<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flash Media on the Web</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/</link>
	<description>Various Epiphanies of a Technical Mind</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:20:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicole</title>
		<link>http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/comment-page-1/#comment-58905</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:34:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.websitestyle.com/?p=154#comment-58905</guid>
		<description>@Jitendra

Keep in mind that this post was written 3 years ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jitendra</p>
<p>Keep in mind that this post was written 3 years ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jitendra vyas</title>
		<link>http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/comment-page-1/#comment-58901</link>
		<dc:creator>jitendra vyas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 11:24:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.websitestyle.com/?p=154#comment-58901</guid>
		<description>youtube is using flash player 9 not 7</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>youtube is using flash player 9 not 7</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Desiree</title>
		<link>http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/comment-page-1/#comment-98</link>
		<dc:creator>Desiree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:38:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.websitestyle.com/?p=154#comment-98</guid>
		<description>Hi-

There is an event on Flash Media Server on Nov 9th in West Hollywood, CA.  Here is the link to in the invite.  It is a FREE event!  http://www.eventsadobe.com/flashmediaserver

Desiree</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi-</p>
<p>There is an event on Flash Media Server on Nov 9th in West Hollywood, CA.  Here is the link to in the invite.  It is a FREE event!  <a href="http://www.eventsadobe.com/flashmediaserver">http://www.eventsadobe.com/flashmediaserver</a></p>
<p>Desiree</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicole</title>
		<link>http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/comment-page-1/#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2006 15:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.websitestyle.com/?p=154#comment-97</guid>
		<description>Roger,

While I&#039;m sure there are important differences between the versions, I still think that part of the appeal of YouTube is that pretty much anyone who goes to view something on their site will be able to because of the version they use. It&#039;s a big selling point.

It&#039;s the kind of issue that each developer needs to weigh for themselves - which is more important to them: quality or accessible content for all their visitors.

Whether or not the visitors will notice the bonuses from a higher version or if it&#039;s the sort of small differences they won&#039;t notice but someone trained to see those differences (like a developer) definitely sees clearly. Or if it will be more damaging to their business to lose an entire section of user base because of their operating system.

On the other hand, there is nothing stopping a developer from making an &#039;enhanced&#039; version available to people who come to their site using a browser/platform combination that supports it - at least until Adobe has made compatible versions for all the systems people run most commonly.

Just some thoughts - it&#039;s still the choice of the developer. Personally, I would be much more annoyed by an alert of &#039;you need to download an update to your flash plugin&#039;. If I didn&#039;t just close the browser window right there (which is 90% of the time for me) I&#039;d be much more annoyed to try clicking on that link to update my plugins and find out that the one the site wants is not even available for me. So as a browser, I&#039;d take a slightly lower quality/less features any time over the alternative of not being able to see it at all.

Again, it&#039;s in the hands of the developer to choose how to handle it - but it&#039;s in the hands of the consumer to determine how they react to those choices. I firmly believe that if you cannot provide an equivalent content alternative to a visitor on your site, you shouldn&#039;t do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Roger,</p>
<p>While I&#8217;m sure there are important differences between the versions, I still think that part of the appeal of YouTube is that pretty much anyone who goes to view something on their site will be able to because of the version they use. It&#8217;s a big selling point.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the kind of issue that each developer needs to weigh for themselves &#8211; which is more important to them: quality or accessible content for all their visitors.</p>
<p>Whether or not the visitors will notice the bonuses from a higher version or if it&#8217;s the sort of small differences they won&#8217;t notice but someone trained to see those differences (like a developer) definitely sees clearly. Or if it will be more damaging to their business to lose an entire section of user base because of their operating system.</p>
<p>On the other hand, there is nothing stopping a developer from making an &#8216;enhanced&#8217; version available to people who come to their site using a browser/platform combination that supports it &#8211; at least until Adobe has made compatible versions for all the systems people run most commonly.</p>
<p>Just some thoughts &#8211; it&#8217;s still the choice of the developer. Personally, I would be much more annoyed by an alert of &#8216;you need to download an update to your flash plugin&#8217;. If I didn&#8217;t just close the browser window right there (which is 90% of the time for me) I&#8217;d be much more annoyed to try clicking on that link to update my plugins and find out that the one the site wants is not even available for me. So as a browser, I&#8217;d take a slightly lower quality/less features any time over the alternative of not being able to see it at all.</p>
<p>Again, it&#8217;s in the hands of the developer to choose how to handle it &#8211; but it&#8217;s in the hands of the consumer to determine how they react to those choices. I firmly believe that if you cannot provide an equivalent content alternative to a visitor on your site, you shouldn&#8217;t do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger Benningfield</title>
		<link>http://blog.websitestyle.com/index.php/2006/09/24/flash-media-on-the-web/comment-page-1/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger Benningfield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2006 11:40:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.websitestyle.com/?p=154#comment-96</guid>
		<description>Nicole: I suppose I can sympathize when it comes to online games and the like, but when it comes to video, Flash 7 just isn&#039;t good enough. The difference between a Flash 7 and Flash 8 video encoded at similar bitrates is *enormous*, and if you&#039;re looking to compete with YouTube, the first item on your to-do list has to be &quot;make sure our stuff looks and sounds better than theirs&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nicole: I suppose I can sympathize when it comes to online games and the like, but when it comes to video, Flash 7 just isn&#8217;t good enough. The difference between a Flash 7 and Flash 8 video encoded at similar bitrates is *enormous*, and if you&#8217;re looking to compete with YouTube, the first item on your to-do list has to be &#8220;make sure our stuff looks and sounds better than theirs&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

