Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-21 Thread allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com)
adobe has been saying that the next version of flash will be designer-driven
so it's maybe something that is being looked at at the moment

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:22 PM, daniele tassone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Double click on the component/botton and auto-creation of AS3 code is other
 solution
 in order to keep good code and good humor for people that don't want to
 write code;

 3 weeks ago i have explain at creative team that will work with me, how we
 can work
 togheter with as3; not happy to see that we can't use event on Button.

 Next week other lesson at different creative team in order to explain same
 things.
 I'll hear the same word: loadMovie ? event ?

 I don't want to speak bad about AS3, I think that is a good language/ide,
 with a little bit of problem because it's young.

 But i hope that Adobe can give the right way in order to do more and better
 with low work.
 Adobe have great experience in designer-tool-market, I'll hope for the
 future.

 Daniele Tassone



 2008/7/18 allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  i think someone has touched on it before, but if there is to be code
  applicable to movieclips / buttons on stage then they should work
 similarly
  to the way motion tweens can be copied as actionscript - allow the bad
  behaviour for numpties and quick jobs, but then compensate to move the
 code
  to where it should be.
 
  a
 
  On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Juan Pablo Califano 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   You're probably right. Nevertheless, I think the spirit of the article
  has
   been misunderstood. As I read it, it pointed out the need to have a
   higher-level visual-style user interface to make simple things easier
 for
   non programmers. Visual tools that can intuitively generate the AS 3
 code
   for adding simple behaviours and interactivity.  I'm a programmer
 myself
   and
   I don't think I'd use these features, but I now many people I work with
  who
   would love to have them available. It'd make their lives easier,
 without
   compromising efficency or mantainability (we're talking about simple
  stuff
   anyway). I believe the charges about button events, getURL and
   loadMovie are a good example of this point.
  
   Cheers
   Juan Pablo Califano
  
  
   2008/7/18, Abe Pazos [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
   
I think most of the people who would agree
with these charges are not in this mailing list.
   
Are there more AS3 coders out there?
Or more designers who sometimes use
a line or two of ActionScript with gotoAndPlays,
loadMovies, on release/rollover/rollout?
   
I wonder how would this discussion look
like if this was a designers mailing list?
   
Abe
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
   
   ___
   Flashcoders mailing list
   Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
   http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
  
  ___
  Flashcoders mailing list
  Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
  http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
 
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-21 Thread Brian Mays
This has been the pendulum usually swings. Good to hear it.

Brian Mays


On 7/21/08 6:02 AM, allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 adobe has been saying that the next version of flash will be designer-driven
 so it's maybe something that is being looked at at the moment

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com)
The problem with splitting Flash up into the Designer App and the Coder App
(Talking Flash here, not Flex which i've never used) is that those of us
that have to deal with Flash as a scaling entity (I'm a freelance developer
so this week it's banners, next week it's site development and OOP) will be
forced to use 2 different environments, wtih all the relearning that using
different apps takes. I like how I can choose to use the Flash IDE for
anything or kick development out to another app for more intense work (I've
been using FlashDevelop with parallels where necessary) for any project I
do.

Designers need training to learn to use the timeline for their code rather
than putting it into arbitrary movieclips. That's the solution to the new
paradigm.



On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Matt S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Jason Van Pelt
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  The negative side to creating a flash without the as3 application is
 that
  many of us grew up with Flash and used it as a way to learn to be
  developers. I think Colin's point isn't to provide a basic app to basic
  users, necessarily, but to make the point of entry easy for new users --
 as
  it was for us.
 
  I started in version 3! :-)

 I think it was 4 for me. Good times

 .m
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread Jordan L. Chilcott
I don't know if I could agree with the statement below. I have no real 
use for Flex as I can get everything I need from Flash, and can take it 
down as granular as I want. Flash's failure, IMHO, is providing a proper 
coding IDE for just plain ol' AS3, sans Flex. Thank goodness for things 
like FlashDevelop stepping in (and even on a Mac it still does me well 
in a virtualized Windows environment).


jord

Kerry Thompson wrote:

It IS two apps. Flash and Flex.
More and more of us hard-core coder types are using Flex for heavy-duty
development. 
  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread Jordan L. Chilcott
I'm in the same boat here (been working with Flash since v4 came out, 
but have been coding for 25 years). Most of the stuff that has been 
iterated in this thread somewhat echo my opinions. I particularly agree 
with the one statement down below: AS3 is easier to use. The stigma is 
that AS2 coders have to learn a new way if you want to start coding with 
AS3. IMHO, it's a more proper way and more functional and far less 
confusing to the next person who has to look at an FLA and maintain it.


The article seemed a bit whiny as a refusal to change. There's nothing 
in those changes that are more difficult to implement than their 
predecessors.


If anything, I half agree with the unloading issue. All objects when 
discarded should be garbage collectable, timeline or not. To the garbage 
collector, it is just dereferenced object and not discarding it is 
definitely a bug more than anything else. However, I don't agree for a 
simple unload movie... that could break OOP logic structures if one were 
to simply unload without dereference. Again, we're talking a more 
structured language and despite its simplicity, there is a 
responsibility on the part of the person writing code. I don't apologize 
for being rather unforgiving towards this.


AS2 was an excuse for allowing a lot of bad habits, and now AS3 has 
addressed those bad habits. Adobe shouldn't have to go back to appeasing 
those bad habits as much as they should be showing more how to implement 
things the AS3 way.


jord

Romuald Quantin wrote:

Well, I've coded years with AS2 and I have to say, except for the problem
with loaded SWF, which will probably be solved soon:
http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/07/additional_info.html,
I'm not missing AS2 at all!! I'm not from another language but AS3 is a lot
cleaner, nothing to compare. So yes, I guess it is easier to use.

Probably because I'm not using a lot the flash IDE, but I can understand
that for people who are using it or to make quick dirty test, some old AS
features can be missed.

Romu

  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread Abe Pazos

I think most of the people who would agree
with these charges are not in this mailing list.

Are there more AS3 coders out there?
Or more designers who sometimes use
a line or two of ActionScript with gotoAndPlays,
loadMovies, on release/rollover/rollout?

I wonder how would this discussion look
like if this was a designers mailing list?

Abe
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread Juan Pablo Califano
You're probably right. Nevertheless, I think the spirit of the article has
been misunderstood. As I read it, it pointed out the need to have a
higher-level visual-style user interface to make simple things easier for
non programmers. Visual tools that can intuitively generate the AS 3 code
for adding simple behaviours and interactivity.  I'm a programmer myself and
I don't think I'd use these features, but I now many people I work with who
would love to have them available. It'd make their lives easier, without
compromising efficency or mantainability (we're talking about simple stuff
anyway). I believe the charges about button events, getURL and
loadMovie are a good example of this point.

Cheers
Juan Pablo Califano


2008/7/18, Abe Pazos [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 I think most of the people who would agree
 with these charges are not in this mailing list.

 Are there more AS3 coders out there?
 Or more designers who sometimes use
 a line or two of ActionScript with gotoAndPlays,
 loadMovies, on release/rollover/rollout?

 I wonder how would this discussion look
 like if this was a designers mailing list?

 Abe
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com)
i think someone has touched on it before, but if there is to be code
applicable to movieclips / buttons on stage then they should work similarly
to the way motion tweens can be copied as actionscript - allow the bad
behaviour for numpties and quick jobs, but then compensate to move the code
to where it should be.

a

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Juan Pablo Califano 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 You're probably right. Nevertheless, I think the spirit of the article has
 been misunderstood. As I read it, it pointed out the need to have a
 higher-level visual-style user interface to make simple things easier for
 non programmers. Visual tools that can intuitively generate the AS 3 code
 for adding simple behaviours and interactivity.  I'm a programmer myself
 and
 I don't think I'd use these features, but I now many people I work with who
 would love to have them available. It'd make their lives easier, without
 compromising efficency or mantainability (we're talking about simple stuff
 anyway). I believe the charges about button events, getURL and
 loadMovie are a good example of this point.

 Cheers
 Juan Pablo Califano


 2008/7/18, Abe Pazos [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 
  I think most of the people who would agree
  with these charges are not in this mailing list.
 
  Are there more AS3 coders out there?
  Or more designers who sometimes use
  a line or two of ActionScript with gotoAndPlays,
  loadMovies, on release/rollover/rollout?
 
  I wonder how would this discussion look
  like if this was a designers mailing list?
 
  Abe
  ___
  Flashcoders mailing list
  Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
  http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
 
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-18 Thread daniele tassone
Double click on the component/botton and auto-creation of AS3 code is other
solution
in order to keep good code and good humor for people that don't want to
write code;

3 weeks ago i have explain at creative team that will work with me, how we
can work
togheter with as3; not happy to see that we can't use event on Button.

Next week other lesson at different creative team in order to explain same
things.
I'll hear the same word: loadMovie ? event ?

I don't want to speak bad about AS3, I think that is a good language/ide,
with a little bit of problem because it's young.

But i hope that Adobe can give the right way in order to do more and better
with low work.
Adobe have great experience in designer-tool-market, I'll hope for the
future.

Daniele Tassone



2008/7/18 allandt bik-elliott (thefieldcomic.com) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 i think someone has touched on it before, but if there is to be code
 applicable to movieclips / buttons on stage then they should work similarly
 to the way motion tweens can be copied as actionscript - allow the bad
 behaviour for numpties and quick jobs, but then compensate to move the code
 to where it should be.

 a

 On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Juan Pablo Califano 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  You're probably right. Nevertheless, I think the spirit of the article
 has
  been misunderstood. As I read it, it pointed out the need to have a
  higher-level visual-style user interface to make simple things easier for
  non programmers. Visual tools that can intuitively generate the AS 3 code
  for adding simple behaviours and interactivity.  I'm a programmer myself
  and
  I don't think I'd use these features, but I now many people I work with
 who
  would love to have them available. It'd make their lives easier, without
  compromising efficency or mantainability (we're talking about simple
 stuff
  anyway). I believe the charges about button events, getURL and
  loadMovie are a good example of this point.
 
  Cheers
  Juan Pablo Califano
 
 
  2008/7/18, Abe Pazos [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  
   I think most of the people who would agree
   with these charges are not in this mailing list.
  
   Are there more AS3 coders out there?
   Or more designers who sometimes use
   a line or two of ActionScript with gotoAndPlays,
   loadMovies, on release/rollover/rollout?
  
   I wonder how would this discussion look
   like if this was a designers mailing list?
  
   Abe
   ___
   Flashcoders mailing list
   Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
   http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
  
  ___
  Flashcoders mailing list
  Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
  http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
 
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread elibol
The only one that makes any sense is #2, and that is being addressed with
Loader.unloadAndStop(), except for the most part I'm kind of wary about
having the Loader class tear my loaded swfs a new one. I kind of agree with
Sacks when he more subtly articulates that this is for noobs. I was
expecting charges more along the lines of Remove auto-declare stage
instances and ever having to declare stage instances and just use
getChildByName(). - but I guess that would be a charge against the Flash.

Thats my two cents.

H

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Kerry Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Steven Sacks wrote:

  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash 8, it still could beThe
 reason
  you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY to use for even non
  programmers.

 Steven has a point (even though I cut most of his post). Remember the days
 when Flash's nickname was Skip-intro?

 The Internet has changed, and will continue to change. It has gotten more
 sophisticated. Browsers have gotten more sophisticated. Users have gotten
 more sophisticated. To keep Flash/Flex as a premier Web development tool,
 it
 has to get more sophisticated, and its users must get more sophisticated.

 Having said that, I'd like to see Flash have drag-and-drop behaviors like
 Director has. In its first decade or so, Director followed a similar path
 as
 Flash. It started out as a simple animation tool with an easy-to-use
 language, and developed into a sophisticated programmer's tool. The
 introduction of drag-and-drop behaviors brought it back into the realm of
 the designer, while remaining a sophisticated programmer's tool.

 Of course, Macromedia made a number of blunders with Director/Shockwave
 that, I hope, will not be repeated by Adobe on Flash. Making it more
 sophisticated was not one of those blunders, though.

 Cordially,

 Kerry Thompson

 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Ashim D'Silva
I like the way Steven split this into child's toy and adult's toy
because at heart: yes, Flash is indeed a toy. But like in all cases of
everything, everywhere, things do need to grow. This big jump has been
at the expense of the easy-of-use aspect of Flash, just as the
introduction of Filters and Blend Modes were at the expense of
efficiency. All children grow albeit at different rates, but they must
grow if they want to survive. To keep the toy metaphor going, Lego
started with a really simple ideal, and every piece fitted into every
other. You could take multiple sets of Lego and just stick them all
together in random fun. And then it got complex: things like Lego
Technics came about, and the pieces got more complex. You could still
do all the old stuff, but it took more doing and the previous versions
still existed.

I think Barry has a good point. If you do just like it as it is, use
that version. Use AS2, for as long as it survives, and for as long as
it takes to make the move. But if you want to grow, make the move. As
a designer with little programming knowledge, I was terrified of the
move. But the things being done with AS3 were way to cool.

Hopefully, with the next release, Adobe will make things easier. This
is the first release of the new VM and has a lot of things that can be
improved. But it's opened a massive world online of really powerful
tools and finally an engine efficient enough to drive some incredible
websites. Ease of use is important, but I'd be disappointed if
innovation and power took a back seat to it. Learn grow every
other area of your life requires you to; why do you expect the web to
be different?

2008/7/17 elibol [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 The only one that makes any sense is #2, and that is being addressed with
 Loader.unloadAndStop(), except for the most part I'm kind of wary about
 having the Loader class tear my loaded swfs a new one. I kind of agree with
 Sacks when he more subtly articulates that this is for noobs. I was
 expecting charges more along the lines of Remove auto-declare stage
 instances and ever having to declare stage instances and just use
 getChildByName(). - but I guess that would be a charge against the Flash.

 Thats my two cents.

 H

 On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Kerry Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

 Steven Sacks wrote:

  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash 8, it still could beThe
 reason
  you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY to use for even non
  programmers.

 Steven has a point (even though I cut most of his post). Remember the days
 when Flash's nickname was Skip-intro?

 The Internet has changed, and will continue to change. It has gotten more
 sophisticated. Browsers have gotten more sophisticated. Users have gotten
 more sophisticated. To keep Flash/Flex as a premier Web development tool,
 it
 has to get more sophisticated, and its users must get more sophisticated.

 Having said that, I'd like to see Flash have drag-and-drop behaviors like
 Director has. In its first decade or so, Director followed a similar path
 as
 Flash. It started out as a simple animation tool with an easy-to-use
 language, and developed into a sophisticated programmer's tool. The
 introduction of drag-and-drop behaviors brought it back into the realm of
 the designer, while remaining a sophisticated programmer's tool.

 Of course, Macromedia made a number of blunders with Director/Shockwave
 that, I hope, will not be repeated by Adobe on Flash. Making it more
 sophisticated was not one of those blunders, though.

 Cordially,

 Kerry Thompson

 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders




-- 
Yet another Random Lines
More usable than ever!
www.therandomlines.com
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Beatrix Krümmer-Frau

Juan Pablo Califano schrieb:
 I agree with the article and with what Steve has pointed out already.
 Even from an historical point of view, I think that what made the flash
 platform ubiquitous was that many people started to create cool stuff for
 it. 
Hi,
at this point i just want to remember what the pioneers, the masters of 
flash, did for the success of Flash. Remember Ray of Light from Yasuto 
Suga - the reason i started learning flash. With this little Banners 
and experimentations, Desigerns work and Programmers effords - Flash 
grew and became what it is today. Flash needs both, also in the future, 
i hope Colin this is what you mean in your article.

Beatrix



_
Lustige Emoticons für Ihren Messenger! Hier kostenlos downloaden!
http://messenger.live.de/mein/___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread daniele tassone
I agree with this point.

I use with no particular difficult c#, sql, asp.net, java, as3, as2, Flex
and i think that
as3 is better than as2/as1 because my skill give me the opportunity to work
with
a language that can be great (that is at first version ... so with a
little bit of problem).

But designer that work with me are not happy, and for a more and more
project
i have difficult to use AS3 because the world don't use AS3;

I think that onClipEvent and on(...) is important for designer like class
is important for programmer.
Introduce again this concept, or build a new product for designer is a
must for Adobe.

daniele tassone




2008/7/17 Beatrix Krümmer-Frau [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


 Juan Pablo Califano schrieb:
  I agree with the article and with what Steve has pointed out already.
  Even from an historical point of view, I think that what made the flash
  platform ubiquitous was that many people started to create cool stuff for
  it.
 Hi,
 at this point i just want to remember what the pioneers, the masters of
 flash, did for the success of Flash. Remember Ray of Light from Yasuto
 Suga - the reason i started learning flash. With this little Banners
 and experimentations, Desigerns work and Programmers effords - Flash
 grew and became what it is today. Flash needs both, also in the future,
 i hope Colin this is what you mean in your article.

 Beatrix



 _
 Lustige Emoticons für Ihren Messenger! Hier kostenlos downloaden!

 http://messenger.live.de/mein/___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Meinte van't Kruis
I don't see why people make such a distinction between designer and
programmer,
I think, espessially in the flash environment, this distinction is very
vague and you'll see
alot of designers doing programmer work and vice versa. That said I think
that anyone who
was used to as2 and the way things worked has to invest some time before
becoming
completely comfortable with the new language and everything that surrounds
it. Most designers
I see in my environment are actually quite cool with it and don't have any
real problems, other
than the discomfort of getting used to something and getting the feel for
it, which takes time
but doesn't neceserally mean that as3 is so much more complex that as2, I
actually believe
that in some ways as3 can be easier to work with than its predecessors. But
that's just my
view on things.

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:43 AM, daniele tassone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 I agree with this point.

 I use with no particular difficult c#, sql, asp.net, java, as3, as2, Flex
 and i think that
 as3 is better than as2/as1 because my skill give me the opportunity to work
 with
 a language that can be great (that is at first version ... so with a
 little bit of problem).

 But designer that work with me are not happy, and for a more and more
 project
 i have difficult to use AS3 because the world don't use AS3;

 I think that onClipEvent and on(...) is important for designer like class
 is important for programmer.
 Introduce again this concept, or build a new product for designer is a
 must for Adobe.

 daniele tassone




 2008/7/17 Beatrix Krümmer-Frau [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 
  Juan Pablo Califano schrieb:
   I agree with the article and with what Steve has pointed out already.
   Even from an historical point of view, I think that what made the flash
   platform ubiquitous was that many people started to create cool stuff
 for
   it.
  Hi,
  at this point i just want to remember what the pioneers, the masters of
  flash, did for the success of Flash. Remember Ray of Light from Yasuto
  Suga - the reason i started learning flash. With this little Banners
  and experimentations, Desigerns work and Programmers effords - Flash
  grew and became what it is today. Flash needs both, also in the future,
  i hope Colin this is what you mean in your article.
 
  Beatrix
 
 
 
  _
  Lustige Emoticons für Ihren Messenger! Hier kostenlos downloaden!
 
 
 http://messenger.live.de/mein/___
  Flashcoders mailing list
  Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
  http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
 
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders




-- 
M.A. van't Kruis
http://www.malatze.nl/
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Brian Mays



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Meinte van't Kruis
Sent: Thu 7/17/2008 3:59 AM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
 
 I don't see why people make such a distinction between designer and
 programmer, I think, espessially in the flash environment, this distinction 
 is very
 vague and you'll see alot of designers doing programmer work and vice versa. 

Because it all comes down to strengths. Designers make it look great. 
Developers make it work well.

The vast majority of designers don't code well. And the vast majority of 
developers don't design well. Both areas can make respectable efforts at 
playing on the other field. And the higher ups don't care who does what 
sometimes as long as it looks respectable and works decently.

My favorite bitter drum to beat is the one about developers using Photoshop 
and its dumbed down filters and layers effects to thrust the contrived copy-cat 
Web 2.0 style on us. :-) Maybe we should make Photoshop less of a toy for 
non-designers...it should require everyone to originate a concept and do 
thumbnail sketches with a pencil on paper first.

Thoughts to chew on :-) Feel free to agree or disagree (althought I may not 
respond quickly because I'm conducting a tour group for 4 hours, YIPES!).

Brian Mays
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Paul Andrews
- Original Message - 
From: Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0


Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when they 
were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.


Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article about 
how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it right out 
the gate.


Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an 
effective retraction of his original article.


Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on 
this issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better are 
either


1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other programming 
languages.


2. See 1.

Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some 
timeline somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who just 
needs to get some glorified banner out the door.


Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly hard 
to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just needs to 
set the text of some TextField two levels up.


Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.


I'll put myself in the or people who came from other programming 
languages. camp.


As such I find AS3 far easier than AS2, which seems very quircky by 
comparison.


I think the main reason there appears to be some bad feeling about AS3 is 
that (naturally enough) people get familiar with things and don't like to 
see them change.


My opinion is that for flash newbies AS3 is far simpler to learn than trying 
to get to grips with the idiosynchacies of AS2.


I'll freely admit that if you have an easy animation job that's disposable, 
AS1 is the way to do it.


Generally speaking I'm with Patrick not Moock on this one, but as you say it 
probably depends on your background where your sympathies lie.


Paul






___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders



___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Romuald Quantin
Well, I've coded years with AS2 and I have to say, except for the problem
with loaded SWF, which will probably be solved soon:
http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2008/07/additional_info.html,
I'm not missing AS2 at all!! I'm not from another language but AS3 is a lot
cleaner, nothing to compare. So yes, I guess it is easier to use.

Probably because I'm not using a lot the flash IDE, but I can understand
that for people who are using it or to make quick dirty test, some old AS
features can be missed.

Romu


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Andrews
Sent: 17 July 2008 15:11
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

- Original Message - 
From: Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Flash Coders List flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0


 Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when they

 were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.

 Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article about

 how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it right out 
 the gate.

 Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an 
 effective retraction of his original article.

 Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on 
 this issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better are 
 either

 1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other programming

 languages.

 2. See 1.

 Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some 
 timeline somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who just

 needs to get some glorified banner out the door.

 Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly hard

 to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just needs to

 set the text of some TextField two levels up.

 Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.

I'll put myself in the or people who came from other programming 
languages. camp.

As such I find AS3 far easier than AS2, which seems very quircky by 
comparison.

I think the main reason there appears to be some bad feeling about AS3 is 
that (naturally enough) people get familiar with things and don't like to 
see them change.

My opinion is that for flash newbies AS3 is far simpler to learn than trying

to get to grips with the idiosynchacies of AS2.

I'll freely admit that if you have an easy animation job that's disposable, 
AS1 is the way to do it.

Generally speaking I'm with Patrick not Moock on this one, but as you say it

probably depends on your background where your sympathies lie.

Paul





 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
 

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Matt S.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Meinte van't Kruis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I don't see why people make such a distinction between designer and
 programmer,
 I think, espessially in the flash environment, this distinction is very
 vague and you'll see
 alot of designers doing programmer work and vice versa.

Thats true, mostly, but with the arrival of AS3 that has changed
somewhat. As a creative-turned-developer, I'm quite comfortable with
AS3 and for the most part havent looked back or missed AS2 at all
(except when I have to relearn how to do something for the first time
on deadline ;) ). But I think part of the problem is the increasingly
schizophrenic nature of Flash's identity as an application. Even
with the advent of AS3, its still unclear what defines a Flash
designer or Flash developer,  especially to people coming to it
fresh who may be misled by bad teachers or learn flash in 10 minutes!
make a bouncing bunny! articles in magazines which still teach it as
a Timeline application. Even the Flash documentation still focuses
heavily on the Timeline, tweening etc in the early chapters, even
though thats practically deprecated at this point. And Flash still has
friggin SCENES despite those being about as looked down upon as cheese
on fish for like 3 years now. I still have people tell me all the time
that they know flash, and when they show me their work its a
timeline-based animation. Which is totally fine of course, but the
problem is that they *dont even know* that what they're showing me has
very little to do with what Flash currently has become. They may not
even realize that those amazing Flash sites they see online dont have
the slightest connection to their cute little timeline work, despite
their both being built in flash, and when I explain that, there is
genuine confusion. After all, they bought Flash CS3, cracked the
owners manual, and looky here, the whole first section is all about
timelines, tweens, keyframes etc, and Actionscript comes later.

Which is not to blame anyone. But it seems like Flash may need to
become two apps in the long run. Or rather, EXPLICITLY become two
apps, since at this point it already basically is.

.m
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Merrill, Jason
Nice post - I agree with most of what you have said... although just a
comment on this one, it seems like Flash may need to become two apps in
the long run. Or rather, EXPLICITLY become two apps

It already has:  Flash CS3 and Flexbuilder.  Adobe is working on other
tools too to ease the workflow between Flash and Flex and other Adobe
products.


Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology  Global Risk LLD 
Instructional Technology  Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GTO Innovative Learning Blog  subscribe. 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
Of Matt S.
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:36 AM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Meinte van't Kruis 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I don't see why people make such a distinction between designer and 
 programmer, I think, espessially in the flash environment, this 
 distinction is very vague and you'll see alot of designers doing 
 programmer work and vice versa.

Thats true, mostly, but with the arrival of AS3 that has 
changed somewhat. As a creative-turned-developer, I'm quite 
comfortable with
AS3 and for the most part havent looked back or missed AS2 at 
all (except when I have to relearn how to do something for 
the first time on deadline ;) ). But I think part of the 
problem is the increasingly schizophrenic nature of Flash's 
identity as an application. Even with the advent of AS3, 
its still unclear what defines a Flash designer or Flash 
developer,  especially to people coming to it fresh who may 
be misled by bad teachers or learn flash in 10 minutes!
make a bouncing bunny! articles in magazines which still 
teach it as a Timeline application. Even the Flash 
documentation still focuses heavily on the Timeline, tweening 
etc in the early chapters, even though thats practically 
deprecated at this point. And Flash still has friggin SCENES 
despite those being about as looked down upon as cheese on 
fish for like 3 years now. I still have people tell me all 
the time that they know flash, and when they show me their 
work its a timeline-based animation. Which is totally fine of 
course, but the problem is that they *dont even know* that 
what they're showing me has very little to do with what Flash 
currently has become. They may not even realize that those 
amazing Flash sites they see online dont have the slightest 
connection to their cute little timeline work, despite their 
both being built in flash, and when I explain that, there 
is genuine confusion. After all, they bought Flash CS3, 
cracked the owners manual, and looky here, the whole first 
section is all about timelines, tweens, keyframes etc, and 
Actionscript comes later.

Which is not to blame anyone. 

.m
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Matt S.
Maybe THREE Apps then ;)

Flash CS3, FlexBuilder, and some sort of Animation/Timeline focused
app, called, lets say, FutureSplash. ;)

.m

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Merrill, Jason
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Nice post - I agree with most of what you have said... although just a
 comment on this one, it seems like Flash may need to become two apps in
 the long run. Or rather, EXPLICITLY become two apps

 It already has:  Flash CS3 and Flexbuilder.  Adobe is working on other
 tools too to ease the workflow between Flash and Flex and other Adobe
 products.


 Jason Merrill
 Bank of America
 Enterprise Technology  Global Risk LLD
 Instructional Technology  Media

 Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community

 Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
 ideas and technologies?
 Check out our internal  GTO Innovative Learning Blog  subscribe.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Matt S.
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:36 AM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Meinte van't Kruis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I don't see why people make such a distinction between designer and
 programmer, I think, espessially in the flash environment, this
 distinction is very vague and you'll see alot of designers doing
 programmer work and vice versa.

Thats true, mostly, but with the arrival of AS3 that has
changed somewhat. As a creative-turned-developer, I'm quite
comfortable with
AS3 and for the most part havent looked back or missed AS2 at
all (except when I have to relearn how to do something for
the first time on deadline ;) ). But I think part of the
problem is the increasingly schizophrenic nature of Flash's
identity as an application. Even with the advent of AS3,
its still unclear what defines a Flash designer or Flash
developer,  especially to people coming to it fresh who may
be misled by bad teachers or learn flash in 10 minutes!
make a bouncing bunny! articles in magazines which still
teach it as a Timeline application. Even the Flash
documentation still focuses heavily on the Timeline, tweening
etc in the early chapters, even though thats practically
deprecated at this point. And Flash still has friggin SCENES
despite those being about as looked down upon as cheese on
fish for like 3 years now. I still have people tell me all
the time that they know flash, and when they show me their
work its a timeline-based animation. Which is totally fine of
course, but the problem is that they *dont even know* that
what they're showing me has very little to do with what Flash
currently has become. They may not even realize that those
amazing Flash sites they see online dont have the slightest
connection to their cute little timeline work, despite their
both being built in flash, and when I explain that, there
is genuine confusion. After all, they bought Flash CS3,
cracked the owners manual, and looky here, the whole first
section is all about timelines, tweens, keyframes etc, and
Actionscript comes later.

Which is not to blame anyone.

.m
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Zeh Fernando

Matt S. wrote:

But I think part of the problem is the increasingly
schizophrenic nature of Flash's identity as an application.


This is the money quote of this whole discussion, IMO.

AS3 is fine as a language. The charges are indicative of a bigger 
problem, however.



Zeh
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Merrill, Jason
Maybe THREE Apps then ;)

Flash CS3, FlexBuilder, and some sort of Animation/Timeline 
focused app, called, lets say, FutureSplash. ;)

There you go!

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology  Global Risk LLD 
Instructional Technology  Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GTO Innovative Learning Blog  subscribe. 

 
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Brian Mays



On 7/17/08 10:35 AM, Matt S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 But I think part of the problem is the increasingly
 schizophrenic nature of Flash's identity as an application.

I like that. That's my new mantra :-)

Brian Mays

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Kerry Thompson
Matt S. wrote:

 it seems like Flash may need to
 become two apps in the long run. Or rather, EXPLICITLY become two
 apps, since at this point it already basically is.

It IS two apps. Flash and Flex. 

More and more of us hard-core coder types are using Flex for heavy-duty
development. I often work on a team that includes an artist who knows little
or no AS, but does some wicked Movie Clips in Flash.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Matt S.
I know, Jason called me on that :)  But I guess my real point was that
there needs to be another version of Flash which is explicitly
targeted at the non-coder, at the people who want to timeline and
tween and drag-drop their way to an animated/interactive product.
Flash for dummies as it were. Break off a third version aimed at those
who still want to use Flash as it was originally developed back in the
day. There's certainly still a demand for it, and no other product
which does it as well.

.m

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Kerry Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Matt S. wrote:

 it seems like Flash may need to
 become two apps in the long run. Or rather, EXPLICITLY become two
 apps, since at this point it already basically is.

 It IS two apps. Flash and Flex.

 More and more of us hard-core coder types are using Flex for heavy-duty
 development. I often work on a team that includes an artist who knows little
 or no AS, but does some wicked Movie Clips in Flash.

 Cordially,

 Kerry Thompson

 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Kerry Thompson
Matt S. wrote:

 I know, Jason called me on that :)

Yeah, I saw that. He beat me to the punch. (Jason, you _will_ pay! ;-)

  But I guess my real point was that
 there needs to be another version of Flash which is explicitly
 targeted at the non-coder, at the people who want to timeline and
 tween and drag-drop their way to an animated/interactive product.

Flash CS3 has all the features of Flash 8--in fact, Flash 6. You can still
write AS2 code, and you can still do all the tweening and timeline animation
you want. I work with artists regularly who don't do a lick of coding, but
turn out some really nice assets for me.

Actually, come to think of it, I'm not sure CS3 has the old click-and-choose
coding--I forget what it was called, but the alternate to expert mode. If
that is missing, it would be too bad, because that does make medium-level
coding accessible to the non-programmer.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Matt S.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Kerry Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Flash CS3 has all the features of Flash 8--in fact, Flash 6. You can still
 write AS2 code, and you can still do all the tweening and timeline animation
 you want. I work with artists regularly who don't do a lick of coding, but
 turn out some really nice assets for me.


Yeah I know, but I'm suggesting a version which is explicitly
targetted at that user.

.m
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Meinte van't Kruis
  Yeah I know, but I'm suggesting a version which is explicitly
  targetted at that user.

So you mean flash cs3, but without the actionscript ;) :P


 But I think part of the problem is the increasingly
 schizophrenic nature of Flash's identity as an application.

Well, this has maybe always been the case, and to a certain extent will
remain so. I certainly hope so, because that's what makes flash so much fun
for me.
Another big part of the problem is perhaps; nostalgia, I've seen alot of
sentences in this discussion which started with 'the good old days' ;)



On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Matt S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:47 PM, Kerry Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
  Flash CS3 has all the features of Flash 8--in fact, Flash 6. You can
 still
  write AS2 code, and you can still do all the tweening and timeline
 animation
  you want. I work with artists regularly who don't do a lick of coding,
 but
  turn out some really nice assets for me.
 

 Yeah I know, but I'm suggesting a version which is explicitly
 targetted at that user.

 .m
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders




-- 
M.A. van't Kruis
http://www.malatze.nl/
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Matt S.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Meinte van't Kruis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Yeah I know, but I'm suggesting a version which is explicitly
   targetted at that user.

 So you mean flash cs3, but without the actionscript ;) :P

Exactly!

.m
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Jason Van Pelt

The negative side to creating a flash without the as3 application is that
many of us grew up with Flash and used it as a way to learn to be
developers. I think Colin's point isn't to provide a basic app to basic
users, necessarily, but to make the point of entry easy for new users -- as
it was for us.

I started in version 3! :-)


Jason Van Pelt
Senior Interactive Developer
504.210.1232 (p) / 504.581.2731 (f)
Peter A. Mayer Advertising, Inc.
www.peteramayer.com___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-17 Thread Matt S.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Jason Van Pelt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 The negative side to creating a flash without the as3 application is that
 many of us grew up with Flash and used it as a way to learn to be
 developers. I think Colin's point isn't to provide a basic app to basic
 users, necessarily, but to make the point of entry easy for new users -- as
 it was for us.

 I started in version 3! :-)

I think it was 4 for me. Good times

.m
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Brian Mays
Awesome. Thanks. This reinforces some points I've been making to so
colleagues.

Brian Mays


On 7/15/08 3:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 hi all,
 i just published an article called Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
 covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.
 
 it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
 http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html
 
 The article discusses the following issues:
 
  1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
 simple interactivity hard.
  2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
  3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
 hard.
  4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
  5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
  6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
  7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
  8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
 all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
  9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
 instance (really) hard.
 
 if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond
 if necessary.
 
 colin
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Jordan L. Chilcott

I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of these points.

jord

Brian Mays wrote:

Awesome. Thanks. This reinforces some points I've been making to so
colleagues.

Brian Mays


On 7/15/08 3:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  

hi all,
i just published an article called Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.

it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html

The article discusses the following issues:

 1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
simple interactivity hard.
 2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
 3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
hard.
 4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
 5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
 6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
 7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
 8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
 9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
instance (really) hard.

if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond
if necessary.

colin


___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Matt S.
Even the garbage collection and unload movie issues?

.m

On 7/16/08, Jordan L. Chilcott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of these points.

 jord

 Brian Mays wrote:
 Awesome. Thanks. This reinforces some points I've been making to so
 colleagues.

 Brian Mays


 On 7/15/08 3:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 hi all,
 i just published an article called Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
 covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.

 it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
 http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html

 The article discusses the following issues:

  1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
 simple interactivity hard.
  2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
  3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
 hard.
  4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
  5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images
 hard.
  6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
  7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
  8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
 all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
  9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
 instance (really) hard.

 if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond
 if necessary.

 colin

 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Merrill, Jason
I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of 
these points.

Are you serious? Did you read the article?

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology  Global Risk LLD 
Instructional Technology  Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GTO Innovative Learning Blog  subscribe. 

 
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Jordan L. Chilcott

Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.

jord

Matt S. wrote:

Even the garbage collection and unload movie issues?

.m


  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Jordan L. Chilcott
Of course I did... I don't deny his points. I just don't agree with them 
all. We're talking about opinions here. I'm no more incorrect as the 
next guy, including Colin.


jord

Merrill, Jason wrote:
I'm on the other side of this... I hardly agree with any of 
these points.
  


Are you serious? Did you read the article?


  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Merrill, Jason
Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.
Of course I did... I don't deny his points. I just don't agree with
them all. 
We're talking about opinions here. I'm no more incorrect as the next
guy, including Colin.

Agreed.  Well, actually, I guess thinking a little deeper on the points
(maybe more than I should), I disagree with his charges #1, 7, and 9 (if
for #9 you can use the new operator, instead of cloning, - cloning is
not something I ever did anyway), but agree with the rest. 

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology  Global Risk LLD 
Instructional Technology  Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GTO Innovative Learning Blog  subscribe. 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
Of Jordan L. Chilcott
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 2:28 PM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0



jord

Matt S. wrote:
 Even the garbage collection and unload movie issues?

 .m


   
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Kerry Thompson
Jord wrote:

 Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.

Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the discussion if you
told us which issues you have, ahem issues with, and why. 

I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin Moock, but I do enjoy
a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Jordan L. Chilcott

Let's be fair: I'm not looking to argue. I have a wife for that. :)

I intend to state my issues, but it may have to wait a couple of days 
because I'm sure most, if not all, of you are in a working situation and 
faced with some slimy brown stuff rolling downhill towards you. I was 
going to type a whole thing before this happened, but let me just start 
for now by saying that having programmed in Flash among other things, 
that a lot of things I have issues against were, in my mind, the cause 
of a lot of programming deficiencies and obstacles within Flash.


I intend to elaborate further... and keep in mind that this is, again, 
just my opinion.


jord

Kerry Thompson wrote:

Jord wrote:

  

Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.



Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the discussion if you
told us which issues you have, ahem issues with, and why. 


I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin Moock, but I do enjoy
a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.


  

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Patrick Matte | BLITZ
I've always admired Colin Moock, but after reading those 9 points, I'm not sure 
he still has all that credibility anymore...

 1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
 simple interactivity hard.

Who would want to add an onClipEvent on a movieclip anymore? I haven't done 
that since like... flash 5 or 6... You're much better off writing function 
onEnterFrame(){} instead of onClipEvent(enterFrame){}... And I'm so glad AS3 
got rid of that onLoad method...

2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
That is like the only point in this list that makes sense.

3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie
 clips hard.
Not sure what that means but I never ever use parent... its just bad OOP... But 
I guess they could have casted parent as Sprite. And also maybe set Sprite as a 
dynamic class like MovieClip?

4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
Yeah well it's just a little more complicated but when you know how to do it, 
it's just fine.

5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
Haven't used loadmovie since flash 6. In flash 7, use MovieClipLoader instead, 
it's much better. Now why does AS3 use Loader instead of MovieClipLoader... 
that I don't know...

6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
Hmm well those errors are supposed to help you... But I admit that some of the 
errors could be a little more explicit on what is wrong... If I'm trying to 
access a property that is undefined, can Flash please tell me which one ?

7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
No it's not. I really like doing addChild(new RedCircle()) instead of 
attchMovieClip(RedCircle, circle, getNextHighestDepth())

8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
 all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
I don't think this is really relevant. Nobody wants all classes to be dynamic 
do they? Althought, I admit it could be nice to extend TextField...

9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
 instance (really) hard.
Duplicate movieclips ? Geez, I remember using that back in the day, I would put 
a button off stage and then duplicate it to create multiple instances of it. 
But you're much better off using attachMovie if you're working with AS2.


BLITZ | Patrick Matte - 310-551-0200 x214

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jordan L. 
Chilcott
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:03 PM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

Let's be fair: I'm not looking to argue. I have a wife for that. :)

I intend to state my issues, but it may have to wait a couple of days
because I'm sure most, if not all, of you are in a working situation and
faced with some slimy brown stuff rolling downhill towards you. I was
going to type a whole thing before this happened, but let me just start
for now by saying that having programmed in Flash among other things,
that a lot of things I have issues against were, in my mind, the cause
of a lot of programming deficiencies and obstacles within Flash.

I intend to elaborate further... and keep in mind that this is, again,
just my opinion.

jord

Kerry Thompson wrote:
 Jord wrote:


 Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.


 Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the discussion if you
 told us which issues you have, ahem issues with, and why.

 I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin Moock, but I do enjoy
 a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.



___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Merrill, Jason
I'm going to do a switcheroo.  Excellent post Patrick, I'm in agreement
more and more after reading this and previous debunking Moock's points.
Moock seems to be really stretching his points in order to make a viral
blog post.  You're making more sense than he is. 

Jason Merrill 
Bank of America 
Enterprise Technology  Global Risk LLD 
Instructional Technology  Media

Join the Bank of America Flash Platform Developer Community 

Are you a Bank of America associate interested in innovative learning
ideas and technologies?
Check out our internal  GTO Innovative Learning Blog  subscribe. 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
Of Patrick Matte | BLITZ
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 4:17 PM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

I've always admired Colin Moock, but after reading those 9 
points, I'm not sure he still has all that credibility anymore...

 1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 
makes creating
 simple interactivity hard.

Who would want to add an onClipEvent on a movieclip anymore? 
I haven't done that since like... flash 5 or 6... You're much 
better off writing function onEnterFrame(){} instead of 
onClipEvent(enterFrame){}... And I'm so glad AS3 got rid of 
that onLoad method...

2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
That is like the only point in this list that makes sense.

3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie 
 clips hard.
Not sure what that means but I never ever use parent... its 
just bad OOP... But I guess they could have casted parent as 
Sprite. And also maybe set Sprite as a dynamic class like MovieClip?

4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
Yeah well it's just a little more complicated but when you 
know how to do it, it's just fine.

5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files 
and images hard.
Haven't used loadmovie since flash 6. In flash 7, use 
MovieClipLoader instead, it's much better. Now why does AS3 
use Loader instead of MovieClipLoader... that I don't know...

6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
Hmm well those errors are supposed to help you... But I admit 
that some of the errors could be a little more explicit on 
what is wrong... If I'm trying to access a property that is 
undefined, can Flash please tell me which one ?

7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
No it's not. I really like doing addChild(new RedCircle()) 
instead of attchMovieClip(RedCircle, circle, 
getNextHighestDepth())

8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text 
fields, to 
 all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
I don't think this is really relevant. Nobody wants all 
classes to be dynamic do they? Althought, I admit it could be 
nice to extend TextField...

9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip 
 instance (really) hard.
Duplicate movieclips ? Geez, I remember using that back in 
the day, I would put a button off stage and then duplicate it 
to create multiple instances of it. But you're much better 
off using attachMovie if you're working with AS2.


BLITZ | Patrick Matte - 310-551-0200 x214

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
Of Jordan L. Chilcott
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 12:03 PM
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

Let's be fair: I'm not looking to argue. I have a wife for that. :)

I intend to state my issues, but it may have to wait a couple 
of days because I'm sure most, if not all, of you are in a 
working situation and faced with some slimy brown stuff 
rolling downhill towards you. I was going to type a whole 
thing before this happened, but let me just start for now by 
saying that having programmed in Flash among other things, 
that a lot of things I have issues against were, in my mind, 
the cause of a lot of programming deficiencies and obstacles 
within Flash.

I intend to elaborate further... and keep in mind that this 
is, again, just my opinion.

jord

Kerry Thompson wrote:
 Jord wrote:


 Let me rephrase this: I hardly agree with MOST of the issues.


 Fair enough. It would be a valuable contribution to the 
discussion if 
 you told us which issues you have, ahem issues with, and why.

 I personally am not in a position to argue with Colin 
Moock, but I do 
 enjoy a good debate, as long as it illuminates issues.



___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http

Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Steven Sacks
Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when 
they were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.


Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article 
about how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it 
right out the gate.


Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an 
effective retraction of his original article.


Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on 
this issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better 
are either


1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other 
programming languages.


2. See 1.

Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some 
timeline somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who 
just needs to get some glorified banner out the door.


Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly 
hard to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just 
needs to set the text of some TextField two levels up.


Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.
___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Steve Mathews
The more I read here, the more I am on the fence. On the one hand, I
use FlexBuilder every day and love AS3 as a language. But at the same
time I think Steven has a good point here. In the end I actually think
Colin is 'mostly' correct with his post.

What we need is for the tools to support simplifying usage of the
language. Let the developers creating RIAs use the power of the
language, let the designers creating simple interactions use the
simplicity of a tool. The problem here is that Flash CS3 falls short
of simplifying, while FlexBuilder does a great job of giving
developers access to the power of the language.

Steve Mathews
Senior Team Lead

Flypaper Studio, Inc.
2999 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85018
www.flypaper.com


On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when they
 were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.

 Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article about
 how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it right out the
 gate.

 Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an
 effective retraction of his original article.

 Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on this
 issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better are either

 1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other programming
 languages.

 2. See 1.

 Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some timeline
 somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who just needs to
 get some glorified banner out the door.

 Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly hard
 to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just needs to
 set the text of some TextField two levels up.

 Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Ashim D'Silva
I love flash and have been using it since 5.  And although at the
time, it was almost possible to drag and drop what you needed to get
something going, we know there were a host of disadvantages that came
with everything being so dynamic and code being everywhere. So as
Flash has gotten stricter, I've had to learn more and more about
coding practices and OOP of course, and let me say, it's brilliant.
Let me say straight up, I'm a designer,  not a programmer so much
however, if you're going to work with Flash you really NEED to be a
bit of both.

Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
expect to have a app 2 hours later. And I'll gladly put in the work to
learn for the amount of power flash is beginning to put at our
disposal. 3D, EFFICIENT filters and blend modes, pixel level controls
- if I was to chose between a system that works well, and a system
that's easy to use, I would much rather have the former - shopping
online should be easy, building an online shop: not so.

And as for flash banners: glorified or otherwise; I detest them and if
it were possible to burn them, I would.

Ashim

-- 
Yet another Random Lines
More usable than ever!
www.therandomlines.com



2008/7/17 Steven Sacks [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Everyone forgets their roots.  Nobody remembers what it was like when they
 were first learning Flash and learning the basics of programming.

 Colin Moock forgot his roots when six months ago he wrote an article about
 how easy AS3 was to learn and how n00bs should be learning it right out the
 gate.

 Colin Moock has now remembered his roots and written what amounts to an
 effective retraction of his original article.

 Anyone who looks at the archives of Flashcoders knows where I stand on this
 issue.  People who say all these features in AS3 are much better are either

 1. Experienced, talented coders, or people who came from other programming
 languages.

 2. See 1.

 Yes, it's really bad to put scripts on MovieClips or nested in some timeline
 somewhere.  But, it's also really good for some designer who just needs to
 get some glorified banner out the door.

 Yes, it's questionable OOP to use _parent._parent, and it's certainly hard
 to maintain, but it's also really good for some animator who just needs to
 set the text of some TextField two levels up.

 Advanced coders often take their intelligence and knowledge for granted.
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Steven Sacks

Ashim D'Silva wrote:

Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
expect to have a app 2 hours later.

---

This is where we part ways.  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash 8, it 
still could be.  Now, with AS3, Flash has ceased to be a child's toy and is now 
only a toy for adults.  Child, in this sense, means non-programmer who is more 
comfortable with design and timeline animation, and adult meaning seasoned 
programmer.

The notion that Flash is not (or was ever) meant to be easy enough to just pick up and make something really quick is diametrically opposed to reality.  The reason you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY to use for even non programmers.  


It's the same with all the bad HTML.  It's like saying that AJAX means that the web 
browser is no longer a toy.  The difference here is that browsers still accept 
noob HTML coding standards (according to people who are AJAX/CSS experts), 
but Actionscript 3 gives you zero latitude.

Flash is, at its _root, a vector animation tool with a scripting language tacked on.  To say that a vector animation tool is not a toy is pretty far off the mark.  


Actionscript 3 takes Flash away from the realm of the artist and into the realm 
of the programmer.  It makes simple things harder (regardless if it's better, 
it's still harder for non-coders) and is thus much less appealing to its 
original core audience, and a VAST MAJORITY of the people who use it.

Sorry, but good Flash coders are hard to find.  You just think otherwise 
because you run in these circles.  For every person participating in online 
Flash development communities, there are thousands who aren't.

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Barry Hannah
I agree with you to a point Steven, but speaking for myself if I may.
I used to be a child as you put it - to the extent that all Flash
developers/designers were back in the day. Keeping up with the code side
of things as they have developed - beyond the expectations of everyone -
has been interesting (I don't have a programming background). We've all
had to grow, as developers and users have expected more from the tools
and the applications made with them. Call it progress, professional
development, whatever. If you don't keep up in this industry you're
toast (or destined to make banners).

I wonder why someone who likes their timeline paradigm would even bother
with AS3, why not just stick to AS2? You can still code for player 9 and
take advantage of fullscreen or HD. Might not last long but for now why
not? If you don't care about learning the code, why would you care about
whether it's AS3 or not?

To me that point is missing from Colin's argument, Adobe made the effort
to include 2 VM's so old content would be supported. Just us AS2. Am I
missing something?

Barry.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven
Sacks
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2008 12:18 p.m.
To: Flash Coders List
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

Ashim D'Silva wrote:

Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
expect to have a app 2 hours later.

---

This is where we part ways.  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash
8, it still could be.  Now, with AS3, Flash has ceased to be a child's
toy and is now only a toy for adults.  Child, in this sense, means
non-programmer who is more comfortable with design and timeline
animation, and adult meaning seasoned programmer.

The notion that Flash is not (or was ever) meant to be easy enough to
just pick up and make something really quick is diametrically opposed to
reality.  The reason you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY
to use for even non programmers.  

It's the same with all the bad HTML.  It's like saying that AJAX means
that the web browser is no longer a toy.  The difference here is that
browsers still accept noob HTML coding standards (according to people
who are AJAX/CSS experts), but Actionscript 3 gives you zero latitude.

Flash is, at its _root, a vector animation tool with a scripting
language tacked on.  To say that a vector animation tool is not a toy is
pretty far off the mark.  

Actionscript 3 takes Flash away from the realm of the artist and into
the realm of the programmer.  It makes simple things harder (regardless
if it's better, it's still harder for non-coders) and is thus much less
appealing to its original core audience, and a VAST MAJORITY of the
people who use it.

Sorry, but good Flash coders are hard to find.  You just think otherwise
because you run in these circles.  For every person participating in
online Flash development communities, there are thousands who aren't.

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

Scanned by Bizo Email Filter


___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Juan Pablo Califano
Hi,


If you don't care about learning the code, why would you care about
whether it's AS3 or not?

To me that point is missing from Colin's argument, Adobe made the effort
to include 2 VM's so old content would be supported. Just us AS2. Am I
missing something?


I think so... From the article, it's clear the he's not saying, let's go
back to on/onclipevent handlers, but rather make it as easier for people
who are not programmers and / or are not interested in learning about OO,
inheritance, packages and stuff (which is a respectable position, IMO). What
he says is, give these people an easier interface in the authoring tool and
behind the scenes convert that input into AS 3 code. Which I think is
perfectly reasonable and not even technically complex to implement. So, if
you're a coder and you want to have more control and make things more OO,
neat, clean and such, great. But you shouldn't be forced to go that way for
adding even the simplest functionality.

I agree with the article and with what Steve has pointed out already.
Even from an historical point of view, I think that what made the flash
platform ubiquitous was that many people started to create cool stuff for
it. And that was possible because there was a relatively low entry barrier.
Think about Java on the client side. How many applets do you find around
nowadays? Was it because the Java technology was inferior to Flash? I think
not, and probably it's still (and certainly was) the opposite way. But to
build an applet, you needed to have a fair knowledge of programming. And
even then, truth is, especially for the UI part, you can build something
that looks way better, in less time, without having necessarily formal
knowledge on programming.

Of course, when you start to build more complex stuff, things will
necessarily get more complex and having better tools and following good
pratices will save you time and allow you to even make it possible in the
first place. But if you want to do something simple in the simplest possible
way, why not?

Cheers
Juan Pablo Califano

2008/7/16, Barry Hannah [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 I agree with you to a point Steven, but speaking for myself if I may.
 I used to be a child as you put it - to the extent that all Flash
 developers/designers were back in the day. Keeping up with the code side
 of things as they have developed - beyond the expectations of everyone -
 has been interesting (I don't have a programming background). We've all
 had to grow, as developers and users have expected more from the tools
 and the applications made with them. Call it progress, professional
 development, whatever. If you don't keep up in this industry you're
 toast (or destined to make banners).

 I wonder why someone who likes their timeline paradigm would even bother
 with AS3, why not just stick to AS2? You can still code for player 9 and
 take advantage of fullscreen or HD. Might not last long but for now why
 not? If you don't care about learning the code, why would you care about
 whether it's AS3 or not?

 To me that point is missing from Colin's argument, Adobe made the effort
 to include 2 VM's so old content would be supported. Just us AS2. Am I
 missing something?

 Barry.



 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven
 Sacks
 Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2008 12:18 p.m.
 To: Flash Coders List
 Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

 Ashim D'Silva wrote:

 Flash is not a toy. You can't pick it up, with no prior knowledge, and
 expect to have a app 2 hours later.

 ---

 This is where we part ways.  Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash
 8, it still could be.  Now, with AS3, Flash has ceased to be a child's
 toy and is now only a toy for adults.  Child, in this sense, means
 non-programmer who is more comfortable with design and timeline
 animation, and adult meaning seasoned programmer.

 The notion that Flash is not (or was ever) meant to be easy enough to
 just pick up and make something really quick is diametrically opposed to
 reality.  The reason you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY
 to use for even non programmers.

 It's the same with all the bad HTML.  It's like saying that AJAX means
 that the web browser is no longer a toy.  The difference here is that
 browsers still accept noob HTML coding standards (according to people
 who are AJAX/CSS experts), but Actionscript 3 gives you zero latitude.

 Flash is, at its _root, a vector animation tool with a scripting
 language tacked on.  To say that a vector animation tool is not a toy is
 pretty far off the mark.

 Actionscript 3 takes Flash away from the realm of the artist and into
 the realm of the programmer.  It makes simple things harder (regardless
 if it's better, it's still harder for non-coders) and is thus much less
 appealing to its original core audience, and a VAST MAJORITY of the
 people who use it.

 Sorry, but good Flash coders are hard to find.  You just

RE: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-16 Thread Kerry Thompson
Steven Sacks wrote:

 Flash used to be a toy, and, up until Flash 8, it still could beThe
reason
 you see so much BAD Flash is because it was SO EASY to use for even non
 programmers.

Steven has a point (even though I cut most of his post). Remember the days
when Flash's nickname was Skip-intro?

The Internet has changed, and will continue to change. It has gotten more
sophisticated. Browsers have gotten more sophisticated. Users have gotten
more sophisticated. To keep Flash/Flex as a premier Web development tool, it
has to get more sophisticated, and its users must get more sophisticated.

Having said that, I'd like to see Flash have drag-and-drop behaviors like
Director has. In its first decade or so, Director followed a similar path as
Flash. It started out as a simple animation tool with an easy-to-use
language, and developed into a sophisticated programmer's tool. The
introduction of drag-and-drop behaviors brought it back into the realm of
the designer, while remaining a sophisticated programmer's tool.

Of course, Macromedia made a number of blunders with Director/Shockwave
that, I hope, will not be repeated by Adobe on Flash. Making it more
sophisticated was not one of those blunders, though.

Cordially,

Kerry Thompson

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders


Re: [Flashcoders] The Charges Against ActionScript 3.0

2008-07-15 Thread Moshen Chan
Great article Colin, thanks for your work!

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:06 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 hi all,
 i just published an article called Charges Against ActionScript 3.0
 covering the things people don't like about ActionScript 3.0.

 it's posted on O'Reilly's InsideRIA, here:
 http://www.insideria.com/2008/07/the-charges-against-actionscri.html

 The article discusses the following issues:

1. The removal of on()/onClipEvent() from Flash CS3 makes creating
 simple interactivity hard.
2. Getting rid of loaded .swf files is hard.
3. Casting DisplayObject.parent makes controlling parent movie clips
 hard.
4. The removal of getURL() makes linking hard.
5. The removal of loadMovie() makes loading .swf files and images hard.
6. ActionScript 3.0's additional errors make coding cumbersome.
7. Referring to library symbols dynamically is unintuitive.
8. Adding custom functionality to manually created text fields, to
 all movie clips, or to all buttons is cumbersome.
9. The removal of duplicateMovieClip() makes cloning a MovieClip
 instance (really) hard.

 if you have comments, please leave them on the article so i can respond if
 necessary.

 colin
 ___
 Flashcoders mailing list
 Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
 http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders

___
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders