Flash seems to be the best at integration of audio, video, and visual effects. Now with Adobe and it's resources in charge will there be no stopping Flash at becomming the leading web tool.

Ajax is the future, not Flash. Reason? Ajax does not require any plugins to be installed. All you need is a modern browser, which more people certainly have, than Flash. Also, you need to continuously update Flash - in fact, Macromedia just recently released a new version of Flash a few weeks ago.

Flash is still good for media such as audio and video (my preferred for things that move, such as games, for instance, but I like Quicktime for videos. Flash is probably one of the best for audio as well, though, since it doesn't freeze the browser :D), so it won't be going anywhere anytime soon.

But more and more people will soon develop websites in Ajax rather than an entire website in Flash. Why? Because Flash is not indexable by search engines, since the text is contained in the Flash file. It will probably be possible to index the text one day, but for now, it is not. I'm sure Ajax has its own indexing problems, but not as many. Also, Flash is controlled by one company, and in this day and age, this is a no-no :p (At least, for the web :) Of course there are certain times when a company is better than simply a method or an organization.)

Yes Flash is a great tool and stunning websites can be created using Flash

But will Flash become the leading web tool, I'm not sure only time will tell.

Flash is a great multimedia enhancing tool that has definitely created some visually stunning avenues for true web companies to strut their stuff and show wha the difference is between a so called web designer and a design firm that puts many hours into a design's conception and implementation. I believe whoever designs a drag and drop flash like program that allows for much faster creation of quality flash sites and presentations will bear the title of King. The only drawback to flash is the time it takes to create these visually stimulating works of art. If there is such a product with all the functionality and no loss in quality and flexibility in a WYSIWYG type enviornment please let me know. Thanks.

I think flash is great for smaller sites but when things get big flash takes too long to load. For example, a rock band website, great has all the tools you need loads in a reasonable time and looks much better than a standard web site. But for something like argos or a big shopping website it would take such a long time to load.

I think flash is the future of all personal sites and smaller sites but it just hasn't got what it takes to power big sites.

flash is pretty good for some things, online animation, video, tutorials (vnc2swf etc) but sites that use it for everything are annoying.

if a site makes noise of any kind i leave it, if i cant link to a certain page i won't use/reccomend that site. same goes if cant right click/save as on pictures, or click back and go back.. and sites with intros that you cant skip, or have to watch each time you go there are very annoying.

no point being fancy if there is no substance. ajax is the way forward

A static HTML base version of the flash site with well written content might be better choice. However CSS2 can be also considered a better approach.

One major thing that is keeping Flash back is SEO. I would use Flash a lot more if it could be picked up by search engine more affectively.

One major thing that is keeping Flash back is SEO. I would use Flash a lot more if it could be picked up by search engine more affectively.

Surely flash saying many words in motion, it is effective when it is nicely designed for SE, though depth in content and uniqueness is going to be gold.

As a power user of flash and expert in static sites as well I am in a unique position to answer this. Having spent over 8 years building content driven flash and non-flash sites the answer is hands down flash has nailed it. Too many people are seeing flash as a plug in, instead view it as a browser in itself. As far as takes to long to load I can point you in the direction of non-flash sites that do the same. Flash sites are capable of doing anything non-flash sites can do and then hundreds of times more, the only reason people dont think so is pure ignorance (and quite often fear / stupidity / hate ).

A well coded flash site is scale-able to any size, whats more size in KiloBytes is of no importance. The only difference between the size of a flash and non-flash sites are any multi-media components (images, sounds, movies etc). So the size issue may have been relevant a few years ago when this ground breaking technology was taking off and people did not know how to use it, but it is irrelevant today with so many experts.

finaly comments about versions of flash are ridiculous, what version of Explorer are we at ? What version of html, css, how inane.

The real question is not will flash win (it has already won, some people just cant admit it), but where will it go: hold on.

Flash is going to be the vanguard of online applications (AJAX is for laughs). Full blown online applications such as photoshop, word, whatever you want, is exactly where the future is at, and exactly why adobe purchased the company. Further to this is the fight being taken to Microsoft with flash now being capable of deploying customizable desk top operatining systems, this is why Microsoft is now launching their own fight in this market.
Get with the programme people and leave your prejudices at the door.

I don't see Flash as the future, at least not for me. 3 years ago I started dabbling in Flash since I loved the effects I could get. But after a while (and making my main site in Flash) I realised it takes a lot to load, people might not have it installed and some won't nstall it for my sake and it's not a good idea for SEO.

Now I don't use it anymore. I have content driven sites and I make efforts to that SE can get as much content as possible. For an offline presentation I'd use flash, but I don't find it useful for my online sites.

>>Is Flash the Future?

Define “future. The questions states:

>>Flash seems to be the best at integration of audio, video, and visual effects.

That is very true.

>> Now with Adobe and it's resources in charge will there be no stopping Flash at becoming the leading web tool.

The leading web tool for integration of audio, video and visual effects that is. I share that prediction. Flash won the fight with Java for the “web animation plugin and has been the leading tool for a while.

But, if your question is if it will replace HTML (or xHTML in the following years), then no, that is not going to happen nor is Flash trying to achieve that.

Audas,

I have to say I pretty much disagreed with everything you said, starting with you calling Ajax “for laughs.

The web is what people want it to be, and people want information. Fancy graphics are a nice bonus but not the main thing. Flash is a good tool but it offers in no way a better browsing environment than regular HTML and other W3C standards. I don’t think anybody would want their documents to be animated. These days more and more people are disabling Flash in their browsers to avoid advertisements and unnecessary smoke and mirrors.

Bottom line, Flash on the web is here to stay because it fills the void for animation/multimedia as a plugin; but it is only that, a plugin. Are there other uses for Flash? Certainly, but not on the web.

I forgot to make my point about AJAX:

AJAX is basically a window to move information on the web without having to navigate the page. This opens a whole new world of possibilities that will let the web borrow ideas from desktop software where interaction with the user doesn’t require a page to “reload.

We are going to start seeing more interfaces that respond to clicks without reloading the page, documents being served faster, searches that happen in the background before we finish typing the query, registration forms that are easier to fill and validate, etc; an overall better experience for the visitor and more power for the developer.

The acceptance of AJAX has grown so large that IE7 removed the HTTPRequest object from the list of ActiveX components and now supports it natively (so that it works even when ActiveX components are disabled).

Here are a couple of excellent articles from a friend of mine that illustrate the power of AJAX and how simple it is to use it:

- Introducing AJAHT
http://www.expertsrt.com/tutorials/Rod/ajaht.php

- Reading Files With JavaScript
http://www.expertsrt.com/tutorials/Rod/JSread.php

AJAX is simply a set of technologies that already existed, but was brought together and marketed in a different way. The same could be said for DHTML when that was the big thing.

Personally, I think the AJAX technologies have infintely more scope than Flash, but it would be foolish to ignore what Flash can do. When used sparingly, it can make an other wise dull site look very slick and professional.

AJAX is better if you want to embed functionality / create web applications.

Also, I don't approve of sites being created entirely in Flash. They can be hard to manage and slow.

Well, even you can do all flash development in java script with single language AFLAX.

It's safe to say ... yes it will be the future of web tv.
Take a closer look on the adobe shares !!