flashamation archiflash

1. 1

   ralph on June 13, 2002 at 11:15 am

   Where was the 1% good?

   Almost makes you want to change the name of the field….

2. 2

   mims on June 13, 2002 at 11:42 am

   It reminds me of that controversy over that video game that caused little kids to have seizures.

3. 3

   vanderwal on June 13, 2002 at 6:16 pm

   The damn thing moved so fast I could not read it. But I think it was some Inf… Ar… Group, which I think may be the Infertile Arachnids Group my neighbor was looking for. Truly it is rare to see anybody abuse information in the manner this site did, and yet think they knew something about fixing such maladies.

4. 4

   DJ on June 14, 2002 at 7:21 am

   Well, just goes to prove that NNGroup’s decision is the right one, no?

   Cheers, d

5. 5

   erin on June 14, 2002 at 10:09 am

   This is just an example of bad design period. Flash only adds to the insult. The typography is bad, the design is bad, the motion and use of flash is bad, the quality of the images – the jpegs are so poorly rendered I had to clean my glasses to make sure they weren’t dirty, things were so fuzzy.
   Yuk!

   This gives all design a bad name and doesn’t look good for IA either, given their name.

6. 6

   Anne on June 14, 2002 at 12:45 pm

   Darwinism will take care of that one eventually.

7. 7

   Chad Lundgren on June 14, 2002 at 4:52 pm

   Those graphics are like one of those fuzzy text T-shirts.

   I had a potential client today off-handedly mention a site the president of his company liked, describing it as having a lot of “Flash”. I heard the capital F. Boy, was I glad to discover the only animation was a relatively harmless animated GIF, and apparently only had “flash”.

Comments are closed.