Web Developers/Designers...

[Dark Prodigy]

What are you using more to animate your web pages? I'm talking menu animation, mouse over effects, banner slideshow headers, photo galleries....etc

I spent a GREAT deal of time learning Flash and ActionScript 3.0, I can cook up some nice stuff. I started there because Flash seemed to be the default for a more interactive web experience for clients/customers/people. Now it seems jQuery is gaining ground, and I'm not exactly sure why...well I'm not totally oblivious - just want to read responses from some other developers.

I see nothing but jQuery "plug-in" type web design all over the place these days. Don't get me wrong, jQuery is good and light, but it just seems no one wants to program anymore...and just knit a bunch of plug-ins together without really knowing any code. What say you.

 

[odoe]

I'm an AS3 guy, but I do some JavaScript as well. I heard someone talking about jQuery/JS say that the more you use jQuery, the less you use jQuery.

Flash/Flex stuff has it's place. I love it. jQuery is nice for lots of reasons, but I mainly like Templates. Templates make it very easy to create a jQuery widget and have stuff up and running.

On the mobile front, hopefully jQuery mobile can ease the use of making mobile apps x-platform compatible. Unfortunately, at this point browser features are not universal across devices, so some stuff works,some stuff doesn't, never mind that some carriers just add their own 2 cents to decide how the browser should work on their phones (**coughcoughsprint**). But now I'm just ranting.

 

[The Donut]

We use jQuery - Flash has too many disavantages, non-spiderable content being one of them.

 

[Sgraffite]

I use jQuery, it saves a lot of time and there is a lot of support and add-ons for it.

It doesn't really make sense to reprogram things that already exist. For instance if you want a graph, you could use the Flot jQuery plugin or equivalent, if you want tooltips you could use the qtip jQuery plugin or equivalent.

In what case would it make more sense to "want to program" and write your own version of those from scratch?

 

[Deleted member 12930]

I use jQuery, however I don't go plugin crazy either. Most the time I'm writing my own jquery code to achieve what I need, which is usually because I'm not happy with the plugins that might be relevant.

I also tend to shy away from having animated anything in work I do. Besides the occasional slideshow on the homepage. They tend to just be more of a headache in the long run. I also refuse to use flash for anything, with the only exception being video.

 

[phide]

I use jQuery, however I don't go plugin crazy either. Most the time I'm writing my own jquery code to achieve what I need, which is usually because I'm not happy with the plugins that I might be relevant.

Same. Most jQuery plug-ins fall into two categories:

A) Plug-ins that attempt to do absolutely everything, including mowing your lawn and feeding your cat, for the low low price of 60 KB (58.6 KB of which you don't need).
B) Plug-ins that attempt to be lightweight and efficient but are otherwise too poorly written or simply over-efficient and limited to be directly usable. jqModal is an excellent example.

As far as jQuery itself is concerned, I've yet to encounter a scenario in which I'm saying "the way this works is stupid and it should work like this". There will always be those who scoff at it due to its popularity, but as far as there being anything terribly wrong with it, I haven't found anything notable.

 

[Bigbacon]

jquery/css...

same here, I rarely use plugins or I just write my own.

I also still heavily use just regular javascript.

For me, I really LOVE programming the client side stuff with JS/jquery.

 

[mrgstiffler]

Javascript/jQuery/CSS here.

I use much more pure Javascript than I do jQuery. I don't use too many jQuery plugins, maybe the same 2-3 for all my projects. All of them I've had to modify to be useful though.

 

[Tweakin]

I am all about using anything were appropriate. Which in general means using JavaScript/jQuery for client side effects on websites/apps.

I used to avoid JavaScript like the plaque until decent cross browsers frameworks like jQuery and Prototype came into existence and stabilized. Frankly, I can not imagine starting a website or web application today without including reset.css and jquery.min.js before I start doing anything with the markup.

 

[Dark Prodigy]

Is the trend toward jQuery because of better mobile support... Or simply because some fruit company won't support flash on their popular devices... really?

Even though Action Script is very similar to JS, Flash is just so easy to work with in comparison. Is this all about plug-in support? 1.5yrs ago Flash was king of the hill... why the sudden shift... And don't tell me its simply about SEO...

 

[phide]

Why use a browser plug-in when you can do it "natively" with JavaScript? Besides, how do you get separate Flash objects to interact with each other or with the DOM? How do you bind events to page load events? Last time I developed with Flash, this was all impossible.

With JavaScript (ECMAScript, in reality), you have that capability; it's fast and it isn't dependent on the user having a browser plug-in. For complex animation with vectors, Flash still makes sense, but otherwise it isn't particularly advantageous. jQuery just simplifies DOM selection, manipulation, animation and events and it runs on damn near anything that's fast enough at JS execution.

 

[Deleted member 12930]

Is the trend toward jQuery because of better mobile support... Or simply because some fruit company won't support flash on their popular devices... really?

You really think that's why jQuery/JavaScript is popular? It's not. jQuery was gaining traction before the iphone even came to market. In fact, I think before the iphone was even announced.

And yes, a lot of it does come down to SEO. When Flash was REALLY popular, SEO was a magical term that no one understood, and no one cared about. Back then the web wasn't nearly as saturated with content as it is now. So it was easier to get traffic even with poor SEO. But now you have to be really aware of that. Also, back then there were a lot of ways to trick search engines into upping your rank. Now... not so much.

JavaScript has been used for interactivity in websites for years upon years. It's just usually hidden behind other terms; DHTML being one of them. Hell, a lot of ignorant people probably think jQuery is a programming language, all together separate from JavaScript...

Even though Action Script is very similar to JS, Flash is just so easy to work with in comparison. Is this all about plug-in support? 1.5yrs ago Flash was king of the hill... why the sudden shift... And don't tell me its simply about SEO...

Flash is easy for you to work with because of your bias towards it. My bias is towards JS, and while I have plenty of experience in Flash/AS, I find it an absolute pain to work with. See how that works?

If you want to actually compare the two, consider this; with JS, you don't have to publish or compile your code. You just drop the file onto the web server.

With JS you don't have to include embed or object code and then require a plug-in for people to view your site. Hell the fact that there are jQuery plugins written to make embedding flash easier should be a hint as to how "easy" it is.

There are also far fewer assets to keep track of and maintain with JS. With Flash you have the FLA, the SWF files, then either external AS files, or code within frames of your timeline in the FLA. You have a library of images, buttons, and movies all within the FLA to maintain. Then you probably have half those files also externally in your file structure that you probably keep for reference.

In JS, you have any plug-ins and library files in one location, and any images used in potentially another. But realistically, you don't even need to have a JS library. Everything could be done using pure JS. So let's say that best case you have one JS file.

Now, I'm sure you'll come back and give me counter-point after counter-point. That also goes to prove my point; every developer will have a preference one way or another.

Don't get me wrong, there's certain things that just simply can't be done in JS alone. Games and the like. But then there are other things that just shouldn't be done in Flash either, such as menus or content delivery.

The fact that you consider Flash to have been "king of the hill" only 1.5 years ago shows me how out of touch you really are. The shift away from Flash hasn't been sudden at all. It probably started with prototype back in 2005. But like I said, people were using JavaScript for years before that.

... wow, i didn't intend for this post to be so long...

 

[Imaulle]

just as a 'web user' I have always found Flash so freaking annoying... I'd say there are very very few flash sites that are actually well made :\

 

[maw]

I love jQuery, but damn, every time I don't use it for a couple of months, I feel like I have to re-learn it all over again.

 

[whatisboom]

I'm going with jQuery as well, other than the initial jQuery library, self-written scripts are truly minimal and painless. As long as you're comfortable with CSS (selectors) its really not hard to control any element on the screen.

I do agree though that tools like jQuery and MooTools have watered down the interactive web design experience with the "plugin" flood.

 

[Loctus]

I love jquery, I don't use 3rd party plugins much though, I make my own.

 

[iKnowKungFoo]

it just seems no one wants to program anymore...and just knit a bunch of plug-ins together without really knowing any code. What say you.

Anymore? People have NEVER wanted to program. Why do you think FrontPage made so much cash for MS back in the day? All those JavaScript cut&paste sites from the 90's and early 00's have been migrated to a standard, cross-browser, easy to implement series of jQuery plugins.

And who backs jQuery? Microsoft and Adobe. You can't get away from it. I love it. I built my own library years ago for a major project and wish I had just picked up jQuery instead. So much wasted time.

Don't get me wrong, I love Flash too. But it's the right tool for the right job and 98% of the time a site's navigation menu is not the right place for Flash. Also know that many big companies don't allow Flash to be installed, and as long as jQuery supports MSIE 6 you're good to go.

The only thing lacking in jQuery IMO is a native grid widget and they've recently announced that project. I can't wait.

 

[Drewcifer]

jQuery for sure.

time = saved. and if you use it within reason it degrades nicely

 

[Ankle]

CSS3. The only time I touch Javascript is for manipulating the DOM.

 

[adamt19]

figures i join to post my build and end up posting my first post in a web design thread!

jquery whenever possible - should be the mantra

flash when nothing else will the job within the parameters allotted. And sometimes the job parameters include: 'with a staff of x, and a budget of x" - rendering flash and its easy authoring environment and quick turnaround time for advanced features.. the best tool for the job

 

[Crax]

I use JQuery, but rarely really use plugins. I may look at their source to see how they are doing something, but as mentioned above, some of them do a lot more than needed. I try to keep it all minimal.

 

[snokarver]

I use whichever I deem appropriate for the task at hand. If I can use JavaScript, I will. But there's a lot of things it can't do, at least without thousands of hours of work. They each have their strengths and weaknesses.

And Google can crawl Flash: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/google-learns-to-crawl-flash.html

I do use existing libraries when available. I don't see the point in writing something myself if it's already been done before and distributed under the GPL.