AJAX better than Flash?
By Mat Morrison September 7th, 2006
In Stories
Gucci and Tiger Beer have both opted for AJAX over Flash. When you look at their sites, there’s only one question: “why?”
Gucci and Tiger Beer have both opted for AJAX over Flash. When you look at their sites, there’s only one question: “why?”
1 Brett Terpstra // Sep 8, 2006 at 1:24 am
Accessibility, standards and W3C compliance. Not to mention SEO.
However, Tiger Beer’s site is not AJAX. It’s a bunch of dreamweaver generated rollovers inside of non-XHTML markup. That, I believe, is why it runs like a web 1.0 site.
2 Mat Morrison // Sep 8, 2006 at 8:32 am
Brett — I’d agree with the first point if the Gucci site were compliant. In fact, the browser requirements are IE6, FF1.5. See Ajaxian for a discussion.
re: Tiger, I picked the story up via Adverblog, and thought they were wrong, too. Then I realised they were probably referring to the javascript sideways scrolling layer.
Thanks for the correction.
The Gucci site is a clever idea, and a clever use of technology, that achieves in HTML and javascript what a less clever person could do in Flash. I’m at a loss to see any compliance, accessibility, or standards.
The Tiger site is a shocker. It’s not even Web 1.0 - it’s Web 0.1