MX 2004 - New Macromedia Products

Has anyone tested Flash MX 04? Heard that it should run a lot better with code written with OS X in mind instead of patchwork.

Imhotep
 
I was wondering how they were going to designate the upgrades to MX. The year makes sense.
 
I have a love/hate relationship with Flash. In fact, I keep a daily log I have titled "Why Flash Sucks ****". I am currently at 54 separate entires describing the absurd choices and hoops this program makes you jump through just to do basic things. Nonetheless, there is nothing like it and the end results can be fantastic.

So, what's my point? Basically, I am excited for its touted features. "Transitions" for one. I've been bitching for months now about how Flash needs to take on a more "video editing" style. This looks like one step toward that. Also, its video improvements (in theory) are much needed. Video in Flash is currently a joke. Ever try to sync audio and video in Flash? Absolute nightmare. And how about the butchered, hap-hazard Quicktime export? Sounds like they really made that better. Final Cut integration! Wow! That would be phenomenal. Does anyone know if it's a true, across-the-board Quicktime export, or this garbage, only if there's nothing nested, no modern scripts-used, etc. export?

My only regret is that LiveMotion never really developed. Rumors say it's dead. That's s shame, because for certain things, it's still way faster and easier to keyframe and loop in LiveMotion than Flash.


-------

As for Dreamweaver. A solid program gets even better. We recently dumped GoLive for Dreamweaver, and I'm glad we did. I was reluctant, because as art director, I preferred GoLive's tight integration with Photoshop and Illustrator for automatic updating. But the code was just garbage and the back door stuff was a pain (according to my programmer). Even as a non-programmer, I find Dreamweaver's overall approach much more efficient. And now that MM has had two revisions before Adobe has had one, Adobe better start catching up again or they can say goodbye to GL.

Fireworks. Never use it, but I'm anxious to give it a go now that it looks like it's got better integration with DW now.


I'm glad to see MM fully supporting OS X. Their apps run great on my DP 1 gig and I bet they will smoke on the G5s. Can't wait!
 
You should blog your list and share it with everyone. Or did you already?
 
Yea, video in Flash is a joke, until it is on the level as Quicktime, I will keep the clips on my site seperate. When did MX come out, has it been 2 years? Well anyway, improvements and additions are always welcome, that way i can mess around with new code additions to soup up my flash sites and programs.
 
$399 upgrade price? $499 if you opt for Flash "Professional"? This is a joke, right?

Thankfully, I am now eligible for student pricing, otherwise, at these prices, I'd continue to make due with Studio MX 2002.
 
damn, I missed that. I bought Flash 4 for $299 back in 2000, that is crazy.MX '04 better be stealth for me to buy it, although my development curiosity will give way forcing me to purchase it.
 
i'd love to get the educational versions but i don't really want the educational branding. Does it really matter?
 
Originally posted by twister
i'd love to get the educational versions but i don't really want the educational branding. Does it really matter?
Click to expand...

the only branding is on the start up screen
 
Excited about the new CSS relevant features... it seems archaic developing with CSS in DWMX at present.

I echo exactly your thoughts Mindbend, we swapped over as well. Will never look back. As for Fireworks, it's integration with DWMX is second to none... be interesting to see the improvements there as well.
 
I never cared for Fireworks, i used the very firs release, then Adobe countered with the Image Read/PS combination, which works for me. I still use GoLive, but it is weak compared to DW, but it gets the job done.

Yea, the CSS looks very interesting, and I want to make a few things for mobile phones, preferably something useful for my own needs.

You can't do professional work with them, it's not like Director where it leaves a HUGE logo that states that it is a educational version.
 
Im' very happy to see this update.

Macromedia MX on OSX has been somehwhat of a disappointment.

I hope that MX2004 (don't really like the name) will solve many of the preformance issues.

Also, despite the preformance issues, Fireworks totally kills Photoshop except for the print world. I believe it is the best for the web world.

It is far easier to edit vectors and raster combined than any other program out there. If you haven't tried it out give it a chance, you won't be disappointed (asuming the preformance is better in version MX2004)

slo
 
Slo, are you talking about Fireworks vs. Imageready? Photoshop has a much different purpose than Fireworks.

Personally, I have never actually used a Macromedia product except Freehand 8, so I can't compare anything, but I like Imageready. It is very easy to use, and it makes slicing and dicing a simple task. It also has lots of export options when it comes time to output your code, and it's fully integrated with Photoshop (making changes in a document in one immediately updates that document in the other, even without saving).
 
I had good intentions to start using FWMX as a viable replacement for Photoshop. But after one project I went back (though still use FWMX where I can)... the only reason: the shear scope and filter options available in Photoshop (compared to FWMX) suits my design better. Everywhere else IMO in FWMX is much better, particularly workflow wise.

Hope the update to Fireworks isn't simply an afterthought.
 
Fireworks works much better for slicing and dicing in my opinion than image ready or photoshop. I like fireworks over Photoshop because of the vector and bitmap integration. but i do rely on photoshop for the simple fact that i know it better but I'm using fireworks more and more each day.
 
I will have to agree that FW is better at handling the mix of vector and bitmap imagery in one. There is no way FW can meet the full needs of PS. If you use PS for only web things and minimal layout and print, FW will work for you. but if you are into heavy photo retouching, crazy design and tweaking of things down to the last pixel, personally PS is the best. Image ready is on the bad side, that i will have to admit, but i still manage to get my designs chopped and on the web with no problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top