I HATE Technical Book Authors!!!!!!!!!!!!
[rant mode on] Well not ALL technical book authors.I have been trying to get my head around a flash problem today,and I spent three valuable hours, while the deadline clock ticked away looking through books about flash, and NOT ONE of them actually MENTIONS the version of flash it's written for. Oh I know why ... they want to keep on selling their book to mugs who dont know the product doesnt match their old version of the book. But that doesnt help me as a developer. For example, I saw a book called Flash and XML - A Developers Guide, by Dov Jacobson and Jesse Jacobson.NOWHERE does it mention the version of flash it's written for.The only way to tell it's not for FlashMX is the screenshots in the text, which dont look like WindowsXP, and the publish date, hidden away in the VERRY small fine print on page viii.What use is that?How many people, thinking XML is pretty new, and up to date, will be duped into buying the book only to find that it's totally useless for their FlashMX because few of the commands for FlashMX are where they used to be in Flash 5? Part of the trouble with Flash is that every new version has commands in a new place.I can never remember from one month's end to the next how the hell to do anything.For example it took me 4 hours today to produce a simple rollover effect on an object. I tried 4 different tutorials only to give up on them because either the author of the tutorial assumed the reader had more than a passing knowledge of the product, or it was for a different version and there was no mention of what version it was written for.So after half an hour of working through his tutorial I had to give it away as a waste of time because I couldn't follow it. The bottom line I've never once been able to produce anything worthwhile in flash, aside from a simple banner. Compatible with the other macromedia products?Common user interface?RUBBISH IT's NOTHING like it! [/rant mode off] -- Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com .com,.net,.org domains from AUD$20/Year [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: I HATE Technical Book Authors!!!!!!!!!!!!
lol but once u get going it will blow your mind on what it can do! its awesome now, just look in the help docs, lots of good tuts there heres some links to tuts to get ya going Flash: http://www.markme.com/mesh/archives/004700.cfm http://www.sephiroth.it/python/sepy.php http://flashmx2004.com/forums/index.php? http://www.ultrashock.com http://www.flash-db.com/ http://www.flashkit.com/index.shtml http://www.flashcfm.com/ http://www.kirupa.com/ http://www.flashloaded.com https://store.beamjive.com/ http://www.flashscript.biz/components.html http://www.flashnewz.com/ http://www.funciton.com/commponents/ http://www.actionscripts.org http://www.kewbee.de/FlashPluginSwitcher/index.php http://www.jason3d.com/tutorials/ http://www.moock.org/unity/ http://www.actionscripthero.com http://www.daemon.com.au/go/training/tips-and-tricks/flash-remoting http://www.flashmagazine.com/html/495.htm http://www.internetcross.com/flash_tutorials.php http://philflash.inway.fr/example.html http://www.flashkart.com/ http://www.muzakdeezign.com/mxi_creator/about.asp -- Original Message -- From: Mike Kear [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date:Thu, 9 Sep 2004 18:20:17 +1000 [rant mode on] Well not ALL technical book authors.I have been trying to get my head around a flash problem today,and I spent three valuable hours, while the deadline clock ticked away looking through books about flash, and NOT ONE of them actually MENTIONS the version of flash it's written for. Oh I know why ... they want to keep on selling their book to mugs who dont know the product doesnt match their old version of the book. But that doesnt help me as a developer. For example, I saw a book called Flash and XML - A Developers Guide, by Dov Jacobson and Jesse Jacobson.NOWHERE does it mention the version of flash it's written for.The only way to tell it's not for FlashMX is the screenshots in the text, which dont look like WindowsXP, and the publish date, hidden away in the VERRY small fine print on page viii.What use is that?How many people, thinking XML is pretty new, and up to date, will be duped into buying the book only to find that it's totally useless for their FlashMX because few of the commands for FlashMX are where they used to be in Flash 5? Part of the trouble with Flash is that every new version has commands in a new place.I can never remember from one month's end to the next how the hell to do anything.For example it took me 4 hours today to produce a simple rollover effect on an object. I tried 4 different tutorials only to give up on them because either the author of the tutorial assumed the reader had more than a passing knowledge of the product, or it was for a different version and there was no mention of what version it was written for.So after half an hour of working through his tutorial I had to give it away as a waste of time because I couldn't follow it. The bottom line I've never once been able to produce anything worthwhile in flash, aside from a simple banner. Compatible with the other macromedia products?Common user interface?RUBBISH IT's NOTHING like it! [/rant mode off] -- Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com .com,.net,.org domains from AUD$20/Year [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: I HATE Technical Book Authors!!!!!!!!!!!!
I actually prefer the now dead Adobe Livemotion 2.0 to flash. I didn't even need to read the manuals to create linked rollovers... it had a superior interface and scripting elemets imo. Too bad Adobe didn't make enough off it. now I'm left with dead software. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: I HATE Technical Book Authors!!!!!!!!!!!!
I actually prefer the now dead Adobe Livemotion 2.0 to flash. I didn't even need to read the manuals to create linked rollovers... it had a superior interface and scripting elemets imo. Too bad Adobe didn't make enough off it. now I'm left with dead software. I'd been told that the IDE (or maybe the player) for it was so heavy handed that it was virtually impossible for a client machine to _use_ the software for lack of memory and/or processor power. Could just be hearsay, but that's what I'd heard. If it's true, that would explain why a superior interface and scripting elements wouldn't have helped make it popular. s. isaac dealey954.927.5117 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477DE=1 http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569DE=1 http://www.fusiontap.com [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: I HATE Technical Book Authors!!!!!!!!!!!!
Another option is XUL. It only works with modernbrowseerv (FF, Mozilla) It is mainly XML with some _javascript_ A little verbose (the XML) But doesn't take the CPU resources that Flash does (even when idle) It is very fast expanding tree menus etc. Dick On Sep 9, 2004, at 6:44 AM, S. Isaac Dealey wrote: I actually prefer the now dead Adobe Livemotion 2.0 to flash. I didn't even need to read the manuals to create linked rollovers... it had a superior interface and scripting elemets imo. Too bad Adobe didn't make enough off it. now I'm left with dead software. I'd been told that the IDE (or maybe the player) for it was so heavy handed that it was virtually impossible for a client machine to _use_ the software for lack of memory and/or processor power. Could just be hearsay, but that's what I'd heard. If it's true, that would explain why a superior interface and scripting elements wouldn't have helped make it popular. s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477DE=1 http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569DE=1 http://www.fusiontap.com [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
Re: I HATE Technical Book Authors!!!!!!!!!!!!
mmm... kay... XUL was created by the folks at Mozilla specifically for the purpose of defining the user-interface for their newer browsers, hence the need for Moz. or FF. It's not so much modern browsers as it is Mozilla browsers - although I wouldn't be surprised to see it expand to be supported by other browsers, it's not (currently) a heralded standard like XHTML or DOM. Although I have recommended / do recommend DOM as a viable alternative to flash for some interface elements such as trees and tabs, I wouldn't currently recommend XUL. parody of=an Ivan Reitman film voice type=demonic ... there is no data, only XUL... /voice /parody Another option is XUL. It only works with modernbrowseerv (FF, Mozilla) It is mainly XML with some _javascript_ A little verbose (the XML) But doesn't take the CPU resources that Flash does (even when idle) It is very fast expanding tree menus etc. Dick On Sep 9, 2004, at 6:44 AM, S. Isaac Dealey wrote: I actually prefer the now dead Adobe Livemotion 2.0 to flash. I didn't even need to read the manuals to create linked rollovers... it had a superior interface and scripting elemets imo. Too bad Adobe didn't make enough off it. now I'm left with dead software. I'd been told that the IDE (or maybe the player) for it was so heavy handed that it was virtually impossible for a client machine to _use_ the software for lack of memory and/or processor power. Could just be hearsay, but that's what I'd heard. If it's true, that would explain why a superior interface and scripting elements wouldn't have helped make it popular. s. isaac dealey954.927.5117 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477DE=1 http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569DE=1 http://www.fusiontap.com [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
