yons, Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 11:19 AM
Subject: RE: StudioMX vs StudioMX 2004
> Charlie,
>
> You could start with the Macromedia propaganda:
>
>
http://www.macromedia.com/software/studio/pro
> appreciate the feedback Larry.
>
> anybody else? I've got a pitch to make (or more accurately...i've got to
> decide whether or not i've got a pitch to make) :)
>
> Thx,
> Charlie
GOOD
Improved CSS.
"Siteless" editing. You can just browse a drive in DW or point to and browse
an ftp server wit
age-
> From: Charlie Griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 1:08 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: StudioMX vs StudioMX 2004
>
>
> appreciate the feedback Larry.
>
> anybody else? I've got a pitch to make (or more
> accurately...i'
y" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 9:16 AM
Subject: RE: StudioMX vs StudioMX 2004
> The component browser is worth the upgrade, as well as the CSS support.
The
> coding environment has substantially improved. Application speed seems to
be
> improved as well.
>
004 11:12 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: StudioMX vs StudioMX 2004
>
>
> Our team (3 developers) currently uses Studio MX
> (predominatnly DWMX...not so much even Flash or Fireworks).
>
> One of the group has made a request (direct to the boss) for
> an upgrade to St
Our team (3 developers) currently uses Studio MX (predominatnly DWMX...not
so much even Flash or Fireworks).
One of the group has made a request (direct to the boss) for an upgrade to
Studio MX 2004, citing "better support for CSS, stability, speed, and easier
connectivity between CF and Flash".
