s.com] On Behalf Of John Dowdell
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006
3:01 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flash
Player 9 Projected Adoption rate
Evan
Gifford wrote:
> What's curious to me is that flash player 8 was
> not markedly faster due to new "
xcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:
flexcoders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Dowdell
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006
3:01 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flash
Player 9 Projected Adoption rate
Evan
Gifford wrote:
> What's curious to me is that flash pla
everytime you wanted
something to happen, the WHOLE PAGE had to load again!” :^)
From:
flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Dowdell
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006
3:01 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flash
Player 9
Evan Gifford wrote:
> What's curious to me is that flash player 8 was
> not markedly faster due to new "in-context upgrade" (which I have had
> some trouble with).
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mannu/148867953/
It may be hard to see on that graph, but I do know that the Flash Player
8 adoption
4 matches
Mail list logo
