Nothing’s wrong with this, mind you. Flash navigation is bad and needs to not exist.

But there are plenty of good reasons to [...]]]> The Google Webmaster Blog has a post about uses of Flash in Web pages. Naturally, as one might expect from Google, they focus on the ability of Googlebot or other spiders to ’see’ Flash.

Nothing’s wrong with this, mind you. Flash navigation is bad and needs to not exist.

But there are plenty of good reasons to use Flash. For instance, while it may not be spiderable, I know two sites where Flash ‘product builders’ are key drivers for conversion. Timbuk2, who make really great bicycle bags (and who’ve branched off into other bags too), have a great bag configurator tool that allows you to build your custom bag, see it, share it, and buy it. (I totally recommend their laptop bag, by the way.)

Similarly, Orbea’s USA site has a lot of Flash. But, they’re a brand play first and foremost. They are bikes yearned for by fanboys (and fangirls, hi), and aren’t going to be a primary (or tertiary, or billionary) choice for a casual shopper looking for help with bike selection on the Internet. Their bike builder tool is teh swanky. And that’s not a site that’s going to need lots of ‘how to choose components,’ since, again: the audience. We know what we like, and it’s shiny, light, and high-tech. Er, did I just say we? Anyway, a few runs through a configurator, then the next stop is a local shop who can help you fit and order a nice bit of carbon fiber with Italian componentry…

er, I digress. Again.

Flash can be a good part of a user experience. Not every site needs to live and die by spiderability. Should Flash be surrounded by spiderable goodness? Sure. Should a site owner decry Flash because it’s not 100% full of SEO goodness? Not if by adding Flash they can get people to drop some change.

(PS: Santa, all I really want for Christmas is Diva with a full Campy Chorus gruppo. I promise to be good.)