flash (macromedia): That's difficult to say. MM clearly blew it with the latest release, and
there are those out there who are hot on their heels. Look at
www.blue-pac.com for example. J. Diogo is giving many of us the opportunity
to rewrite the IDE to be more friendly to developers who don't want to do
the coding--making the Flash authoring environment more friendly to the
"creative types," just as Avid made the video editing environment accessible
to the "creative types" in film and video. Simplicity is not, apparently, on
MM's agenda. Look for competitive products very, very soon.

MM's *shove* in MX 2004 toward developing for the desktop is clearly weird,
when you consider that if you are personally ready to develop for the
desktop, then you are ready to program in VB, C#, etc., and their grab for a
percentage smacks of, well, won't go there. Why waste one's time when all
the API's are exposed in C#, VB.NET, C++ etc? Seems pointless, to me, to go
through the extra step and be reliant on MM, especially as they have not
exposed all the functionality of the operating system. That "extra" step
isn't so great, after all, and the power behind that extra step is profound,
indeed.

Add that to the absence of documentation (better get a divining stick and
tarot cards to supplement their documentation--you can also try praying for
divine guidance, too, but I doubt that will help much), and components that
are so bloated they would make Nero look like a thin man, and what have you
got? Nada.

Just an opinion, mind you......and you were asking for an opinion......

Chris:

Thanks for the insightful comments.

Given: "undo" features are really nothing more than database entries that
branch, and any simple Access database, wedded to an application, can record
an incredible number of branching "undo's", how complex would you like that
"undo" system to be? Is drill-down sufficient? Would a "diagram" of undo
branches be attractive? Sort of a data cube with options?

Scale and rotate are really called "affine" functions--that is,
transformations on the x and y axis of any particular object. 3-D
transformations are really nothing more than "affine" of "affine"
transforms, with an order of magnitude for shadowing, etc., to be thrown in
(not trivial) that takes up processor time. Affine transforms of images,
such as JPEGs, aren't all that more complex, just more processor
intensive....

Given that, do you like the way Affine transforms were performed under
Flash, the old Corel Draw, or the way affines are performed under
Illustrator more? Perhaps the way affines are performed under Adobe
Photoshop?

Just as a matter of interest....

P.S., I do respect your work, and have admired it for years....

Rob W


[quoted text, click to view]
box MX04 doesnt offer much improvment or additions to the design/animation
side of flash - it's nearly identical to MX - except that MX04 can be
customized through the use of JSAPI to make it more of an animation tool I
always hoped it would be.
[quoted text, click to view]
versions I adopted much earlier and left older versions behind - this
release I clung onto MX more-so than previous releases and gradually ramped
up to MX04.
[quoted text, click to view]
to undo edits made while inside a symbol - i get frustrated after 1 minute
and abandon it.
[quoted text, click to view]
Replace for one) - but is it worth the hefty upgrade price? Only you can
decide based on your needs. I think it's the first version released where
the majority isn't screaming "Yes - go for it!" - at least that's the voice
I read in many forums.
[quoted text, click to view]
Scale and Rotate - until they replaced it in the update - but Normal mode is
gone and Behaviors has been added - now non-programming types need 2 panels
open to code most things.
[quoted text, click to view]

I have been using Flash since version 4, I use Flash MX everyday at work, and I am also proficient in ActionScript. Currently, I am using Flash MX (bundled with Studio MX) which my company purchased early in 2003.

Our 2004 budget includes some money I might be able to use, but I don't know if I should upgrade our Studio MX pkg, only upgrade DW, or only upgrade Flash to the MX professional. I have done quite a bit with Flash including some Flash Comm Server apps.

First of all, how can I justify the upgrade cost of the new MX2004 professional when the MX version I am using now works great? My other concern is that MM has a long history of jumping the gun and releasing buggy software and Flash MX2004 appears to be no exception. Has enough time elapsed for MM to address the bugs and release the proper patches/fixes? Any advice?


Best regards,

Thx.

Many of us out there listening, working, and wondering....

and we don't work for Macromedia.

I was using MX and am now on MX 2004. If you're a fan of writing out actionscript then MX 2004 may not appeal to you that much. But for me the less code I have to write the better, which is what the components and behaviors do for MX 2004. In addition the actionscript has changed a bit and now on v. 2.0, which is more Java like. Other than that it is a better design for ui. They are now using a 'halo' design for all the ui which cuts down on time spent creating buttons and tables and such. If you plan to do any remoting or connecting to servers or accessing dbs they have a easy way to do all this, but takes some learning and getting used to. I've been using it for a month on and off and am able to find some new additions/changes. For me, the upgrade was totally worth it. But the best thing would be to download a free trial and check it out....

all i can add coming from a design/animation perspective is, out of the box MX04 doesnt offer much improvment or additions to the design/animation side of flash - it's nearly identical to MX - except that MX04 can be customized through the use of JSAPI to make it more of an animation tool I always hoped it would be.
Real world usage has been a slow progression from MX to MX04 - previous versions I adopted much earlier and left older versions behind - this release I clung onto MX more-so than previous releases and gradually ramped up to MX04.

I still hate the new undo feature (History) - i still cant figure out how to undo edits made while inside a symbol - i get frustrated after 1 minute and abandon it.

Still, there are features that have been added thay are nice (Find and Replace for one) - but is it worth the hefty upgrade price? Only you can decide based on your needs. I think it's the first version released where the majority isn't screaming "Yes - go for it!" - at least that's the voice I read in many forums.

MM changed some of the basics many of us grew familiar with - especially Scale and Rotate - until they replaced it in the update - but Normal mode is gone and Behaviors has been added - now non-programming types need 2 panels open to code most things.

-c

chris georgenes
mudbubble.com
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Flash
http://www.flashfilmmaker.com

Chris:
Given: "undo" features are really nothing more than database entries that
branch, and any simple Access database, wedded to an application, can record
an incredible number of branching "undo's", how complex would you like that
"undo" system to be? Is drill-down sufficient? Would a "diagram" of undo
branches be attractive? Sort of a data cube with options?

Scale and rotate are really called "affine" functions--that is,
transformations on the x and y axis of any particular object. 3-D
transformations are really nothing more than "affine" of "affine"
transforms, with an order of magnitude for shadowing, etc., to be thrown in
(not trivial) that takes up processor time. Affine transforms of images,
such as JPEGs, aren't all that more complex, just more processor
intensive....

Given that, do you like the way Affine transforms were performed under
Flash, the old Corel Draw, or the way affines are performed under
Illustrator more? Perhaps the way affines are performed under Adobe
Photoshop?
[quoted text, click to view]

thanks Robert.
you're making me think way more than I thought I needed to :)
first off I have to say I love Flash's drawing engine - it's simplicity and quickness - I cant compare it to Illustrator because I never really learned the Illustrator way well enough to make a fair and non-biased comparison - I often would start a project with AI and within a half hour get frustrated and open up flash and get whatever i needed done in a matter of minutes. It works for me and my needs and ultimately I regard myself as a very good hack at best.

I like the way flash transforms shapes - sure it can be a little unpredictable at times but i chock that up to the nature of vectors - not sure a fair comparison to photoshop is justified as they are very different programs for different purposes.

how i would like the undo feature to work is an interesting question though - I like the idea of a History panel as I like the way Adobe's works - but in flash i do most of my editing in symbols (as most people do) yet when a mistake is made, "ctrl + z" doesn't undo the edit i made within that symbol - so I open History panel but cant correct this mistake there either. It's not intuitive enough for me (flash user since version 3) - and yeah, i could take some "newbie" advice and consult help docs someday but i have a thick head - and if i cant figure out how the history panel works in flash after using it for years in P'shop - then is there something wrong with me? yeah - probably ;)

i got used to the way the Undo feature worked in previous versions - and trying to re-learn a feature as trivial as this all over again i consider a workflow bump in the road as i have little time to consult manuals and help docs given the amount of deadlines i have each day - although i DO have time to write a thesis about it here :)

-regards
-chris


chris georgenes
mudbubble.com
Team Macromedia Volunteer for Flash
http://www.flashfilmmaker.com

as a web designer, MX04 seems not a good tool for them anymore.
MM seems already forget the earilest version of flash is a wonderful
animation tools to create web animation.
And the verison go on & go on... MM seems target on developing the
programming parts instead of the "Great" drawing
functions of Flash.

..::herman




"phatkow" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> ?????
news:bsr237$p9n$1@forums.macromedia.com...
[quoted text, click to view]
box MX04 doesnt offer much improvment or additions to the design/animation
side of flash - it's nearly identical to MX - except that MX04 can be
customized through the use of JSAPI to make it more of an animation tool I
always hoped it would be.
[quoted text, click to view]
versions I adopted much earlier and left older versions behind - this
release I clung onto MX more-so than previous releases and gradually ramped
up to MX04.
[quoted text, click to view]
to undo edits made while inside a symbol - i get frustrated after 1 minute
and abandon it.
[quoted text, click to view]
Replace for one) - but is it worth the hefty upgrade price? Only you can
decide based on your needs. I think it's the first version released where
the majority isn't screaming "Yes - go for it!" - at least that's the voice
I read in many forums.
[quoted text, click to view]
Scale and Rotate - until they replaced it in the update - but Normal mode is
gone and Behaviors has been added - now non-programming types need 2 panels
open to code most things.
[quoted text, click to view]