The Flash vs. HTML debate: OEM sites enter the fray

This spring, Steve Jobs reignited a long-standing debate between Flash advocates and the technology’s detractors.  Jobs posted a long letter on Apple’s site explaining, point by point, why Apple chooses not to support Flash on the iPhone, iPod, or iPad.  Since the resurgence of this Flash debate (but really, since the debut of the iPhone), major brands have been grappling with the most efficient way to provide a mobile Web experience for their iPhone and iPad users.  Some brands provide a separate mobile site for mobile users.  Others choose to make their primary site mobile-friendly.

Over the last 18 months, we have begun to see automotive manufacturers quietly scaling back their Flash implementation.  In some cases, brands are dropping their Flash sites entirely and launching HTML-based sites.  For example, for Wave 2 of the 2009 Manufacturer Web Site Evaluation Study (MWES), which was fielded in April 2009, Acura converted its all-Flash site to all-HTML while maintaining many of the same navigation features.

Initially, Acura’s MWES scores declined a bit (-7 pts overall, -17 for speed, -1 for navigation), but still ranked #9 overall.  The very next iteration, Acura jumped back up to #3 (+22 overall, +20 speed, +19 navigation).  Not only has their site usability excelled with the HTML implementation, but Acura is likely deriving great benefits in terms of cross-platform usage.  It was the first OEM brand site that functioned as-is on the iPhone, and despite some increased page weights, it seems to load quickly for MWES users.

OEMs Scaling Back on Flash Usage

Acura’s transition from an all-Flash site to an almost-entirely HTML site seemed like a rather bold move 1½ years ago.  However, such transformations are becoming more common in the iPhone/iPad era.  In March of this year (even before Steve Jobs published his Flash manifesto), Virgin America dropped Flash in favor of HTML.  The company’s goal in choosing HTML was to provide a seamless experience for customers, including those who choose to check in for flights with their boarding pass on their phone.  Virgin’s CIO Ravi Simhambhatla commented to The Register website that, “Flash is really, really good, but as long as you can keep the hardware controlled…If the hardware you are trying to put your product on isn’t [controlled] then Flash is questionable.”

We have seen evidence of this phenomenon in the MWES study.  The performance of Flash sites can vary wildly among different computers, a flaw which often negatively impacts an OEM site’s usability.  Perhaps OEMs and their agencies have recognized this as well.  In the last year I’ve noticed that more OEM sites are moving away from pure Flash usage, particularly in their menus and primary navigation.  Instead, Flash is more often being reserved to enable true interactivity.

Out of the 33 OEM brand sites measured by MWES:

• All flash: 4 (Jaguar, Kia, MINI, Scion)
• Mostly Flash: 10
• Mostly HTML: 18
• Entirely HTML: 1 (Acura)

Many of the mostly-Flash sites utilize HTML in their configurators (e.g. Infiniti, which is a strong performer across the board).  The mostly-HTML sites tend to utilize Flash in their homepage and/or model page splash areas (e.g. Jeep, Lincoln).

As a category, the all-Flash sites performed worst for navigation, speed, and overall score.  Among the other categories, there’s no clear pattern of which combination of Flash and HTML works best.  In other words, it’s not necessarily the Flash – it’s how you use it.

For instance, Cadillac’s completely non-standard navigation of moving pieces requires Flash’s interactivity, but the result is a nearly un-usable interface.  And Cadillac suffers, finishing last in MWES.  Similarly, Scion uses Flash to enable its microsite masquerading as an OEM brand site and finishes at #32, beating out only Cadillac.  On the other hand, MINI’s all-Flash site features some quirky activity while maintaining a high level of usability, giving the site a ninth-place finish overall.

Comparing Lincoln vs. Mercury also shows how prioritizing navigation supersedes the choice of technology.  Each site used to have the exact same navigation scheme, but Lincoln recently gave its navigation a minor overhaul.  Lincoln has also shifted to become more HTML-based over the past year.

• Lincoln is currently ranked 6th for speed, 8th for navigation
• Mercury is currently ranked 10th for speed, 16th for navigation

It’s unlikely that Lincoln’s score improvement is due in any great part to the switch to HTML.  Rather, Lincoln’s efforts to simplify its navigation are probably responsible for the improvement in score.  For example, navigating Lincoln’s Features section is dead simple, and the images are large and appear above the fold.  Mercury, in contrast, requires users to look below the fold, awkwardly select different rectangular images, and then view a small image with text.  In general, Lincoln has gone the same route as Hyundai and dramatically cut down the number of links offered per-page.

What’s Next in the Flash vs. HTML Battle?

HTML5 is the long-in-coming alternative to Flash that has been anointed by Steve Jobs.  Some features of HTML5 are expected to be ready for use by the end of 2010, but based on what we’ve observed of OEM Web development behavior, OEMs are traditionally not early adopters when it comes to new Web technologies.  However, it is possible that the pressure for cross-platform usage may accelerate HTML5’s adoption.

Flash will likely continue to face some of the same pressures it always has – among them cost, variable performance on different systems, and the closed nature of its system.  Virgin America’s CIO cited all of these reasons for its decision to switch to HTML.  He commented to The Register that Virgin’s site wasn’t using enough of Flash’s capabilities to justify the continued use of the technology.  Rather, he felt that HTML’s free, open system was “good enough” for delivering the site’s animation and overall user experience.

Mercedes-Benz is the latest OEM to enter the debate, having recently abandoned Flash in favor of HTML.  The new site looks and feels almost exactly the same despite a completely re-engineered user interface.  The next wave of MWES (to be released in early 2011) should reveal whether the brand can achieve some of the same improvements we saw this wave with Acura.

Tagged with: Flash • Manufacturers • Usability • Website