from what I remember.. and this is back in the old days of flash so maybe it has changed. But Flash is built for vector and back then, it handled the pixel graphics as if they were vectors. That is. Many blocks of colors. This made for bitmap graphics taxing the system far more than the vector ones.
Now. Flash is indeed built for vector. There is NO reason to use it for pixels. This is what Shockwave is for.
Back in middle school... Which was 1995 for me. We had green-screen commandliners... I think they were apple. I don't remember.
So I'm not surprised that some schools still have win 95 machines... and really.. Not much has changed since then gui wise. So who gives a crap.
If you are going to use flash. You should do vector. The only way to make it faster, is to optimise the graphics. Proper circles, small numbers of lines and curves. Limit the use of shading and transparency effects.
That'll do ya.
Now. Flash is indeed built for vector. There is NO reason to use it for pixels. This is what Shockwave is for.
Back in middle school... Which was 1995 for me. We had green-screen commandliners... I think they were apple. I don't remember.
So I'm not surprised that some schools still have win 95 machines... and really.. Not much has changed since then gui wise. So who gives a crap.
If you are going to use flash. You should do vector. The only way to make it faster, is to optimise the graphics. Proper circles, small numbers of lines and curves. Limit the use of shading and transparency effects.
That'll do ya.