dcsimg
A Flash Developer Resource Site

Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Flash MX performance on Macs

  1. #1
    Dense Dense Revolution
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    33
    I'm planning to upgrade my good ole copy of Flash 5 to MX. I was just wondering how well will it work on a 400 MHZ G4 in both Mac OS X (I'm planning to switch but until I upgrade my hardware it might be too slow) and 9 ( still the faster and better option, maybe)?

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Amsterdam Holland
    Posts
    25
    I would even say: stick to F5 in OS9 with your 400. But FMX is pretty OK in OS9. OSX is a different story. I would wait for better hardware.


  3. #3
    Senior Member SJT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,563
    I reckon go for OS X, it maybe a little slower but the benefits outweigh this...and a G4 400 is fine for running X, my friend runs it on a G3 350 ibook ok, just get a nice amount of RAM.

  4. #4
    Dense Dense Revolution
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    33

    I got flash MX!

    I just got my upgrade copy and boy am I pleased! For starters I dare not go to OS X yet since I feel it might eat too much memory and run slow on my pokey G4 400 powerbook so I decided to stick with 9.

    Flash MX actually a feels a bit more faster and more responsive than Flash 5 in OS 9. Some of the more complex flash projects seem to run better and there seem to be less skipping of frames.

    Although a lot of the UI have been changed it only took me a while to get used to it. I actually like the new ui features Macromedia did to Flash MX. It easier now to organize the elements and there seems to be less screen clutter as well. A worthy upgrade!

  5. #5
    The Definition of... Urbansory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    702
    Runs fine on my G4 400, with 512 ram, 40 gis5 partitions, 5400 I think(org 10 gig) and 7200 (30 gig) drives. All my apps are on the slower drive, I store all my files on the other partitions. 9 and X have their on partions. I have no true use for MX though, all my professional freelance stuff is still done in 9(classic, since if it bombs I have no need to restart ) My computer doesn't even use all the ram, it uses about 50%, most of that is inactive, but if you use 5 in classic, it will eat all the processor power and audio will skip a little, but it crashes way less than in 9.

  6. #6
    The Definition of... Urbansory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    702
    The UI is ok, but I hate the way to edit instances now, if you click the time line you get one thing, now you have to find that object and click it on the stage to edit it. That is a pain, and cuts down on time it use to take. If you have a little monitor, MX will not be too friendly, because the bottom is occupied, and you find yourself moving things around to get that elusive perfect view of your work area. MX is still nice, I just wish I had time to finish my new site which will be done in MX and 5.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center