Re: FLASH: Aaaggh - Flash 5 programming

[Helen Triolo]

Well said, JGL!  I agree with all of this and just wanted to add that I

didn't mean to criticize Karin or anyone else who chooses to stay with

F4.  No reason to switch if everything will be exported as F4 files

anyway, and there is much to be said for keeping the workflow (and

moneyflow) going in the best way one can  (I could take a lesson or two

from that, as I'd always rather play around with something new and fun

like F5 than work on my paying old-tech jobs ;-)  I see the main plus of

F5 being its value as a real programming language rather than the unique

(albeit functional) language of F4, but that's only useful if you're

creating F5 swf's and have time to learn the dot syntax and

associative-array-syntax that F5 uses.


Regards,

Helen

---------------------------------------------------

Flash 5 Journal:  http://i-technica.com/flash5

Flash Q&A archive:  http://i-technica.com/flashlist


JGL wrote:

> 

> Well, may I jump in too?

> 

> This is all very opiniated discussion - here's mine:

> 

> We've got F5 here in the office but the bulk of the work going on is being

> authored in F4. Mainly due to the fact that all the *great* features of 5

> are not needed in the current projects. There is also a disruptive learning

> curve that really makes the work flow inefficient for these projects that

> always seem to be due yesterday. Couple that with the fact that *most*

> visitors for a while will need to DL the slightly bigger F5 player if

> published out to 5.

> 

> Flash 5 is a great and exciting advancement in swf authoring and really

> shows MM's ability to continue to improve upon an awesome tool. Already

> looking forward to 6!

> 

> But, there is no need to bash those that choose to stay with 4 for a while.

> The 5 authoring environment offers more features, yes, but if your workflow

> is smooth going with 4 and the projects are a success, why switch? The main

> thing is to timely give the client what they want and move on. Not a bad

> business practice and if 4 allows that . . . .

> 

> JD is correct that some of the 5 bashing comes from not understanding the

> environment, the new coding etc. Admitting that you don't understand

> something is one thing, but developers who blame the software when really

> it's due to an inability to comprehend it isn't a good idea. In my

> experience with newly released software, I must say that for the most part

> MM releases a fairly bug free product. And there is a usually quick attempt

> to rectify those bugs that do crop up. Those that aren't usually are coupled

> with poor explanation of the bug itself, or a poor explanation of why it

> isn't a bug. I admit, it took me awhile to comprehend some of the simple

> differences between the two players, but once I did I was able to begin a

> process of fixing the F4 movies to play apropriatly accross the players.

> 

> On another note, the Flash community is one of the most generous I have ever

> been apart of. Brandens Flash Coders list is certainly an asset to F5

> authoring and as with 4, you will see a flood of examples, tutorials and

> downloadable code at places like flashkit and company.

> 

> There is nothing wrong with Flash 5 and there is certainly nothing wrong

> with sticking with 4 if that is what is generating income for you.

> 

> >... or don't. If this is how you make decisions, then really, maybe the

> world is better off if your work doesn't get as much exposure.

> 

> That wasn't very nice John ;)

> 

> >but I wonder why

> many of the interfaces --  such as setting an alpha transparency in

> gradients -- have been changed and are more difficult to use when

> there was nothing wrong with them in the first place.

> 

> Hi Karin, people complained it wasn't like Adobe's stuff . . . you can't

> please everyone!

> 

> >I always though Macromedia listened, but now I wonder.

> 

> I think they do! But John must've been feeling mean that day.

> 

> >I agree that Macromedia puts out a GREAT product, but they don't give it

> away.

> 

> A $149.00 upgrade is *very* reasonable.

> 

> >It is sad when people don't want to move forward to bigger and better

> things

> for no good reason.

> 

> I'd say a good reason not to would be to continue a workflow that is

> generating income.

> 

> >My other complaint is that what is written I've found so far is written

> by programmers for progammers

> 

> You have to learn to program to program :) Don't worry Jeff, there will be a

> *ton* of tutes a examples in the coming months . . .

> 

> >Macromedia did a darn good job with both the program itself and the

> documentation this time around and should be given more credit than

> they're getting. (Helen)

> 

> This is true!!!

> 

> jgl (sorry for the long email)

> 

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> NudeGuru.com is proud to sponsor the Flasher list

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>         IT'S  THE  ART  OF  MONEY,  HONEY!

>  Tips and Advice from some of the most popular Flash

>  artists + industry power-brokers on how to hold onto

>  your rights, negotiate contracts and get full value

>  for your work.http://www.nudeguru.com from Franke James

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

>

http://www.chinwag.com/flasher or email helpchinwag [dot] com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NudeGuru.com is proud to sponsor the Flasher list

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

        IT'S  THE  ART  OF  MONEY,  HONEY!

 Tips and Advice from some of the most popular Flash

 artists + industry power-brokers on how to hold onto

 your rights, negotiate contracts and get full value

 for your work.http://www.nudeguru.com from Franke James

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/flasher or email

helpchinwag [dot] com