Just wondering what you all think of a flash based CMS, used to update a HTML (not flash) website.
Here's my thoughts:
Pro's:
- You create a very powerful interface which can do just about anything (i think)
- You arent limited to what you can do with html
- It will work even if people have javascript turned off, or dont have java installed (alot of CMS with wysiwyg editors use either of these)
Cons:
- The client must have flash installed to run it
- Because of the above you *May* not be able to edit it anywhere in the world (however most pc's have flash installed these days)
- Im not sure how secure flash is (its probably fine)
Now i *think* flash is powerful enough to do this, but i would have to try it - i guess if anyone has had some more experience with it they could probably tell me:
- can you have a button which changes a section of text that is highlighted (i.e to make it bold/change the color)
- would it be possible to insert new images in somewhere among the text
- its easy to connect to a mysql database right?
You are talking about a flash-based admin interface for a CMS-system, right?
I havn't worked hands on with Flash myself but I've seen that Flash together with XML and Serverside languages, ex PHP, can become a very very powerful combination.
I'm actually quite intrigued by this thought, most ppl thinks of flash as the outside interface of a website, I'm not fond of 100% flash sites myself from numerous reasons, SEO and accessability are some major examples of those reasons. However this don't apply for an admin interface in the same way.
In short, yes, I think that flash could probably be used quite successfully as an admin interface for a CMS.
The key to make it a good, powerful & usable interface will however be dependent of the same conditions as any interface regardless of the technology chosen.
Structure, planning, the right features, and knowledge of human/computer interaction.
These things apply everywhere and this must be adressed long before the technology is chosen. Flash, Java, Javascript, DHTML, HTML, CSS etc, these are just the tools you can use to realize the requirements you must have before starting the project.
/Dan
{cell 260}{Blog}
-{ ?There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. - Jeremy S. Anderson" }-
I'm not fond of 100% flash sites myself from numerous reasons, SEO and
accessability are some major examples of those reasons. However this don't apply
for an admin interface in the same way.
That was exactly my thought - personally i never use flash for websites, i steer clear of javascript and all that. However in this situation it doesnt really matter.
And of course your right, since it seems viable from that perspective it then comes down to the planning & implementation.
So the only question i have really is CAN you those those things with flash - if anyone has had experience with it, would be great to know. Otherwise when i get a chance ill have to try it out .
quote:- You arent limited to what you can do with html
- It will work even if people have javascript turned off, or dont have java installed (alot of CMS with wysiwyg editors use either of these)
Nobody told me (D)HTML have some limits. The problem of JavaScript being disabled or Java not installed is about the same as Flash not being installed.
I share your views on ( and lack of experience with ) Flash and am curious about what it could bring to an administration interface. DHTML can already do a lot of things. Can Flash only add some gizmos or can it really enhance the usability beyond what is possible in DHTML ? and how ?
Yeh, sorry what i mean with limits - i mean from an interface point of view. In flash you can drag and drop stuff/animate stuff
- make a real nice interface and all that. I mean there is alot you can do with javascript etc but it seems alot more work.
quote:poi said:
The problem of JavaScript being disabled or Java not installed is about the
same as Flash not being installed
Yeh i pointed out as a con to this, flash would need to be installed. So they are pretty equal there, flash vs javascript anyway -just depends which more ppl have going on their pc. Java itself, to be honest even i'm weary when something asks me to install java, so i can see many people saying no to installing it (from something they arent sure of).
I've been playing around with it and it looks like its all possible, editing content as tho you were using MS word or such - and you shoudl be able to flick a switch and it shows you it all in the html code. One thing i guess i dont like that pretty much every WYSIWYG editor does is having font tags everywhere, since this has been depreciated i'd rather stick to styles.
My current way of thinking for this is to have a set of styles that the user sets up/adds to/removes then these can be used in the editor. The other option is to automatically create styles based on whatever they have done to the text. A few options here - just need to think what would be best and what the user would want.
The whole point of Flash (including the program) is that it's simpler to _make_ stuff in, not really simpler to _use_.
It's like like using Visual Basic to point-and-click instead of just a text editor to type out stuff.
So if you're making a Flash CMS administration area for shits 'n' giggles or to save you the time of learning an actual coding language, more power to you, but if you're making it because you think Flash is easier to use than something that uses JavaScript or Java to do the same thing, you're deluding yourself.
quote:In flash you can drag and drop stuff/animate stuff
I'm certainly picky but you can easily drag'n drop stuff/animate stuff in DHTML as well ( look at the DHTML/Javascript section and the thousands of scripts available in the web related tags of deli.ico.us ). There is some WYSIWYG editors producing valid XHTML markup ( XStandard to name one ).
Thus my interrogation of how, in which ways, Flash could do a better job. Still I'm eager to see a great Flash admin interface.
On the other hand I'm pretty sure the idea I have of an admin interface ( for having done several ones ) prevents me to think out of the box.
The whole point of Flash (including the program) is that it's simpler to _make_
stuff in, not really simpler to _use_.
Hmm i dont entirely agree here, when you know how to code javascript or whatever - doing stuff in flash can actually be more difficult. Things like animation however would probably be simpler.
Overall i guess there isnt alot of difference in what you can produce for the end result, its just another way of doing it. Personally I think flash is/will be more portable than javascript. I don't know anyone that doesn't have flash installed, yet i know many people who use firefox with javascript turned off.
Flash is cross browser/platform? and all that so no problem there either.
At the end of the day what i want is a good editor that is easy to use and *familiar* (most people are familiar with how ms.word works). I don't want them to have to install a custom app on their PC (if they have to install flash thats fine) - and I want it to have the ability to use anywhere in the world, so not just the pc they had to install client software on - for this it needs to be entirely web based.
Obviously there are many ways this can be done, i guess i am a bit of a java/javascript nazi - i have used them before and its not difficult or anything. Im not a flash lover on the other hand, hell if i could do it all in php then i would be happy - but server side isnt great use for an interface ;P.
Xstandard does look interesting, i like the code it outputs, finally something that doesnt use depreciated tags. Im not sure however if you have to install it on any pc you want to use it on? It looks to me like you do.
Hmm i dont entirely agree here, when you know how to code javascript or whatever - doing stuff in flash can actually be more difficult.
Of course - I'm talking about people that consider learning how to use a GUI'd program easier than learning a language...hence the analogy.
quote:H][RO said:
Things like animation however would probably be simpler.
Simpler to _create_ probably - because of the program, not what is actually involved.
quote:H][RO said:
Personally I think flash is/will be more portable than javascript. I don't know anyone that doesn't have flash installed, yet i know many people whouse firefox with javascript turned off.
That's pretty retarded. Flash uses a lot of the same things JavaScript uses...only it's handled by a single company (maybe two now), not an association. Furthermore JavaScript support comes standard (and enabled by default) in most modern browsers - I can't think of a one that comes with Flash pre-installed and enabled (maybe that goofy IE shell browser that uses Flash for the UI? ).
That's pretty retarded. Flash uses a lot of the same things JavaScript
uses...only it's handled by a single company (maybe two now), not an
association. Furthermore JavaScript support comes standard (and enabled by
default) in most modern browsers - I can't think of a one that comes with Flash
pre-installed and enabled (maybe that goofy IE shell browser that uses Flash for
the UI? ).
If javascript is turned off in the browser, does flash stop working? Im not sure but i think it keeps working.
You may think its retarted but seriously if you look at the way things are going, its not really the case... As far as security goes, companies/net cafe's all that sort are more likely to have flash installed. The ones that know about security would possibly have JS turned off.
Also if you ever bother to take a look at statistics, there has been a boom in users of firefox - and for people that are likely to get this, they know about the option to turn JS off (i think it even asks when u install it). Rough figures now show that 11% have JS turned off.
Figures also show that 98% have flash installed.
Of course you cant rely 100% on statistics, they could be biased or whatever - but its better than making complete assumptions surely.
Also i wouldnt be suprised if I.E came with JS disabled in future versions, now they have the popup blocker on by default and all that.
As a side note : Flash can be blocked in FireFox as well. And I know I've been tempted to do it more than one time. But in the end blocking anything according to some rules ( on the URL, HREF, SRC, WIDTH, HEIGHT, ... ) does a very good job to prevent the abuses and ads of all kind. In the same vein, disabling JavaScript purely and simply is a bit extreme because alas some simple sites DO need it to work, some others makes a good use of it ( e.g. Gmail, and all the sites making a non obstrusive use of JS ... just like the Asylum )
Well yeh, overall i guess it doesnt *really* matter what you do it - the end result can be the same. I dont think you will find any functionality you cant get out of JS poi, but you can do the same in Flash i guess.
From the developing point of view also, JS is free all you need is notebad - whereas you need to purchase flash to go that way.
In reality wether flash is installed ir JS is turned off isnt an issue, i mean you are building this specifically for clients so you can let them know what they need. I would still rather not have anything *non standard* i.e a custom java app, be installed on the client (server too) if possible.
I really like the output code of xstandard but from what I see it looks like a custom app for the server and client. There are a few things i want different too so maybe I will just build one from scratch. Still its a decision wether to go and do it in flash on JS - i dunno T.T. Maybe I will just do it in flash because i think thats more of a challenge for this
Yep the minimum specs of admin interfaces are often less minimal than those of front-end interfaces.
For years, admins interfaces often worked exclusively on WIN+IE ( mainly thanks to MSHTML ). Today I think it wouldn't be a big deal if an admin interface require a standard compliant browser ( read Mozilla, FireFox, Opera or Safari ). This option would ensure forward compatibility and that the interface works on any platform.
As for the advantages of Flash over JS, the only things I can think of are the vectorial abilities, a little boost of speed and the sound abilities. But I hardly see how they could enhance the usability of an admin interface.
Yeh, one thing i see alot is people saying its great for cross platform. I guess you dont need to test it really, you know exactly what will happen wherever you put it with flash!
I dont really see any enhanced usability either, but i guess its the same if you look at things the other way around. Yeh I think i will try my hand at a flash one, and im going to base it on a style library that you can create/modify - a GUI for CSS really
TP: That was indeed a powerful demonstration of an unstopable flash popup hell.
Now: This has (usually) been a minor friendly board in the past, and the Doc himself said he would not wish to get any teen (or child) into trouble for visiting the Asylum. Not to speak of the reprimidations one might receive at the work place if you opened this link there.
(For those who have not seen it: Lot's of really ugly porn images plus a loud voice saying 'i'm looking at gay porn')
I do not ever wish to see something of this kind being posted without any warning. Or with a little warning. At the very least stick a really big warning into your post, you horrible inconsiderate inmate!
[edit] The URL TP removed, spawned an insane amount of new tabs ( certainly some popups in fact ) in my FireFox. I did not watched the source code of the page but I guess it exploits the fact that the popup spawned by Flash are not bypassed by FireFox and interpreted as vanilla popups. [/edit]
reiso!
That must have been THE most stupid link posted in a very long time!
What the H*LL was the point of that?
I'm in the sofa with my laptop in full view of all others in the family including my 3 kids and you post this without any warning what so ever!
Think first, then post, if you are unable to do that, just don't post!!!
Oh yes, I'm really pissed right now!
So bloody stupid behaviour I can't even find words for it.
/Dan
{cell 260}{Blog}
-{ ?There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. - Jeremy S. Anderson" }-
To bring into stark relief how silly it is to use a browser with JavaScript
disabled and Flash installed
Your kidding yourself here, even many js popups can get past alot of the popup blockers out there - this would seem to be a browser vulnerability, not sure if its only firefox or not. I have tested flash popups before and my popup bocker treated them just like JS popups in IE not allowing them to open.
Either way the exploitability of it in this sense is clearly irrelivant to the topic, I am building a CMS for my client base, obviously I'm not going to spam them with popups - even if flash was able to cause more damage than JS that makes my last stamement no less true.
even many js popups can get past alot of the popup blockers out there
Right - so you may as well leave JavaScript enabled.
quote:H][RO said:
Either way the exploitability of it in this sense is clearly irrelivantto the topic,
You noted that you know people who have Flash installed and enabled, but have JavaScript disabled...my guess is that this was to support the notion of Flash making a good CMS. Questioning that is off topic?
Right - so you may as well leave JavaScript enabled.
This makes no sense what soever, if JS can get past blockups then why would you leave it enabled?
quote:reisio said:
You noted that you know people who have Flash installed and enabled, but have
JavaScript disabled...my guess is that this was to support the notion of Flash
making a good CMS. Questioning that is off topic?
Your guess would be wrong, this is merely a fact - especially with the increased number of people using firefox. The fact that it supports flash in any way is just how it is.
quote:reisio said:
I don't think I have been. Example(s)?
Nearly everything you have said has been against flash? And hunting for a flash thing that did all those lovely popups - howcome you didnt put all that effort into finding a JS page that does the same?
This makes no sense what soever, if JS can get past blockups then why would you leave it enabled?
If you don't like 'blockups', I guess you wouldn't - but since Flash can be just as annoying, if you have Flash enabled, there's little reason to disable JavaScript.
quote:H][RO said:
Your guess would be wrong, this is merely a fact - especially with the increased number of people using firefox. The fact that it supports flash in any way is just how it is.
My point is only that JavaScript usually comes natively and Flash doesn't really have any security/anti-annoyance advantages over JavaScript, so the question of using one or the other is primarly one of ease of creation, not ease of use or likelihood of support.
quote:H][RO said:
Nearly everything you have said has been against flash?
Well maybe I have been vague. I don't have any great gripe against Flash, I just think arguing that it is better than JavaScript for anything except the possible simplicity of creation is silly.
quote:H][RO said:
And hunting fora flash thing that did all those lovely popups - howcome you didnt putall that effort into finding a JS page that does the same?
I just stumbled upon that and thought it would be a good example.
To bring into stark relief how silly it is to use a browser with JavaScript disabled and Flash installed.
Well next time tell us what to expect, and yes the windows was blank first, for 10-15 seconds, then as it progressed the images loaded... then it got really ugly.
On another note.
I don't think that this is an issue whether flash or js is better than the other.
Basic question as I saw it from the beginning was if Flash can do the things nessecary for a CMS admin interface.
We all know that HTML + JS + CSS can do it, that's been proved tons of times, flash is just another tool.
Personally I think that if you look at the admin interface from a products lifecycle with several iterations and mods/upgrades JS will probably cost more in effort over time than flash since it's not as automated to develop in js as in flash, js is generally more a craft than flash. Of course this is in both cases quite dependant on the skills of the person(s) tasked to maintain and evolve the interface.
However, none of this matters if the interface is poorly designed from a users pow, or if it lacks important features, or if it's cluttered with cool but not needed things.
That's what makes or breaks an admin interface, not Flash or JS as the tool.
/D
{cell 260}{Blog}
-{ ?There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. - Jeremy S. Anderson" }-
backward compatability and maintaining updating your codebase I'd think would be easier using Flash. New browser comes out and supports js (edit: js/html/css) differently. New Flash player comes out and supports your legacy actionscripting and gui bits just fine. Cuts out the scramble to update your code.
...and that link was to be ashamde of indeed =\ I was surfing around a bit before a client was to come in for a meeting. I would have been mildly embarrased to have had that going on when they walked in (thankfully it didn't happen). Warnings are good form, not posting that kind of crap is even better.
Hmm good points, thanks - I didnt know JS changed in that way such that you would have to slighly modify your script, thats what people must mean when they say flash is better for cross compatibility (not only between browsers but browser versions).
The truth of the matter however is there may be some limits in flash, such as creating tables etc. I'm going to see if I can get around this, i think i may have a way. Showing images inline is the other problem also. Standarf formatting of text is no problem however.
Reisio, basically what has been said (and it never hurts to reiterate it once more) was that that was an incredibly stupid thing to do. You didn't think before you posted that and, by consequence potentially compromised (for a short time, at least, until the ever-vigilant TP removed the link) the at least mildly family-friendly atmosphere we try to maintain here. Now I know you say that you didn't realise the full extent of what was there, but it is, frankly put, your responsibility to know everything that is on the links you're posting here. I have yet to see a legal standpoint* where ignorance of a law or the contents of something is a valid defence. But then, I could have just missed it, it happens. You don't suck reisio, but the link you posted does, or did. Don't do it again, please.
Oh, and I will also suggest that if you don't agree with someone or what they're saying on a subject, there are perhaps better ways to express this than calling them or what they're saying 'retarded' or anything like that. Reserve that kind of thing for the Philosilly forum and frankly, in my opinion, not even there. That kind of term never needs to be applied to anyone or anything. it is derogatary and there is no call for it, even if someone says it to you first. The 'he started it!' defense kind of dies in the ass once you leave the pre-school schoolyard.
* please note that I am in no way suggesting taking this to a legal standpoint. That's not why I'm here today
Building a CMS completly in flash seems a little silly to me. XHTML already provides an extensive array of form controls and a rigid means of displaying text/tables/data etc... doing it in flash would mean re-inventing the wheel, and not necessarly for the better. After all, you'd be accessing the same data source for the CMS managaent application as you would for the end display of the site yes? If so, then you'd need to write two completly different presentation layers, one for Flash, one for XHTML.
Why not just stick with XHTML and save yourself the trouble. If need be you could use flash components to *assist* the managing process (WYSIWYG Text Editor etc...), but doing the entire thing in flash would be complete overkill and take twice as long. Trust me, I've built a blog/calendar app in flash before, it really wasn't fun.
Taking a hybrid approach would be the best solution, building the core of the application with a solid XHTML foundation then leveraging flash's scripting, rich media and backgorund request abilties for "enhanced" features and usability would be the best way to go IMHO.
Hmm isnt XHTML just the markup of the code? You would need to still use JS etc wouldnt you (DHTML) otherwise it wouldnt really be a WYSIWYG editor - or am I confusing what you are explaining?
You either need to use flash to build the XHTML markup or Javascript. Essentially you really do have 2 layers for either method, however you are right in the sense flash would be a little more complex for the display layer - this is the part i am investigating wether it is feasible or not. Flash MX 2004 actually gives you alot more control over the code and supports form elements etc so they are slowly getting there.
If they had better support for elements - particularly tables - then i would use flash in a heartbeat over JS.
The problem is that both Javascript and Flash are both relatively low level ways of presenting and manipulating text and graphics. Flash is centrally controlled, which gives it the considerable advantage of cross-platform compatibility. But really, if you want to build large-scale applications you need a higher-level framework to work within.
I've heard good things about OpenLazlo, which is one such framework that currently deploys to Flash, but is designed to be deployable to other platforms in the future.
Nice jiblet, that is very interesting. Im a bit confused as to how it works? It uses a DHTML interface to create the apps, which then generate flash files based on the xml data?
Not sure if thats correct but I will be giving it a try thats for sure
posted 05-12-2005 10:16
DHTML/Javascript
).
