File: Adobe_Animate.swf-(3 KB, 550x400, Loop)
[_] adobe animate = cash grab? Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)06:55:59 No.3174331
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)07:04:56 No.3174333
>>3174331
why do you think so OP?
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)08:06:53 No.3174336
>>3174331
forget your tinfoil hat?
>>3174333
>check'd
Animate just adds HTM5 ntive and yes, fixes up the mess of a UI
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)08:22:52 No.3174338
Basically some shitty companies like Crapple dislike Flash so I guess they are rebranding. Adobe
HQ is round the corner from me, I could go ask them.
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)10:01:32 No.3174361
>>3174331
huh? it *is* flash pro.
they just rebranded it because flash as gotten a bad reputation (thanks fucking google and apple)
and most youtubers dont export to swf any more
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)10:56:13 No.3174374
from what you see on zone's twitter, it's still very shitty and doesn't fix a lot of glitches,
even brings some of its very own....
it's really just the cremated ashes of adobe flash
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)12:35:23 No.3174392
>>3174374
zone has a twitter? and he's trash talking flash???
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)12:37:53 No.3174394
>>3174361
>most youtubers dont export to swf
This has always made me sad. I mean I guess it makes sense because you'd see their animation
without them getting any money if you rewatched the swf.
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)13:34:20 No.3174420
>>3174392
>zone-sama
>he
da fuq is wrong with you BOI?!
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)15:01:58 No.3174450
>>3174394
let's be honest, you wouldn't miss out much money. 99.99% of the views would still be on youtube.
always hated google for not allowing swf uploads.
>before anybody even says it: you can easily strip away any harmful actionscript from a swf file
during upload. it would be child's play for google.
>>3174420
im not doing that meme anymore, zone has betrayed /f/. he no longer posts fun things here and he
doesnt care to make his flashes below the file size limit any longer.
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)15:41:56 No.3174464
>>3174450
It really would allow for more efficient uploading of certain video content.
I mean sure that won't happen too often and a different, newer, vector only format could probably
allow for even greater returns in terms of space reduction but that's still something.
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)16:09:09 No.3174473
>>3174464
i didn't really mean they should add it today, they should have added it 2010. instead they
didn't and pretty much killed swf animations since you had to release on youtube to get the money
and then why bother also releasing the swf that you used to make that animation?
in those days flash was required to watch videos on youtube so it wasn't even reasonable from a
anti-plugin perspective
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)16:51:21 No.3174494
>>3174473
Maybe someday someone will step up with swftube, preferably under a catchier name.
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)17:41:45 No.3174503
SWFs aren't shared because they'd directly harm originality. You can rip a SWF, it's hard to rip
anything from a composited video. You can't separate and extract assets at all.
Plus streaming content is much better suited to video, not SWF. If a SWF contains code, jumping
to the middle could totally screw up the timeline.
etc etc. Do your research on the individual formats to understand why this is a terrible idea.
>> [_] Anonymous 11/10/16(Thu)18:10:09 No.3174512
>>3174503
>Do your research on the individual formats to understand why this is a terrible idea.
was going to give you a very intelligent answer that breaks down exactly why you are full of shit
but since you ended with the typical internet argument insult i will give you the same. fuck you,
you don't even know how much i know about every single god damn format out there.
flash is awesome and there is NO reason why it would be a "terrible idea" to use it for animations
