RE: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
> -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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
> - 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
. 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
>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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
- 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
- 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
>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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
>>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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
> - 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
>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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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 ar
Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
- 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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
> 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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Uns
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 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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
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? 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
Re: Macromedia at Risk (Was OT - Fusebox for Flash?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
> 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
> 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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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=subscribe&forumid=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?)
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=subscribe&forumid=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
