On: Friday, May 13, 2005 8:51 AM, Sam Varshavchik said: >> >> Mark Greenbank writes: >> > The fact is that it is not. There are lots of sites on the 'net >> > that are flash only and that contain functionality the _some_ >> > of us want to see. Often there is no way that it can be done >> > with HTML and Javascript, at least not easily and maintainably >> > in a robust fashion. To bad you can't look at >> > http://www.laszlosystems.com/partners/support/demos :) >> > >> > On the other hand, this chap seems to to remarkable things with >> > DHTML: http://ditchnet.org/dhtmlgallery/jsdock.html >> >> If maps.google.com does fine without needing Flash, I don't see >> why anyone else couldn't. It isn't that they CANnot, it's that they DO not. I suspect you understand what people are telling you but are just being difficult on purpose. Perhaps I'm being too generous. Actually, I've banned Flash from my computer. I told my daughter that she couldn't use the Barbie, PBS Kids or Polly Pocket web sites because their mean owners used Flash. Don't they know it will poison little minds? Likewise, we don't have a TV since all the wicked studios and networks (not to mention the RIAA) make money from them. We certainly don't shop in stores that advertise on television. I won't have anything to do with them. All those proprietary systems! Where will it end? Oh, and we certainly don't eat in restaurants that cook on gas. You have to draw the line somewhere. -- Henry
