Hi!

I´m desperately looking for free webspace to store my .swf files. I tried so many hosts, but they are to slow, delete the files, don´t support ftp and so on.

The host i´m looking for should
- be free
- and fast
- have webspace >= 25 MB
- allow the storage of .swf files > 1 MB
- allow upload via ftp

Banner ads, pop-up windows ... are of no concern (otherwise they found a way putting ads IN my .swfs ;) )

Thank you for your help

You may find one in this listing

http://www.freewebspace.net/guide/diskstorage.shtml

Good Luck

What is .swf?

Thanks for the reply, I will try it.

.swf are Macromedia Flash files, a browser plug-in for vector based animations.
http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/

Originally posted by SysAdmin
What is .swf?


.swf == Shockwave Flash files.

Now which one is it? Shockwave or Flash? I think its both.. but me is yet confused.. so which one is it?

The vast majority of .swf is Flash files, since SWF stands for Shockwave Flash. However, Macromedia has recently consolidated their product line so that .swf can now accommodate other Macromedia programs like Director and Shockwave movies et. al.

Finally the GOD's have spoken!! thanx BC ;)

shockwave/flash is a better description. The plugins are slightly different though as BC said they are going to consolidate them.

The Shockwave plugin refers to 'clips' make via Macromedia Director or Macromedia Generator which gives the ability to produce highly dynamic content 'on the fly' and is updateable through user input and is directly connected to database applications.

The Flash plugin refers to the files produced through Macromedia Flash. Flash is a better looking file and smaller to download as it's an animated vector graphic 'engine'. It lacks the depth of shockwave files as far as dynamic content goes, though it can be 'faked' into producing the results of the afore mentioned programs, through external programs (ie. Swift Generator which is a freeware prog), or by using 'action-scripting' which resembles javascript, albeit slightly different.

Going to the Macromedia site for download you'll notice the option of downloading Shockwave, and THEN Flash as plugins, and the differences above are reflective in the file size of each one. Flash 5 has just been released (I'm awaiting my boxed upgrade *yum*), and the manual is apparently a LOT bigger - Flash 4 cover to cover is 277 pages, while Flash 5 is supposed to be over 800 pages!! A lot of it is apparently due to the scripting ability of the new Flash (ie. more like Director) - hence the intergration of the plugins.

In short, Flash (so far) is a nifty upgrade of the animated .gif and Shockwave is the same .gif attached to cgi <VERY simplistic explanation btw> To prove this point, check out http://www.yugop.com It's Flash 4, and considered one of the best in the world for actionscripting. Also check out http://www.rayoflight.net/ which again is that 'animated .gif' thing I'm talking about.... you'll understand what I mean by simplifying. *lol*

If you wanna talk about optimising load times for graphics and what not, Flashers such as these two guys, put us static designers to shame. I mentioned in another thread how Flash designers are huge culprits when it comes to bloat-design, but done right it's a thing of beauty.

Oh a 'simpler' Flash site is http://www.turtleshell.com/ It's a larger load (slightly), and once you'll seen the above two not as cool, but still beautiful in it's own way. The soundtrack alone has had it as a background for me while I've been net surfing more than once.

Anyhoo, a long way to define a simple question but I'm as jealous as hell of people like the above mentioned sites. My own efforts pale next to them. :)

Greg Moore
http://www.akashik.net

Oh I forgot to mention... If you go to those sites you may have to poke around a bit looking for the 'shocked' versions or the intro of the sites. Flash is running at 86% of all browsers now, but you gotta aim for all, and some people just don't want to look at an intro :)

Greg Moore
http://www.akashik.net

Originally posted by akashik
To prove this point, check out http://www.yugop.com It's Flash 4, and considered one of the best in the world for actionscripting

I had seen rayoflight and it is impressive, though it takes you quite a few minutes to get to anything at all besides pretty pictures.

This one you mentioned above I just can't figure out. I don't see a point to it, even after looking and clicking some of the links.

I think this is a problem with flash. Designers seem to think if "we make stuff move" that is what is important. Often flash sites don't seem to follow the general basic rules of design. Making something that is eyecatching, yet USEFUL. To me, that site is an example of what NOT to do.

My favorite flash site is http://eye4u.com (a web designer's site), which has many of the same bad elements (senseless animations, etc.), BUT they do it in a way that appeals to me. The animations are gernerally light and playful, with music that enhances the visual effects. I recommend that you set your volume up all the way before you go to the site, as it is a bit quiet if you don't.

Chicken... the goal behind a flash site and an HTML site is definately never the same.

One is like reading a book, the other like watching a movie.

You can buy the book of a film, or see the film of a book, but its never as good as the original one. The same apply to Flash & HTML. Flash is much more visual oriented... it is used to demonstrate, show, impress. The html can do that, but it is generally aimed at teaching, informing, etc.

It is never the same experience... HTML tries to be fast and direct. Flash tries often to create a mood, then tries to get the goal of the movie through.

It is a slightly different approach, but in my opinion, both are interesting and deserve to be there.

I wouldnt see a site like download.com in html... but I wouldn't see a site like http://derbauer.de in html either.

Both are interesting, but they have totally different goals

Let's just put it this way. I realize what you are saying, and aside from a momentary feeling of being impressed, I feel as though my time is being wasted. That one you posted has some VERY nice elements. I only got to their 1st (original site) though, and had to turn it off.

They lack functionality. I live in L.A. and have worked on some movie sets and believe me, I appreciate what goes into making a full length feature film. I'm amazed that they are able to make ones that are actually good. But at the same time, one has to be able to step back, look at the final product, and say, "Nope, this is boring as hell".

How many times can you see "loading.. loading... loading...", no matter how well done, and not be impatient. I wouldn't even go near the flash sites if I didn't have DSL.

I guess long introductions bore me, whether on tv, film, or on the web. Too many times I have waited, and there wasn't really a need to, as it seems they wasted all the good stuff for the "loading..." sequence. :)

See, that was my point.

Do derbauer in html... it has nothing.

You must not try to find WHAT is the content... you must let yourself be immerged by the mood of the movie.

That site is not designed to be fast... it is designed to be a place where some guys are having fun and shows it to everyone...

I am currently in the process of developping a web site for a company that will contain both HTMl and flash elements, both updated at the same time with one of my admin script, etc.

The html one WILL be faster. Now is the TIME so important you will not check the other one? Both will do the same job... one in a classic-fast way, the other in a modern-animated way.

Yo choose what you prefer... :)

Another site to view what a flash movie is:
(I said MOVIE)
http://www.dreams2.com

you can view it in html only... or try the flash intro to get the mood of the site, wich you will never get by simply looking at 1-2 pictures and some text.

Who, here, thinks that watching a movie is not a waste of time? You have fun watching it... but once its over... so what?

If you are purely practical, fast and to the point of what you want to see / know... you will never appreciate Flash.

basically, if you are the type of guy that would rather check web pages using lynx because it is faster than using netscape or ie or whatever...

cheer up, pump up the sound, dim the lights and look at an online short movie; or turn down the sound (if you have useless speakers) light up that room go surf on http://www.w3.org/ to learn more stuff.

See the difference?

My point exactly. :) yugop.com doesn't tell you anything as it's little more than a showcase for actionscripting (remembered another - http://www.praystation.com ) . If you look at both sites hoping to learn something about the 'company' or whatever it's not gonna happen. However, if you want to see something that blows you away technically then they are great. High quality actionscripting and Flash is not unlike seeing a magic act. Half the joy is seeing it happen, while the rest is trying to figure out how it was done.

Look at Nike ads. They're about shoes. A plain screen with some information about their new shoe, what color it comes in, and where you can get it would suffice for information. Instead, no information about where to get it, some examples of color by default, and sizing is hopefully available to you at the show store. Last one I saw was a first person view of some guy chasing a girl and then getting the stuffing beaten out of him... shoes? nup! It's a great ad though, and creates a 'mood' about the product without giving specifics. Flash is just that - flash - not a lot of substance. Most content is still in .html on most sites (though Flash 5 is supposed to intergrate content better). Intros are a bit of a waste of time unless you're looking for flash intros in particular. Better to offer it as a link from the main page as something like 'Check out our flash ad' or some such. In fact a lot of people inside the flash community call flash intros 'Skip-tros' in reference to the 'skip intro' button on almost ever one :)

Greg Moore
http://www.akashik.net

Just as an extension to the ruminatings on Flash movies (somehow we're getting wayyyyy off-topic here) I always keep an eye on Web Pages That Suck (http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com), as it always brings up great examples of what not to do with Flash. You'd be surprised.