Why the hell does Flash MX 2004 have a Windows Xp GUI?

**drainyoo** · 09-10-2003, 02:10 PM

What the hell is wrong with Macromedia? This really pisses me off. I have a beautiful OS and I have to sit here and and look at this ugly ass GUI. WHY? Why didnt they make the MAC version of Flash blend more with OSX? I cant believe it. These ugly buttons and scroll bars. I feel like Im working in XP and its killing me.

Other than that the app truly rocks!

**Lightwave Network** · 09-10-2003, 03:05 PM

Get used to it.

Remember when Windows 95 came out? I was a DOS user, and I was so anti-Win95...I thought it was just an excuse to become a Mac.

Then, I got Windows 95. I still hated it (because it was unstable,) but for the most part, it was sweet to work with 32-bit applications.

Eventually, Windows 2000 came out -- I loved it instantly because it was a WinNT/Win98 hybrid. I still use Win2k, actually.

Then, Windows XP came out, and I thought I was going to have to assasinate Bill Gates. But, it's simply a step to the next version of Windows (which is a 64-bit platform and should be coming out soon as Intel releases their 64-bit CPU.) XP is actually pretty nice, and works well, but like you, I dislike the interface (way, way, WAY too much of a user-friendly attempt, which can't really be done well on a PC simply because the structure itself IS technical.)

Think of it as another step...apparantly, Macromedia thinks everyone's on Windows XP (shame on you, MACromedia!) But, you'll get used to it. :P

It would probably look better if you installed in on Windows XP. LOL

**TRJNET** · 09-10-2003, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by Lightwave Network
Get used to it.

Then, Windows XP came out, and I thought I was going to have to assasinate Bill Gates. But, it's simply a step to the next version of Windows (which is a 64-bit platform and should be coming out soon as Intel releases their 64-bit CPU.) XP is actually pretty nice, and works well, but like you, I dislike the interface (way, way, WAY too much of a user-friendly attempt, which can't really be done well on a PC simply because the structure itself IS technical.)

Same here too, but once I got my new laptop, and actually tried out XP Professional for myself, I was litterally stunned at the improvements, graphically & automated-features wise, I am now in love with it

**shadeth** · 09-10-2003, 04:20 PM

I love windows XP professional, it is built on the NT structure from what i've seen, and it is great. i don't have any problem with the GUI and it's the most stable version of windows i've ever ran. about the only thing i dislike is the required "activation" but i hear that's also for these MX 2004 products as well. nothing like extreme anti-piracy methods to annoy the heck out of you.

But i have to say, for stability, the Windows XP (non-professional) version blows.

**drainyoo** · 09-10-2003, 04:28 PM

Ok folks. Let get something straight! im a mac user. I use OSX. I dont care about Windows. I just dont understand why Macromedia would use Xp like GUI elements in the MAC version of Flash. Why couldnt they use Aqua?

Dumb bastards they are.

**cosmiceye** · 09-10-2003, 05:20 PM

if the gui graphics are so darn important to you, why dont you skin it yourself? Or maybe macOs doesnt make that an option, I dunno, but do a google search and see what u find.

**Lightwave Network** · 09-10-2003, 07:19 PM

Strange that MACromedia would apply a WinXP interface to a Mac version of Flash.

What makes it even crazier is that I occasionally got an error message (in Windows) with corrupted FLAs in Flash that would say I needed to allocate more memory to the program using Finder.

I even took a screen shot of this error and sent it to Macromedia:

I guess Macromedia finally bent over to Microsoft and became Micromedia...maybe Windowmedia...

**cancerinform** · 09-10-2003, 07:30 PM

I don't like the whole interface of 2004. I get frightened by the tightness. There is just too much on a "little " screen. One can't move around anything, just open and close. And the help file should have been separated.

I am a bit pi$$$d off

because I am a mac user and have to buy a new computer now, since I have a G3 with 9.1, which was working perfectly for all my purposes. Unfortunately, I am addicted to flash

**Lightwave Network** · 09-10-2003, 07:35 PM

I always thought Flash MX was too sqooshed together anyway. I use Flash MX on a dual-monitor display--two monitors RULE for designers & developers because a lot of our applications have so many panels that can be brought to the second screen, allowing us more room to see our project(s) in the main screen.

**cosmiceye** · 09-10-2003, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Lightwave Network

I guess Macromedia finally bent over to Microsoft and became Micromedia...maybe Windowmedia...

LOL!
I got it:

Macrosoft

**Lightwave Network** · 09-11-2003, 03:55 PM

lol

**FPChris** · 09-11-2003, 10:44 PM

Well, what do you expect Apple does only have 2.3% market.

Why should MM go out of their way to for it?

I care that the product I make looks great not MM's GUI.
Besides Flash hasn't been a one monitor application since Flash4.

Chris

**MikeDowney** · 09-12-2003, 12:46 AM

You want some cheese with that whine?

Geez people, this Mac vs. Windows thing is so 1997. Get over it! The UI looks nice and, more importantly this is an OUTSTANDING release of a tool that does way more than most of you even realise.

When you really think about it, how many major software companies even bother making mac versions of their software? Macromedia, Adobe, Microsoft, Quark (*giggle*), and, uh, Filemaker? Oh no, wait, they're owned by Apple...

Who had the first application to market ported to OS X? Filemaker? Good guess... WRONG!!! Photoshop? WRONG!!! Quark Xpress? WRONG!!! It was called Macromedia Freehand 10 baby, yeah!

You know, I'm a Mac user, always have been. I also use Win XP Pro every day. There are things that I like about both. But I'm so sick of Mac users whining about things like this. FPChris was right, Apple has less than 3% market share. In any other industry it would be dead. Apple's own attention to their customers, sense of style, and market-leading innovation teammed with their loyal customers is "all" that keeps them afloat.

Personally, I think it's quite impressive that Macromedia has released really fantastic tools for OS X and continues to be very committed to the platform.
For OS X:
Dreamweaver MX 2004
Flash MX 2004
Flash MX Professional 2004
Fireworks MX 2004
Freehand MX.01
Contribute 2.0
Director MX
And if you're clever enough, you can even make ColdFusion MX 6.1 run on OS X.

How many other software companies have done as much as we have?

Ahem, I will descend the soap box now with these parting words, "Quit complaining!"

Cheers,
MD

__________________________

Mike Downey
Evangelist | Producer
Macromedia, Inc.
mdowney@macromedia.com
http://www.macromedia.com

**buggedcom** · 09-12-2003, 07:22 AM

I agree mac vs pc get over it. You prefer what you prefer. But then agin if you prefer a mac to a pc you are never going to like seeing an xp interface on a mac.

@MikeDowney

Is there any way to diable the anti aliasing of the text in the actionscript panel as it really slows down the coding. Also i've noticed that on a mac and you are using a font without serifs in the actionscript panel the text isn't displayed properly. some letters are cut off the ends of words and in some cases only half of the letter at the end of a word is visible.

Impressive speed increase on the publishing and export side. big thumbs up. however i find the overall reaction of the app quite slower than before. admittedly i am on a ibook 500 and am considering dare i say it, getting a cheap pc laptop just because they respond so much better than macs at times.

Anywhoo's i really would like to know about the whole text in the as panel thing as it is the only thing that bugs me greatly

**Xample** · 09-12-2003, 08:23 AM

Hey Draynoo (or anyone else),

Can you post a screenshot of the MX 2004 interface for OSX? I'm on the fence on upgrading. If it looks like an Windows XP application I'll probably stick with what I have. But I am curious to know why they didnt skin the app. with Aqua, especially since MX is fully skinned in Aqua. Thanks.

**circle282** · 09-12-2003, 10:55 AM

Yeah because the GUI is a good reason to not upgrade...

Hey it's cool, stay back while the industry moves forward.

**1337designs** · 09-12-2003, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by circle282 Hey it's cool, stay back while the industry moves forward. [/B]

haha

the only thing I agree with that's been brought up is the tightness.. With all my stuff on the right (components, library, etc), when I opened the help file and it put itself to the left side of the screen, I had about 2" of stage left.. but if you close help anymore, you can't read it.. definately much easier in the last release when it loaded seperately.

**circle282** · 09-12-2003, 12:05 PM

You can still open it seperately. Just pull it away from the docks.

**Xample** · 09-12-2003, 12:33 PM

hahah. you just worry about yourself circle. we're doing just fine over here. while it would be nice to have my GUI in line with OSX, it's not going to stop my studio from building its client base and putting out great products. hey, it's ok, you keep running in circles and we'll keep moving forward.

**1337designs** · 09-12-2003, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by circle282
You can still open it seperately. Just pull it away from the docks.

by seperately I mean a seperate window outside of flash, it's own entity so I can have it full screen and not have to move or minimize it to work. just Alt-Tab and done.

Thread: Why the hell does Flash MX 2004 have a Windows Xp GUI?

Thread Tools

Display

Why the hell does Flash MX 2004 have a Windows Xp GUI?

Come on!

screenshot

Posting Permissions