 | |
sound on hover
Macromedia Dreamweaver Macromedia Dreamweaver Discussions (macromedia.dreamweaver)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
sound on hover -
11-14-2004
, 04:15 AM
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. |
the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful
content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when
visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar.
Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business.
However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to
go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the
users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%.
Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would
be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content
a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab
attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears"
for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content?
--
Dan Vendel - *GOF*
"Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet
engines."
Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml
Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that
you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com)
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
laughamp wrote: I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar. Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business. However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%. Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? -- Dan Vendel - *GOF* "Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines." Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com) |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content |
attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears"
for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content?
A nav is a very important aspect of any good website, without a good nav
created by a bloke who knows his stuff and who is also considered good
looking and his nickname is Pablo the content easily gets screwed because
nobody understands how to navigate to the content. The nav is the backbone
of any good website, it should be highly visible as to let users navigate to
the content they wish to view quickly and easily. Pop up menus, scrolling
weirdo things, flash, in my opinion should be avoided at all cost.
Quote:
|
Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. |
I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then
yes the smaller the better.
Hi laughamp
Don't bother with the sound effect, as Dan says it suck's.
Cheers
Pablo
"Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_ (AT) _the_bottom_of_the_po (DOT) st> a écrit dans
le message de news: cn78pp$77b$3 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...
Quote:
|
laughamp wrote: I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar. Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business. However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%. Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? -- Dan Vendel - *GOF* "Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines." Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com) |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. |
the 10 second download time that most (all?) usability experts recommend. A
56k dialup has a practical throughput of no more than 4K/second. You do the
math.
--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================
"Pablo" <dell (AT) takeoutdellwebsites (DOT) com> wrote
Quote:
|
Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? A nav is a very important aspect of any good website, without a good nav created by a bloke who knows his stuff and who is also considered good looking and his nickname is Pablo the content easily gets screwed because nobody understands how to navigate to the content. The nav is the backbone of any good website, it should be highly visible as to let users navigate to the content they wish to view quickly and easily. Pop up menus, scrolling weirdo things, flash, in my opinion should be avoided at all cost. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. Hi laughamp Don't bother with the sound effect, as Dan says it suck's. Cheers Pablo "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_ (AT) _the_bottom_of_the_po (DOT) st> a écrit dans le message de news: cn78pp$77b$3 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... laughamp wrote: I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar. Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business. However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%. Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? -- Dan Vendel - *GOF* "Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines." Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com) |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. You are free to disagree as much as you want. The 40-45K number is based on the 10 second download time that most (all?) usability experts recommend. A 56k dialup has a practical throughput of no more than 4K/second. You do the math. -- Murray --- ICQ 71997575 Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!) ================== http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage! http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes ================== "Pablo" <dell (AT) takeoutdellwebsites (DOT) com> wrote in message news:cn7ihq$kat$2 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? A nav is a very important aspect of any good website, without a good nav created by a bloke who knows his stuff and who is also considered good looking and his nickname is Pablo the content easily gets screwed because nobody understands how to navigate to the content. The nav is the backbone of any good website, it should be highly visible as to let users navigate to the content they wish to view quickly and easily. Pop up menus, scrolling weirdo things, flash, in my opinion should be avoided at all cost. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. Hi laughamp Don't bother with the sound effect, as Dan says it suck's. Cheers Pablo "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_ (AT) _the_bottom_of_the_po (DOT) st> a écrit dans le message de news: cn78pp$77b$3 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... laughamp wrote: I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar. Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business. However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%. Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? -- Dan Vendel - *GOF* "Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines." Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com) |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
No debate please, I did say the smaller the better, and also a page at 50kb will load at around 10secs. It is sometimes better in my opinion to maybe go all the way to 55 kb if the type of page will benefit. The so called experts should have better things to do with their time, there can be no proof that a user will not wait 10 secs for a page to completely load, this is nonsense. A page doesn't load BING BANG so a page weighing 50 kb will show content before someone decides they don't like looking at a blank screen. This off course does depend on the pages layout and design methods. Cheers Pablo "Murray *TMM*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> a écrit dans le message de news: cn7r29$qlb$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. You are free to disagree as much as you want. The 40-45K number is based on the 10 second download time that most (all?) usability experts recommend. A 56k dialup has a practical throughput of no more than 4K/second. You do the math. -- Murray --- ICQ 71997575 Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!) ================== http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage! http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes ================== "Pablo" <dell (AT) takeoutdellwebsites (DOT) com> wrote in message news:cn7ihq$kat$2 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? A nav is a very important aspect of any good website, without a good nav created by a bloke who knows his stuff and who is also considered good looking and his nickname is Pablo the content easily gets screwed because nobody understands how to navigate to the content. The nav is the backbone of any good website, it should be highly visible as to let users navigate to the content they wish to view quickly and easily. Pop up menus, scrolling weirdo things, flash, in my opinion should be avoided at all cost. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. Hi laughamp Don't bother with the sound effect, as Dan says it suck's. Cheers Pablo "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_ (AT) _the_bottom_of_the_po (DOT) st> a écrit dans le message de news: cn78pp$77b$3 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... laughamp wrote: I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar. Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business. However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%. Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? -- Dan Vendel - *GOF* "Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines." Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com) |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
If no debate is allowed, then why did you mention the 55K? Obviously, this number will depend on what constitutes the 40-45K, what the code on the page looks like, whether it's an interior page or a 'home' page, what is meant by "engaging content", etc., etc., etc. Anyhow, my number is better than yours. 8) -- Murray --- ICQ 71997575 Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!) ================== http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage! http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes ================== "Pablo" <dell (AT) takeoutdellwebsites (DOT) com> wrote in message news:cn7rr0$r4r$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... No debate please, I did say the smaller the better, and also a page at 50kb will load at around 10secs. It is sometimes better in my opinion to maybe go all the way to 55 kb if the type of page will benefit. The so called experts should have better things to do with their time, there can be no proof that a user will not wait 10 secs for a page to completely load, this is nonsense. A page doesn't load BING BANG so a page weighing 50 kb will show content before someone decides they don't like looking at a blank screen. This off course does depend on the pages layout and design methods. Cheers Pablo "Murray *TMM*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> a écrit dans le message de news: cn7r29$qlb$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. You are free to disagree as much as you want. The 40-45K number is based on the 10 second download time that most (all?) usability experts recommend. A 56k dialup has a practical throughput of no more than 4K/second. You do the math. -- Murray --- ICQ 71997575 Team Macromedia Volunteer for Dreamweaver (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!) ================== http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage! http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes ================== "Pablo" <dell (AT) takeoutdellwebsites (DOT) com> wrote in message news:cn7ihq$kat$2 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? A nav is a very important aspect of any good website, without a good nav created by a bloke who knows his stuff and who is also considered good looking and his nickname is Pablo the content easily gets screwed because nobody understands how to navigate to the content. The nav is the backbone of any good website, it should be highly visible as to let users navigate to the content they wish to view quickly and easily. Pop up menus, scrolling weirdo things, flash, in my opinion should be avoided at all cost. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. Hi laughamp Don't bother with the sound effect, as Dan says it suck's. Cheers Pablo "Dan Vendel *GOF*" <see_my_signature_ (AT) _the_bottom_of_the_po (DOT) st> a écrit dans le message de news: cn78pp$77b$3 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com... laughamp wrote: I create rollovers in fireworks and export them into dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to also make the rollovers play a sound (ala flash) each time I hover over and click on a slice. Thanks in advance. Why you would do that is an enigma. You have about 45Kb to spend, that's the weight a page should not exceed. Use that to fill it with useful content that will contribute to the reward the user will enjoy when visiting your site. Not "clicks" and "swosh" when using the navbar. Unless, of course, "clicks" and "swosh" when using navbars is your business. However, if you desperately need to do that, flash is the only way to go. Every other method wiill cause problems for a huge part of the users. Flash will only cause problems for 6-7%. Sorry about the rantish reply. But I wonder how much nicer the web would be if people spent the same amount of concern and time with the content a they do with the menus. A menu is a tool that should *never* grab attention from the content. Have you ever seen a catalogue with "ears" for the register that are more developed and eye catching than the content? -- Dan Vendel - *GOF* "Eagles may soar, free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines." Contact: http://www.proformica.com/contact.shtml Call or chat me via Skype ID: danvendel, but DON'T ask questions that you can ask here! (get Skype at http://skype.com) |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. You are free to disagree as much as you want. The 40-45K number is based on the 10 second download time that most (all?) usability experts recommend. A 56k dialup has a practical throughput of no more than 4K/second. You do the math. I think dial-up users are becoming inured to longer load times, though. |
#10
| |||
| |||
|
|
Murray *TMM* wrote: I disagree I think anything up to 55kb is fine, but if at all possible then yes the smaller the better. You are free to disagree as much as you want. The 40-45K number is based on the 10 second download time that most (all?) usability experts recommend. A 56k dialup has a practical throughput of no more than 4K/second. You do the math. I think dial-up users are becoming inured to longer load times, though. Mick |
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.