It seems that getting by without Flash is becoming easier (there’s no Flash on the iPhone or the iPad, for example), and I’m looking forward to a future where open technologies like HTML5 will render Flash obsolete (for more about why open standards matter, see my interview with Bruce Lawson of Opera). However,  even though HTML5 video is becoming more commonplace, and I don’t come across Flash-based websites quite as often as I once did, I don’t think I could do without having Flash installed on my machine just yet. Personally, I don’t believe Flash is enough of a security risk or a resource hog to force myself into having to use workarounds to access web content on a daily basis. What do you think, though? Could you live without Flash?

Photo courtesy Flickr user e³°°°, licensed under CC

Since the dawn of the Internet, it’s been an article of faith that connection speeds will get faster and costs will drop. We might be seeing the end of that trend. If predictions are correct, we’ll be facing a mobile bandwidth shortage in just a couple of years.

Once upon a time, web developers knew that we had to keep graphics to a minimum, since many Internet users had slow dial-up connections. Today, we’ve become dependent on multimedia, which, in many cases, is a crutch for those who don’t have the time or just don’t want to bother to write effective site content. This is a bad idea. Sites with content that is wholly, or mostly, contained in videos are probably not reaching:

• Most of the people who use mobile devices, including iPhones. Over 50 percent of Internet shoppers are using mobile devices, most of which don’t support Flash, and have small screens that don’t display images — especially moving images — well.
• Many people with mobile connections who have data plans that cap bandwidth use. Exceeding those caps can be very expensive. You and I are probably already considered part of the “mobile workforce,” and this category is growing rapidly. One-third of all workers are anticipated to be mobile by 2013. These users will likely be on capped connections.
• People who don’t install Flash for security reasons.
• People with old browsers.
• People with visual disabilities.
• People who are behind corporate firewalls.
• People who use software or browser add-ons that block multimedia content.

If you’re a web developer, or are updating your web presence, try not to get too dependent on video, audio and other bandwidth hogs. I like a friendly multimedia experience as much as anyone. But do yourself a favor and ask these questions.

• Is this video (or audio) really necessary, or is it being included because it’s easier than actually writing a cogent description of what the site is about?
• If you must include a video, then what will people see if they can’t load the file? Will the site degrade gracefully? That is, will people see helpful alternative content?

It’s possible that faster, better and cheaper bandwidth may be on the horizon. Google seems to want that. But they are also pushing projects to increase the efficiency of the web. So living with limited bandwidth may be the next “inconvenient tech truth,” and we should plan our web projects accordingly.

How can you make your web projects more bandwidth-efficient?

Image from sxc.hu user CDWaldi

I want to find the perfect flash drive like baseball pitchers want a perfect game. The perfect gadget is elusive and amazingly rare, and I’ve often come tantalizing close to finding it without actually getting there. I think I’ve found the perfect drive now, but I’ve thought that in the past, too. So, here’s a run down of where I’ve come from, and where I’m at now, and why I think I’ve come as close to perfection as possible.

Monarchs of Old

Two flash drives come to mind when I think back on the long parade of USB keys that have come and gone over the course of my life as a gadget-addicted web worker. Both shared some similarities, but I liked them more for their differences than for what they had in common.

Lexar FireFly

The FireFly represents the first time I paid attention to the case design of a flash drive. Before this, it didn’t matter what it looked like, and to my mind, none really looked that good anyway. It didn’t matter that there were complaints about the speed of the drive, and even some murmurs about high failure rates. It felt solid, had a blue glow, and genuinely resembled its namesake.

When I started using a FireFly, a 512MB capacity drive was all that I really needed. I still have the neon green one that I had back then, and it still works, though I don’t use it any more because all of my documents are now online, and at that capacity there’s very little else I can carry on it. They’re still available from Lexar, but the capacities don’t seem to be increasing and keeping track of the cap started to become a nuisance, so I moved on.

SanDisk MicroCruzer

To escape the tyranny of caps, I moved on to the MicroCruzer, which again boasts a pretty attractive form factor, but with a retractable USB connector to eliminate the need for protective covers. A reassuring orange glow lets you know it’s working, and you get the reassurance of using a SanDisk flash product, a company I’ve found to be tremendously reliable. Many of my MicroCruzers are still in service.

But not all. The retraction trick may prevent the connector from getting damaged and reduce the need for a cap, but with lots of repeated use it seems to wear down, and now some won’t catch when extended, making it much harder to connect them to the computer. And it shares the same small but chunky design with the FireFly, which means they still feel like a bulky imposition in my pants pockets.

Current Ruler

LaCie CooKey/IamaKey/WhizKey

The flash drive so nice they made it thrice. LaCie originally released the IamaKey model of this drive, which I bought as soon as I became aware that it existed. It’s a USB key meant to resemble an actual key, thanks to a housing designed by 5.5 Designers for the Mac-friendly accessory maker. When that model took off, LaCie introduced two further designs that essentially replicated the form factor.

Which is a good thing, because it’s actually perfect, insofar as my current flash memory needs go. The keys come in a range of capacities, from 8GB to 32GB, and they sport a rugged metal design. They’re as thin as house keys, so they fit can on your key ring. The connector is one-sided (doesn’t have the traditional box of a male USB connector, only the business side with the contacts), which allows for the thinness of design.

A little plastic cover is provided for those who are paranoid about damaging the contacts, but as someone who promptly lost that cover on his first key, let me tell you that it isn’t at all necessary. The construction of the contacts is such that they seem impervious, even when kept with the rest of your keys in a pocket filled with change and other bric-a-brac. They’re easily portable, functional, unobtrusive and stylish. Plus clients and people I meet in the course of doing business almost always fall in love with them, so they help with networking and they make great corporate gifts, too.

Have you found the perfect flash drive?

Related GigaOM Pro Research:

• “Do Consumers Care Where Their Content Is Stored?“
• “Bringing Moore’s Law to the Data Storage Market“

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Do Consumers Care Where Their Content Is Stored?
• Bringing Moore’s Law to the Data Storage Market
• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010

Do you avoid AIR apps because they are so resource-hungry?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

It has an interface that I find more attractive than some of the other products I’ve looked at. Its navigation is better than Peago‘s, with menus that seem logical to me, and slide-out sidebars that can be made to appear and disappear as desired. Ubidesk is Flash-based, however, so it won’t be useful in corporate and mobile environments where that technology isn’t available.

Ubidesk has a nice range of features, most of which are pretty standard in web-based project management apps, including:

• Online document editing, with the ability to see who wrote what, revision history, and the ability to lock documents.
• Task management, with calendar and Gantt-chart type views, along with the ability to assign and track tasks, and to link documents to a specific project. Calendars can be exported via iCal.
• User management, allowing administrators to set up project leaders, and to invite others to collaborate with them on specific projects or documents.
• Email notifications that can be adjusted to meet user needs. Ubidesk doesn’t support RSS, however.
• Help that is easily accessible, well-written and useful.

Ubidesk also has some unusual features, including the Notepad, a sidebar element where one can take notes while viewing any of the site’s screens, then save the notes as a document. This feature wasn’t working for me a few days ago, but is now operational again.

One feature might be confusing: Ubidesk makes a distinction between “Docs” and “Files.” “Docs” can be created and edited online using a Word-type editor, but apparently can’t be imported. They can be emailed and exported as Word, PDF and HTML.

“Files,” on the other hand, can be imported, exported, and previewed, but can’t be edited online. They can be in several formats. I tried previewing DOC, XLS, GIF, JPG, PDF, and even an old WordPefect file; the online viewer displayed them all. (I couldn’t upload a 23MB Powerpoint file, which returned the error “This file is too large,” even though the service can supposedly accept files of up to 300MB.) Since Files can’t be edited online, Ubidesk has a feature called “Direct Edit,” which apparently allows files to be edited directly by the software on your local computer, then re-uploaded to Ubidesk. I couldn’t test it, though, because it requires MS Word and Firefox 3.0+ running under Windows.

Ubidesk is in beta. Several new features have appeared in the past week, so it’s obvious that the service is evolving rapidly. It’s being offered at no charge during the beta, but several subscription levels are planned, ranging from $14 to $119 per month. I wouldn’t depend on Ubidesk for anything mission-critical right now, but it’s a service worth keeping an eye on.

Have you tried Ubidesk?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

As with classic email lists, Convos allows group members to send and reply to messages via email. But Convos has a larger feature set than standard email groups, including:

• A web interface where members can see and update what the group is working on. This password-protected, advertising-free web site includes panes to compose and display messages, upload files, manage tasks and schedules, and create and view on-screen pages. The interface has a custom URL like “group_name.convos.com” to which you can add your own logo.
• A system for creating and getting RSVPs for events.
• A system for posting comments and questions (which can be anonymous if desired).
• The ability to add subgroups, which could be useful for organizations with a committee structure.

But although Convos has a task module, it isn’t really a project management system: Its content is not organized by projects. If you need to manage projects, you’ll notice what Convos doesn’t have:

• The ability to group tasks together as part of larger milestones.
• The ability to assign tasks to specific members.
• Project management features, like Gantt charts.

Convos also doesn’t have any Twitter-like microblogging status updates. The Convos web interface looks a bit like a simplified version of Peago, which I recently reviewed. And it has many of the same limitations: It’s Flash-based, built in Flex and Silverlight, which means it’s not suited for corporate environments that limit Flash, or for mobile devices. Convos also shares with Peago a navigation structure that can be confusing; you can simplify the display by turning panes on and off, but the interface can get pretty crowded unless you’re using full-screen mode in a large monitor.

Convos has several pricing plans, ranging from a free version that allows five group members and 50MB of storage for files, to the $100 per month “Large” plan that allows 4GB of storage for unlimited members and subgroups.

Convos bills itself as “professional online groups.” If you need more than something like a Google Group can offer, and don’t mind the limitations of a Flash-based interface, then Convos may be for you. But if you need to manage projects, you’ll probably be better off with a full-featured project management system.

Have you used Convos? How do you communicate with groups?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

Peago, a Flash-based PM tool, has some nice features, but in my opinion they’re overshadowed by a difficult interface.

There are certainly some things to like about Peago:

• It offers several free and paid options, as well as a 14-day trial. The site says that there are “no contracts, upgrade or cancel anytime for any reason.”
• The sign-up process is easy.
• Peago has a lot of useful features that are now standard in project management sites, plus some that aren’t seen as frequently, like timelines, Gantt charts, and an ingenious use of drag-and-drop for doing things like assigning users to tasks.
• The interface is clean. Everything is on one screen, and Peago makes use of various programming tricks to show and hide elements as needed. This works, but causes navigation headaches (see below).
• The program has a useful, if limited, help system. It also makes extensive use of tool tips, most of which are helpful and to the point.

There are other things about Peago that I don’t like. Some are mere nitpicks, others are more major problems:

• The “tour” page isn’t very detailed. It consists of a couple of screenshots and a video. I dislike the increasing reliance on video to sell complex technology products.
• Peago is Flash-based. I’ve discussed the limitations of Flash before (and started a lively debate) but in this case, Peago’s dependence on it precludes compatibility with mobile devices and low-bandwidth connections.
• Navigation seems simple at first glance, but mini-menus, tabs, tool tips and icons are sprinkled all over the screen. Windows appear, resize and disappear in odd places. Icons are non-standard and take some getting used to. And once I’d opened a particular screen, it wasn’t obvious how to get back a screen I’d used before. Being Flash-based, of course, the back button in the browser didn’t help.

As someone who spends a lot of time working with user interfaces, I’m sure that I — and most web workers — would get used to the navigation eventually. But I doubt that many of my clients or the less tech-savvy people I sometimes work with would find Peago very easy to use.

Peago’s feature set is good, and its pricing is on a par with other, similar solutions. If the site’s navigation can be improved, Peago could become a worthy competitor in the crowded project management field.

Have you used Peago? How do you manage projects?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

PHP still holds the No. 1 spot (as it has since February), but what’s more interesting are the “movers and shakers” this month. In particular, jobs in the “Graphic Design” and “Adobe Flash” categories have leaped up the index this month to end up in second and third places overall (up ten and six spots from last month, respectively) — this is good news for designers. Another big mover is jobs in the “Joomla!” category (breaking into the top 10 by rising 10 places to eighth), suggesting that there’s increasing demand for people skilled in the open-source CMS.

It’s more of a mixed bag for writers: While “Copywriting” (up 11 places to 23rd), “Editing” (up 16 spots to 48th)  and “Proofreading” (up 15 spots to 44th) are all winners, “Article Writing” (down five places to 7th) and “Online Writing” (down 12 places to 29th) are dropping down the index.

While some of these categories sound too similar to take this index all that seriously (how different is “Online Writing” from “Web Content,” really?) and you should remember that this is taking into account only jobs posted on one site, it’s still worth noting as a snapshot of the current freelance marketplace.

Here’s the Elance Online Work Index Top 10 for July.

1. PHP (–)
2. Graphic Design (+10)
3. Adobe Flash (+6)
4. MySQL (-1)
5. HTML (-1)
6. Web Content (+1)
7. Article Writing (-5)
8. Joomla! (+10)
9. CSS (-4)
10. WordPress (-2)

(Disclaimer: WordPress is produced by Automattic, a company that is backed by True Ventures, a venture capital firm that is an investor in the parent company of this blog, Giga Omni Media. Om Malik, founder of Giga Omni Media, is also a venture partner at True Partners.)

Designers: Are you noticing an increase in demand for your skills recently?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Report: High-Impact Collaboration in the Enterprise
• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis

Don’t get me wrong: Flash is fine when used for specific purposes, such as video playback and animation. But it can be overused. There was a fad for Flash-based web site introduction screens several years ago. We quickly found that just about everybody was clicking the “skip intro” link. (There was even a site dedicated to Flash usability called “Skip Intro.”) As a result, Flash introductions are much rarer these days. Still, Flash is ubiquitous, and that can cause problems.

• There are too many Flash sites that are one big SWF file. This can mean that site visitors must wait for the whole file to load before links become clickable. And, of course, in such sites the browser’s back button is disabled, or will take visitors completely away from the site (unless the file was displayed in a popup window, and I’m sure everyone realizes the problems that that causes).
• Despite the Google improvements, Flash sites are not as search-engine friendly as text-based sites. See SEO expert Josh Freedman’s Ten Tips for a Better Website.
• As of a year ago, Flash had not yet achieved 40 percent penetration of the cell phone market.
• Adobe claims that “Flash content reaches 99 percent of Internet viewers,” but this figure only applies to the U.S., Canada, the UK, France, Germany and Japan. What about the rest of the world?
• Because of the file sizes involved, Flash sites don’t work well for folks with limited-bandwidth connections.
• Flash sites can be made accessible to those with disabilities, but require special techniques that are not widely used.

I’m sure that Flash enthusiasts will have lots of ways to get around these limitations. But really, why build a site that requires such workarounds, when you can make an appealing site with no, or limited, use of Flash?

When do you use Flash, and what alternatives have you found for creating visual appeal on your sites?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

Wix — founded in New York by ex-venture capitalist, Allon Bloch — offers users the ability to create a free, SEO-friendly, Flash-based web site using only drag-and-drop tools. I’m surprised I hadn’t come across Wix before, as according to the company’s PR, more than 500,000 users are actively using the service, a fifth of whom joined from the UK just last month.

Wix appears to be targeting professionals in various industries who want to set up a glossy site very quickly. The directory of published sites ranges from photographers, stylists, designers and actors to real estate companies, bands and arts sites.

What’s particularly notable about Wix isn’t the Flash-based authoring tools, but the ability to publish “widgetized” versions of your site to MySpace and Facebook, as well as publishing to online marketplaces such as Etsy, Craigslist and eBay. Handily, Paypal and Google Analytics integration is also included.

As much as I’m impressed by Wix’s ease of use, integration with third-party services and widget-publishing tools, I don’t accept that a Flash-based site is superior to HTML. To quote usability guru Jakob Nielson:

Although multimedia has its role on the Web, current Flash technology tends to discourage usability for three reasons: it makes bad design more likely, it breaks with the Web’s fundamental interaction style, and it consumes resources that would be better spent enhancing a site’s core value.

As pretty as many Wix-powered sites are, they don’t contain anything that couldn’t be produced using HTML and CSS. Flash has its place as a video and animation tool, and to some extent as an interactivity mechanism.

Wixs assert that the thousands usually spent on producing a Flash-based site can be reduced to a hundred dollars or so using a premium Wix account. It’s not difficult to see the appeal of Wix to anyone lacking the skills to produce Flash-based sites, or indeed to professional designers using the service to produce low-end sites for clients.

What do you think? Is Flash a good substitute for general site design?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected Consumer Market Overview, Q2 2010
• Google TV: Overview and Strategic Analysis
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech