> On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne > wrote: >> If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web >> Interface, they must introduce an application that makes >> it easy to generate "Dynamic" RIA.
> I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring > environment for Flash movies? I've done some work with Flash and I just find the Flash MX authoring tool frustrating to work with. Unfortunately I don't have any useful suggestions of how to make it easier to use, so I for the most part just do what I can and wait and hope that it will improve with time. I don't suspect he meant is was an unsuitable authoring environment, like, "gee if I wanted to sweep the floor the _last_ thing I would use is a broom!". But rather that it's rather intimidating / unuserfriendly for a lot of us CF developers who are used to doing everything in a text environment. For my part, I'm inclined to think that I might actually have an easier time developing flash movies if given a tool (or mode) which focuses almost solely on text, allowing me to designate the height and width of the stage, new items, etc. all with ActionScript, "pull in" any vector graphics from external sources and tween them with more ActionScript, much the same way I leverage things like Application.cfm, OnRequestEnd.cfm and cfinclude now. Granted, part of the reason I have a tough time adjusting to the Flash MX UI may be largely because I've not read much of the documentation on how to accomplish these sorts of things with ActionScript. But I suspect also that if a focus were given to developing that sort of tool (emphasis on text vs. the visual stage) that the documentation would also follow that approach and focus on doing things with code, the way we're used to. I find the current documentation for Flash MX as difficult to use as the interface itself (and it's easily broken by changes to the JVM on the host machine), so I don't really see it as a significant asset the way I always have seen the documentation for ColdFusion. I suppose for starters, this url needs to not produce a 404 error: http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flashmxdocs/dochome.jsp That's the url for the ColdFusion livedocs, with the abbreviation "cf" swapped out for the name "flash". I think that in order for the CF community at large to really get involved in and grasp Flash the way that MM probably wants, you need to provide them that same documentation in the same format for both products. So if I had to try to give a constructive criticism, that would would be my first suggestion. :) But that's just the first step in brining together what have in the past been reasonably separate designer / developer communities. And as strange as it may sound, I think there's a lot of merit in the previous suggestion of a Flash authoring tool (or mode in the existing tool) that relegates the stage off to a pull-down menu somewhere or a separate window all-together as a default authoring environment, if for no other reason than that it forces the documentation to be changed to cater to us cf developers who are used to _not_ using a graphical tool to place an image (or anything else) on an html page. Maybe DWMX is that tool and I just haven't taken the time to look at it. If that's the case, then the documentation needs to follow. >> But when Macromedia introduced �Contribute� is was >> insulting. Trust me. People attracted to �Contribute� >> will not be the people that build RIA. > Contribute has a specific target market. That target > market does not include ColdFusion developers (in general) > nor does it include Flash developers. I'm a little puzzled > as to why you think it is "insulting"? Again, playing devil's advocate, I think the problem that some CF developers have had with Contribute (myself not included, so I'm sure I'm not really speaking for anyone in particular), is that it's seen as a waste of resources which might have otherwise been spent on more ColdFusion Server development. Yes, MM has a limited pool of cash and resources to work with and I think it's important for MM not to get too caught up in "one-off" or "pet" projects. Any decent product-oriented (software, automotive, fast-food, etc) company of any size however must occasionally launch new projects in an attempt to expand their market. When you do this, you're intentionally trying to get those "one-off" projects that are similar or complimentary to some of your existing products, but target new / different people. The idea is that, while many _will_ fail (like SiteSpring which didn't generate as much interrest as was hoped), every x in y of them will be a continued success and thereby allow even the largest company to continue to grow by attracting previously untapped income potential. Plus I think I'm getting away from the subject. In any event -- I think I understand both the sense of frustration or possibly abandonment of cf developers looking at where MM is putting their resources as well as the need on MM's part to keep a few eggs out of the basket. s. isaac dealey 954-776-0046 new epoch http://www.turnkey.to lead architect, tapestry cms http://products.turnkey.to tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
