Sneak PeakFlash site UPDATED 8/30

Comments

JasonMurray wrote on 9/6/2004, 6:11 PM
Is this forum always this volatile?

No, sometimes to chill out we talk about less-volatile things such as religion or politics. :)
kentwolf wrote on 9/6/2004, 6:56 PM
>>...I was standing up for you and your tutorials...

I noticed that too.

Wow.
beerandchips wrote on 9/6/2004, 7:22 PM
I think you guys need to go behind the woodshed and beat the sh*t out of each other. I'd pay good money to see that.

Remember, if we have nothing in life, we have humor. And, this thread has been humorous.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/6/2004, 7:45 PM
Standing up for my tutorials? By all week attacking my efforts?

ROTFLMAO!

This must be the TwlightZone.

Like I said, I'm taking a few days off working on the project.
Cheno wrote on 9/6/2004, 7:45 PM
"And, this thread has been humorous"

All the threads BillyBoy starts are.... I'm sure the conversations he has with himself are as well.

Yes your picture scares me. Why couldn't you have used something less scary as a placard, like Jason Voorhees or something? Your last site, with the cheesy fade transitions between pages? Yes, it stunk too, but nonetheless the tutorials were useful. Like I said earlier, stick to something you are talented with. Web design isn't it, unless you're the back end guy and you get a parter to "design" it for you. The tutorials were useful, if you care to design more, I know we'd all be appreciative, because we'd know this damn thread would end.



JasonMurray wrote on 9/6/2004, 7:49 PM
Standing up for my tutorials? By all week attacking my efforts?

Let me be crystal clear about this.

I've never used your tutorials. Comments in this thread indicate they're a welcome addition to the universe in general, and that people like them. Therefore, I've got no beef with your tutorials.

I'm not disparaging your tutorials, I've never said anything bad about them.

My contention is that you're going about building your site - which contains but is not the same thing as your tutorials - in a less than optimal fashion.

Get it? Got it? Good.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/6/2004, 8:30 PM
What I "got" is somehow you and a few others think you have some right to endlessly whine about what you don't like about Flash (actually your'e very uninformed on the subject) and why nobody should make such a site because Jason fancies himself a "expert" on the matter, yet apparently hasn't done a thing with Flash himself, at least nothing he's willing to show us... and thus he limits himself to elementary HTML any ten year old kid can learn in a hour.

I got it. I understand completely.

Tha'ts OK, the web is a big place. If you and others like you are so set in your ways you're unwilling to even give new technology a chance, simply don't bother vistiting my site. I couldn't care less. Get it? Good!
Spot|DSE wrote on 9/6/2004, 8:37 PM
And the longest, most rambling, yet not-as-offensive-as-many-lengthy-threads award goes to.........THIS ONE!
Eyepiece, this forum is rarely this volatile. Stick around. Of course, you're also welcome to visit the almost never, ever volatile DMN forums too.
www.dmnforums.com will get you there.
Dang! I just added another post to this thread!
Cheno wrote on 9/6/2004, 8:43 PM
"and thus he limits himself to elementary HTML any ten year old kid can learn in a hour"

Perhaps you ought to get this ten year old kid to teach you something, BB...

I don't program. Don't want to, but I do know what looks good and do know that it takes practice and a sense of design. You act like your flash site is the shits and it's not. It sucks, looks crappy but contains some good tutorials. You act like you're a programming whiz in flash. You may be but you lack some very basic skills in the design and 'looks good' department that you ought to look into. Funny how I never get a direct response to my posts yet you hammer Jason, John and Spot almost continuously.

Based on the "looks" of your sites, you don't know much about web design. That's what the general census is here. That's what is being said. Functionality is a whole different ballgame yet you're site doesn't function like a decent one should.

I can recommend a ten year old kid if you don't know any.

mike
apit34356 wrote on 9/6/2004, 8:59 PM
"Dang! I just added another post to this thread!" From "A Bug'sLife", " don't go towards the light" and a big loud Zap follows.
Eyepeace wrote on 9/6/2004, 9:11 PM
Well sir, the only comment I can make about your rave regarding how elementary HTML is, is that it's still the primary format of conveying information across the internet. It's somewhat like the English-American language. Yes, a 10 year old can succinctly communicate with the language, but only a mature, educated person may wax eloquent, finding beauty and portraying sensibility in the use of the very same words a 10 year old might utter. It's no where near the delivery that matters in communication. It's the story, the content.
I'm sorry, but you have turned me away from your site permanently after only one look. Self aggrandizement seems to be the tenor of this thread and of the others I've viewed recently. Helping other persons for the sake of feeling good is redeeming in itself. Helping others for the purpose of chest thumping is rather obnoxious. It calls to mind the opening sequence of a Kubrick film.
Best of luck with your website, sir.
JasonMurray wrote on 9/6/2004, 9:30 PM
I got it. I understand completely.

Excellent, thats the first time you've directly answered a question in this entire thread. No seriously, bravo!
VegasVidKid wrote on 9/6/2004, 10:43 PM
BB,

At the risk of going "on-topic", I will try to give you the info you asked for:

I don't have SP2 on either of the machines I tried (one is XP Home, and one is XP Pro, in the office).

I just get the "This should feed a new full screen page" message from the first link. The second link works for me (not the first one, which is the opposite of what you said to use). Once it's displayed full screen at 1280 resolution, I think it displays the way you intended (had to increase my rez from 1024, though).

I don't particularly like having to click the search button in the glossary. I think most people would intuitively hit the enter key, but that just wipes out the text you just enetered. I think there's a lot of potential, and I understand you're just getting it started, so I won't pick it apart.
mrjhands wrote on 9/7/2004, 1:25 AM
... and thus he limits himself to elementary HTML any ten year old kid can learn in a hour...

Which is precisely why newspapers across the country are written AT THE FOURTH-GRADE LEVEL, (or roughly, so a 10 year old can read), for ease of assimilation of it's information.

Ya know, there are SOME folks who will critizise the invention of the wheel,
saying that is just TOO round, too plain in this techno-advanced society, while some of us still think its PERFECTLY functional. It aint broke.

SWISHSITES are prefortmatted flashsites, a dozen or so from swishzone.com for sale, wonderfully simple to use, and you STILL GET CREDIT for designing your own site, kinda like using, oh I dont know, a PLUGIN of some sort. My ego certainly doesn't take a hit for using a plugin, takes years of guesswork out of a task, hit and miss, improves my workflow significantly.

Oh, and I too was inspired enough to look around the web... for some FLASH TUTORIAL sites (here comes the irony), and all the BETTER Flash tutorial sites are written in, well.....plain old HTML... things that make you go HMMMMMMM...might consider that BillyBob?

Best of luck BillyBob, I have used your tutorials, thank you.
TorS wrote on 9/7/2004, 5:40 AM
Opened the site in Opera (7.54 Build 3865).
Had to use the "fullscreen" link which opened in not fullscreen mode. In Opera you just press F11 to toggle fullscreen, so that's OK).
From what I then saw I assume most things went on as planned (can't be sure, of course). But only a couple of tutorials opened when I clicked the menu on the left.

You asked for feedback, not opinion. But I must say this: I don't like things moving around on the screen unless they have a very good reason for it. Flash may be the future, but aimless movement is not. However, the way the tutorials are set up may well be the foundation for a great tutorial site. Over time, no doubt you will rationalize the effects, keep the ones that add to the experience and remove the ones that only disturb (I'll be in the conservative camp over that question). Also (I hope) you will think again on some of the colour choices you've made. The font sizes is an issue that you of all people will resolve sensibly by and by. I just know.

One of the good things about good HTML is that it will display its content properly in whatever size browser window is available. One of my reasons for using Opera is that is has always complied fully with HTML recommendations from W3C - something IE hardly ever has done. In fact, Haakon Lie, who was so instrumental in developing CSS and more for W3C, now works for Opera.
I'm not saying stick to HTML. I'm saying stick to the best available practice as far as simplicity and clarity of presentation is concerned. Your old tutorial site was just perfect - well, maybe not beautiful, but functional and to the point. Don't take it away, even if you feel you must venture into other formats.

Here is an example of the kind of web design (and thinking) I like.
Philip Greenspun: Philip and Alex's Guide to Web Publishing

Flash may be the future. I'm the now.

Tor

PS
Some of the things you've been told in this thread you should not have to hear. But then it should not surprise you either. And you should not loose your cool over it.
BillyBoy wrote on 9/7/2004, 6:55 AM
Hi Tors, thanks for the input.

One thing that shouldn't really surprise me, and doesn't anymore, is the open hostility of some forum members to me, nearly anytime I say anything.

Maybe I should have just done a rehash of the manual call it a book and then then people would line up stumbling over each other to kiss my butt. My whole original concept was to both explain what the manual doesn't that well and go beyond the manual. Many have told me, I've managed to do that, which is why they like my tutorials. Oh well, can't please everybody, and you can't beat my price; FREE.

I certainly don't expect someone to read the entire thread and for sure people jump in at the end or middle or who knows where. So that answers the 'only a couple tutorials open' question. Read my original post that stated this thread. Only a few things were implemented. AS A TEST. I also left up a few test pages, not as an example of how I want things to look, rather as an example of what isn't working. To expect everyone to have enough common sense to know the difference was obviously my error.

Another error I made was to try to nudge people into the future... that requires changing how you think and some willingness to change. The bottom line as witnessed by this thead is people aren't ready. I'm sure some would have liked to seen what I developed, but you remained mostly silent. So I had a little talk with myself and my conclusion is I'd be a damn fool to help people that only find fault or offer no support.

OK, so be it.

So you'll never see what I had planned and had 90% finshed. All the INTERACTIVE features I had worked out and more I was planning so you could learn Vegas by mimicking Vegas in a Flash movie running it off a web page is now a dead project. So too are the roughly 50 new tutorials sharing some new tricks I discovered.

I have had it with the abuse. So sorry, kiss them goodbe at least for now. I'd be a damn fool to freely share my knowledge when I get treated like I am here. I may be a lot of things some people have trouble with, a damn fool isn't one of them.

While I'll still upgade the new site and use Flash, its going to be a very much watered down version. I didn't kill the better project. YOU DID and I mean everyone that whined and bitched and all those that remained silent. The bottom line is you're not ready for the future so why should I knock myself out trying to bring it to you.




JasonMurray wrote on 9/7/2004, 8:24 AM
Maybe I should have just done a rehash of the manual call it a book and then then people would line up stumbling over each other to kiss my butt.

That's mighty harsh, and uncalled for. (Aren't you doing a rehash of the manual and calling it a website?)

To expect everyone to have enough common sense to know the difference was obviously my error.

Wow, even when someone gives you feedback you can't resist throwing your holier-than-thou attitude in their face.



If you check my messages a little further up you'd find a suggestion on how you could handle your tutorials running at fullscreen while not compromising your site's accessibility (offer them as executable downloads) - I still think you'd find that a lot more suitable as you wouldn't have to contend with browsers and Javascriipt issues.
Cheno wrote on 9/7/2004, 8:46 AM
"So you'll never see what I had planned and had 90% finshed. All the INTERACTIVE features I had worked out and more I was planning so you could learn Vegas by mimicking Vegas in a Flash movie running it off a web page is now a dead project. So too are the roughly 50 new tutorials sharing some new tricks I discovered."

So this has been a test all along.. I can't believe I wasn't smart enough to catch on. A really, crappily designed website as a front for the latest and greatest website we've ever seen. Kind of like the guy who orders a mail order bride, she turns out to be ugly as sin and then after a year of horrible marriage because she's also a kniving b**ch, flings off a mask to reveal a beautiful princess.. surprise...

Hah.. not gonna fall for it. If you had something that great in mind, your initial concept wouldn't have looked like my butt on a bad day. 50 tutorials? State of the art delivery system, we don't understand the future?

I'm laughing so hard I've got tears coming down my face.. latest, state of the art tears.. but I won't show them to you.. cause you're not ready..

Spot|DSE wrote on 9/7/2004, 8:52 AM
Jason, BB has a history of commenting on 'rehashing' the owners manual.

I guess he doesn't realize that at some level, nearly everything out there is apparently a 'rehash" of the owners manual. Except that it doesn't tell you how to perform most of the tasks that various tutorials from myself, Mike Keniger, Jason Abbot, Ed Troxell, Satish have done.

I for one, have taken your comments and noted some of them in my "save this info" file.
apit34356 wrote on 9/7/2004, 10:57 AM
Spot, all information in training is basically a rehash of given building blocks of information but with a new approach. Since your book is about vegas, no reference about the tech manual would be foolish. Also since you have included additional ideas and vegs to help the user, it is a not a rehash. But every training manuals and tutorials, including BBs would a rehash by BB's view. The simple fact is, more books on the shelf about vegas at the bookstore, more vegas will gain acceptance with the average video person, a simple review of the bookshelf reveals market interest. I would to see a more advance book, where vegas is used in a IDF project with other software.



mark2929 wrote on 9/7/2004, 12:45 PM
Billy Boy I think its GREAT what your doing Keep up the Good Work... Your right about thinking ahead to the Future..

Best of luck with your Site !
Grazie wrote on 9/7/2004, 12:47 PM
Hiyah Mark! Where yah been?!?!? G
mark2929 wrote on 9/7/2004, 12:53 PM
Working HARD on my latest MANAGED tO even get a Composer on Board for this Latest Epic
JasonMurray wrote on 9/7/2004, 3:29 PM
I guess he doesn't realize that at some level, nearly everything out there is apparently a 'rehash" of the owners manual. Except that it doesn't tell you how to perform most of the tasks that various tutorials from myself, Mike Keniger, Jason Abbot, Ed Troxell, Satish have done.

Absolutely correct ... that's why you're the trainers and we are ... well, the trainees. :)