Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Macromedia app willl go...
- Thread starter Platform
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are not going to see Flash from Adobe for at least 18 months if not longer. Studio MX 2005 is just around the corner...
Blue Velvet said:
That's not a surprise - Flash is so huge and if Adobe doesn't do a good job of integration there will be riots.
I'm for them taking as much time as they need to get it right.
D
bobx2001 said:
I pretty much agree with you.
Adobe is famed, and rightly so for it's consistant GUI and near seamless intergration between applications, something that simply cannot be said of Macromedia.
Macromedia's failure in developing Flash to run on OS X anywhere near as well as it does on the PC speaks volumes.
It is true that Flash app runs slower on OS X than on PC but even on PC, I feel that Flash still has tons of room to optimize. Even on a 2 Gig machine, 2D animation on Flash can be slowed to a crawl easily if there are too many points involve. (although it can be argued that the publisher should be the one doing the optimizing)iGav said:
I came across this article which I think is a pretty good news for the flash community.
http://builder.com.com/2100-6371_14-5659052.html?tag=nl.e601
Macromedia is famous for creating slow code long before Mac OS X was even an issue. Remember the original Myst and The Journeyman Project games? They were developed using Director and Lingo but were later re-worked using Macromedia's brand new (then) C API because of glacial performance. Myst was not released until it was better and of course, The Journeyman Project suddenly became Turbo! 
It's sad to think that Adobe will do a better job of optimising the Macromedia applications since Adobe seem a bit bankrupt on the subject. However, the UI consistency, preference consistency thought that Adobe put into their work will make the Macromedia applications more of a joy than a labour to use.
It's sad to think that Adobe will do a better job of optimising the Macromedia applications since Adobe seem a bit bankrupt on the subject. However, the UI consistency, preference consistency thought that Adobe put into their work will make the Macromedia applications more of a joy than a labour to use.
You know it's kind of funny but most of the Flash sites I visit people are having the same argument, but thinking that Adobe has the bloated software. Purely a perception thing I would say. According to this, basically all plans are going to remain the same at least into the second half of the year. I'm guessing there will be plenty of advance warning on changes to be made.
Well, I was gonna buy CS 2... But I think I can live with the original CS until we see CS 3 and Flash CS (if it ever happens).
Macromedia's mac software.... I love Macromedia's software, but it's absolutely horrid on a Mac.
Adobe, on the other hand, does an excellent job of producing Mac software.. I can't wait to see what they do with Flash.
Or maybe they'll keep publishing them under separate banners. Who knows.
Macromedia's mac software.... I love Macromedia's software, but it's absolutely horrid on a Mac.
Adobe, on the other hand, does an excellent job of producing Mac software.. I can't wait to see what they do with Flash.
Or maybe they'll keep publishing them under separate banners. Who knows.
Hmm, september....Do you think that MX2005 files wont open with MX2004, like 2004 is with MX? I may hold out if its expected by september.
Also does macromedia make two different discs for each platform or is it just one installer exe that can work for both?
Also does macromedia make two different discs for each platform or is it just one installer exe that can work for both?
I run Macromedia apps on Mac all day every day for my living and I have no complaints. I get those great apps AND the productivity of the OS X environment.
I really like Macromedia apps... and I find using Director, Flash, and/or Dreamweaver with OS X Exposé is a very nice experience. All those windows suddenly become manageable.
People like to pick on Macromedia but I disagree. I think the two main complaints that I DO find to be legitimate--but things of the past--are:
* Making you buy Director for Mac AND Windows if you want to make apps for both platforms. BUT THAT'S NO LONGER TRUE. I make Windows software on my Mac with Director MX, and I no longer need Virtual PC and a second copy of Director
* Framerates for Flash playback on Mac. But Macromedia announced last year that they were working on that, and expected faster rates with each updated player version. And I have no complaints about the current speed myself.
I agree that Macomedia sometimes uses quirky UI stuff--but I think Adobe does too. And in both cases, once you're used to it you can be very productive. Macromedia apps are highly capable--nothing can touch Flash, Director and Dreamweaver for my needs.
And Macromedia supports Mac-specific features, too--windowing stuff in Director, for instance, that's Mac-only but you can still use it in your creations.
So I'll be using Macromedia on Mac for a long time to come--owned by Adobe or not. If people notice any sluggishness that I'm not noticing myself, I wouldn't worry about it much on a new Mac. Maybe on older Macs.
I really like Macromedia apps... and I find using Director, Flash, and/or Dreamweaver with OS X Exposé is a very nice experience. All those windows suddenly become manageable.
People like to pick on Macromedia but I disagree. I think the two main complaints that I DO find to be legitimate--but things of the past--are:
* Making you buy Director for Mac AND Windows if you want to make apps for both platforms. BUT THAT'S NO LONGER TRUE. I make Windows software on my Mac with Director MX, and I no longer need Virtual PC and a second copy of Director
* Framerates for Flash playback on Mac. But Macromedia announced last year that they were working on that, and expected faster rates with each updated player version. And I have no complaints about the current speed myself.
I agree that Macomedia sometimes uses quirky UI stuff--but I think Adobe does too. And in both cases, once you're used to it you can be very productive. Macromedia apps are highly capable--nothing can touch Flash, Director and Dreamweaver for my needs.
And Macromedia supports Mac-specific features, too--windowing stuff in Director, for instance, that's Mac-only but you can still use it in your creations.
So I'll be using Macromedia on Mac for a long time to come--owned by Adobe or not. If people notice any sluggishness that I'm not noticing myself, I wouldn't worry about it much on a new Mac. Maybe on older Macs.