February 22nd, 2010 by admin

Ok, so here we go again…

So, an Adobe developer today posted this.  In a nutshell, (and please do read it yourself, I’ve no wish to misrepresent it), the article posits that Flash will never work on the iPad, or any other touchscreen device, because of rollover behaviour.  We’re all aware of rollovers right?  Buttons which highlight when you mouseover them, controls which appear/disappear depending on the presence of the mouse?  Good.

Rollovers are necessary on a device with some kind of remote pointer, (such as a mouse), as they clearly show where the pointer is, providing instant clarity and position.  They are a key part of interface design online.  On a touchscreen, they are completely unnecessary, (we know where our fingers are right?), and they don’t really wok anyway, as there is no contact with the screen until you press, (or ‘click’).  So, there are things which are different between touchscreen and web interfaces, and we, as developers, have coped with this before when adapting web applications for touchscreen kiosks.  In my experience, most have transferred with no amends necessary, the rollovers are present but irrelevant, never seen and not missed, and the experience is just fine without them.

However, the article also points to some uses of rollovers which have transcended the “where is the pointer” use, such as when you have a video player and the controls appear/disappear dependent on the presence of the pointer.  It makes for a slicker look & feel, and saves real estate.  Now it’s true to say that this implementation needs an amend before it will work on a touchscreen, but it’s hardly a killer to change.  That goes for tooltips as well, and the other examples of non-click interaction.

The very idea that the fact that rollovers don’t work on touchscreen devices renders an entire technology stack redundant is patently absurd.  The writer suggests that developers will create solutions with other technologies, but fails to recognise that the issue effects all technologies equally – rollovers are by no means exclusive to Flash.  The ‘rollover issue’ is not a technology issue, it’s a UX issue.  UX designers have determined that rollovers are good methods for accomplishing certian things on the web, and it’s worked well.  Now they will need to think of another method to accomplish the same things on touchscreen devices.  And the methods they come up with will be equally as available to Flash developers as they will to developers using any other technology.

Mike Chambers posted this response, but really you should take a look at this video from bytearray, to see Flash 10.1 running on the Google Nexus One.  It performs beautifully, much better than I expected, even with the 3D.

I’ve personally seen large Flash experience websites running on Flash enabled phones and a variety of touchscreen devices, large and small, with no alterations, and been excited by the results. I can also think of many examples where alterations would be necessary to make them work seamlessly in touch environments. And that also goes for sites and apps developed with non-Flash technologies.

The fact is, the way interfaces are designed will evolve to meet the new ways of interacting with them. It will be a gradual process, and in the meantime some content will work as-is, and some won’t. But it’s not down the technology, and no technology will stand or fall as a result.

February 1st, 2010 by admin

Since the UX world exploded into activity following Steve Jobs rant at the expense of Google & Adobe it has been interesting, and a little sad, to follow the ‘debates’, (if one may dignify much of the vitriol with such a name).  Several well considered and informative posts on the subject were submitted over the next few days by people who have a good understanding of both worlds, such as this from Richard Leggett.  However, the arguments still raged.

Posts such as this one from Crunchgear go to show that misinformation can come from the most seemingly authoritative sources.  The writer is referencing Sketchpad, a very good piece of work developed with HTML5.  It goes to show just how far HTML has come, and provides a glimpse of it’s future.  It’s impressive.  However, it is not “the death of Flash” and to suggest as much is to show a genuinely surprising lack of awareness of the whole subject matter.  Yes, Sketchpad is impressive and should be lauded as a benchmark for where HTML5 currently is, and as a signpost to it’s future.  Hopefully you’ve had a look at Sketchpad now.  So now have a look at Aviary.  That’s Flash, and it’s Creative Suite 4 to Sketchpad’s MS Paint.  It was developed mostly in 2007 and released in early 2008, so it’s not even particularly recent.  Now don’t get me wrong here, I am not having a go at HTML5 or Sketchpad, I am merely trying to put them both in context.  HTML5 is on a journey.  It currently allows a developer to do things he was able to do with Flash a couple years ago, but it’s getting there and it will gradually become the best practice means of deploying a lot of things which are developed with Flash purely because there’s no better option.  That’s progress.

Right now tho, and looking at Sketchpad as “the Flash-killer” – well, Sketchpad doesn’t run on the majority of users’ machines, due to browser compatibility, and lastly – take a look at the code.  Is that how you see a multi-developer team writing complex applications?

Celebrate the HTML5 achievement, but do some research before making very hasty proclamations about Flash.