Kevin Airgid is an internationally recognized designer, author and speaker. He runs a small interactive studio that develops creative projects for clients such as: Amnesty, ESPN, Ford, MTV and Pepsi.
CSS Purists vs. FWA-Bombshock-School-Of-Heavy-Flash
Over the past couple of years I have noticed a disturbing trend with my fellow web developers. Many developers are so focused on CSS compliance and developing cool Flash that they forget why they are building the site. I point out these two groups of developers for a reason; it seems that CSS Purists and the FWA-Bombshock-School-of-Heavy-Flash developers share the same problem: tunnel vision. Both of these groups of developers tend to view the world through a very narrow set of pop bottle glasses that are too focused on the tools and not on the end user.
First let’s pick on the CSS Purists
My big beef with this movement is the fact that they become so focused on the code they forget who they are building the site for. Let’s face it, the fact that a page renders 0.23 seconds faster using CSS over tables isn’t going to make a wit of difference to Joe-consumer. When my mom goes to a site to check the weather (my mom is in her 60’s by the way) she doesn’t pull up the source code and think? ¦ hey these guys are hacks, they are building it all in tables. No, she doesn’t care as long as it works. Now it might be more difficult for the developers to maintain the site if it uses all tables.. but to the user it doesn’t matter. The CSS Purists need to focus less on the code and more on the end user. Nothing is more important than the PEOPLE who are using the site, NOTHING! The reason we are paid to develop websites is so other people can use them. Every decision we make about how a site is designed, coded should always answer the question of how will this decision make this site better for the user.
FWA-Bombshock-School-Of-Heavy-Flash
Now I must admit I consider my self to fall into this category. I have been known in the past (see my old portfolio site) to produce heavy, animation driven Flash content. And I do declare I will produce more of this sort of “eye candy” in the future. The only difference between then and now is the way I approach building my Flash content. Now my decisions about the Flash content are driven by what the needs of my target audience are. I don’t build gratuitous Flash for the sake of Flash anymore. Yes, there are specific projects that require that I build loads of animation and “flaming logos” but only when the target audience wants this type of thing. (example: Game sites, promotions, art pieces etc) Flash developers suffer the same problem as our CSS Purists, they do not think about what the target audience wants before they build the project. Many sites that win an Ultrashock BombShock Award or a FWA tend to be extremely hard to use (although I must admit I visit these sites daily… they are soooo much fun!), and take too much time to download even over a broadband connection. Does the end user really want to download 600k of 3D animation of a door opening to access the main navigation? I would say the answer is NO to a lot of these questions.
My Advice
Someone once told me advice is like horse shit, often given but seldom wanted. This advice will probably be received with much of the same reaction. But never the less like any good (opinionated pain in the ass) web designer here it is:
CSS Purists
Does spending 40% more time on a project to get it to work on an older version of Opera make the end user happier? ? ¦maybe if the end user is using Opera? ¦ but not so much if it’s for an intranet for a company that IE 6.0 is the standard. Use common sense; use CSS where it makes sense for your end user, not for your ego. If you don’t buy my 25 cents, you should read this or this or even this.
FWA-Bombshock-School-Of-Heavy-Flash Folks
Just because you “can” doesn’t mean you “should”. Every time you create a monster download or a non-traditional interface in Flash you need to justify why this is required. Will the end user benefit from this? If not, then very, very early on in the planning stage you need to remove these items from the project. Every animation and gee-wiz item you add to the Flash needs to add some type of value to the project, and to the end user.
Final Thoughts
I think the design community needs to take a breather. Maybe everyone should take a week off and contemplate who they are building websites for? Are you building websites for 20 year olds? Is your target audience young children? I don’t know, but you sure should? ¦ and start designing projects for them instead of you.
A few people have emailed me after reading this telling me they are glad someone is finally speaking up about this. Maybe a “back lash” movement is starting here… Read the User Centred Manifesto, Sign it & Spread the Word!
[note: If you would like to write an article about this topic email me, and I'll post it here Flash 99% Good.. with a link back to your site] I found another good article on CSS vs Tables here.. worth a read.
53 Responses
I totally agree with you!. And your post does a great job I think of explaining it. BTW I love your site! hats off! .. I hope to make my next version of Airgid Media Inc. a fluid site like yours… but hmmm I might use tables!
Your points are valid, but I’ve never met a CSS purist who wouldn’t agree that the User Experience comes first. So I’m not sure what kind of CSS people you’ve met, but I think we’re all on teh same page.
Also for the flash, any good Flash design knows the times of heavy animation/splash pages are trend of the past and they provide nothing useful to the user for the average informational site. Again, I don’t know what kind of Flash designer’s you know, but I think they’re all on the same page as you as well.
It’s an interesting article.
I have to wonder if there are any sour grapes here though.
Have any of your sites won a BombShock or FWA or been fully standards compliant?
It’s often the case that one will criticize something they have failed to achieve or understand.
Just an observation.
I found myself thinking, “my God, I’m a CSS Purist, and I’ve lost my way!” I also get hung up on creating neat code, and admittedly have given the user-experience a tertiary position.
However I believe that at least the most in-experienced CSS Purist, over the most in-experienced Flash Zealot, is more likely to stumble onto a more user-centric design purely in the nature of CSS and its ties with accessibility. After all, isn’t inclusive design (sites that everyone regardless of ability or device used can use) the biggest step you can take in reaching a larger audience. Of course I don’t mean to imply that if you build a site using web standards it automatically becomes accessible. I just mean that if you start with the right building blocks you are more likely to create the right kind of building.
But, like you say, you can still start with the right building blocks and forget to put the doors in.
CSS Purists, let ‘user-testing’
Outstanding! My thoughts exactly. I tend to fall more in the School-of-Heavy-Flash as well, but I completely appreciate what web standards and complience has done for the internet in the past couple years. There’s a time and place for it all, and just like you said, the client and the end user should always be the focus of any professional project. I don’t want to dig through buckets of flash loads to get my daily news, nor do I want to arrive at a typical drop shadowed, subtle backgrounded, gradient filled, uterly complient css/xhtml site when I’m looking to be impressed or sold on the latest and greatest new gadget.
Thank for the article, hopefully we’ll ALL find a happy medium.
i have been ranting on about this for a long time and its finnaly good to see someone else agrees with me.
nick from post no. 4 thats such a moronic thing to say, grow up.
thanx everyone… no sour grapes here just wanted to share some thoughts… winning awards is nice (i’ve done that) but building highly usable sites is way more fun…
I agree with this, at many levels.
Cheers.
+LA
@ Luis
Why is it moronic? The comments so far are all from people who can’t build the sort of sites that are getting moaned about.
Get some top flashers in here or top web standards builders for their side of the argument.
And the author of the article made this site http://www.airgid.com/images/large/01/index.html
Surely that site is no different from any other flash site out there. It’s no example of usability now is it?
Rather hypocritical.
I have translate it into Chinese.
Kevin, you totally nailed it in this article, lets not forget we’re all providing a “service” to our clients. If this service doesn’t do what it is intended too, like for example taking the bus should get you to your chosen destination instead of somewhere 50 miles off, then it’s pretty obsolete to even start with it.
I agree with a lot of what you said but think you’ve been sucked in by bad reasoning for using “standards” – and assuming that therefore there is no good reasoning to do so.
To me one of the biggest reasons to go the semantic route (a different thing to being “valid” or “standards compliant”) is precisely to allow EVERYONE to view a site – not just those using a recent browser on a desktop/laptop.
There is still no decent browser for PDAs. Tables that “work fine” on the desktop almost never translate well onto a small screen device; yet decent semantic markup gives you almost no problems (especially if you disable the CSS altogether). Everyone forgets us poor saps who actually use a mobile device to try and browse the web – even you!
So there you go – a really good, people-focused, inclusive reason to use standards, and one that you don’t seem to have thought about. Somehow I doubt there are many of those in favour of using tables.
I knew some one would mention “Accessibility†as a reason for ditching tables and doing the CSS thing. If you cared about Accessibility then these people would actually use screen readers to discover that tables are actually no problem at all (there is a small case on forms where if you place the input boxes on the second row of cells and the labels on the first then it will not work as screen readers read from left to right, from cell to cell).
I love doing CSS and when it comes to CMS initially a huge headache but you can see the benefits in the future. But the fact is we still can’t separate content from design because the order and creation of new DIV tags still matter when it comes to complex designs. If we could separate the content from design completely then happy days otherwise use whatever is easiest to get the job done!
The CSS Purists need to come back to reality and focus less on the code and more on the end user. Nothing is more important than the PEOPLE who are using the site, NOTHING! The reason we are paid to develop websites is so other people can use them.
And this is exactly the reason why people are using web standards. Developing for the people that are using the site, regardless of the technology they are using. In your example, you’re mom might be lucky – somebody else’s mom, using a screen reader, may have no chance of checking the weather.
Just my two cents.
Great writing …
I tried to make this argument at Stylegala (or some other CSS showcase site) some time ago and was shouted down by the CSS purists. There was a site that was well designed and had very good content, but the markup was lacking behind, and they just tore the WHOLE site apart.
It did not matter that the site worked on every browser, the content was outstanding and propably most of the users of the site were very happy.
Hope this article gets read by a lot of people 
This is interesting. I think, though, with regards to the standards crowd at least, that we are probably on the positive backswing of the pendulum. There seems to be an emerging consensus that the rules are more guidelines, and that they are a tool to get the job done, rather than an end result. Enhancing, usable flash is working its way into many of the sites showcased on the standards circuit. Things are good.
To nick, above: You do not have to win a BombShock or FWA to be making good Flash. Coding a fully standards compliant site is easy as cake. It’s knowing when to bend the rules that’s difficult. You are not different. You are not special. Sorry.
And dragging out unrelated examples of the author’s old work without providing examples of your own? Ha. I didn’t realise that everything we write was to be taken in context of all our past work and actions. Is learning and development not allowed?
Sorry to bitch.
So much true… I guess you have to go to one extreme before you can come back to what is really useful. I’m fitting to the CSS-purist category, learnt it because of 2 things: Firstly I’m living in Cambodia and with our internet connection a KB makes difference… secondly I saw good results in search engines using “high content-to-code-ratio”. Also I’ve found that clients are generally impressed if you explain them why you are doing it this way.
It all depends on the project, the target audience and money you get paid / time you have to spend.
Hey, thanx everyone for the positive feedback. It’s ok you can drag stuff out of my portfolio… like I said… if a client requires something then I do it.. simple as that. So in the case of the example provided Mecury wanted a Flash site…
cheers! — excellent comments!
I don’t agree with your opinion about CSS Purists. Take a look at csszengarden, that was created to prove that you can create standards-based sites and still make them useful for any client. Good article though.
cheers.
?????
Dude you have too much time on your hands – consider yourself a poet here, watching the world and commenting. Your comments are like, the sky is pink…
Seriously man you have too much time on your hands – i even question myself posting this response, and apologies if it appears negative – but wtf… seriously pointless statements about your personal views on a selective bunch of tunnel vision developers.. any decent company focus’s on a projects purpose and where it will be accessed (maybe this is where i stand out?). My only qaum about the industry is the lack of respect companies give to developers, and the meddling they do – in my experience this where technologies get mis-used (and this happens in design all the time too).
Any real person knows its the project that will suit either flash css js whatever – if you are some tunnel vision mong that only develops a certain way for the web because of your personal opinions you will find out your ritous path is stupid… dam stupid… each way has its pros and cons which will suit a project – hardly requires your comments for anyone to realise this?
idiots? or is that me? really dont understand – seriously guys…
you would think eh? i can’t tell you how many people i run into that have this tunnel vision… thanx for your comments… as for too much time on my hands… i wish… =)
very well made article.
cheers
I mean, you realize you’re writing this in a Wordpress template designed entirely with CSS — right? Isn’t it — I don’t know — ironic? Don’t you think?
Just because you “can†doesn’t mean you “shouldâ€.
Finally, someone else said it. The problem with Flash does not lie with the Flash itself, but with the authors who feel it appropriate to use a jackhammer when a screwdriver will do. Just because a few developers don’t understand Flash isn’t the solution for every site, doesn’t mean all other Flash developers should be discredited.
It makes me absolutely crazy when people complain about Flash being inaccessible, because it’s only inaccessible if you make it so. For a few years now Flash has given us the ability to separate style and content, and to create user-friendly applications (that don’t require any pages reloading) that AJAX can only dream of right now.
totally ironic! but illustrates my point… CSS / Tables … doesn’t matter as long as the user’s needs come first…
So, is this a way of justifying still using tables for websites? Are we supposed to make sites for a specific audience? Don’t the kids down the block wonder what the weather are going to be like, or is it just old people?
I don’t think tables was the focus of the article at all Tor. There’s no hidden agenda.
Kevin, I think what’s heating the standards people up around the collar is that they don’t see a reason to ever use tables over css. While there is definately a case for using flash over standards sometimes, as there are certain things that HTML simply cannot do, tables should never be used for layout, because you can achieve everything with css and xhtml that you can achieve with tables if you are skilled enough. Point out something that you want to do with tables and 99.99 percent of the time there’s a way to do it with CSS. And it’s not always a nasty hack. There’s a difference between finding a balance and not applying yourself to learning the best way to do something.
But don’t kneejerk people. Read and react.
What it comes down to, in my mind, is practicality. Sure CSS can do everything Tables can, but currently for me it is easier and far speedier to use tables. It’s less research, less compatability issues, and overall less painful. So why not use tables? Again, just my personal experience. I’m all for using CSS, but don’t say there is no reason to use tables.
Am I supposed to laugh, or cry?
I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about in your CSS-purist section. Those aren’t the top three or even three of the top 20 reasons we use to promote standards.
Anyway, your conclusion to “use CSS where it makes sense for your end use” doesn’t make the tiniest bit of sense. Name the last three Web sites you developed that did not use CSS. What *are* you talking about?
Joe, thanx for your comments. My point is if developing a site using only CSS and it doesn’t benefit the end user… then what is the point? For instance I designed a site for people in Africa a year ago. The site need to be all in tables so users could see the layout properly in old browsers. If i did it all in CSS it would like like a text only site… make sense?
So standards dont mean anything?
Is it OK to use tables because it’s easy’r?
Perhaps we should all start using Word as our WYSIWYG editor. Thats easy!
Whenever you make a site you have to go thru a list:
1 – Get the goal of the site
2 – Get the content of the site
3 – Create a design to enhanse the content
4 – Code it
So how can you claim that good coding can interfere with usability?
Why cant you just do it right?
Do you care about the internet?
And something else; are you still using xhtml?
http://misinterpreted.org/archives/2004/08/15/xhtml-mime-types
http://www.damowmow.com/playground/xhtml-in-uas.xhtml
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/xhtml-the-point/
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-talk/2001JulAug/0008.html
http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2005/03/14/xhtml-is-dead
http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml
OK, so you wont read all those articles that tells you why you dont need xhtml, and dont even use it right. But take my word for it.
What I se as the biggest problem among coders today is Divmania
cheers orsus
I’m not a complete CSS-purist, but I’ve got some of the characteristics you write about.
I think you’ve got some good points. However, I don’t think there is any reason not to write good, semantic code, that still renders good in (almost) all browsers. Personally, I exclude IE5 from “all browsers”, but I don’t have any problem making a site look the same in IE6, Opera, Firefox, Safari, etc. Most of the problems are solved within seconds. For instance, using the “!important”-method you can make a special property for IE. No stress.
And I can’t see how writing good code can be a bad thing for the end user.
I don’t write _perfect_ code myself, but I think there is a balance. Not tables, but not spending 40% of the time figuring out how to code best either.
I didn’t need to read much further than the second paragraph to see this article as a bit contradictory of itself.
People will likely argue various reasons for css, and against it, but in my opinion, CSS purity boils down to two things: the seperation of content from style, and the development and use of standards.
You’re right, the average end user doesn’t know the difference between a site using full CSS and tables. But it’s not always about the end user and what they get out of it. Equally important is the process that goes into the coding and development and how standards of doing so filter through the industry so that a common playing field is created.
Ever taken over someone elses project at a new company, or taken on freelance work that involves rebuilding aspects of a existing site? Plenty of people complain about these situations, and how the code was horribly done, or, would you have guessed, didn’t adhere to standards.
In all sincerity, CSS is allowing people to do things in much more advantageous ways than without. You can knock the browser hacks all you want, but even without CSS, when have browers ever been 100% compatible for everything in the first place?
It’s not the developers fault hacks are needed. We work with what users will be viewing sites in. The argument that CSS coding needs to be reigned in because of hacks is a bit out there.
Kevin,
I am assuming many of the negative comments here are a direct result of the caustic tone of this article. If you cut out the acerbic lines like “grow up” and “give up the religion”, you would probably get higher quality discussion.
With that said, I agree with you totally. I think many designers and developers, especially younger ones, focus on technology-centered design as opposed to human-centered design. I also think you are making inaccurate generalizations.
I know these irrational web standards zealots and flash all-stars exist but I think they are the minority. I believe that most of the people who use these technologies do so to best serve the needs of their clients. Also realize that these zealots may just be more visible on the internet because you are visiting sites specifically for that technology. Of course you are going to get a handful of tunnel-visioned flash zealots on ultrashock, it is a flash community.
I agree that these people who design projects for themselves, not the clients are in the wrong. I just think this problem isn’t as big as you think it is.
Point, well taken about the "caustic tone"… i’ve gone back and removed alot of this "impulse driven" writting… hopefully it’s a little more professional
Hey,
that was an interesting article,
I agree, the CSS (for geeks), Flash (for designers), when either of them start to take toll on the websites, the content goes off, and comes only the look, alright if “first impression is the last”, but if your site can’t help you navigate the content of yours in an easy and instinctive way, Sorry the site CRAP
I’m sorry, I’ve never heard of a CSS project taking longer than it would in tables. How could it? Spend the time to do the layout in one css file, rather than in all the html files… it’s quicker by nature. Sure, there are a lot of designers out there banging their heads over CSS bugs, but I wouldn’t say they are the ones to look at.
As for whether or not CSS perfection involves keeping the end user in mind, read this:
Elsewhere in the Wootville Mailsack, two different users have written to thank us for the site’s accessibility for the vision-impaired:
Thanks for your very kind awareness of making the Woot site accessible to those of us that are visually impaired and use screen reading software to navigate the web. In general, the site is extremely accessible and I actually placed my first order this week…It is very unusual to find a site that has such a high level of support for accessibility that isn’t funded by some deep pocketed government agency! Are you guys some kind of front for a diabolical, mass government experiment?!
We wish! If you know any diabolical government types who are hiring, send them our way. And:
I am blind and use adaptive technology to read the screen…I really would like to thank for making an effort to make it accessible…I would be glad to talk you up. Have already given your link to some people. Thanks for what you are trying to do.
We certainly appreciate the compliments, although this says more about the sad state of accessibility on the rest of the web than it does about us.
It’s not just about viewing the source.
This is from here if you want to know.
Excellent article. Perhaps it’ll keep me out of a trap I hopefully haven’t fallen into yet. I don’t make Flash, but I do write CSS sites.
Well first let me say i agree with you in theory but i think that there is a missunderstanding of the difference betwen CSS and Standards.
I am a designer who moonlights as a coder and have just recently jumped from tables to css, and now with css further understanding what standards are. You can have a ‘css’ site with no standards. I think the point that needs to be made here is that we are going through a growth phase in the web industry and for whatever the reason ( generally a need to feel respected ) we have divided ourselfs into groups. Designers and Developers. I think that as more designers ( like myself ) become better developers and more developers ( Like most css freaks ) become better designers, all this back and forth will work its way out.
We are now just quibiling over who thinks their way is best and i belive we can come to common ground and move forward.
standards based design with the inclusion of CSS and accessibility is the right way to design, having said that. there is a place for flash in design and there is a place for tables in development.. I think that flash should probably not ( that doesn’t mean they can’t) contain navigational items or items that the user needs to view if they are not on a desktop. and i think that tables should be used to display tabluar data.
now before you go routing through my old work , Like i said earlier i am new to standards design because I was not taught that way and continued to self educate the ‘wrong’ way. but now that I know that there is a better way to design i am teaching myself how to do that. Im telling you if you know AS ( action script) you can pick up on standards in a few months if that. if you know any JS or can functionally read html you can pick up on css in no time at all.
What if I’m a CSS purist and I think your advice is horseshit. The folks that get “caught up in makeing code neat” are the perfectionists that strive to make websites better. The fact of the matter is, CSS is easy, so why not spend some extra time making it right. Whether it’s done in tables or css (speaking of layout) “can” and most often does matter. We are “internet” developers, not “intranet” developers. Granted, I’m sure you got pissed off by one of those standardistas getting mad at you because you forgot to close a tag or used a css hack to get something to look the way you wanted, but damn, time to calm down.
Like Joe said in post #3, who are these “Purists” you’re talking about because before you posted this I would have called myself a CSS purist, but I beg to differ that I resemble the assholes you’re ranting about.
Lastly, on the bit about this:
the fact that a page renders 0.23 seconds faster using CSS over tables isn’t going to make a wit of difference to Joe-consumer
Fine. but it does make a difference to the business. When you’re working on giant corporate sites, a couple extra milliseconds can save thousands of dollars every month in bandwidth 
.
Spot on man.
i’m stil waiting for the first client to say “awesome work, it validates nicely”, and the answer to the question “what is taking so long??” isn’t “i’m making sure everything validates” if you get my drift.
CSS is great and i’m not going to say we have to throw everything down the drain, but sometimes the standards are taking it a bit too far especially when it comes to meeting a deadline.
I found myself with tunnel vision. I have installed the Web Developer Extension in Frefox. The extension puts an icon on the status bar that allows me to see if the page is valid or not. I quickly disabled the status bar icon when I found myself judging a page design depending on the icon. I know, that is bad. But I have recognized my mistake and am changing my ways.
Ah man I just downloaded that firefox extension. that is cool as H#ll. I am not using it to judge others sites but it helps me in the production environment in case i forget to validate it myself or if for some reason dreamweaver ( i’m a noob i know ) doesnt catch something.
Heres the link
Your article is a breather yes, but everyone within the design community should step back and say, “Is what he saying right?” People need to make their own judgements. Over the past 2 years I have been around the design community, people become so fixated (including me) about people’s work. One person might design a brillant website and then others take notice and try to copy that person’s work. This is the main problem with design communites because there’s only one view or perspective of design. Take 2 advanced for example. My god, how many copies of you seen of it and when some designers create a really good illustration, every other user would think it’s great.
People need to take a step back and say, “Is his/her work actually that good?” That’s what I have learnt over the recent weeks. People should not get too absorbed within forums. Go out and read some magazines because those who write the articles are established industry people and they give a critial analysis of work. Knowing appications inside out is stupid. When you out into the industry, you need to adapt to any application. That also means you are not reliant on the application. The ideas you make, the things you conceptualise; the programs you use are only to aid the product, not make the product. People also need to be aware of their audience. It’s particularly pointless when you make a real big site when you need to atract potentials clients who actually want to see your portfolio.
[quote]
A few people have emailed me after reading this telling me they are glad someone is finally speaking up about this. Maybe a “back lash” movement is starting here
[/quote]
This has been discussed ever since. Design is about opening your eyes. Are you a goat or a sheep?
Personally I’m grateful that Kevin back in 2003 pointed me to the Web Standards Awards site. I first was a flash developer, ignoring standards all together. Once I started to broaden my horizon away form flash, learning about web standards I realized this first about usable sites:
I started reading and reading and reading.Sites where so readible friendly. I noticed where ‘designers valued usability’ made a difference in content delivery.
Still today I will visit Bombshock or FWA, but never feel I walk away with actual knowledge of what was suppossed to be communicated. The animation (and custom navigation) outweighs content way to often.
That’s what I appreciate most about Kevin, regardles what you believe of him, he is one solid designer that knows where the balance lies. I believe this article was written to help get ride of that tunnel vision. He hit bullseye, hence the negative comments, nobody likes to be put on the spot. At some point you will realize he was right and find that balance.
thanx for your positive support!
i couldn’t agree more, well said.
Okay then!
For once an article I can agree with about the whole issue. The problem here is not necessarily one of design or programming, it’s more of a social problem. Nobody likes being told what they can or cannot do anywhere. I found it a problem when I was doing graphic design at college (as well as my peers there), when the school “enforced” their “standards” of a “good or bad design”, and I found it a problem as soon as this whole “Pure CSS” mess started rearing it’s ugly head. I’ve always loved CSS, from the moment it was introduced to now I still use it to make keeping my websites unified a simple task, among other things. The problem happened when I started being told that I must abandon tables for anything else than “tabular data” they called it, and try to “enforce” their statements with arguments like “tables are outdated for anything else”, or “they oppress the blind”. Most of these children do not even know why the structures are called tables in the first place. When it comes down to the wire if it is much easier, simpler and takes less time for an experienced developper to use a method he / she will take it, and none of my websites ever oppressed the blind (oh, yea, and they work everywhere too).
Here, here. Found myself nodding in agreement after every paragraph. I kinda touched upon this emerging mentality here …