However, I can somewhat see why it need not be an interactive object, at least in the case where the loaded object is a swf, which presumably already contains interactivity itself. Maybe they needed two Loader classes, one that would load non-interactive content like images and videos, and one that would load interactive content like swfs. The former could be itself an interactive object while the latter needn't be.

I personally like Loader a lot for its versatility in what it can load. It has its quirks–for example, having to add the COMPLETE listener to the contentLoaderInfo property instead of directly to the loader itself, and if you forget, it will fail silently. But all in all I think Loader is better and easier to use than the equivalent AS2 tools.

Thanks for a great article, I enjoyed it immensely.

The problem with this is that the vast majority of Flashers do not need a platform which is capable of writing a serious application. They work in demanding, fast paced, visual-creative environments and what they need is a SCRIPTING language, not a platform for serious application development. Adobe's response has largely been to scoff at this issue — which is quite frankly suicidal on their part — because at the agency/production level, there is no mercy for *anything* that costs time and increases workload.

Adobe is having the same dream that Java had many years ago — that of a full featured virtual machine that is capable of robust distributed applications. To which the average creative/programming hybrid (ie: The CORE flash user) usually says, "who gives a crap?".

Adobe does not yet understand how genuinely *dangerous* this moment is to them. There are a half dozen other options competing for these creative/programming hybrids. None are yet as good as even Flash 8 — but they will be. And Adobe would be wise to remember that it's core base is actively exploring other options.

They would also be wise to remember that Java was a massive financial failure and faced similar adoption issues.

Personally I am well versed in AS2 and AS3 and almost always use AS2. It's perfect for rapid application development. Something Adobe seems to have forgotten about.

The fact of the matter is that Flash became popular because its language was so forgiving and loose.

I am well aware that AS3 is far better than AS2. I'm also absolutely right that AS3 has many poor API decisions that only serve to confuse people trying to make the transition. I am able to figure these things out because I'm an experienced developer, but other people have had a lot of trouble with this stuff.

The only difference is that some people are able to remember what it was like when they were first starting out or they spend a lot of time working with (or teaching) designers who have limited or no coding experience. When you understand the position these people are in and you see their pain points and learning challenges, you are much more easily able to identify the spots where AS3 is more difficult to learn than AS1.

AS2 is irrelevant. If you know AS2 (classes, OOP), then AS3 is easy. It's all about AS1, the on(release) crowd, as I call them. There are more of them than anyone else developing Flash and they were basically forced to learn how to program in order to take advantage of the new player's capabilities.

It's easy to say "just learn it, it's better for you" but for these people, it's not so easy.

AS3 continues to be a language that can be cut and pasted by all, hacked to bits and still work. The new abilities inherent in as3 give MORE power to the noobie because of lots of *powerful*, and easy-to-use components and far better encapsulation.

Do you really want to stunt flash so that newbies can write poor code that still works? Hell, they can do the same thing in AS3 just by unchecking strict mode.

I'm calling it like it is- you are defending poor practice and a laziness in learning something new (as3 is no harder to learn than as3, it's just a bit different). Have you seen CS4? It is proof that AS3 is a happy future for both pure designers and developers.

And besides, why do you rule out timeline flash so readily?

Basically, you're saying to everyone "If you don't know how to program correctly, don't use Flash" which is the very definition of being a douchebag.

Yes, their inheritance in this case is funky. No, it is not a strong point to stay with AS2.

If you don't want to learn how to code, just stay with components and the timeline.

moving myself to ajax/management personally, good luck with the adobe fight,

Ant

Up until this point, Flash allowed for creative people to marry the left and right sides of their brains when developing for Flash – with the loss of logic, the ditching of longstanding conventions (i.e. we've gone from _x back to x now??), I worry that the barrier to entry is now far too high for new developers, even more so for those who've been using AS1/2 for a decade and didn't come from a computer science background!