We just welcomed our second son this morning (of course, he looks so much like our first son that you’ll just have to take my word that this is a picture of number #2.

Mom’s fine.

After two weeks of downtime, BeyondSecond.com is back up!

What happened?

Roughly two weeks ago, Beyond Second’s hosting provider migrated to new servers. The hosting provider resells RackSpace (one of the biggest and most reliable hosts in the business), so the hardware wasn’t the issue, however, our hosting provider apparently didn’t prepare for the DNS changes associated with such a move. In the end, what this meant was that the site went down, and we couldn’t even access the site files to download and move them.

So what did you do?

We were finally able to access the site files after four days–even though the site was still not displaying at the Web address. Ultimately, this oversight by our host, compiled with the fact that we were exceeding our hosting limit (and would have had to pay extra for more space), made us decide to change hosting providers. We settled on Bluehost, one of the largest shared hosting companies out there. Besides their reliability, they offer unlimited hosting space, so B2 won’t be running out of space in the near future (if ever!).

But what took so long?

There were a variety of issues, starting with establishing old account info with Bluehost (B2 actually had an account on Bluehost back in ’06), to permissions issues (1600 photos were stubbornly not backing up). Trust me, this couldn’t have occurred at a worse time, as work has been really busy and my wife’s technically due with our next child as I write this.

It was really cool hearing from those of you who immediately noticed the site was down, and I apologize for the delays. Once things settle down a bit here, I’m hoping we can add some new features to the site to further support the community. In the meanwhile, happy posting, and if you notice any issues please ping me!

Designing my own portfolio has always been one of the most time-consuming projects because I, like any other designer, become my own harshest critic.

While I still intend to redo my company’s site in Flash, I decided in the meantime to redo my portfolio in an iPhone-friendly format by using only HTML, CSS, and Javascript (For those that might have come across my guest post on Fathom’s blog, I’m sure this must come off as an about-face). I didn’t really use HTML 5-specific tags like <header>, <footer>, etc., since my site needed to remain accessible, and I relied heavily on JQuery for the animation. Up until this point, I’ve read the complaints for and against both Flash and HTML 5, but this gave me the opportunity to guinea pig my own site and experience the issues firsthand.

Development Environment Differences

The first big difference I noticed was the work environment. JavaScript wasn’t really intended as an object-oriented language, and the work process felt much messier than building the site in classes (ala ActionScript). Furthermore, since many of the divs were hidden on page load, I felt that I wasn’t able to quickly preview elements during development. I ended up relying heavily on the Firefox Firebug plugin and going back-and-forth between the browser and the code.

Search Engine Accessibility

From a search engine standpoint, the differences between the two technologies feels somewhat of a wash. Both sites would have a page title and meta tags, so there’s no big advantage for either here. On the plus side for HTML, absolutely everything can be interpreted by all major search engines. Had I done the site in Flash, only Google would have been able to partially parse the SWF file. On the other hand, I couldn’t take advantage of separate URL paths or page titles like I could with Flash (with the addition of the SWFAddress). the only way I could have done this would be to force a page refresh–an interruption in the experience I really didn’t want to occur. Actually, Asual has the JQuery Address plug-in, which does the same thing as SWFAddress. Thanks @kweerious.

Font Options

The decision of HTML over Flash heavily impacted my font choices as well, since HTML pages are reliant upon client machines having the font installed. Flash, on the other hand, can simply embed the font. Granted, there’s alternatives, like SiFR and Cufón, however, I didn’t want to use Flash replacement text and don’t like the fact that Cufón doesn’t allow for text selection (neither of these options, by the way, seem to be intended for extensive font use).

Another option is to use the @font-face call with the Web Open Font Format (WOFF). This format places font files on the server for the HTML page to reference, and is currently the frontrunner for inclusion in the HTML 5 spec. WOFF is certainly the most elegant (see the recently-designed splash page I completed for metalledwith for example), however, because the font files are available on the server, the file can easily be downloaded illegally. Not wanting to infringe upon the license I have for Futura and not wanting to make all of the text into images, i simply used a safe system font (Trebuchet).

Browser Inconsistencies

A good front end designer ensures that their Website renders consistently across a variety of browsers. In the case of Flash, there’s really no need to test, as the plug-in ensures consistency across browsers and platforms. In my case, Internet Explorer protested to using transparent PNG files, so it required additional code. Furthermore, while the code I used to generate an image reflection is proven to work in IE7, it didn’t want to work with how I built the reflection into the JQuery Cycle plug-in. I’m sure there would have been a way to make it work, but frankly, I didn’t feel it was worth the time–besides, IE users should already be accustomed to limitations.

Performance

Performance-wise, I was a little surprised to see that the animations were sluggish on the iPad and iPhone in comparison to their desktop counterparts. Granted, JQuery isn’t the fastest JavaScript framework on the market, but I was expecting at least slightly better performance compared to how Flash performs on Android devices. Overall, I suppose it only reinforced my agreement with Apple that intense animations in Flash would yield poor performance on their mobile devices.

My biggest issue with the end product, though, is how the site downloads. I’ve seen it before–JavaScript-based sites can’t preload animations or elements well, and therefore animations start playing before all of the elements have downloaded. The reason for this is because the HTML page attempts to download all of the elements contained in it–even if they are set not to display.

I’m a firm believer that you don’t tax the user with downloading content they haven’t requested, so I tried implementing the LazyLoader plug-in to ease the site download. I honestly don’t have complete faith in this plugin, but fortunately, the site is relatively small. Regardless, Flash currently blows HTML out of the water with its programmatic ability to queue and download content without requiring a page refresh.

Conclusion

I’m sure that the development tools will continue to evolve and I’m not claiming that my implementation of the all the various plug-ins was constructed in perfect harmony (anyone out there, please correct me if there’s a better approach). In the end, this endeavor opened my eyes to some of the things JavaScript can replace Flash for, but HTML 5′s inability to create a length presentation (without a page refresh or complete asset download) makes me believe that Flash isn’t going anywhere for a long time.

It’s inevitable; every designer does it at some point in their career.

They create something. They efficiently solve their design problem. Then, they later realize it looks almost exactly like something someone else hsd already done. Such was the case when I came up with the logo for my company in 2006. Yes, it was just different enough to serve its purpose, though a few industry friends always made it a point to never let me forget that I’m not in the high-end furniture industry.

Four years and several dead ends later, I’m proud to have a more unique nameplate, I was a little sad to push the Trebuchet font out the door for the far more common Futura, but overall, i think the new logo is a big improvement over the original.

Now, I just have to find out what to do with all those outdated business cards . . .

I’ll be hosting a discussion on using Photoshop to improve one’s pictures (I like the word discussion since class is out for the semester). What’s probably bigger incentive for everyone is that there will be a raffle for a copy of Photoshop CS5.

Event details here.

http://dknite.wordpress.com/2010/05/19/firefox-sync-1-3-is-coming/

The name’s not as cool, but it definitely is more concise. Weave’s something I’ve been watching since the Nokia N900 came out, and I’m hoping it finds its way into the Webkit/iPhone OS world.

UPDATE: Looks like I’m getting my wish.

I recently had a client inquire about the feasibility of replacing some of their Flash content with HTML 5 (they’re a very large organization and require supporting a variety of browsers). Of course, the inquiry spawned from the iPad. Here’s an excerpt of my response–I thought it’d be valuable to share.

1. Universal browser support is not here yet.
   You’ll notice that Internet Explorer versions 6,7, and 8 support nearly nothing of HTML 5. You’ll also notice that these tests don’t account for older versions of Firefox or Safari, neither of which are likely to provide as much support as their current editions.

   http://www.deepbluesky.com/blog/-/browser-support-for-css3-and-html5_72/
   http://findmebyip.com/litmus/#target-selector
   http://html5test.com/

2. HTML 5 Tools don’t yet exist, and the community is still young.
   HTML editing software hasn’t been updated/created to accurately write and validate HTML 5. Granted, HTML 5 can be written by hand, but the workaround to unilaterally support modern browsers has not been fully discovered or documented.
3. HTML 5 will not be finalized until 2022. See comments below.
   I have no doubt that browsers will continually progress with supporting the market’s ongoing “definition” of HTML5, however, since the W3C’s (the governing organization behind the Web) current roadmap doesn’t finalize the spec until 2022, much can change in that time. Based on past history, HTML 5 could drastically change–or even be completely abandoned.

   http://www.webmonkey.com/2008/09/html_5_won_t_be_ready_until_2022dot_yes__2022dot/
   http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/programming-and-development/?p=718

Personally, I own an iPad, and am excited by the potential of HTML 5, and while I do a significant amount of Flash development, I look forward to HTML 5 replacing certain tasks that Flash Player had to fill. That said, HTML 5 is not yet a valid solution for mainstream Websites, especially when Flash Player runs on ~99% of Web browsers (including mobile devices besides Apple’s). Also, while I agree with many of the points on Steve Jobs’ open letter, Apple’s financial incentives of eliminating Flash and Java games to emphasize the iTunes store are hard to overlook.

They give you a handy box for the four hardcover books you get with attending the seminar.

I recently attended Presenting Data and Information, a day-long seminar by Edward Tufte.

I suppose, for starters, that I’m rather surprised at how few people know who Tufte is. Of course, the ones that do recognize the name know him for his recent White House appointment, his distaste for PowerPoint, and his invention of Sparklines.

A common question I get from people after attending the seminar is “Was it worth it?” At $380 a pop, it’s definitely not cheap (add another $170 in train tickets for me on a sleep-deprived Friday), and judging from the number of attendees (estimating 400 at the NYC seminar), I wouldn’t be surprised if the pulled in a cozy six figures after expenses.

Sugarcoating aside, it’s a scheme to sell books (You receive four of Tufte’s books). Thing is, they’re four excellent books, and Tufte utilizes them as high-resolution graphics for his presentation. As soon as you sit down, you’re given a reading assignment–several pages and a few chapters–prior to the presentation beginning.

During the presentation, I found myself often looking up, expecting slide show images to accompany the topics, but often found that wasn’t the case. The epiphany for me, however, was the reminder that people do learn differently, and that a handout prior to any presentation allows students to absorb the material in a variety of ways. Tufte’s comment that people can read faster than you can speak somehow reminded me of my grad school days studying neurolinguistics.

I can't say I've ever had a bookcover autographed before.

I also collected a few new favorite quotes– “No matter how beautiful your interface is, it’d be more beautiful if there were less of it” and “Design is a resource problem, not a creative act“.

So, was it worth it? I’d say yes, though I must admit that I attended based on reputation and never picked up any of his books before. Of course, all of the material is pretty much in the books, anyway, So buying the books by themselves offers a much cheaper alternative.

There’s been a lot of talk regarding the future of Adobe Flash thanks to the blockade generated by Apple on the iPad and iPhone. It’s been covered extensively by the news media and blogs, but I figured as a Flash developer/designer, I’d chime in.

To paint a picture of my stance, I will say that:

1. I hope open-source OGG format replaces Flash video. Flash has standardized a ubiquitous video format for the Web, and it’s wonderful evolution we can’t deny. Gone are the days of multiple encodings for Quicktime, Real Player, and Windows Media, and I doubt supervision excluding a for-profit company would have succeeded. That said, I think the Web has evolved, and the fact that HTML 5 has dropped OGG as the definitive format is a politically-driven mistake. We, as the creators of the Web, should be embracing an open video format.
2. I’m not an Adobe fanboy. Flash provides a format of expression unlike any other, and while I admit that Flash work is my bread-and-butter (and that I’m coincidentally wearing Adobe-branded apparel as I write this), I recognize Adobe is a company that answers to its shareholders. Frankly, their Open Screen Project and claims of Flash being an “open” platform register strictly as propaganda to me, and I felt the need to point out this stance because of the opinions I’ve encountered at some Adobe user groups.
3. I don’t believe HTML 5 is the Messiah. I support universal formats that ensure consistency between browsers. However, formats, while well-intentioned, don’t always reach the Web–they are ultimately dictated by the market. If that wasn’t the case, we’d all be discussing XHTML 2.0 instead of HTML 5 and be visiting .MOBI sites instead of using Webkit on our phones.
4. Flash isn’t going anywhere. Flash is used for more than just the Web–it’s great for standalone applications, and its games can’t be successfully emulated with HTML + JS. Furthermore, it allows for data without browser refreshing, and provides a more media-rich interactive experience. Regarding standards, see #3.
5. I want to see Flash Player on the iPad and the iPhone, but I believe this responsibility falls to Adobe.

I think something many in the Flash community fail to realize is that Flash Player doesn’t play well on mobile, and it’s not exclusive to Apple products. I know firsthand, as I considered purchasing a Nokia N900 as a result of Apple’s embargo. I checked out Flash Player 9.4 on the N900′s browser while stopping in at NYC’s Nokia Store, and the performance was nothing short of atrocious. YouTube videos were so choppy that they weren’t viewable, and simple Flash sites crashed the browser.

I should mention that the N900 is powered by the same ARM Cortex-A8 processor as the iPhone 3GS (the 3GS is underclocked to 600 Mhz). Sure, there are videos of Google’s Nexus One playing Flash Player 10.1, however, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Nexus One’s Snapdragon 1 GHz processor is concealing Flash Player’s inherent memory issues.

Reinforcement for this argument is Mozilla’s decision to drop Flash Player support for their mobile Firefox browser just prior to launch. I’m still amazed that this hasn’t garnered as much press as the iPad announcement.

This brings me back to the title of this topic–the Future of Adobe Flash.

Personally, I wonder if Adobe might have lost its way. Their community support is excellent, and I use their industry-standard tools every day, however, they’ve seemingly become obsessed with supporting a proprietary platform instead of focusing on building excellent tools, and their evangelists seem to point outward for blame rather than looking within. As I mentioned in #5, I want to see Flash Player arrive on all of Apple’s products, however, I think this falls upon Adobe improving the player’s performance. As for my predictions:

1. Flash Player goes truly open source and somehow gets included in the HTML 5 spec. Sadly, this is unlikely, as Adobe licenses proprietary video codecs for HE-AAC and h.264. More importantly, it’d likely affect Adobe’s bottom line.
2. Adobe publishes an API for Actionscript that supports gestures. Gestureworks is already providing this, and Adobe’s not far behind. Personally, I’m holding my breath for official Flash SWF support.
3. Adobe starts building applications that publish content for HTML 5 and mobile platforms.

Obviously, #1 and #2 are less predictions than #3, but I think it’d be refreshing for Adobe to begin exploring these new mobile outlets as opportunities to provide new software. Can you imagine a software that publishes iPhone, Blackberry, and MeeGo apps–without doing translations from Flash? Now that would truly be interesting . . .

I’m a little late to post this, but BarCamp Harrisburg 2 has been officially announced. It’ll be on Saturday, April 10, 2010 from 9am to 5pm at Harrisburg University. Attendance is free–just make sure to bring topics to discuss! I was hesitant to begin promoting this so far in advance, but there’s already been a decent amount of signups, plus we already have more sponsors at this point than last year (to be announced soon).

Hopefully, the weather will be better this time around (for those not in attendance, BarCampHarrisburg 1 was held in January during an ice storm). The venue has changed, too–Harrisburg University has a tremendous facility, and the wireless and projector hiccups from last year will won’t be an issue here. Frankly, it’s awesome that they’ve been so open and enthusiastic about hosting the event.

Also new is the Website and registration process. Gone is the confusing Wiki signup, as we’re now using Eventbrite (I’ll confess to cherry-picking some of the features of BarCampPhilly’s Website approach, as it’s one of the few examples of Websites hosted outside of barcamp.org).

A common question asked by potential attendees unfamiliar with the format is whether or not they will be forced to present. The answer is no. Personally, though, I hope we have so many attendees that it’d be impossible for everyone to present. Even if Especially if you’re not in the tech or education industry (but have interest in it or the social aspects of the Internet) I recommend you check BarCamp Harrisburg 2 out.