RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-07 Thread Kevin Graeme
I have numerous problems with simple things like scroll bars disappearing
and the whole environment losing windows after a test publish and such. And
it happens on multiple installations of different XP machines.

I've reported bugs to the wish form, but that's just like spitting into a
black hole considering this bug was reported at least 6 months ago.

-Kevin

 -Original Message-
 From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 6:56 PM
 To: CF-Talk
 Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 I do development in Flash on mac and windows, and I do not find
 it buggy. At
 least not any more buggy than any other app I use on a day to day basis.

 mike chambers

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 - Original Message -
 From: Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 5:20 PM
 Subject: RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


   -Original Message-
   From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:08 PM
   To: CF-Talk
   Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
  
  
   On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface,
they must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate
Dynamic RIA.
  
   I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring environment
   for Flash movies?
 
 
  Sean, do you do Flash development? While FlashMX is potentially a nice
  authoring tool, it's so buggy that it can be extremely
 frustrating to work
  with. Basic things like scroll bars in the app disappearing
 make it really
  hard to get work done. And I know that bug was reported at
 least 5 months
  ago and the only update to FLMX is the documentation.
 
  -Kevin
 
 
 
 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-07 Thread Clint
I use Flash on multiple machines from Win98 to Win XP Pro and I have not had
any of the problems that you describe..

Clint

- Original Message -
From: Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:16 AM
Subject: RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 I have numerous problems with simple things like scroll bars disappearing
 and the whole environment losing windows after a test publish and such.
And
 it happens on multiple installations of different XP machines.

 I've reported bugs to the wish form, but that's just like spitting into a
 black hole considering this bug was reported at least 6 months ago.

 -Kevin

  -Original Message-
  From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 6:56 PM
  To: CF-Talk
  Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
 
 
  I do development in Flash on mac and windows, and I do not find
  it buggy. At
  least not any more buggy than any other app I use on a day to day basis.
 
  mike chambers
 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 5:20 PM
  Subject: RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:08 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
   
   
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
 If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface,
 they must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate
 Dynamic RIA.
   
I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring
environment
for Flash movies?
  
  
   Sean, do you do Flash development? While FlashMX is potentially a nice
   authoring tool, it's so buggy that it can be extremely
  frustrating to work
   with. Basic things like scroll bars in the app disappearing
  make it really
   hard to get work done. And I know that bug was reported at
  least 5 months
   ago and the only update to FLMX is the documentation.
  
   -Kevin
  
  
  
 
 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-07 Thread Kevin Graeme
That's only more frustrating to hear. Especially considering that it _does_
happen to me on multiple machines.

-Kevin

 -Original Message-
 From: Clint [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:20 AM
 To: CF-Talk
 Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 I use Flash on multiple machines from Win98 to Win XP Pro and I
 have not had
 any of the problems that you describe..

 Clint

 - Original Message -
 From: Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:16 AM
 Subject: RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


  I have numerous problems with simple things like scroll bars
 disappearing
  and the whole environment losing windows after a test publish and such.
 And
  it happens on multiple installations of different XP machines.
 
  I've reported bugs to the wish form, but that's just like
 spitting into a
  black hole considering this bug was reported at least 6 months ago.
 
  -Kevin
 
   -Original Message-
   From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 6:56 PM
   To: CF-Talk
   Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
  
  
   I do development in Flash on mac and windows, and I do not find
   it buggy. At
   least not any more buggy than any other app I use on a day to
 day basis.
  
   mike chambers
  
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
   - Original Message -
   From: Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 5:20 PM
   Subject: RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
  
  
 -Original Message-
 From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:08 PM
 To: CF-Talk
 Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
  If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web
 Interface,
  they must introduce an application that makes it easy
 to generate
  Dynamic RIA.

 I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring
 environment
 for Flash movies?
   
   
Sean, do you do Flash development? While FlashMX is
 potentially a nice
authoring tool, it's so buggy that it can be extremely
   frustrating to work
with. Basic things like scroll bars in the app disappearing
   make it really
hard to get work done. And I know that bug was reported at
   least 5 months
ago and the only update to FLMX is the documentation.
   
-Kevin
   
   
   
  
 
 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-06 Thread Kevin Graeme
 -Original Message-
 From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:08 PM
 To: CF-Talk
 Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
  If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface,
  they must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate
  Dynamic RIA.

 I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring environment
 for Flash movies?


Sean, do you do Flash development? While FlashMX is potentially a nice
authoring tool, it's so buggy that it can be extremely frustrating to work
with. Basic things like scroll bars in the app disappearing make it really
hard to get work done. And I know that bug was reported at least 5 months
ago and the only update to FLMX is the documentation.

-Kevin


~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-06 Thread Mike Chambers
I do development in Flash on mac and windows, and I do not find it buggy. At
least not any more buggy than any other app I use on a day to day basis.

mike chambers

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

- Original Message -
From: Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 5:20 PM
Subject: RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


  -Original Message-
  From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:08 PM
  To: CF-Talk
  Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
 
 
  On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
   If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface,
   they must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate
   Dynamic RIA.
 
  I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring environment
  for Flash movies?


 Sean, do you do Flash development? While FlashMX is potentially a nice
 authoring tool, it's so buggy that it can be extremely frustrating to work
 with. Basic things like scroll bars in the app disappearing make it really
 hard to get work done. And I know that bug was reported at least 5 months
 ago and the only update to FLMX is the documentation.

 -Kevin


 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-02 Thread S . Isaac Dealey
 - Original Message -
 From: S. Isaac Dealey [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 make flash dev. much easier for me. For instance, if I
 had an AS statement
 that would import a vector graphic

 myClip.loadMovie(myvectorgraphic.swf);

Ahhh awesome... Then my only real barrier is the documentation. Thanks Mesh.
:)

Not that it's really a barrier per se either -- but it really wasn't my
intention to complain about Macromedia or even about Flash -- I was merely
trying to express what I have felt to be hurdles to my own becoming more
heavily involved in Flash and RIA. i.e. shedding light from the perspective
of someone in a committed relationship with CF. :)

s. isaac dealey954-776-0046

new epoch  http://www.turnkey.to

lead architect, tapestry cms   http://products.turnkey.to

tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi

certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer
http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



CF wish list (was: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-02 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 22:38 US/Pacific, samcfug wrote:
 But I certainly have a wish list for the server products,

So do we :)

http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/

 and that would be to
 incorporate into CF Administrator, provisions for making all the 
 tweaks and
 settings that seem to be giving System Admins so many headaches  such 
 as
 settings for stand-alone and multi-homes server settings, etc. Also to 
 include

Well, this discussion's been had here before and there was no real 
consensus. I think that exposing *all* the possible tweaks would be (a) 
nearly impossible and (b) make the CF administrator *incredibly* 
complex! I think it would be bad for the vast majority of CF users who 
would be overwhelmed by it (and just think of the additional 
development, QA and documentation cost to Macromedia to do this!).

HOWEVER!

I agree that certain 'FAQ'-style config options *should* be made part 
of the CF admin and the cacheRealPath option to which you refer is 
probably one of those.

Part of the issue now is that many of the tweaks are actually 
J2EE-server specific so it really wouldn't be practical to build them 
all into the CF admin - the machinery would be different on every J2EE 
server.

 those choices during the install routine.   While developers may be 
 comfortable

Good idea (install option for multi-homed). If you haven't already, 
please submit it to the wishform above.

 with modifying this file and that, this is definitely an area that 
 Network and
 System Admins avoid to the extent possible.

I'd argue that J2EE admins are extremely used to modifying these sorts 
of files and that if you are installing CFMX for J2EE on, say, 
WebSphere or WebLogic, it is not unreasonable to expect the server 
administrator to be able to do this. Again, I think this is one of 
those tradeoffs that come around by increasing the power and 
flexibility of ColdFusion. When this discussion came up last time, I 
argued that apart from a few key omissions, the CF Admin let you do 
what 99% of users needed.

If you look at the J2EE section of my blog:

http://www.corfield.org/blog/archives/cat_j2ee.html

you'll see that most of the configuration that I needed to do with CFMX 
for J2EE was actually in the J2EE server, not CFMX, and so I was 
dealing with specifics of JRun - you can't expect that sort of 
functionality to be exposed via CF Admin when it is so app-server 
dependent.

Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/

If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: CF wish list (was: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-02 Thread samcfug
| you'll see that most of the configuration that I needed to do with CFMX
| for J2EE was actually in the J2EE server, not CFMX, and so I was
| dealing with specifics of JRun - you can't expect that sort of
| functionality to be exposed via CF Admin when it is so app-server
| dependent.
|

Does this mean that we need a Jrun Admin GUI?   possibly linked to the CF Admin
page?

I still advance the theory that if you want to sell it, you had better make it
Admin friendly.

Using Government networks as an example, where network priorities are clear and
in writing, the programmer/developer is nowhere the top of the access control
lists.   The server Admins are not programmers, not java programmers, not CF
programmers.  They are more focused on Security, intrusion prevention, and
uptime.

For the developer who has a one or two machine network with a developer
edition installed, it is a no-brainier for him/her to tweak it to the max.  In
order to get tweaks looked at on a government network, you are talking about
weeks to get a minor change implemented.  In the event that the tweak fails, or
there is a problem with an updater application, you are likely to find your
server software removed from the machine with advice to Use something else
sent to your superior.

Macromedia themselves are another example of what I am trying so hard to
express.  They do not incorporate their own technology on their own servers
until long after the product has been in the market place and beta tested by
their customers, if then.

If full disclosure was adhered to in the documentation, I am quite sure that
sales would drop off considerably as large networks, and multi-homed service
providers avoid your product , favoring instead one that gives them less
problems.

Your statement that this represents only 1% of the installations, absolutely
does not fly.

Perhaps you feel this is not a genuine concern, I am getting that message loud
and clear.  But if I am forced to develop in PHP, Java or ASP which installed on
the server without a hitch, I assure you it is a concern to me.

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: CF wish list (was: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-02 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Sunday, Mar 2, 2003, at 17:07 US/Pacific, samcfug wrote:
 Does this mean that we need a Jrun Admin GUI?

You mean the JRun Management Console? It already exists and it's 
probably the most user-friendly J2EE server admin UI on the market!

There cannot reasonably be a link between the two Admin UIs tho' as 
they run on different 'servers' - they don't both need to be up at the 
same time. CFMX is installed in a separate server (I use 'cfmx' or 
'cfmx1', 'cfmx2' etc) from the JMC (which is pre-installed on the 
'admin' server). You can start and stop them independently. You can 
also configure the JMC to run on a different port so it would be hard 
to reliably link from CF admin to JMC (unless of course we made users 
add and update the link manually!) and since JRun isn't always running 
CFMX, you can't really have it link back to CF Admin...

 I still advance the theory that if you want to sell it, you had better 
 make it
 Admin friendly.

As I say above, the JMC has been highly praised for its ease of use in 
the J2EE world.
I'd also say that WebLogic and WebSphere (and JRun) admins are already 
familiar with how to administer their J2EE servers using the tools at 
hand. Yes, it means that CF admins need to learn a new tool to take 
advantage of the advanced features in the underlying J2EE server. I 
don't think that's so unreasonable, do you?

 Using Government networks as an example, where network priorities are 
 clear and
 in writing, the programmer/developer is nowhere the top of the access 
 control
 lists.   The server Admins are not programmers, not java programmers, 
 not CF
 programmers.  They are more focused on Security, intrusion prevention, 
 and
 uptime.

That's pretty much the same here at Macromedia but you should expect to 
have J2EE server-savvy admins if you're basing your infrastructure on 
J2EE... A Unix / network admin doesn't necessarily have the skills to 
administer a J2EE server (or a CFMX server for that matter).

 Macromedia themselves are another example of what I am trying so hard 
 to
 express.  They do not incorporate their own technology on their own 
 servers
 until long after the product has been in the market place and beta 
 tested by
 their customers, if then.

Actually we launched a public CFMX server months before the product 
shipped:
http://examples.macromedia.com/ has been powered by CFMX since March 
2002. Apart from an Apache upgrade, that server has been running pretty 
much non-stop since then (it may even still be running the Release 
Candidate - I don't remember whether we ever upgraded it).

The webforums have been running on CFMX for some time (and no one 
noticed). It was a relatively painless (but very significant) upgrade.

We were developing parts of the new macromedia.com on pre-alpha CF 
software back in October 2001 and providing feedback to the CF team as 
they developed the software. We've done a lot of RD over the 
intervening period, experimenting with approaches and seeing just how 
far we can push the technology. We will soon be releasing the fruits of 
our labor, based on CFMX for J2EE, on JRun, using Flash and Flash 
Remoting. About 120,000 lines of CFML and about 80,000 lines of 
ActionScript - excluding all our test harness code (close to the same 
amount again of CF).

 Your statement that this represents only 1% of the installations, 
 absolutely
 does not fly.

My asserted 1% of 'advanced admin' does not include the multi-homed 
'cacheRealPath' configuration as I've already conceded that should be 
either an install option or accessible via the CF admin. Note, however, 
that it is clearly called out in the Release Notes!

Sean A Corfield -- Director, Architecture
Web Technology Group -- Macromedia, Inc.
tel: (415) 252-2287 -- cell: (415) 717-8473
aim/iChat: seancorfield -- http://www.macromedia.com
An Architect's View -- http://www.macromedia.com/go/arch_blog

Announcing Macromedia DevNet Subscriptions
Maximize your power with our new premium software subscription
Find out more: http://www.macromedia.com/go/devnetsubs

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-02 Thread Kay Smoljak
samcfug wrote:

 Yes we did demo the application - in fact this was done via our
pioneering use
 of Flashcom server.  Contribute was our topic that day.
 But like you said, Contribute is not targeted at Developer types, and
this is
 who we have in attendance.

Obviously developers aren't going to want to use it, they're going to
want 
to demonstrate/on-sell it to their clients... I'd have jumped at a free 
copy for that purpose :)


-- 
Kay Smoljak

http://kay.smoljak.com

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread dwayne
If the PHP community finds a better way to interact with Flash, ColdFusion Development 
will be in trouble. 

If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface, they must introduce 
an application that makes it easy to generate Dynamic RIA.  What we are doing now is 
like using perl and .cgi scripts to generate HTML.  Allaire figured out a better way 
to bridge  the “gap” and walla - we have the ColdFusion dynasty.   

When Macromedia abandoned ColdFusion Studio and tried to force us to adopt Dreamweaver 
or Homesite+ I thought they were a little insensitive.  But when  Macromedia 
introduced “Contribute” is was insulting.  Trust me.  People attracted to “Contribute” 
will not be the people that build RIA.  Furthermore, people attracted to Dreamweaver 
will not be the community to build RIA.  I don’t even believe that Flash Designers 
will be the builders of generation RIA.   To really make the RIA thing work, 
Macromedia, or some one, will have to give us ColdFusion developers a development 
environment that works and one that leverages our hard earned ColdFusion competencies 
and listen – “Dreamweaver MX” is not it.  Dreamweaver competes with FrontPage for the 
FrontPage sort off developer.  ColdFusion Developers are not the “FrontPage” sort of 
people.

“HEY MACROMEDIA IF YOU ARE LISTENING, HERE’S A STRATEGIC THOUGHT” 

 Please Remember us ColdFusion Developer Guys !!!

If you help us out we can help you make this RIA thing a reality.   Right now you are 
wasting resources helping the wrong people.  Revitalize ColdFusion Studio and 
integrate some mechanisms to create and manipulate Flash Components.  


Dwayne Cole, MS in MIS, MBA
Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer

 
It can truely be said that nothing happens until there is vision. But it is equally 
true that a vision with no underlying sense of purpose, no calling, is just a good 
idea - all sound and fury, signifiying nothing.  The Fifth Discipline - Peter Senge


~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Michael T. Tangorre
don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use Homesite+ . What
is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is practically the same
damn thing.


- Original Message -
From: dwayne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:22 PM
Subject: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 If the PHP community finds a better way to interact with Flash, ColdFusion
Development will be in trouble.

 If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface, they
must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate Dynamic RIA.
What we are doing now is like using perl and .cgi scripts to generate HTML.
Allaire figured out a better way to bridge  the gap and walla - we have
the ColdFusion dynasty.

 When Macromedia abandoned ColdFusion Studio and tried to force us to adopt
Dreamweaver or Homesite+ I thought they were a little insensitive.  But when
Macromedia introduced Contribute is was insulting.  Trust me.  People
attracted to Contribute will not be the people that build RIA.
Furthermore, people attracted to Dreamweaver will not be the community to
build RIA.  I don't even believe that Flash Designers will be the builders
of generation RIA.   To really make the RIA thing work, Macromedia, or some
one, will have to give us ColdFusion developers a development environment
that works and one that leverages our hard earned ColdFusion competencies
and listen - Dreamweaver MX is not it.  Dreamweaver competes with
FrontPage for the FrontPage sort off developer.  ColdFusion Developers are
not the FrontPage sort of people.

 HEY MACROMEDIA IF YOU ARE LISTENING, HERE'S A STRATEGIC THOUGHT

  Please Remember us ColdFusion Developer Guys !!!

 If you help us out we can help you make this RIA thing a reality.   Right
now you are wasting resources helping the wrong people.  Revitalize
ColdFusion Studio and integrate some mechanisms to create and manipulate
Flash Components.

 
 Dwayne Cole, MS in MIS, MBA
 Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer


 It can truely be said that nothing happens until there is vision. But it
is equally true that a vision with no underlying sense of purpose, no
calling, is just a good idea - all sound and fury, signifiying nothing.
The Fifth Discipline - Peter Senge


 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread S . Isaac Dealey
I still use CF Studio 4.5 myself and am not bothered by it... I tried jEdit
for a while -- there are things I both like and dislike about both of them.
I had to stop using CF Studio 5.0 because of a bug that causes local files
to be semi-randomly saved to the wrong directory when ctrl+s is used to save
them. (That particular hand motion is really hard-wired for me.) So I'm not
rushing out to purchase a license for Homesite+ not knowing if it will have
the same or similar problem. But I don't really see it as a big issue.


s. isaac dealey954-776-0046

new epoch  http://www.turnkey.to

lead architect, tapestry cms   http://products.turnkey.to

tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi

certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer
http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816

 don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use
 Homesite+ . What
 is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is
 practically the same
 damn thing.


 - Original Message -
 From: dwayne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:22 PM
 Subject: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 If the PHP community finds a better way to interact with
 Flash, ColdFusion
 Development will be in trouble.

 If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web
 Interface, they
 must introduce an application that makes it easy to
 generate Dynamic RIA.
 What we are doing now is like using perl and .cgi scripts
 to generate HTML.
 Allaire figured out a better way to bridge  the gap and
 walla - we have
 the ColdFusion dynasty.

 When Macromedia abandoned ColdFusion Studio and tried to
 force us to adopt
 Dreamweaver or Homesite+ I thought they were a little
 insensitive.  But when
 Macromedia introduced Contribute is was insulting.
 Trust me.  People
 attracted to Contribute will not be the people that
 build RIA.
 Furthermore, people attracted to Dreamweaver will not be
 the community to
 build RIA.  I don't even believe that Flash Designers will
 be the builders
 of generation RIA.   To really make the RIA thing work,
 Macromedia, or some
 one, will have to give us ColdFusion developers a
 development environment
 that works and one that leverages our hard earned
 ColdFusion competencies
 and listen - Dreamweaver MX is not it.  Dreamweaver
 competes with
 FrontPage for the FrontPage sort off developer.
 ColdFusion Developers are
 not the FrontPage sort of people.

 HEY MACROMEDIA IF YOU ARE LISTENING, HERE'S A STRATEGIC
 THOUGHT

  Please Remember us ColdFusion Developer Guys !!!

 If you help us out we can help you make this RIA thing a
 reality.   Right
 now you are wasting resources helping the wrong people.
 Revitalize
 ColdFusion Studio and integrate some mechanisms to create
 and manipulate
 Flash Components.

 
 Dwayne Cole, MS in MIS, MBA
 Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer


 It can truely be said that nothing happens until there
 is vision. But it
 is equally true that a vision with no underlying sense of
 purpose, no
 calling, is just a good idea - all sound and fury,
 signifiying nothing.
 The Fifth Discipline - Peter Senge



 ~~
 ~~~|
 Archives:
 http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.
 cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
 Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up
 with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics.
 http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

   Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/uns
   ubscribe.cfm?user=633.558.4


~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread dwayne
don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use Homesite+ . What
is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is practically the same
damn thing.


Well  fine, let it be Homesite+.  The point is we need a development enviorment that 
makes it easier to develop Flash based RIA using ColdFusion and Flash Remoting.
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Michael T. Tangorre
point is, the learning curve for PHP is a lot higher than that of Cold
Fusion, and for that reason alone, CF will not be surpassed by PHP.



- Original Message -
From: dwayne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use Homesite+ .
What
 is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is practically the same
 damn thing.
 

 Well  fine, let it be Homesite+.  The point is we need a development
enviorment that makes it easier to develop Flash based RIA using ColdFusion
and Flash Remoting.
 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
 If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface, 
 they must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate 
 Dynamic RIA.

I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring environment 
for Flash movies?

 But when  Macromedia introduced “Contribute” is was insulting.  Trust 
 me.  People attracted to “Contribute” will not be the people that 
 build RIA.

Contribute has a specific target market. That target market does not 
include ColdFusion developers (in general) nor does it include Flash 
developers. I'm a little puzzled as to why you think it is insulting?

  Please Remember us ColdFusion Developer Guys !!!

*smile* Don't worry, we're not forgetting you... We certainly listen!

 If you help us out we can help you make this RIA thing a reality.   
 Right now you are wasting resources helping the wrong people.  
 Revitalize ColdFusion Studio and integrate some mechanisms to create 
 and manipulate Flash Components.

Well, neither CF Studio nor HomeSite+ (which is essentially CF Studio 
anyway) would be suitable vehicles for developing RIAs. Dreamweaver MX 
has integration with Flash MX and Fireworks MX as well as Web Service 
browsers and CFC browsers and wizards. If you're looking for a 
Macromedia tool to help you build RIAs, you're better off looking at 
DWMX + FLMX than anything else. I use DWMX for all my CFMX development 
and my ActionScript. Then I use FLMX to create the visual stage and 
compile the ActionScript into a movie. That's a pretty good workflow.

Naturally, we're always looking for specific ways to improve the tools 
and RIAs are very important to us so we want to help people build them 
more easily.

Sean A Corfield -- Director, Architecture
Web Technology Group -- Macromedia, Inc.
tel: (415) 252-2287 -- cell: (415) 717-8473
aim/iChat: seancorfield -- http://www.macromedia.com
An Architect's View -- http://www.macromedia.com/go/arch_blog

Announcing Macromedia DevNet Subscriptions
Maximize your power with our new premium software subscription
Find out more: http://www.macromedia.com/go/devnetsubs

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Michael T. Tangorre
good points Sean.

- Original Message -
From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne wrote:
  If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web Interface,
  they must introduce an application that makes it easy to generate
  Dynamic RIA.

 I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring environment
 for Flash movies?

  But when  Macromedia introduced Contribute is was insulting.  Trust
  me.  People attracted to Contribute will not be the people that
  build RIA.

 Contribute has a specific target market. That target market does not
 include ColdFusion developers (in general) nor does it include Flash
 developers. I'm a little puzzled as to why you think it is insulting?

   Please Remember us ColdFusion Developer Guys !!!

 *smile* Don't worry, we're not forgetting you... We certainly listen!

  If you help us out we can help you make this RIA thing a reality.
  Right now you are wasting resources helping the wrong people.
  Revitalize ColdFusion Studio and integrate some mechanisms to create
  and manipulate Flash Components.

 Well, neither CF Studio nor HomeSite+ (which is essentially CF Studio
 anyway) would be suitable vehicles for developing RIAs. Dreamweaver MX
 has integration with Flash MX and Fireworks MX as well as Web Service
 browsers and CFC browsers and wizards. If you're looking for a
 Macromedia tool to help you build RIAs, you're better off looking at
 DWMX + FLMX than anything else. I use DWMX for all my CFMX development
 and my ActionScript. Then I use FLMX to create the visual stage and
 compile the ActionScript into a movie. That's a pretty good workflow.

 Naturally, we're always looking for specific ways to improve the tools
 and RIAs are very important to us so we want to help people build them
 more easily.

 Sean A Corfield -- Director, Architecture
 Web Technology Group -- Macromedia, Inc.
 tel: (415) 252-2287 -- cell: (415) 717-8473
 aim/iChat: seancorfield -- http://www.macromedia.com
 An Architect's View -- http://www.macromedia.com/go/arch_blog

 Announcing Macromedia DevNet Subscriptions
 Maximize your power with our new premium software subscription
 Find out more: http://www.macromedia.com/go/devnetsubs

 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for 
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread samcfug
Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be given away as
a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They remain
unclaimed after two meetings so far.

The majority of our developers still use CF Studio 4.5.  Not dreamweaver, not
flash.  Their comments are long the lines of If it ain't broke, why fix it?

Very few of them have any plans to migrate to the MX server products, due to the
many and complex installation and configuration issues, that seem to not go
away.  It seems that with the updates, new issues are introduced.

CF 5.0, an Allaire product, still remains stable and viable for Dynamic data
driven web sites.

=
Douglas White
group Manager
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.samcfug.org
=


| don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use Homesite+ . What
| is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is practically the same
| damn thing.
| 
|
| Well  fine, let it be Homesite+.  The point is we need a development
enviorment that makes it easier to develop Flash based RIA using ColdFusion and
Flash Remoting.

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Dave Watts
 If the PHP community finds a better way to interact with 
 Flash, ColdFusion Development will be in trouble.

I don't know why you'd say this. There isn't even a supported version of
Flash Remoting for PHP, to the best of my knowledge. There aren't any great
development tools specifically for PHP that aren't available for CF.

 If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web 
 Interface, they must introduce an application that makes it 
 easy to generate Dynamic RIA.  What we are doing now is 
 like using perl and .cgi scripts to generate HTML. Allaire 
 figured out a better way to bridge the gap and walla - we 
 have the ColdFusion dynasty.

Well, I'd expect future versions of the Flash IDE to be better than the
present one, just as the present one is better than the previous one. But,
in fairness to the present version, it's not all that hard, assuming you
understand Flash development, to use the current IDE.

 When Macromedia abandoned ColdFusion Studio and tried to 
 force us to adopt Dreamweaver or Homesite+ I thought they 
 were a little insensitive. But when  Macromedia introduced 
 Contribute is was insulting. Trust me. People attracted 
 to Contribute will not be the people that build RIA.

I would hope not. Contribute isn't designed for developers; it isn't
intended for developers. It's intended to allow people who don't know HTML
to contribute content to static web sites.
  
 Furthermore, people attracted to Dreamweaver will not be the 
 community to build RIA. I don't even believe that Flash 
 Designers will be the builders of generation RIA. 

Maybe not Flash designers, but certainly Flash developers will be building
these things. To build workable, useful Flash interfaces, you need to know
Flash, which is significantly different from ColdFusion.

 To really make the RIA thing work, Macromedia, or some one, 
 will have to give us ColdFusion developers a development 
 environment that works and one that leverages our hard 
 earned ColdFusion competencies and listen - Dreamweaver 
 MX is not it. Dreamweaver competes with FrontPage for the 
 FrontPage sort off developer. ColdFusion Developers are not 
 the FrontPage sort of people.

First, to make the RIA thing work, you won't be able to just leverage
[your] hard earned ColdFusion competencies. You'll have to learn something
new, and significantly different, from CF. You'll have to learn Flash, which
is different from CF in some of the same ways that Visual Basic is different
from batch programming. Macromedia can improve the Flash IDE, and I suppose
they will, but that's not going to magically make us all competent Flash
programmers.

And to elaborate on this theme a bit, I think this is the dirty little
secret of the RIA idea. Macromedia has a wonderful course, Developing Rich
Internet Applications, which is aimed at CF developers, to teach them how
to build form interfaces in Flash. However, taking this course isn't going
to just enable you to build good, complex, production-quality Flash
interfaces - you still have to learn that non-trivial stuff by learning how
to design and program in Flash. You're not going to be able to apply much of
your CF knowledge to learn this stuff, either, since it's fundamentally
different.

Finally, I think it's a bit off the mark to compare Dreamweaver and
FrontPage. FrontPage is certainly not intended for developers; Dreamweaver
is. Lots of people don't like it - I have my own reservations with it at
times - but since Macromedia intends it to be a developers' tool, they will
almost certainly add the features that developers want. As I use it more and
more, I keep finding new useful features in it, and am becoming more
satisfied with it myself.

Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Mike Chambers
You can use external editors (such as Homesite plus) to edit your
ActionScript for Flash Applications.

mike chambers

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

- Original Message -
From: dwayne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use Homesite+ .
What
 is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is practically the same
 damn thing.
 

 Well  fine, let it be Homesite+.  The point is we need a development
enviorment that makes it easier to develop Flash based RIA using ColdFusion
and Flash Remoting.

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Mike Chambers
Did you show / demo Contribute? I spoke at the bacfug meeting the other
night, and we showed Contribute (almost as an after thought) and people were
interested once they realized what it did.

mike chambers

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

- Original Message -
From: samcfug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be given
away as
 a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They remain
 unclaimed after two meetings so far.

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 18:23 US/Pacific, samcfug wrote:
 Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be 
 given away as
 a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They 
 remain
 unclaimed after two meetings so far.

By contrast, Mike Chambers and Christian Cantrell offered Contribute at 
BACFUG and there was quite a bit of interest. It all depends on what 
you need. I'm an ardent fan of Contribute because we have a large 
number of project mini-sites that are pure HTML. It's very, very easy 
to manage these with a simple browse'n'edit application like 
Contribute. Until I moved from Windows to Mac, I kept Contribute open 
all the time and worked on drafts when I was offline and used to update 
websites whenever I thought of something to add.

 The majority of our developers still use CF Studio 4.5.  Not 
 dreamweaver, not
 flash.  Their comments are long the lines of If it ain't broke, why 
 fix it?

And that's a perfectly reasonable position. Naturally, we'd like 
everyone to upgrade, but in reality, it doesn't happen very quickly for 
certain types of products. Typically with software, about 30% of your 
market upgrades immediately every time and 30% never upgrades (or takes 
forever to do it). The middle 40% may or may not upgrade.

 Very few of them have any plans to migrate to the MX server products, 
 due to the
 many and complex installation and configuration issues, that seem to 
 not go
 away.  It seems that with the updates, new issues are introduced.

Server product upgrades are usually much more complex to deal with than 
desktop tools. A lot of CFers seem to still be on 4.5 or even 4.0 and 
many have no immediate plans to upgrade. As for the complex issues - 
I think that's just a tradeoff that comes naturally with increased 
power and capability. J2EE servers have many more 'tweakable' 
parameters that CF has historically had. In order to gain the 
flexibility and benefits of moving to a J2EE platform, you have to 
accept some increased complexity (see, for example, several of the 
entries in my blog discussing CFMX for J2EE configuration scenarios).

 CF 5.0, an Allaire product, still remains stable and viable for 
 Dynamic data
 driven web sites.

Technically it is a Macromedia product - it shipped after the merger - 
but I understand your point. However, you should remember that CFMX nee 
Neo started life long before Macromedia bought Allaire and it was the 
same team of developers and QA folks that continued to work on it after 
the merger. You could just as accurately describe CFMX as an Allaire 
product. But then the Allaire-good, Macromedia-bad argument would lose 
some of its impact :)

Sean A Corfield -- Director, Architecture
Web Technology Group -- Macromedia, Inc.
tel: (415) 252-2287 -- cell: (415) 717-8473
aim/iChat: seancorfield -- http://www.macromedia.com
An Architect's View -- http://www.macromedia.com/go/arch_blog

Announcing Macromedia DevNet Subscriptions
Maximize your power with our new premium software subscription
Find out more: http://www.macromedia.com/go/devnetsubs

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread John Quarto-vonTivadar
 point is, the learning curve for PHP is a lot higher than that of Cold
 Fusion, and for that reason alone, CF will not be surpassed by PHP.



Michael,

if that were the only deciding factor then how come there are 10 ASP
developers for each CF developer? And why aren't we all out using Macs?


clearly learning curve can only be credited as a contributing factor in
market acceptance, not as its deciding factor

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 19:00 US/Pacific, Dave Watts wrote:
 I don't know why you'd say this. There isn't even a supported version 
 of
 Flash Remoting for PHP, to the best of my knowledge.

There's an Open Source project but you don't call the server-side 
methods the same way as you do for 'real' Flash Remoting as far as I 
can tell. I need to do a little more experimentation with it to decide. 
When I first downloaded the code from sourceforge it didn't even work 
with Mac clients (ironic since an earlier version of the code *did* 
before it became an Open Source effort).

 There aren't any great
 development tools specifically for PHP that aren't available for CF.

I use DWMX for all my PHP development. It's about the best thing I've 
found so far. A little ironic, if you ask me :)

DevNet has a great set of articles on developing PHP applications:

http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/topics/php.html

 in fairness to the present version, it's not all that hard, assuming 
 you
 understand Flash development, to use the current IDE.

...and it is light years better than Flash 5! I couldn't get anything 
done in Flash 5. It was only when Flash MX came out that I was finally 
able to create Flash movies.

 Maybe not Flash designers, but certainly Flash developers will be 
 building
 these things. To build workable, useful Flash interfaces, you need to 
 know
 Flash, which is significantly different from ColdFusion.

Yes, and dare I say much more demanding than ColdFusion. You really 
need to understand OO principles pretty well to be a decent Flash 
developer. And understanding such principles allows you to use CFMX 
much more effectively too, IMO, because you can see how to fully take 
advantage of CFCs.

 Finally, I think it's a bit off the mark to compare Dreamweaver and
 FrontPage. FrontPage is certainly not intended for developers; 
 Dreamweaver
 is.

And, perhaps more to the point, FrontPage tends to lock you into 
Internet Explorer whereas Dreamweaver lets you build cross-platform, 
standards-compliant websites (and helps you do so).

 As I use it more and
 more, I keep finding new useful features in it, and am becoming more
 satisfied with it myself.

For a short while I switched from DWMX (6.0) to jEdit for CF 
development. Once the 6.1 update came out, I switched back and haven't 
used jEdit since. I consider myself a pretty demanding software 
engineer and, whilst DWMX isn't perfect, I find it to be a very good 
development tool for CF (and PHP!).

Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/

If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Dave Lyons
I'll take them:)
see for me they would work out nice, as i make sites for my real estate
agents, they can change there info when needed without buggin me too do it.
And since i dont charge them for the sites, I'd rather not be changing there
stuff all the time. I havent tried contribute yet but that along with the
dynamic parts will save me a lot of headaches.

as far as the original gripe.
If you are too good or proud to use dreamweaver then go use notepad;)

dave
- Original Message -
From: samcfug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be given
away as
 a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They remain
 unclaimed after two meetings so far.

 The majority of our developers still use CF Studio 4.5.  Not dreamweaver,
not
 flash.  Their comments are long the lines of If it ain't broke, why fix
it?

 Very few of them have any plans to migrate to the MX server products, due
to the
 many and complex installation and configuration issues, that seem to not
go
 away.  It seems that with the updates, new issues are introduced.

 CF 5.0, an Allaire product, still remains stable and viable for Dynamic
data
 driven web sites.

 =
 Douglas White
 group Manager
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.samcfug.org
 =


 | don't be ridiculous. there is no need for CF Studio... use Homesite+ .
What
 | is the big fuss with no more CF Studio? Homesite+ is practically the
same
 | damn thing.
 | 
 |
 | Well  fine, let it be Homesite+.  The point is we need a development
 enviorment that makes it easier to develop Flash based RIA using
ColdFusion and
 Flash Remoting.

 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Michael T. Tangorre
good point.

All I am saying is that CF is comparatively easier to learn and use


- Original Message -
From: John Quarto-vonTivadar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 10:06 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


  point is, the learning curve for PHP is a lot higher than that of Cold
  Fusion, and for that reason alone, CF will not be surpassed by PHP.
 


 Michael,

 if that were the only deciding factor then how come there are 10 ASP
 developers for each CF developer? And why aren't we all out using Macs?


 clearly learning curve can only be credited as a contributing factor in
 market acceptance, not as its deciding factor

 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for 
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Christian Cantrell
On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 09:23 PM, samcfug wrote:

 Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be 
 given away as
 a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They 
 remain
 unclaimed after two meetings so far.

If nobody wants them, you should send them to bacfug coordinator.  Mike 
Chambers and I demoed Contribute last Thursday and people were very 
interested.

Christian

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for 
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Dave Lyons
there are a few people in the Louisville usergroup that are interested as
well


- Original Message -
From: Christian Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 11:14 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 09:23 PM, samcfug wrote:

  Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be
  given away as
  a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They
  remain
  unclaimed after two meetings so far.

 If nobody wants them, you should send them to bacfug coordinator.  Mike
 Chambers and I demoed Contribute last Thursday and people were very
 interested.

 Christian

 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread S . Isaac Dealey
 On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 17:22 US/Pacific, dwayne
 wrote:
 If Flash is serious about being the next Generation Web
 Interface, they must introduce an application that makes
 it easy to generate Dynamic RIA.

 I take it you don't think Flash MX is a suitable authoring
 environment for Flash movies?

I've done some work with Flash and I just find the Flash MX authoring tool
frustrating to work with. Unfortunately I don't have any useful suggestions
of how to make it easier to use, so I for the most part just do what I can
and wait and hope that it will improve with time.

I don't suspect he meant is was an unsuitable authoring environment, like,
gee if I wanted to sweep the floor the _last_ thing I would use is a
broom!. But rather that it's rather intimidating / unuserfriendly for a lot
of us CF developers who are used to doing everything in a text environment.
For my part, I'm inclined to think that I might actually have an easier time
developing flash movies if given a tool (or mode) which focuses almost
solely on text, allowing me to designate the height and width of the stage,
new items, etc. all with ActionScript, pull in any vector graphics from
external sources and tween them with more ActionScript, much the same way I
leverage things like Application.cfm, OnRequestEnd.cfm and cfinclude now.

Granted, part of the reason I have a tough time adjusting to the Flash MX UI
may be largely because I've not read much of the documentation on how to
accomplish these sorts of things with ActionScript. But I suspect also that
if a focus were given to developing that sort of tool (emphasis on text vs.
the visual stage) that the documentation would also follow that approach and
focus on doing things with code, the way we're used to. I find the current
documentation for Flash MX as difficult to use as the interface itself (and
it's easily broken by changes to the JVM on the host machine), so I don't
really see it as a significant asset the way I always have seen the
documentation for ColdFusion.

I suppose for starters, this url needs to not produce a 404 error:

http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flashmxdocs/dochome.jsp

That's the url for the ColdFusion livedocs, with the abbreviation cf
swapped out for the name flash. I think that in order for the CF community
at large to really get involved in and grasp Flash the way that MM probably
wants, you need to provide them that same documentation in the same format
for both products.

So if I had to try to give a constructive criticism, that would would be my
first suggestion. :)

But that's just the first step in brining together what have in the past
been reasonably separate designer / developer communities. And as strange as
it may sound, I think there's a lot of merit in the previous suggestion of a
Flash authoring tool (or mode in the existing tool) that relegates the stage
off to a pull-down menu somewhere or a separate window all-together as a
default authoring environment, if for no other reason than that it forces
the documentation to be changed to cater to us cf developers who are used to
_not_ using a graphical tool to place an image (or anything else) on an html
page. Maybe DWMX is that tool and I just haven't taken the time to look at
it. If that's the case, then the documentation needs to follow.

 But when  Macromedia introduced “Contribute” is was
 insulting.  Trust me.  People attracted to “Contribute”
 will not be the people that build RIA.

 Contribute has a specific target market. That target
 market does not include ColdFusion developers (in general)
 nor does it include Flash developers. I'm a little puzzled
 as to why you think it is insulting?

Again, playing devil's advocate, I think the problem that some CF developers
have had with Contribute (myself not included, so I'm sure I'm not really
speaking for anyone in particular), is that it's seen as a waste of
resources which might have otherwise been spent on more ColdFusion Server
development. Yes, MM has a limited pool of cash and resources to work with
and I think it's important for MM not to get too caught up in one-off or
pet projects. Any decent product-oriented (software, automotive,
fast-food, etc) company of any size however must occasionally launch new
projects in an attempt to expand their market. When you do this, you're
intentionally trying to get those one-off projects that are similar or
complimentary to some of your existing products, but target new / different
people. The idea is that, while many _will_ fail (like SiteSpring which
didn't generate as much interrest as was hoped), every x in y of them will
be a continued success and thereby allow even the largest company to
continue to grow by attracting previously untapped income potential. Plus

I think I'm getting away from the subject. In any event -- I think I
understand both the sense of frustration or possibly abandonment of cf
developers looking at where MM is putting their resources as well as the
need on MM's part to 

Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Sean A Corfield
On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 20:29 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
 Granted, part of the reason I have a tough time adjusting to the Flash 
 MX UI
 may be largely because I've not read much of the documentation on how 
 to
 accomplish these sorts of things with ActionScript. But I suspect also 
 that
 if a focus were given to developing that sort of tool (emphasis on 
 text vs.
 the visual stage) that the documentation would also follow that 
 approach and
 focus on doing things with code, the way we're used to.

Well, as I say, we mostly have just a line of code in our .fla that 
says:
#include Stuff.as
and then use DWMX to write Stuff.as and all the other .as files that it 
includes. Everything can be done in pure text mode. Then you just 
publish to .swf using the Flash MX tool.

Admittedly, some component and layout issues are much easier to achieve 
in the authoring tool than in pure ActionScript but the work you do in 
the authoring environment can be minimal.

 documentation for Flash MX as difficult to use as the interface itself 
 (and
 it's easily broken by changes to the JVM on the host machine), so I 
 don't

I don't follow you - what has Flash MX got to do with the JVM?

 I suppose for starters, this url needs to not produce a 404 error:

 http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flashmxdocs/dochome.jsp

Well, we don't have livedocs for every product yet, see:

http://livedocs.macromedia.com/

for what is available today. We're looking at putting other 
documentation online (although the LiveDocs system really needs a bit 
of an overhaul before we can do that!).

 I think there's a lot of merit in the previous suggestion of a
 Flash authoring tool (or mode in the existing tool) that relegates the 
 stage
 off to a pull-down menu somewhere or a separate window all-together as 
 a

My default Flash environment layout has the Actions panel as its focus 
(when I write little movies I still do all the scripting direct 
inside Flash. I only switch to the stage if I want to lay some things 
out visually.

 default authoring environment, if for no other reason than that it 
 forces
 the documentation to be changed to cater to us cf developers who are 
 used to

Of course, you also need to consider that there are about three times 
as many Flash users as there are ColdFusion users but your point is 
well taken - Flash developer documentation will likely be structured 
very differently from Flash designer documentation.

 Again, playing devil's advocate, I think the problem that some CF 
 developers
 have had with Contribute (myself not included, so I'm sure I'm not 
 really
 speaking for anyone in particular), is that it's seen as a waste of
 resources which might have otherwise been spent on more ColdFusion 
 Server
 development.

Well, the Contribute team is a totally separate group of people to the 
CF server team, with a different skill set. If we hadn't had those 
people build Contribute, they certainly wouldn't have worked on CF. And 
there's only a certain number of people you can reasonably have all 
working on the same code base at any one time if you want to stay 
efficient. The argument that Contribute took resources away from CF 
server is, frankly, a very silly one indeed!

Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/

If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive.
-- Margaret Atwood

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread S . Isaac Dealey
 Well, as I say, we mostly have just a line of code in our
 .fla that
 says:
   #include Stuff.as
 and then use DWMX to write Stuff.as and all the other .as
 files that it
 includes. Everything can be done in pure text mode. Then
 you just
 publish to .swf using the Flash MX tool.

I think what I'm really looking for is for there to be a way to do a lot (if
not all) of that remaining stage work with the AS file. It doesn't
necessarily need to be hideously easy the way a lot of stuff is in CF. As
a matter of fact I'd be okay with it being rather complex. ActionScript is a
sub-set of JavaScript and that's okay, so if I had a way of creating items
on the stage and importing vector graphics from say Illustrator and tweening
them all using Flash, I'd be really really really impressed. It would have
to be documented differently than all the documentation I've seen for Flash
as of yet in order for me to really feel comfortable getting into flash
heavily.


 Admittedly, some component and layout issues are much
 easier to achieve
 in the authoring tool than in pure ActionScript but the
 work you do in
 the authoring environment can be minimal.

 documentation for Flash MX as difficult to use as the
 interface itself
 (and
 it's easily broken by changes to the JVM on the host
 machine), so I
 don't

 I don't follow you - what has Flash MX got to do with the
 JVM?

Much of the documentation that comes with the Flash MX tool (the part with
the search form), is a separate desktop application written in Java -- which
worked on my machine for about 4 days and then stopped working all together
as a result of some unbeknownst change to my JVM that I never could figure
out how to repair. I even tried uninstalling and reinstalling Flash to no
avail. Imho documentation is too important to allow its primary source to be
in a format that is as prone to problems as that. Imho I should be looking
at html and or PDF or even windows Help files (although I realize those are
probably useless on other operating systems and so they're less useful than
pdf and html since they would result in duplicated work) _long_ before I
ever hit anything that's even remotely tied to Java in any way.


 I suppose for starters, this url needs to not produce a
 404 error:

 http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flashmxdocs/dochome.jsp

 Well, we don't have livedocs for every product yet, see:

   http://livedocs.macromedia.com/

Oh okay -- so it's coming and I'm just a bum 'cause it didn't occur to me to
check the root domain. :) Thanks. :)


 for what is available today. We're looking at putting
 other documentation online (although the LiveDocs system
 really needs a bit of an overhaul before we can do that!).

There's a feeling I'm familiar with. :)


 default authoring environment, if for no other reason
 than that it forces the documentation to be changed to
. cater to us cf developers who are used to

 Of course, you also need to consider that there are about
 three times as many Flash users as there are ColdFusion
 users but your point is well taken - Flash developer
 documentation will likely be structured very differently
 from Flash designer documentation.

Yea, it's really all about the semantics and getting into the headspace of
the developer vs. the headspace of the designer -- cf / flash / html or
otherwise.


 Again, playing devil's advocate, I think the problem that
 some CF developers have had with Contribute (myself not
 included, so I'm sure I'm not really speaking for anyone
 in particular), is that it's seen as a waste of resources
 which might have otherwise been spent on more ColdFusion
 Server development.

 Well, the Contribute team is a totally separate group of
 people to the CF server team, with a different skill set.
 If we hadn't had those people build Contribute, they
 certainly wouldn't have worked on CF. And there's only a
 certain number of people you can reasonably have all
 working on the same code base at any one time if you want
 to stay efficient. The argument that Contribute took
 resources away from CF server is, frankly,
 a very silly one indeed!

Bottlenecks -- yep... Did I forget to mention that in my last message? I had
meant to.


s. isaac dealey954-776-0046

new epoch  http://www.turnkey.to

lead architect, tapestry cms   http://products.turnkey.to

tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi

certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer
http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
 

Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Mike Chambers
- Original Message -
From: S. Isaac Dealey [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 I think what I'm really looking for is for there to be a way to do a lot
(if
 not all) of that remaining stage work with the AS file. It doesn't
 necessarily need to be hideously easy the way a lot of stuff is in CF.
As
 a matter of fact I'd be okay with it being rather complex. ActionScript is
a
 sub-set of JavaScript and that's okay, so if I had a way of creating items
 on the stage and importing vector graphics from say Illustrator and
tweening
 them all using Flash,

Flash can import files from Illustrator (as well as tons of other formats),
and Illustrator can export SWF files.

However, if you are creating apps, then most of your work flow will be
draging your components (prebuilt UI widgets) into the app, and then writing
code that controls the components or reacts to user input or other events.
Once everything is working, you can give it to a designer to make it look
pretty.

mike chambers

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Bryan F. Hogan
Ok, I may be jumping in here a little late, but in my experience. (I have
been using CF since version 4 and Flash since version 3). In Flash version
4, I just did not get it. Nothing made any since to me. Now when Flash 5
came out, I finally understood it, I don't know if it was Flash 5 or if it
was some luck, I really didn't make anything but stupid simple CD
presentations (kind of like powerpoint). Untill Flash MX came out, Flash was
just something to play with, it really had no use for me, besides silly
flash ads and CD presentations.

Since Flash MX, I have been able to create some really cool interfaces for
my CF projects. Some of which include a text editor which allows one to type
in a news story (think of a blog entry) and then when they are connected
have it publish to the CF server, Dynamic site widgets, such as newsletter
signups, simple IM's and of course flash forms.

I understand people having frustrations, I just don't understand why Flash
should be more like HTML+Time or SVG. I think Flash should stay just as it
is. The only thing I would like to have more documentation on is the Flash
Gateway, I consistently have problems connecting to it. Anyways, Flash is
really cool, once you take some time to get familiar with it.

To learn flash (at least this is how I did) is to start by creating some
simple useless animations. You really need to understand the timeline if you
want to make an animation. But if not and you just want a RIA, think of each
frame as a page. Thinking this way it took me no time at all to get a grasp
of it.

Now for CF. I love CF, CF is the only thing that I use (unless forced to, by
some COM problems are indexing server searches) for development. I have
always been a fan of XML, I have been following it since HTMLGoodies.Com
(You remember Joe don't you? :) ) first referenced it in one of Joe's
tutorials 4 or 5 years ago. I was always frustrated by CF's lack of ability
to work with XML in 5 and exspecially 4. When I got to be a part of the NEO
beta program I was thrilled to see XMLSearch, XMLParse(), etc. With the new
XML abilities of CFMX and the abilities of Flash's, I have found it
extremely simple to whip up something really cool, in no-time. It is far
much better than forcing CF to write a txt file being carefull not to leave
any white space (which is a really pain in the ass) so Flash 5- would be
able to pick it up.

I think I rambled so long that I forgot what my point was. But if I can do
it, anyone can. It just takes a few late nights and long weekends to get a
grasp of the Flash thing. The biggest thing IMO to learning Flash, is to not
think of it as you do CF, think of it as a movie and at certain times in
that movie you pause to make a request for data, retrieve the data, massage
the data and continue on with the show.

As far as DWMX, I have worked with DW since version 2 and I found it way to
cool. I could make my own options (as long as you had a great deal
experience with Java Script). If DW didn't have something I could just make
it. DWMX follows this tradition and other than being slow loading at times,
I have no quames against it. I have not used any of the new CF features in
it, such as CF studio's CF buttons at the top of the screen, they just sit
there.

If you are a hard-core coder use Notepad, if your semi-lazy use CF studio,
if your ready to simplify and shorten your programming time, use DWMX.

Just my oppinion take it as you will. Take a deep breath and jump, it's a
long way down, but once on the ground it's sort-of nervana.

My tool set in order of priority:

1. CFMX
2. Beyond Compare
3. DWMX
4. XML Spy
5. FLMX
6. Photoshop 7
6. FWMX
7. Notepad

- Original Message -
From: Sean A Corfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


 On Saturday, Mar 1, 2003, at 20:29 US/Pacific, S. Isaac Dealey wrote:
  Granted, part of the reason I have a tough time adjusting to the Flash
  MX UI
  may be largely because I've not read much of the documentation on how
  to
  accomplish these sorts of things with ActionScript. But I suspect also
  that
  if a focus were given to developing that sort of tool (emphasis on
  text vs.
  the visual stage) that the documentation would also follow that
  approach and
  focus on doing things with code, the way we're used to.

 Well, as I say, we mostly have just a line of code in our .fla that
 says:
 #include Stuff.as
 and then use DWMX to write Stuff.as and all the other .as files that it
 includes. Everything can be done in pure text mode. Then you just
 publish to .swf using the Flash MX tool.

 Admittedly, some component and layout issues are much easier to achieve
 in the authoring tool than in pure ActionScript but the work you do in
 the authoring environment can be minimal.

  documentation for Flash MX as difficult to use as the interface itself
  (and
  it's easily broken by changes to the JVM on 

RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Chris Kief
so if I had a way of creating items
on the stage and importing vector graphics from say Illustrator and
tweening
them all using Flash, I'd be really really really impressed.


I'm really having a hard time trying to understand what you're asking for.
To address your example, open a new movie in Flash, copy / paste your
graphic from Illustrator. You can then manipulate that vector graphic in a
myriad of ways using ActionScript and the timeline. Not to be rude, but this
sounds like a simple lack of time with the application and its manual ;)


Imho documentation is too important to allow its primary source to
be
in a format that is as prone to problems as that. Imho I should be looking
at html and or PDF or even windows Help files (although I realize those are
probably useless on other operating systems and so they're less useful than
pdf and html since they would result in duplicated work) _long_ before I
ever hit anything that's even remotely tied to Java in any way.


C:\Program Files\Macromedia\Flash MX\PDF\ (windows). You'll find 3 huge
PDFs: Using Flash, ActionScript Dictionary, and Flash tutorials. You can
also find the ActionScript Dictionary online at:
(http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/action_scripts/actionscript_diction
ary/)


chris


~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for 
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread S . Isaac Dealey
 - Original Message -
 From: S. Isaac Dealey [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 I think what I'm really looking for is for there to be a
 way to do a lot
 (if
 not all) of that remaining stage work with the AS file.
 It doesn't
 necessarily need to be hideously easy the way a lot of
 stuff is in CF.
 As
 a matter of fact I'd be okay with it being rather
 complex. ActionScript is
 a
 sub-set of JavaScript and that's okay, so if I had a way
 of creating items
 on the stage and importing vector graphics from say
 Illustrator and
 tweening
 them all using Flash,

 Flash can import files from Illustrator (as well as tons
 of other formats), and Illustrator can export SWF files.

yes, but can I import files from Illustrator using ActionScript?


s. isaac dealey954-776-0046

new epoch  http://www.turnkey.to

lead architect, tapestry cms   http://products.turnkey.to

tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi

certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer
http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread S . Isaac Dealey
so if I had a way of creating items
on the stage and importing vector graphics from say
Illustrator and
tweening
them all using Flash, I'd be really really really
impressed.


 I'm really having a hard time trying to understand what
 you're asking for.
 To address your example, open a new movie in Flash, copy /
 paste your
 graphic from Illustrator. You can then manipulate that
 vector graphic in a
 myriad of ways using ActionScript and the timeline. Not to
 be rude, but this
 sounds like a simple lack of time with the application and
 its manual ;)

Well the manual is probably the larger part of my problem. Imho it stinks.
:) That probably has a lot to do with the fact that I'm a CF developer and
I'm used to the CF documentation. But there was never a point in time (from
day 1) when I felt the way I do now about the Flash documentation about the
CF documentaiton.

What I was saying would really impress me is being able to import those
vector graphics programmatically in an AS file, similar to the way AS files
are programmatically included in a Flash movie. This sort of thing would
make flash dev. much easier for me. For instance, if I had an AS statement
that would import a vector graphic, then I could update the graphic in the
movie by changing and saving the graphic, without having to then copy the
graphic and paste it onto the stage. Of course -- I understand I wouldn't be
able to get away with updating published swf's by saving the graphic -- I'm
just talking about an AS command that imports the graphic during the testing
stage and can then be ignored in the published swf.

Imho documentation is too important to allow its primary
source to
be
in a format that is as prone to problems as that. Imho I
should be looking
at html and or PDF or even windows Help files (although I
realize those are
probably useless on other operating systems and so they're
less useful than
pdf and html since they would result in duplicated work)
_long_ before I
ever hit anything that's even remotely tied to Java in any
way.


 C:\Program Files\Macromedia\Flash MX\PDF\ (windows).
 You'll find 3 huge
 PDFs: Using Flash, ActionScript Dictionary, and Flash
 tutorials.

I don't have a PDF directory. :-(

  You can also find the ActionScript Dictionary online at:
 (http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/action_scripts/ac
 tionscript_diction
 ary/)

Thanks a ton for the url.

However -- this only solidifies my point. I don't seem to have the PDF's --
so maybe I got my copy before they were added, but if they are added, when
you open the Flash editor and you hit help, when does it point you toward
the PDF? And does the Flash MX installer make shortcuts to those in my start
menu (if I get the right version)? It doesn't help me much to have
documentation if I have to dig to find what I need even when what I need is
extraordinarilly basic (like a PDF copy of the manual).

s. isaac dealey954-776-0046

new epoch  http://www.turnkey.to

lead architect, tapestry cms   http://products.turnkey.to

tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi

certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer
http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Chris Kief
yes, but can I import files from Illustrator using ActionScript?

You'll need to convert them into a proper format first. Either export from
Illustrator as a .jpg or .swf and then use loadMovie() in your code to
import at runtime.

chris


~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Mike Chambers
- Original Message -
From: S. Isaac Dealey [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 make flash dev. much easier for me. For instance, if I had an AS statement
 that would import a vector graphic

myClip.loadMovie(myvectorgraphic.swf);

mike chambers

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Mike Chambers
- Original Message -
From: S. Isaac Dealey [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 yes, but can I import files from Illustrator using ActionScript?

at runtime? no. But if you need to do something like that, just have
Illustrator export a SWF and then import that at runtime.

mike chambers

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread Chris Kief
I don't have a PDF directory. :-(

Hmmm...maybe I stuck those there. That'll teach me to try to respond on a
Saturday night ;)

But regardless, you should have been able to get these anyway:

Printable versions of the Using Flash manual and the ActionScript Dictionary
are available on the Flash MX CD. If you download Flash MX from our online
store, you have the option to download printable manuals at the same time.

(from http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/documentation.html)

chris


~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread samcfug
Yes we did demo the application - in fact this was done via our pioneering use
of Flashcom server.  Contribute was our topic that day.
But like you said, Contribute is not targeted at Developer types, and this is
who we have in attendance.

=
Douglas White
group Manager
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.samcfug.org
=
- Original Message -
From: Mike Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)


| Did you show / demo Contribute? I spoke at the bacfug meeting the other
| night, and we showed Contribute (almost as an after thought) and people were
| interested once they realized what it did.
|
| mike chambers
|
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| - Original Message -
| From: samcfug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| To: CF-Talk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2003 9:23 PM
| Subject: Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
|
|
|  Our ColdFusion user group was given two copies of Contribute to be given
| away as
|  a prize at a meeting.  We tried, and no one was interested.  They remain
|  unclaimed after two meetings so far.
|
| 
~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for 
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4



Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)

2003-03-01 Thread samcfug
. But then the Allaire-good, Macromedia-bad argument would lose
| some of its impact :)


I was not intentionally making an argument along those lines,  we remain a
Macromedia Group.

But I certainly have a wish list for the server products, and that would be to
incorporate into CF Administrator, provisions for making all the tweaks and
settings that seem to be giving System Admins so many headaches  such as
settings for stand-alone and multi-homes server settings, etc. Also to include
those choices during the install routine.   While developers may be comfortable
with modifying this file and that, this is definitely an area that Network and
System Admins avoid to the extent possible.

~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribeforumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in 
ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm

Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4