URL link to open new window?

[Larry Pike]

Hello, and thanks in advance for the help...

I'm kind of new to Flash programming.
I'm trying to get a link to a url to open a new window for that url. I'm
using Flash MX 2004... an I missing something obvious?

Thanks again,
Larry

[Larry Pike]

never mind... I was missing something obvious!
I got it now... Thanks any ways!
if interested... check out the site, it's my band site!
[url]www.blindmosaic.com[/url]
thanks
Larry

"Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net> wrote in message
news:UHo_d.66588$SF.58961@lakeread08...

> Hello, and thanks in advance for the help...
>
> I'm kind of new to Flash programming.
> I'm trying to get a link to a url to open a new window for that url. I'm
> using Flash MX 2004... an I missing something obvious?
>
> Thanks again,
> Larry
>

[Samuria]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:44:29 -0500, "Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net>
wrote:

The site is so small you cant see it even if you zoom in

>never mind... I was missing something obvious!
>I got it now... Thanks any ways!
>if interested... check out the site, it's my band site!
>[url]www.blindmosaic.com[/url]
>thanks
>Larry
>
>"Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:UHo_d.66588$SF.58961@lakeread08...

>> Hello, and thanks in advance for the help...
>>
>> I'm kind of new to Flash programming.
>> I'm trying to get a link to a url to open a new window for that url. I'm
>> using Flash MX 2004... an I missing something obvious?
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Larry
>>

>

[Larry Pike]

What are you using for a computer?

From desktops to laptops with monitors in the 13-15 inch size the picture
looks fine. A little smaller than that requires zoom (F11), but it's still
readable.

Out of everyone I did the beta test with, you're comment was the first of
this type.

Just curious...

"Samuria" <samuria@rock.com> wrote in message
news:abnm315a75ja7uk95n5gslp46psi214bna@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:44:29 -0500, "Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> The site is so small you cant see it even if you zoom in
>

>>never mind... I was missing something obvious!
>>I got it now... Thanks any ways!
>>if interested... check out the site, it's my band site!
>>[url]www.blindmosaic.com[/url]
>>thanks
>>Larry
>>
>>"Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:UHo_d.66588$SF.58961@lakeread08...

>>> Hello, and thanks in advance for the help...
>>>
>>> I'm kind of new to Flash programming.
>>> I'm trying to get a link to a url to open a new window for that url. I'm
>>> using Flash MX 2004... an I missing something obvious?
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>> Larry
>>>

>>

>

[Duh NuhnKa]

I have the same problem. My resolution is 1280x1024 and your site looks
like a 200x200 square in my browser (firefox).

Larry Pike wrote:

> What are you using for a computer?
>
> From desktops to laptops with monitors in the 13-15 inch size the picture
> looks fine. A little smaller than that requires zoom (F11), but it's still
> readable.
>
> Out of everyone I did the beta test with, you're comment was the first of
> this type.
>
> Just curious...
>
> "Samuria" <samuria@rock.com> wrote in message
> news:abnm315a75ja7uk95n5gslp46psi214bna@4ax.com...
>

>>On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:44:29 -0500, "Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>The site is so small you cant see it even if you zoom in
>>
>>

>>>never mind... I was missing something obvious!
>>>I got it now... Thanks any ways!
>>>if interested... check out the site, it's my band site!
>>>[url]www.blindmosaic.com[/url]
>>>thanks
>>>Larry
>>>
>>>"Larry Pike" <lpike22@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:UHo_d.66588$SF.58961@lakeread08...
>>>
>>>>Hello, and thanks in advance for the help...
>>>>
>>>>I'm kind of new to Flash programming.
>>>>I'm trying to get a link to a url to open a new window for that url. I'm
>>>>using Flash MX 2004... an I missing something obvious?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks again,
>>>>Larry
>>>>
>>>

>
>

[Brandon Bradley]

I also couldn't read it at the current size. My monitor is set to
1024*768 and it was very small. At first I was unaware that the majority
of the text was supposed to be readable and thought it was just supposed
to be filler text to fit the background. You could probable increase the
size to at least double what you have and still be plenty safe on all
the other systems you were testingwith while improving readability for
other users. From the stats I have been seeing recently there are more
users on 1024*768 than the old 640*480, but again even doubling the size
would likely still be in the safe range for even those users.

--
Brandon Bradley
Macromedia Certified Instructor
[url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Larry Pike]

cool, thanks for the precise feedback! It helps!
Larry
"Brandon Bradley" <brandonbradley@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Wqy%d.42191$3z.26701@okepread03...

>I also couldn't read it at the current size. My monitor is set to 1024*768
>and it was very small. At first I was unaware that the majority of the text
>was supposed to be readable and thought it was just supposed to be filler
>text to fit the background. You could probable increase the size to at
>least double what you have and still be plenty safe on all the other
>systems you were testingwith while improving readability for other users.
>From the stats I have been seeing recently there are more users on 1024*768
>than the old 640*480, but again even doubling the size would likely still
>be in the safe range for even those users.
>
> --
> Brandon Bradley
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> [url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Larry Pike]

One more question...
My screen resolution is 1280X800. The published size of the movie is
850X700... That looks really big in every configuration I've seen.
I can try to increase the font size, but too big looks out of place on this.
If I publish at 850X700, isn't it supposed to load that size?
Thanks again...
Larry

"Brandon Bradley" <brandonbradley@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Wqy%d.42191$3z.26701@okepread03...

>I also couldn't read it at the current size. My monitor is set to 1024*768
>and it was very small. At first I was unaware that the majority of the text
>was supposed to be readable and thought it was just supposed to be filler
>text to fit the background. You could probable increase the size to at
>least double what you have and still be plenty safe on all the other
>systems you were testingwith while improving readability for other users.
>From the stats I have been seeing recently there are more users on 1024*768
>than the old 640*480, but again even doubling the size would likely still
>be in the safe range for even those users.
>
> --
> Brandon Bradley
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> [url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Larry Pike]

Brandon,
Can you do me a favor, and check it again please?
Tell me what you think, I just increased the font size all around on it...
(took a while!)
I've had one other look at it, he said it was much better.
Thanks for the QA
Larry

"Brandon Bradley" <brandonbradley@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Wqy%d.42191$3z.26701@okepread03...

>I also couldn't read it at the current size. My monitor is set to 1024*768
>and it was very small. At first I was unaware that the majority of the text
>was supposed to be readable and thought it was just supposed to be filler
>text to fit the background. You could probable increase the size to at
>least double what you have and still be plenty safe on all the other
>systems you were testingwith while improving readability for other users.
>From the stats I have been seeing recently there are more users on 1024*768
>than the old 640*480, but again even doubling the size would likely still
>be in the safe range for even those users.
>
> --
> Brandon Bradley
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> [url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Brandon Bradley]

What was the URL again?


--
Brandon Bradley
Macromedia Certified Instructor
[url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Larry Pike]

[url]www.blindmosaic.com[/url]

thanks again!

"Brandon Bradley" <brandonbradley@cox.net> wrote in message
news:__L%d.42912$3z.3334@okepread03...

> What was the URL again?
>
>
> --
> Brandon Bradley
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> [url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Brandon Bradley]

I still needed to zoom in, and that is not something that most users
will think to do. Maybe you need to update the html file to reflect the
new size you are publishing the swf as? It seems to be the same size as
before honestly.

--
Brandon Bradley
Macromedia Certified Instructor
[url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Larry Pike]

So 850X700 is the issue? Not the font size?
The HTML file has the size specs in it... don't know what else to do.
I really didn't want the user to have to scroll around the page, and this
size seemed big enough...
Hmmm

"Brandon Bradley" <brandonbradley@cox.net> wrote in message
news:eWN%d.42921$3z.39084@okepread03...

>I still needed to zoom in, and that is not something that most users will
>think to do. Maybe you need to update the html file to reflect the new size
>you are publishing the swf as? It seems to be the same size as before
>honestly.
>
> --
> Brandon Bradley
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> [url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Brandon Bradley]

Larry Pike wrote:

> So 850X700 is the issue? Not the font size?

Right. No matter what size you make the font in the flash piece if you
are only allowing a small area to view it in it will be hard to read.
And ultimately the html size specifications control; how large of a area
the flash piece displays in.

What resolution are you developing for? Even if you are developing for
640*480 you should be able to increase the size to about 600*400 without
having any scrolling. Most users on the web though are at either
800*600, or 1024*768 at this point at which point for 800*600 you can
increase your display area to 750*420 with little to no hazard of
scrolling being necessary.


--
Brandon Bradley
Macromedia Certified Instructor
[url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Larry Pike]

You got me on this one!!!
I checked the publish settings... right now it's at 103%X103% and I got the
scroll window. I did that change today!! Yesterday it was set to 850X700
pixels. fullscreen view with no scroll. I checked the HTML file, it matched
then and now.
Is that different than the display area?
My settings in the publish window, HTML Tab are;
flash only
dim - pixels
width 850 height 700
Q is best
window mode - window
HTML align - default
sacle - default(show all)
Flash align - center and center.

Thanks again Brandon! to this point all I have learned has been by using...
experimenting! You've been very kind!
Larry

"Brandon Bradley" <brandonbradley@cox.net> wrote in message
news:G310e.44002$3z.25216@okepread03...

> Larry Pike wrote:
>

>> So 850X700 is the issue? Not the font size?

>
> Right. No matter what size you make the font in the flash piece if you are
> only allowing a small area to view it in it will be hard to read. And
> ultimately the html size specifications control; how large of a area the
> flash piece displays in.
>
> What resolution are you developing for? Even if you are developing for
> 640*480 you should be able to increase the size to about 600*400 without
> having any scrolling. Most users on the web though are at either 800*600,
> or 1024*768 at this point at which point for 800*600 you can increase your
> display area to 750*420 with little to no hazard of scrolling being
> necessary.
>
>
> --
> Brandon Bradley
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> [url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]

[Brandon Bradley]

Larry Pike wrote:

> My settings in the publish window, HTML Tab are;
> flash only
> dim - pixels
> width 850 height 700

[snip]

I normally set the dimensions to match movie, but as long as you keep
them set to the same size it should be fine.

And yes, it is possible to have a diffrent publish size for your flash
peice than your display size in your html but that can cause a lot of
confusion as you have pparently seen. :)

--
Brandon Bradley
Macromedia Certified Instructor
[url]http://www.attconline.org/[/url]