Bad). By giving designers total control, Flash-world sites broke nearly every rule of the web; each Flash-world site introduced new, idiosyncratic conventions for navigation, scrolling, etc. The mess of the whole slowed the emergence of many of today’s established web design conventions. Now, many realize that Flash is best used to solve specific problems, not provide complete site architecture.

Consider YouTube. The entire site is predicated on the delivery of video using Flash, yet the site itself is HTML/CSS. At this point, the silliness of rolling all of YouTube into one giant Flash-world should be obvious to all.

MTV.com is another example. In 2006 mtv.com went Flash-world. As a designer and developer, I found the site interesting and certainly an impressive technical achievement. However, the user experience was frustrating. MTV realized their error and within nine months ditched the Flash-world and returned to an HTML/CSS architecture. Flash is still used to deliver video content, but the site browsing experience is no longer hijacked by a Flash-world.

Flash Development

Beyond the issue of appropriateness, Flash applications (especially Flash-worlds) are challenging development projects. It’s not that Actionscript is complicated. (It’s pretty easy to pick up for those familiar with Java, Javascript or any OO language.) Flash development is challenging because it is ridiculously tedious. By providing designers and developers with a blank canvas and complete control, Flash development becomes an exercise in reinventing wheels. Want to go to another “page” in your Flash-world? You’re going to need to write Model, View and Controller classes. Want a form in Flash? You’ll need to instantiate a bunch of objects, add event listening, and tie the whole form to a bunch of logic for error checking, data handling, etc. Even the basic task of loading an image (a no-brainer with HTML in a browser) is a challenge in Flash — you’ll need instantiate an image loading class, set up some logic, and bother with event handling. It’s all a lot of work.

Flash-world development is essentially the reinvention of the browser, inside a plugin, running in a browser. It’s silly. Browsers already do such a good job of managing state, rendering content and working with forms. Why start over?

To be profitable in the Flash-world business, you have to develop and maintain a library of frameworks and classes to deal with all the wheels you need to reinvent. Historically, Flash development had a closed, proprietary, arms-race quality to it, with studios maintaining proprietary arsenals of frameworks and classes. The closed nature of Flash development was due to a number of factors:

• Unlike plain-text HTML and CSS, SWF files are compiled runtimes and there is no way to “View Source” or otherwise look under the hood of Flash apps. This keeps the code mysterious, prevents the development community (from beginner to pro) from examining and learning from the work of others, and generally excludes Flash from the web’s traditional culture of knowledge-sharing. Two notes: Flash decompilers do exist, but such tools have only been used by the extremely motivated, and again, one doesn’t need a decompiler to view HTML or CSS source. Second, View Source functionality is now possible in Flash, but this still remains a developer-elected option rather than a default.
• Flash started as a designer’s tool. Designers, being a bit more guarded with their intellectual property, do not have the same culture of sharing that you find in the software world.
• Actionscript did not become (in the eyes of developers) a real programming language until the introduction of Actionscript 2 with Flash 7 (2004). AS2, being styled directly from Java, was designed to appeal to Java developers. Having AS embraced by the software world injected a lot of software culture in Flash, and helped pull Flash out of its designer-centric origins.

There is now a growing open source Flash community, but you still don’t find near the scope of community as you do around big-timers like PHP or (relatively) new technologies like Ruby on Rails.

Flex

Adobe has tried to remedy Flash’s customization-over-convention problem with the introduction of Flex, a development framework for creating Flash apps, or what Adobe refers to as Rich Internet Applications (RIAs). Summary: it’s like HTML for Flash. There are certainly some very interesting things about Flex, but again, it all seems like a very complicated way of doing things that are already possible with HTML/CSS/Javascript in browsers.

Flex doesn’t seem to have much of a future, and it’s difficult to find anyone excited about it. These days the web is full of rich internet apps (i.e., Gmail, Basecamp, Flickr), but I couldn’t name a single app built using Flex. I went to Adobe’s Flex Showcase but didn’t find any particularly rich internet experiences — mostly the same confusing, idiosyncratic Flash interfaces quick to hijack the browser’s scrollbar and disable the scroll wheel (in OS X anyway).

More coming

Over the years we have certainly built our share of Flash-world sites, though we have been moving away from this type of work. Rather, we try and only use Flash when appropriate – video/audio players, widgets, games, slideshows, etc. But now, for the first time in nearly a year, we are tackling a proper Flash-world project — an experience-oriented site with a few particular demands that only a Flash-world can accommodate.

Flash-worlds have come a long way since our last contact. Developers have been working to bring Flash apps in line with standard web conventions, most notably deep-linking and browser back/forward-button support.

We are using Asual’s open-source library, SWFAddress, to provide our Flash-world with state management and deep-linking. SWFAddress plugs in nicely in front of our otherwise proprietary MVC architecture. It has been great to find a solid open-source, cross-browser solution that solves one of the most glaring Flash-world usability issues. We first discovered SWFAddress after visiting Burst Labs, a wholly appropriate Flash-world site designed by Gridplane and developed by David Knape. (Note: Knape has also released Bumpslide, an open-source library of useful AS2 classes.)

Given our thoughts on the Flash-world practice, this return to form has been an interesting challenge. In some ways frustrating, others rewarding. We are pleased to be using Flash for its intended purpose: constructing interactive applications combining both visual and technical challenges. Despite our criticism and reservations, the Flash-world architecture can still make for smart solutions given the appropriate context.

Look for more Flash-related thoughts over the next months as this current project progresses.