| 6:06 pm on Mar 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Welcome to the Graphics forum, teknoiz! If you're a Macromedia fellow, I'd love to see you around the forum more often... we're a little heavy on Adobe folks right now, and it would be great to see more input from the Macromedia universe!
| 6:59 pm on Mar 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
We'll... you'll see me more often here :). At least Adobe is doing a great job on SVG authoring, and if Adobe would not be chasing Macromedia's ass on Flash authoring, Macromedia probably would not be so quick and alive in updating Flash :)
We need each other :)
| 7:06 pm on Mar 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
<dirty little secret>I still prefer FreeHand over Illustrator... From back in the Aldus days...</dirty little secret>
| 12:28 pm on Mar 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Freehand is horny, though I believe the colors are better displayed in Illustrator.
A think a combination of these two is always the best option.
What would happen if Adobe would merge with Macromedia? I think everything will become super expensive, and less innovation. (though MM should be integrating some XML and SVG support.
| 6:19 pm on Mar 7, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think you're definitely right about the $$$ and less innovation. Hehe... the merged company would be in danger of becoming the Microsoft of the graphics industry, and heavens knows we don't need one!
Both companies work their tails off to snipe each other's users, which keeps them on their toes. But since a lot of their programs overlap each other for functionality (Dreamweaver/GoLive, Freehand/Illustrator, Flash/LiveMotion), I think a lot of users choose one favorite app and then buy from the same company for workflow efficiency...
Of course, Macromedia got the jump on the web professionals market with Dreamweaver & Flash. The only reason I didn't go with their web products is because I'd bought GoLive Cyberstudio Personal Edition ($98) back before Adobe bought it, and the upgrade path is always cheapest!
I think the only reason Adobe wasn't totally buried in the web arena is because they already had a HUGE user base with Photoshop, and they made a really good move buying GoLive instead of pushing forward with PageMill. Releasing LiveMotion was just playing catch-up with Macromedia.
If Microsoft had someone providing that kind of 1-to-1 competition for their programs & customers, I think their programs would be a lot more secure, streamlined and all-around higher quality today.
| 5:22 pm on Mar 9, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Is Flash MX a plug-in for Flash? or is it a seperate app in its own? It looks exactly like Flash, wiht a few more features.
Can someone please clearify what exactly it is?
BTW>> Someone tell MM to make a blend tool for Flash (like in Illustartor)... That will make 3d shapes and text much mor easier, and will make my day ;)
| 6:06 am on Mar 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It's the upcoming new version of Flash, if I'm not mistaken.
| 9:39 am on Mar 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
You're not mistaken. Should be interesting - video import, probably some more scripting stuff, haven't been paying close attention recently. I use most of the macromedia products, hard to beat them for web stuff.
| 10:13 am on Mar 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The Flash MX player is already available for download on the site.
We have very good experiences with video support in flash. Check the site to see a video implementation
| 8:39 pm on Mar 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Ya i checked out all of the screenshots, looks sweet... I still prefer using Flash over any other vector based drawing prog...
So is MX going to basically be Flash 6?
Also, is the regular flash player gonna be replaced by the Flash MX player, or will peopole have to download the special MX player aswell as the regualr flash player?
Sounds sweeeet, when can i download a demo??
| 8:46 pm on Mar 10, 2002 (gmt 0)|
You will need the Flash MX player to enjoy all the new Flash features. A demo will be available after March 15th, thoug I am one of the happy beta version owners :)
Sorry, a million people ask me to copy it bu I simply don't. Keep waiting, it will satisfy you when it is there :)
| 3:48 am on Mar 11, 2002 (gmt 0)|
But is the Flash MX player going to replace the old flash player?
Folks are just too lazy to download the regular flash player and then the flash mx player. Im hoping it will just take over...
Marking March 15th on me calendar :)
| 9:04 am on Mar 11, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Flash MX is Flash 6 they just copied the trend of windows XP etc.
There are some really cool features like having dynmic content, dreamweaver like properties panel. one of the things im looking forward to is the 'distribute to layers command' - basically if you type "webmaster world" each letter will be given its own layer with its own unique name. How much time will that save...tons :)
| 9:31 pm on Mar 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Ohman that distribute to all layers sounds awesome, could have used it when i had to make a big 5 minute intro a few months back..
| 9:46 pm on Mar 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I still have Flash 4. I'm not interested in ActionScripting (not that it isn't damn cool!) -- more interested in simple, pretty animations. Should I bother upgrading?
| 9:55 pm on Mar 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The main improvements in Flash MX are not focussing on the programming environment, but more on the authorative stuff for design. Grouping layers, inserting (live) video etc. Why don't you download a trail? These will be availeble from the fifteenth.
| 10:07 pm on Mar 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks, I'll do that.
<GAB>I just love the way Flash makes things look -- I've used it for image creation (url in profile: occupation), not just animation!</GAB>
(edited by: mivox at 6:29 pm (utc) on Mar. 13, 2002)
| 6:32 pm on Mar 13, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I hope you won't be offended when I say those are frighteningly cute graphics. ;)
Flash definitely tends to create it's own "style." Of course, with the right tools in any vector drawing program, you can re-create that look, but why bother using two or three programs, if you're happy with the results you get from one?
| 5:03 pm on Mar 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
DAng, just tried to download the FLASH MX demo, but it said the store was curently overloaded with users :(
BTW, why is it so big now (47 mb)? Flash 5 demo was like 18 mb... My comp is only a 200 mhz, so i like appz that can open relatively fast (like Flash 5 & PSP7, oppose to Photoshop)... I hope Flash MX wont make my 'puter spazz....
| 8:11 pm on Mar 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It's so big because Flash MX is tha Bomb. Glad that I have it already for two weaks grin grin :)
| 8:26 pm on Mar 15, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Unfortunately, as computers get more powerful, software manufacturers seems to feel it excuses them from writing small, efficient software. You get bells and whistles, but you pay for it with disk space and RAM demands. Even operating systems are headed that way... OS 9.2 takes up less than 500MB on my Mac HD. A default install of OSX.1 took up 1 gigabyte... Graphics programs are headed the same way.
However, with a really goo dupgrade, the bells and whistles are worth most of the extra room. ;)