Member Avatar for Soral 3.0

Hi All!
I am just beginning to learn flash. I barely know what tweening is, and my most complicated animation consists of 2 gears rotating each other in a 1:1 gear ratio which I made in Flash 5.
I noticed that newer versions such as Flash MX and Flash MX 2004 are out, and I decided that I should learn those versions rather then being satisfied with Flash 5.
I would like to know how to make a Flash-driven website, and I believe that I should learn the newer stuff, but I am confused about what the difference between MX and MX 2004...
Could someone give me an honest laydown of what they are (I have visited ) and give me advice of what a beginning flash developer should learn?
Thanks.
-Soral 3.0

  • 5 Contributors
  • 7 Replies
  • 215 Views
  • 1 Year Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by advancescripts

Dani AI

Generated

Short, practical summary grounded in what people said here in 2004–2005 and what matters now.

Back when asked, choosing Flash MX 2004 made practical sense: it formalized a component architecture and a more structured scripting model that made building larger, script-driven sites easier than the older Flash 5 workflow. That’s why several replies in this thread leaned toward MX 2004 as the sensible “next step.” (adobe.com)

Compatibility note for working across versions: authoring files can sometimes be published for older players, but ActionScript versions are not drop-in compatible. MX 2004 brought a stricter, class-like ActionScript (AS2); the later ActionScript 3 runtime is a much bigger break and requires different code and APIs. Expect to maintain timeline/tweens for very old Flash 5 projects and to translate code if moving between AS versions. (en.wikipedia.org)

A modern caveat: the official Flash Player reached end-of-life on December 31, 2020 and browsers block the plugin, so Flash is not a viable platform for new web sites. For new interactive or animated work, use open web standards—HTML5 Canvas/SVG/WebGL and JavaScript—paired with libraries and workflows that replace classic Flash features (for example GSAP for choreography and Lottie/Bodymovin for AE-to-web vector animations). These options are faster, safer, and supported by current browsers and tooling. (adobe.com)

If the goal is maintenance or migration rather than new builds, practical steps: run legacy SWFs locally or on archival pages via an emulator like Ruffle; extract artwork and export vector/raster assets from the FLA/SWF using Animate or AE; then rebuild interactions in JS/Canvas or deliver motion as Lottie JSON where appropriate. That approach preserves value from old projects while removing long-term security and compatibility risk. (ruffle.rs)

Recommended Answers

All 7 Replies

Member Avatar for mikeandike22

yeah i think you should go with flash mx 2004.

Member Avatar for Soral 3.0

Thanks for input, but I would like to put another question out.
I work where I may have to be able to use flash MX and possible 5. I should be able to obtain my own copy of Flash MX 2004, but there are situations where I should be competent with the older versions.
I know there is a fairly significant difference between flash 5 and 2004 MX, so I will be sufficed with not being able to use flash 5.
But if I learn Flash MX 2004, is there enough backwards compatability so that I will be able to use flash MX efficiently?
thanks.
-Soral 3.0

Member Avatar for mtheory

Start with the latest version and learn Actionscript 2. Your future in Flash depends on it.

Member Avatar for >shadow<

all platforms of flash are good but the new flash 8 is absolutely flawlessly perfect
but otherwise flash mx is a good way to go

Member Avatar for Soral 3.0

Is the new Flash 8 that good?

-Soral 3.0

Member Avatar for >shadow<

flash 8 is great but for the $800 it only has a few new extras

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.