Andy Dingley wrote:
> On 28 Feb, 00:11, Tony <nos...@example.com> wrote:
>> Andy Dingley wrote:
>>
>>> Flash intros are bad, no matter what the content.
>> Why?
>
> Because you're making the user sit through an intro when they could be
> sitting through your content instead.

If the target market LIKES the intro, then how is it bad?

> Because this isn't TV, and certainly not a long movie. We don't
> consume the web in a serial manner as we used to with broadcast media,
> we pick and choose what we want, and exactly how much of what we want.

Who is "We"? A specific group of expert users like this group? All users
in general? A specific target audience?

> In particular, feeding the same intro to repeat visitors is especially
> annoying. They might tolerate this once a week on a TV series, but not
> every time they refresh a page (and it's hard to reliably avoid that).

You state a position: "feeding the same intro to repeat visitors is
especially annoying.". While I would tend to agree with you, do you have
any specific evidence to back up this claim? And more particularly, can
you say that claim is true for all target demographics?

> It's an impatient audience out there these days! They don't want to
> sit through an intro, and if you force then to do so, you're likely to
> find them going somewhere else altogether.

Also, your original statement didn't say anything about forced Flash
intros. Many of them have a "skip" link. And some sites even have ways
to bypass them.

You made a broad statement: "Flash intros are bad, no matter what the
content". Fair enough - you feel that Flash intros are bad. But are they
ALWAYS bad? I think it's rather small-minded and quite limiting to say
"yes" to that - what's good for one target audience may or may not be
good for others. That's something I often see missing from some of the
discussions here.