Friends,
I am wondering if you gentlemen who surf the provider sites, are willing to wait 30 sec - 3 minutes for a page to load.

I ask this because "flash", the web technology that allows for extended animation, is really in style now. There are two schools of thought on this technology:
1) Flash is very glitzy and draws attention to your site. It has a great WOW! factor.
2) Flash is just a gimmick,and content is the most important factor. People do not like the slow download time on a dial up modem. They also do not wish to download the flash plug in.

P.s. How many of you use a dial up modem?

What say you kind sirs?

Here's how I see it:

If I'm looking for music, entertainment, or art, then I will tolerate a Flash site because it can be fun and interesting.

If I am shopping for a product or service, I can't stand it. I want the information & rates right now, not after a cute animation. That holds true for shopping sites like Amazon, as well as provider sites.

If you do decide to use Flash, make sure you offer the option to click out of it and go to a plain section w/o the bells and whistles.

I agree with Channel_Z. When I'm surfing I want response from a provider site. On another topic... I just went to your site and found it very well done! Congrats on the content.

Reo you wait?

Hateit.  Despise it.

First let me say, great point by Channel_Z. If you do choose to use Flash in a website, you should always do two things: 1) Offer both a Flash and non-Flash option, and 2) Provide a link to let someone download the Flash viewer (it's free).

As a graphic designer and web designer...let me offer you my two cents worth. As long as it's well executed (i.e., has a real purpose and strong design quality), then Flash, like most web-based technologies, is not only appropriate, but can enhance the overall effectiveness of your website.

You generally need to ask yourself two basic questions: 1) Does this [Flash] animation add anything to my site?, and 2) Could my site be just as strong without this [Flash] animation?

I generally only use Flash as an accent to the websites that I design. This way, it doesn't detract from my overall content. When used as a primary element, Flash, can be overwhelming and confusing.

As to speed and load times...I generally keep my Flash movies to under 200KB. This ensures a quicker load time..and, by publishing your animations with a transparent background, you can layer your animations over each other when you layout your web pages (e.g., in Dreamweaver). This avoids having to create one large Flash animation file. I tend to use the transparent background option and include animations in the "Over" or "Hit" states of my animated buttons.

As a side note, you might also want to check out Fireworks. It integrates and compliments Flash very well.

I hope that this helps.

or interesting text, I hang around for 40 seconds.
Content and substance are more important to me, such as breasts (yours) and cute buns, (no too's - consider lasering that big one into disappearing oblivion), super sexy photography. LOL

Your site without Flash is very imaginative and attractive, in the upper 5% for sure. Motion does attract attention, no doubt about it.

"In style" fads are just that, cutesy, transient.

I appreciate a professional design, with professional photos and layout, but HATE gimmicks...things that take way too long to load, waste my time, are just annoyingly cute, etc. I say don't bother.

I doubt if in the history of the hobby any guy has ever picked a girl based on the "tech level" of her website. Clean design (which makes the info I care about easy to find and gives the impression that you a  classy gal), professional photos (which flatter you but also give the mimpression that you are not trying to hide something).....those are enough

Reo you wait?

I have DSL, so load time is generally not a problem. But when I had dialup I hated Flash. I don't think you should waste your money on developing a Flash-rich site. You won't attract any more customers with it, but you may turn some away. You can have an awesome looking site without it. "Keep It Simple" always works best IMHO.

I say forget the flash. It rarely happens that anything shown in flash is worth it.
Maybe you could make it an option for after they have seen pictures and gotten other information about you that clients could look at yougiving massage or something in flash. That might be fun.
etienne

Nothing worse than looking at a website in the office when suddenly "DO ME!!" blurts out of your speakers.

Reo you wait?

Follow the Joe Friday rule:    "Just the facts, ma'am."    Oh, with pics, of course.    

The other stuff may feed the provider's ego but doesn't generate my business.    I would rather she use the tip on something she really needs rather than paying some fancy web site designer.

The older I get, the more I appreciate the KISS rule: Keep it simple stupid.
As a freelance photojournalist, I'm biased - put the $ into good
images will get you a lot further because IT will attract more attention then gimmicks on a website. As someone else posted, you're going to lose more people unwilling to wait then you'll ever gain.

Reo you wait?

I only like flash when it adds something to the web site.  So I don't like it when I'm watching a movie, but it can be useful/neat when it's make the site work (such as menus, etc)

Also, there are a bunch of tricks for speeding up the download time.  Smaller movies, etc.  Make sure your movie file is as small as possible.

Thanks for the suggestion. I guess I did not consider that you may be viewing the site at work. I have removed the sound from the main pages and left it in the special features. Checking out my site at work...you naughty man!

Two buttons on your first page:

1. Enter with Flash

2. Enter without Flash

Very good answer, I agree with having a choice.
Not everyone has a fast connection.

I have a dial-up and some of the non-flash sites can take a while to load on my pc. Either way, I can usually find something to do while I'm waiting.

photo thumbnails for easy random display of photos.  Good, fun photos - nude, sexy lingerie, casual clothings, etc. - beats animations anytime.

Like maybe 5 seconds at most. I have a DSL line, but I think that pages should be constructed so that it will load in a matter of seconds even on a 56K line, even if you are using flash.

This is a marketing issue and you're asking the wrong question...

If you ask people if they like advertising, the answer is a solid no. Do you like Telemarketers? NO Do you like Spam? NO Do you like (etc) And yet all of those work. Every single one.

You have received a lot of replies and in there are the gems. They say very clearly that content matters. If the content is compelling, the delivery mechanism will be apparent. You're getting good advice... if the content doesn't warrant Flash, don't try to use Flash to save it. If the content can only be presented using Flash, use it. Some months ago, someone posted a link of porn babe Sydney Moon in a skimpy white T and when you moused over it, she lifted it up and her big boobs bounced and.. you get the idea. When you moved your mouse off, she dropped her shirt. It was done in Flash. 554kb of compelling stuff. Couldn't be done without Flash. Compelling content that dictated the medium.

My advice... use Flash. But figure out how to make people not notice it's Flash first.

One humble opinion.

I have cable internet which is supposed to be as fast as it gets, and unless there is a real point to be made with Flash or animation, it's still a waste of time.  With your beautiful face and figure, it's absolutely unnecessary.  Your site is an excellent production as is, and you're the shining star that has no need for any gimmicks.

I use a cable modem but usually bypass the flash unless it covers ground I have not seen.  In using the web, I am usually looking for factual information and the flash usually doesn't represent any "facts".

-Hoot.

Reo you wait?

Absolutly hate it.  Don't use it.  If I can't find a way around it quickly, I move on to another site, and that site has lost my business.