Posts by MBMedia

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

How exactly would flash being on downfall lower how much it costs to build a project? (especially a project that as far as I see from the description, only flash is capable of doing in any simple way). I probably would have quoted 3k-5k depending on other details, such as what libraries I could find to make things like audio conversion easier, etc. Though of course what you need to charge depends on where you live and the cost of living there, so take that into account that I live in the U.S. when I say that price. It does sound like a pretty large project though, so in the end you really can’t charge a complete pittance for it, no matter how bad you want the project.

The only non-flash ways I can think of to do that project would involve PHP getting wave data, sending it up to HTML5 front end that can allow the selection, etc, and a whole lot of browser<->server back and forth like that. But frankly that would be a whole lot harder that it has to be. So if his problem is honestly with flash itself, offer to do it that way and double the quote, it’s a win either way :)

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

To top it off….the file update that I deleted got approved (...after I deleted it). Definitely some bugs goin on here :P

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

I’m not so sure. I ended up deleting the first update (the complete update, not just the main.zip) and just doing the second update, and now I can go to the first file and click the edit tab and I see all the files for the second update showing on the first file’s edit page as well. There’s definitely some leak-between where the files uploaded for different updates are not being kept separate.

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

So I have 2 files to update. Did the first update no problem. Went to do the second update…and the main.zip upload from the first update shows within the “Files” area of the update page still.

I feel like deleting it so that I can upload the main.zip for the second update is gonna delete the first update’s main.zip and then the update won’t work…or worse the same main.zip will end up being put up for both files and people are gonna buy one file but download another. Has anyone else had this happen? What did ya do?

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

It’s a catch-22 because the only way a buyer would pay a buyout price that’s actually what the project is worth is if they were buying fully exclusive rights (which can’t be guaranteed unless there were no previous buyers of the item). So envato would have to price it lower to account for the fact that it’s not actually a fully exclusive license…which means it’s a price not worth it to the authors. Buyout + microstock doesn’t always mix that well for that reason, it’s typically just gotta be one or the other.

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

The essence of my argument is to:

1) learn all techs so that you can always make the right decisions for every device
2) think of mobiles and desktops as separate experiences so that you always give each the best experience possible. For most average sites this is simple responsive design, for higher-end sites sometimes it means completely different designs for desktop/mobile.

I see no possible way to argue that those two points are limiting anyone to desktop in any way, in fact: it’s the exact opposite, they are points specifically made to make sure mobiles always get thought of and catered to, even if the original site design would have sucked on a mobile :)

My personal addition to those is that when it is best to separate the layouts of desktop completely (for interactive sites, that’s most of the time) and when flash is the better choice for the desktop tech (some of the time). Then don’t be scared to use it.

That’s all. I honestly have a hard time seeing how anyone can argue against it. Any valid reasons against it are a paradox because the points themselves say that if it’s not the best option then don’t do it!

Such as if there’s no need to separate the desktop and mobile: then don’t! Use responsive html! If the desktop version design would be faster to build in HTML5 : then do it in HTML5 . If you can build it in flash CS6 and output HTML5 and it works better than .swf format: do that! If the mobile and desktop are separate and desktop version runs better and more cross-browser in flash than html5…do that!

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says


That’s actually the point I’m trying to make. If you make flash websites that aren’t mobile capable, then that’s why you see an enormous lack of work in the area of flash, because no one wants to use you. People want mobile capable websites and if you’re not putting
Sorry again man if you make a flash website with great look and user experience then back it up with HTML just in the name of mobile capable, this have no logic in my opinion for the ordinary client ,its simple way to much work on the modification from client end perspective

It doesn’t make sense because you’re applying it to situations where it wouldn’t. That’s why I talk about discernment and it being so important: not everything should be flash. If you’re building a site for the express purpose of making it’s underlying code as editable as possible then the right choice was never flash. And if you’re building a site so that it’s content is as editable as possible then the right chose was never to hard code content into the front end, but instead to draw it from database or XML , making content editing not dependent upon the front-end.

But the point that is being COMPLETELY missed is that different designs for mobile/desktop front-end layouts is a choice important for design not tech. Google, twitter, facebook….none written in flash, all with completely different mobile front-ends, just driven by a common set of data. Not just a responsive layout: a completely different interactive process and design for the mobile touchscreen user. This is a fact you need to accept whether you stick partly with flash or go to HTML5 full time, because it’s gonna follow you there as well :)

I’ve just already accepted the fact that any good site needs 2 designs, and I’m just taking it one step further and saying that when the mobile and desktop designs/code are separated like that, it does give you the freedom to then choose the rendering techs for the mobile/desktop versions separately, and gives you the freedom to choose the best one for each.

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

MB, I admire your standpoint and your enthusiasm… but I guess the lack of work out there kinda speaks for itself.

That’s actually the point I’m trying to make. If you make flash websites that aren’t mobile capable, then that’s why you see an enormous lack of work in the area of flash, because no one wants to use you. People want mobile capable websites and if you’re not putting that out then you don’t get customers.

That’s why I’m trying to teach 2 things:

1) discernment for not using flash everywhere: learn every tech, use it in it’s place. Once developers start making good choices on the techs they use, then the right to choose which techs you use will start to be yours again because you don’t have to be baby-sat on the subject. Don’t build a fully featured WP type blog in flash. Don’t make a non-animated website in flash. etc. If it offers an advantage (other than you know flash and don’t know HTML5 …that’s not an advantage) then use flash. Otherwise, don’t.

2) when you choose flash: progressively enhance, because otherwise you’re like a guy selling cookies with poop on them, wondering why no one wants cookies! The cookie market has crashed! No…people love cookies…you just rubbed poop on them. But from that person’s perspective it will seem like the whole darn world is anti-cookie, wouldn’t it? :)

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

At the end MB you are going to be Sofer Stam…now you ask yourself what is hell is Sofer Stam? Well they are very small group around the globe they master in font topography and they write all the bible by hand , it’s a master work ,it take them long time to make but there so few of them and they charge tons of money on the making :P

Hehe, maybe. But the thing is: I actually don’t care what renders my programs.

1) I care that the workflow is OOP enough that I can write code/frameworks I can re-use to save time and therefore build quick projects cheaper/better after spending a little initial time on a framework. Right now in JS when I write frameworks I’m always surprised at how little they end up applying to. I write a tweening engine, yet the next project I make needs “properties” set with functions because of a lack of getters/setters and I have to write a new tweening engine…it drives up cost. Right now with the flash frameworks I have I can build a completely custom designed site that is mobile friendly and has a CMS in a matter of a couple hours for a client, all because of how OOP capable flash is, and it gives me an enormous time/price benefit. CS6 ’s “compliling” to javascript may open new avenues where I can bring those same OOP abilities to HTML5 rendered projects, and if so I’ll be all over that when the project allows as well.

2) And then I care that the end product is the best it can be in as many mediums as can be. Right now when I build an HTML5 website it doesn’t work in as many browsers, it’s slower than the flash product on the browsers it does work on, and unless it’s really basic: it actually breaks most mobiles. So in the end I pick the rendering method that is the most capable and the most cross-device/browser: right now that’s flash desktop + simple HTML mobile for high end graphic/animation intense sites – responsive HTML /jQuery for less intense basic sites. And that’s exactly what I do. But I find that anyone can build the less intense sites, I’m either the cheaper bid or I’m not….sometimes I win sometimes I lose. But the graphically intense sites where I use flash and progressive enhancement…I own that category because I’m putting out websites more interactive AND more accessible than HTML5 .

I doubt a $50 android will ever render as fast as a $1000 desktop: as one progresses so does the other…so I’ll still be providing simpler backup versions for mobiles regardless of the tech I use for desktop for a long time to come, so they don’t figure into which tech I use for the desktop version. And for desktop flash still beats out HTML5 in both workflow and end product…so picking it for the desktop version would make for a more expensive, less capable, and less accessible medium for my clients. That’s not ok with me just in the name of standards…even though believe it or not I like the standards (though I believe there always has to be an outside force pushing past the standards so that they don’t stagnate, that’s flash right now). The moment those situations are reversed flash won’t be ok with me. But they’re not reversed, they are what they are, and right now I’m alone in a progressive enhancement niche starving for cool & accessible websites. Won’t you be my neighbor? :)

1234 posts
  • Has been part of the Envato Community for over 6 years
  • Has referred 50+ members
  • Has sold $75,000+ on Envato Market and is now an Elite Author
  • Has collected 50+ items on Envato Market
+5 more
MBMedia says

I don’t know if IE10 will be out before window 8 or with window 8 . I do know base on what Microsoft say in window 8 , there browser won’t support flash you will have to enable it or do some fall back to except flash, it’s more like if you have window 7 64 bit you can have the option use of 32 bit. But I can’t tell in 100 % how it will be .

That’s not the full situation. There will be 2 browsers in windows 8, IE10 normal and IE10 metro. IE10 metro looks like a mobile browser in interface even, IE10 normal looks like firefox with an IE logo slapped on it, and has full everything plug-in support just like chrome or FF. IE10 metro is the default browser if someone just clicks on some app that will automatically open up an internet page, but even then meta tags you can include in your markup allow the page to prompt to automatically open in the normal IE10 browser and display just like chrome or FF instead.


Bottom line like many here we do less and less flash work

That’s because people like me that woo the client with dreams of animated flash desktop sites that still have simple and ubiquitously working mobile backups are stealing all your work :)

by
by
by
by
by
by