In the year 2000, usability guru Jakob Nielsen published in his Alertbox1 column an article regarding Macromedia Flash technology, as used primarily in various Web sites at that time. His article was entitled, alarmingly, “Flash: 99%
Bad,” and he explained the reason for this harsh judgement, as follows:
1 Online bi-weekly Web-based column focusing on usability issues written by Jakob Nielsen
About 99% of the time, the presence of Flash on a website constitutes a usability disease.
Although there are rare occurrences of good Flash design (it even adds value on occasion), the use of Flash typically lowers usability. In most cases, we would be better off if these multimedia objects were removed. Flash tends to degrade websites for three reasons: it encourages design abuse, it breaks with the Web’s fundamental interaction principles, and it distracts attention from the site’s core value. (Nielsen, 2000)
In his article, Nielsen pointed out various usability issues that arose because of the introduction of Flash technology. He mentioned the following major problems inherent in Flash-enabled Web sites at that time: unnecessary intro/animation; lack of user control (more TV-like experience); and nonstandard scrollbar. He also noted that it was not that the Flash technology itself was inherently bad, but rather that Web designers already had an inclination to break usability rules and Flash just enabled them to do so more easily. For example, it is easy to create nonstandard scrollbars in Flash but it is impossible to do so using plain HTML.
In the year 2002, after Macromedia had received considerable negative feedback concerning Flash (the most prominent being Nielsen’s article discussed above), they decided to seek help from a usability expert, who turned out to be the same Jakob Nielsen who wrote the article “Flash: 99% Bad” two years before.
Therefore, in June 2002, a few months after the release of Flash MX (Flash version 6), Macromedia and the Nielsen Norman Group (a company founded by Jakob Nielsen and Donald Norman) formed a strategic partnership focusing on the improvement of Flash usability (Macromedia, 2002). Their ultimate goal was to make Flash Web sites “100% good” instead of “99% bad.” As part of that agreement, Nielsen developed a number of usability guidelines for Web design/development with Flash MX2. In addition, Nielsen contributed to one of the
2 Commercially available at http://www.nngroup.com/reports/flash/
major changes in Flash MX from the previous version; Flash MX was shipped with a standard set of interface components (e.g. scrollbars, buttons, etc.) so that Flash designers could use them to increase consistency across Web sites.
Since the year 2002, Macromedia has encouraged Web designers/developers around the world to use Flash MX to create Web sites entirely in Flash. However, the benefit of switching the Web from HTML-based to Flash-based is still obscure.
Although Flash technology enables more application-like Web sites and higher integration of animated contents, the usability of Web sites created entirely in Flash has not yet been determined. Becker (2002) wrote about this “Flash everywhere”
situation as follows:
One promised pay-off is easier-to-use transaction sites with content that, through Flash-enabled browsers, can be updated selectively rather than having to redraw the entire page every time new data is submitted. Another pay-off is video clips that don’t require a separate browser window. But critics say a Flash-everywhere approach carries hidden potential liabilities that could stifle innovation. […] Flash can also limit the sharing of Web information. Flash pages can’t be easily indexed, making them inaccessible to search engines. And because everything happens within the same browser window, there’s no way to link to specific parts of a Flash site.
From the year 2003, it is evident that the “Flash everywhere” phenomenon is becoming more popular with Web site developers. Many Web sites have been created entirely in Flash, while others use a combination of Flash and HTML.
McGregor (2003) has provided guidelines regarding when to use Flash or HTML as follows:
• When to use Macromedia Flash; if these elements are important to the project, use Macromedia Flash: animation, sound, rich interactivity, compatibility across browsers, stability across platforms, server independent publishing (CDs, kiosks).
• When to use HTML; if these elements are important to the project, use HTML: long sections of text data, frequent updates (both design and content), legibility, largest possible audience, dynamic formatting of text, accessibility.
However, it is commonly found that many Web designers/developers do not utilise a combination of Flash and HTML as per the criteria above, but instead, they use only
one or the other for the entire Web site. This might be because they consider that it would take longer to develop a Web site by interweaving the two approaches.
It is also useful to consider the suitability of Flash usage as contingent upon Web site purpose. For example, the categories of Web site purpose suggested by Turk (2001) are:
1. Communication (e-mail; discussion lists; chat groups) 2. Information (e.g. educational material; news)
3. Entertainment (e.g. games; gambling; pornography)
4. Services (e.g. search engines; software libraries; counseling)
5. Electronic commerce / marketing (business-customer and business-business)
It can be clearly seen that, according to their intended purpose, Web sites in some categories above may be more suitable for Flash than Web sites in other categories.
For instance, communication and services Web sites are rarely found implemented in Flash because of their needs for frequent updates and large text display. On the other hand, most entertainment Web sites utilise Flash because it provides easy integration of animation and sound, which are the main features for entertainment purposes. Information and e-commerce/marketing Web sites are somewhere in between, depending on the individual Web site’s purpose and target audience.
Because Web site purpose can influence the usability of Flash Web sites, it is also considered in this thesis and discussed in the following section.