feature feedback

Ok, so I am once again going out to the community to get some feedback on some possible changes in a future version of Flash.

First I would like to know how you feel about removing screens from Flash; and no I don’t mean SCENES. I am talking about the feature we added in Flash MX2004 to add two new type of documents -"Flash Slide Presentation" and "Flash Form Application". If you still don’t know what I am talking about then I guess you don’t have a problem with this.

Screens only work with AS2 and got very little traction when released. As many of you can tell we have not been making it easy to find them in the tool and we don’t intend on updating them to AS3. We feel there are better solutions to solve the problem they originally intended to solve.

So, if the next version of Flash didn’t have screens, how would that affect you?

the other change I am curious to get feedback on would be in dropping support for PowerPC. That could mean only Intel-based Mac’s might be supported in the future? How would this affect you?

 

Please let us know.

 

48 Responses to feature feedback

  1. NateJC says:

    I fully support dropping both of them. I would much rather have Adobe spending their time on things that the majority of people really care about.

  2. Rich Morey says:

    I am an avid AS3 programmer so screens don’t mean anything to me. And I’m a PC guy so again PowerPC support means nothing. What I would love is some kind of version number tracking in Flash / Flash Builder that you can set to auto increment with each build and access easily via code to display in a debug log, etc.

  3. Benjamin says:

    Never used screens.

  4. Mark says:

    Screens was a bad idea from the start. I’m an elearning developer and I first learned flash right when MX2004 came out. Without knowing much about actionscript/flash at that time, I still had the sense to stay away from screens : ) Flash developers learn through the huge amount of online tutorials/discussions on the net. There were none about screens, so it was dead from the start.markwww.elearninglive.com

  5. Quentin says:

    I’ve never used screens and always thought it was useless… I would drop it!

  6. Jensa says:

    Wouldn’t affect me at all. Please remove. I tried using it initially, but it was just gibberish + if you want to do screen based apps, you’re much better off using Flex or Catalyst.J

  7. Jensa says:

    … and PowerPC? It’s been a few years, haven’t it. I only have one PowerPC and that’s being used by my kids. I wouldn’t dream of installing modern software on it as it’s way too slow for that.J

  8. Ross says:

    Lets see, screens, screens, yeah – doesn’t ring a bell.Actually, I knew about the slide presentation one, but not the form application.Personally, I think they could have been great tools, and still could be, were they advertised, updated, and easy to find/use.Would I miss them if they were gone…. I don’t even miss them now.As for powerPC support…… I would not be affected, but my coworkers would. I think you should wait until at least CS6 to drop support for the powerPC chips, as many companies are often slow to upgrade computers that still work (especially in this economy) – and, since large companies are probably who gives Adobe the most money in software purchases (due to the overwhelming cost of the software) it would be a good idea to wait until they have mostly upgraded to newer Apple computers.Just my 2c

  9. nd says:

    go on for both. i’m user of flash since v4 and wouldn’t miss neither slides nor forms.as for intel mac only- the faster you have 64bit ready intel optimized version the better. powerpc is too old to drag the evolution.please better spend time making flash faster, more stable and native feeling on mac. it’s still kind of rough nowadays.. 🙁

  10. simon says:

    Sayonara, Screens. I don’t think I ever used that feature for anything that actually went into production. It’s a shame – I work at an ad agency, and we’re often asked to do very “powerpoint-like” presentations. Screens would have been perfect for that, except there was always some bit of custom behavior that was required that ended up complicating the issue, and we’d end up doing everything manually.As for PPCs, our agency is pretty much all on Intel Macs now, so I doubt it would affect us much at all.

  11. If it means spending more time on making the core application less buggy, I am all for it.Besides, if you are not going to update it, why leave it around if it is not used anyways?

  12. Lena says:

    Scenes are pretty bad too 😉

  13. Keith Peters says:

    I did a project with screens once…ONCE!!!!!

  14. Eric Dolecki says:

    1. Drop screens ASAP.2. Drop PPC ASAP.3. Have a wonderful day.

  15. ljones says:

    Drop em! Haven’t used them and no need for them… and my PPC is damn near 10 years old.TIme to move on, bring speed, performance and hardware acceleration.

  16. I too am a fulltime Flash user without any needs for screens. I think I tried them once for a project in college and quickly scrapped them. Adobe has been trying to send the message that AS3 is the only way to get things done – killing AS2-specific tools is a good way to reinforce the message. :-)As for Intel support, I think that highly depends on the reason you are killing it. One of my clients has a couple of $15,000 photo printers that only work on PPC Macs. Obviously, they are hesitant to replace $30,000 worth of equipment. Since the printer isn’t supported on Intel, they’ve been moving to G5s.I’m sure they are a relatively niche case, but still, there are people out there stuck in PPC land. If you kill PPC support, there should be good cause.

  17. KS says:

    Richard, I agree 100%. Let’s start weeding out the extra stuff.

  18. Peter says:

    I miss screens in Flash authoring as much as I miss using mx.utils.Delegate.create(this, someFunction) :)Good thing removing it from Flash authoring.

  19. stacey says:

    Its still in there? 🙂 Get rid of behaviours too.

  20. Used it a handful of times for quick presentation style stuff – but as others have noted – it always required tinkering or other scripting to extend stuff to make it do what you really wanted, so it wasn’t worth the hassle. Haven’t touched screens or a project based on screens since early 2005. Drop it.With Snow Leopard approaching rapidly which drops support for PPC, and the past 3-4 year transition from PPC to Intel for Apple, I think its also safe to drop support for PPC in the IDE.One big reason is simply the performance difference and gains in moving from PPC to Intel are so dramatic (even from the very last multi processor G5 towers produced) that to me it doesn’t make sense, to continue to try and run Flash (or any of the other Adobe Creative Suite apps for that matter) on a PPC based machine. This is especially true if you are working in it all day. The end developer will save so much time with an Intel based machine, that it will pay for itself pretty quickly. Drop it.Drop them both and move on to bigger and better. 🙂

  21. David says:

    I would drop support for PowerPC macs. If an agency is going to spend $1K per person to upgrade software every year, they’ll spend $2K to upgrade hardware every three.Also, dropping support in future versions won’t prevent anyone with an older version from continuing to use it. So there’s no loss to PowerPC holdouts, only no gain.

  22. Fuad Kamal says:

    I would personally be shocked to find out if anyone has ever used the Screens feature. Out with it! I’m developing on a five year old Mac and it’s Intel – with my long compile times (working on MASSIVE projects with many libraries) I am longing to upgrade to a new MBP sporting 8 GB of RAM…so no, I wouldn’t care less if you didn’t support PowerPC. Would anyone else? Maybe, but even Apple is dropping PowerPC support (SnowLeopard doesn’t support non-intel) so maybe Adobe should follow their lead.

  23. Tom Green says:

    1) Kill screens and kill ’em dead.2) I once had a PPC but lost my wind up key.3) Send Scenes to a hospice.

  24. Yes, drop screens and PPC. Screens would only be useful for some sort of Light Flash IDE, not for real Flash development. PPC is going away.It would be nice, though to be able to save more than one version back. Especially for those stuck with an older version of Flash on PPC.

  25. I’m going to make an assumption: all the people who would have possibly used screens are all using AS3 now, and more than likely using Flex. If you wouldn’t have said anything, I don’t think anyone would have noticed.I’d vote yes for dropping PPC support too. We actually have a couple of g5 towers here at my current gig, but I mean come on…seriously.

  26. radley says:

    considering that Apple doesn’t support PPC any longer, it’s no longer a concern….

  27. I could do without having screens in the next version of Flash authoring. We have never used that feature internally to my knowledge. Drop away.As for Intel, we just transitioned the whole shop to Intel based architectures. I think a lot of devs are transitioning to Intel also for the cross platform advantages. I think it’s a safe move to drop the PPC legacy.

  28. Greg Dove says:

    Screens:I used it once or twice back when I used MX2004. Never since. Nuke it.PPC: I don’t use a mac, so can’t comment directly other than saying it’s not relevant to me. But the mac people seem to think it’s history too…

  29. PowerPC has nearly vanished from desktops, but Adobe should continue Flash support for the architecture. From personal experience, many G4 and G5 iMacs remain in-use to this day. More significantly, dropping it would mean exiting markets for other devices (think Xbox 360 and PS3). With threats from Silverlight (and perhaps HTML 5), Flash should maintain its ubiquity to stay competitive.

  30. Fernando says:

    Kill ’em. Kill powerpc version too, not even apple supports powerpc anymore (snow leopard)

  31. Guy Watson says:

    Bye bye screens and forms. Also second removing Behaviours. No opinion on PPC support.

  32. I used screens for one project in 2005. I don’t need them, thanks.MK

  33. ev4n says:

    havent used it before so it wouldnt matter 😛

  34. Kevin Newman says:

    Sounds great, then you can get to work on a compile mode other than “Strict Mode” which would not halt execution (like having Strict Mode off) but would still kick out warnings into the log window (like having “Strict Mode” on). 🙂

  35. Thea says:

    Screens? PowerPC? I don’t even know what those are?Let’s move forward, a 64bit version of Flash is long overdue. I actually ended up downgrading from 64bit because of the lack of support for it.

  36. Dan orlando says:

    Drop them like a bad habit.

  37. Please not just drop screens and PPC support, but also scenes, they are outdated too and if anyone needs, just hang on to the current version of Flash.

  38. Wayne Cater says:

    Dropping PPC support should really be a moot point by now. Apple, with it’s Snow Leopard, OS release will be dropping PPC support. It can only be suspected that vendors will do the same.The more feature gloated apps become, the more CPU needed. It’s a sad reality that PPC is becoming a part of Apple history.Press On!

  39. 1. Yes, drop screens2. Yes, it would be okay to drop PPC support

  40. Ryan Phelan says:

    I say out with the old, in with the new.

  41. naturally screens are useless–never used them, the last time I saw them–wow, yesterday when I got a template file from Adobe! But, seriously, it’s not exactly fair… you say “well, it only works with as2” okay, that’s true, but that begs the question of whether it should work in as3. But–yeah, the reason you should ditch them is because they’re so under-baked and never got any love. Not saying they deserved any, but really… this is a straw man. You think anyone would defend them?I don’t care about PowerPC support. Are these two questions serious?I think the real question is so blindingly obvious and that’s: would users rather have a solid product (say, like Flash 8–that last valid product version) or more features (along with the expected flakiness)? Obviously, we’d rather have the features and stability–but let’s be honest: there’s no indication this is even possible… not with recent history as our guide. So, just once you might consider “make a solid product” as the goal. If the pesky share holders think this is unwise just ask them how CS4 is doin’ for ’em.I suspect many of you already agree with this… but try this: name a few really great pieces of software that you use today. I’ll bet the #1 common feature is “it works”.

  42. Eskil Janson says:

    Yes Please!I have never liked the concept, it is has always been confusing. Pleas remove!

  43. Bystander says:

    Hmm, I am impressed by the consensus around this. However, developers who read blogs tend to be the ones who always have the latest of everything, so you need to hunt down the lazy average dev 😉

  44. YL says:

    To be honest, I don’t feel good to see Flash going to a direction to which it’s going to be more of a programming tool, straying off from its original intention to be a simple vector animation software.I’ve read comments about removing even scenes, which I simply cannot agree with. It’s just getting harder for people to even get the hang of the software. And this means the software will scare new people away, which is, unless alternatives to the software is found, never good.Quote from Phillip Kerman at June 17, 2009 11:26 PM:I suspect many of you already agree with this… but try this: name a few really great pieces of software that you use today. I’ll bet the #1 common feature is “it works”.I can’t agree more. And I think adding new features should not involve making the original ones unusable. It’s like asking “Native 3D or good UI?” Can’t I have both?And now to the questions:Screens:I’d like to see what will removing support results in. Will it render past Flash 7 files unreadable? If so, don’t kill it. And I don’t care for AS3 support, since there are already a lot of AS2-only stuff.The story of SmartClip in Flash 5 tells us that removing features often cause practical troubles. So I’d say not to remove them (at least reading them) unless you can at least help converting them to screenless version of FLAs that use screens.But then, Adobe has a long history of not listening to users. That’s why they killed Authorware to favor Director.PowerPC support:Not that I’ll use one, but it’s like asking “should we force you to use a new OS?”I won’t feel good for such a removal since that means existing users are to use the utterly-unstable and unfriendly CS4, but who am I to judge?No yes/no comments for this issue.

  45. Mark 2000 says:

    Adobe as a whole needs to follow in the footsteps of Apple and Snow Leopard. The next update should have few if no new features but be all about rewriting the software to be slimmer and faster.Flash should be cocoa based, 64-bit, and GPU accelerated. Flashplayer as well should have all its visuals GPU accelerated. There’s no reason why, when every system has 3D processing on it, that a game with gigs of textures and billions of triangles should run faster than a simple SWF.Performance, performance, performance. CS6 can be all about features, but make CS5 about joining the 21st century back-end techwise.

  46. Hardik says:

    I would like to make all the tools & new features of CS4 “Work Steadily” before adding new features.Some suggestions:1) Improve Bone tool. When we make larger animation using bones, it results into plenty of ‘unexpected, unintended’ changes. First, The character will burst apart. Second, bone’s orientation & that of symbol attached to the bone dont remain consistent. Third, armature layer gets converted into normal layer. Fourth, armature layer is there but we couldn’t select the bones at all (even if we use bone tool). All these & many many more problems make bone tool ‘Unusable’ for real life projects where characters generally need longer animations2) For Armature layer, provide scope to cut, copy & paste multiple poses.3)CS4 is very slow. Please, improve overall work environment speed.4) Introduce ‘Custom Shaped Brushes’ and allow more variations in brush size.5) Introduce facility to type text on an irregular path.6) Introduce newer ‘much innovative’ gradient types.7) Add a ‘Motion Blur’ feature that introduces ‘in-between’ blur during frame changes (if user opts for it). This can improve the smoothness of animation.8) Provide a Camera feature so that the entire stage can be viewed at different angles.9) If a font for an existing file is missing then provide a choice to permanently substitute that font for all its instances in the .fla file.10) If possible, please introduce particle systems.I loved all the new additions to CS4 but plenty of those additions are a bit buggy. At the end of this post, I will only say that even if you do not add any of the features that I suggested, It is my earnest request to please please make all the existing tools & the overall application steady & fast in working.