Scratch 3.0 is going in the wrong direction

__init__

infinitytec wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
PrincessFlowerTV wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
I hate scratch 3.0 ):
Hi there, can you please elaborate what you mean it a respectful way?
Just saying “I hate scratch 3.0” is un-constructive and not helpful.
yea, i don't mean to be disrespectful, but 2.0 was just perfect, it had anything a beginner needed for coding, and really siple and easy to use, but 3.0 is the opposite.
Meh, I beg to differ.
1.4 was significantly more stable than 2.0.

guess you never experienced the Disappearing Text Bug

infinitytec

__init__ wrote:
infinitytec wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
PrincessFlowerTV wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
I hate scratch 3.0 ):
Hi there, can you please elaborate what you mean it a respectful way?
Just saying “I hate scratch 3.0” is un-constructive and not helpful.
yea, i don't mean to be disrespectful, but 2.0 was just perfect, it had anything a beginner needed for coding, and really siple and easy to use, but 3.0 is the opposite.
Meh, I beg to differ.
1.4 was significantly more stable than 2.0.
guess you never experienced the Disappearing Text Bug

Oh yeah there was that.
I had forgotten about it. I know I had it at some point. And yes, it caused problems, but other than that I think 1.4 was more stable.

TailsDoll506

__init__ wrote:
infinitytec wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
PrincessFlowerTV wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
I hate scratch 3.0 ):
Hi there, can you please elaborate what you mean it a respectful way?
Just saying “I hate scratch 3.0” is un-constructive and not helpful.
yea, i don't mean to be disrespectful, but 2.0 was just perfect, it had anything a beginner needed for coding, and really siple and easy to use, but 3.0 is the opposite.
Meh, I beg to differ.
1.4 was significantly more stable than 2.0.
guess you never experienced the Disappearing Text Bug

Sorry, but that was in 2.0 as well. Caused for different reasons, but still THERE. Also, PINK BLOCK GLITCH.

__init__

TailsDoll506 wrote:
__init__ wrote:
infinitytec wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
PrincessFlowerTV wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
I hate scratch 3.0 ):
Hi there, can you please elaborate what you mean it a respectful way?
Just saying “I hate scratch 3.0” is un-constructive and not helpful.
yea, i don't mean to be disrespectful, but 2.0 was just perfect, it had anything a beginner needed for coding, and really siple and easy to use, but 3.0 is the opposite.
Meh, I beg to differ.
1.4 was significantly more stable than 2.0.
guess you never experienced the Disappearing Text Bug
Sorry, but that was in 2.0 as well. Caused for different reasons, but still THERE. Also, PINK BLOCK GLITCH.

it was much less frequent and iirc eventually fixed. back in 1.4 it would be like a bi-weekly occurrence for me.

i've never even heard of the pink block glitch

__init__

comp09 wrote:
I'll just leave this here:

Memory usage was over 50 gigabytes during project loading.

No, that's not a typo.

I have 8GB RAM and that project loaded up to 5GB before I stopped it. If I didn't have an SSD for swap my PC would have become unusable.

I thought it would be bad but not that bad. That has to be a bug

TailsDoll506

__init__ wrote:
TailsDoll506 wrote:
__init__ wrote:
infinitytec wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
PrincessFlowerTV wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
I hate scratch 3.0 ):
Hi there, can you please elaborate what you mean it a respectful way?
Just saying “I hate scratch 3.0” is un-constructive and not helpful.
yea, i don't mean to be disrespectful, but 2.0 was just perfect, it had anything a beginner needed for coding, and really siple and easy to use, but 3.0 is the opposite.
Meh, I beg to differ.
1.4 was significantly more stable than 2.0.
guess you never experienced the Disappearing Text Bug
Sorry, but that was in 2.0 as well. Caused for different reasons, but still THERE. Also, PINK BLOCK GLITCH.
it was much less frequent and iirc eventually fixed. back in 1.4 it would be like a bi-weekly occurrence for me.

i've never even heard of the pink block glitch

Pink block glitches would occur when bitmap images and vector sprites were used in the same costume, most frequently when converting a bitmap image to vector. Every time a change was made to a bitmap-converted-to-vector costume, it had a chance of failing to render entirely and instead appearing as an opaque pink block. If the change was done quickly enough, it wouldn't even load properly in the sprite editor, and would be a permanent pink block. The only way to fix this glitch was to convert it back to bitmap, and even then it wouldn't always work. I know it's not a problem with my computer because it has happened on multiple systems.

infinitytec

TailsDoll506 wrote:
__init__ wrote:
TailsDoll506 wrote:
__init__ wrote:
infinitytec wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
PrincessFlowerTV wrote:
CalvanoDeGreat wrote:
I hate scratch 3.0 ):
Hi there, can you please elaborate what you mean it a respectful way?
Just saying “I hate scratch 3.0” is un-constructive and not helpful.
yea, i don't mean to be disrespectful, but 2.0 was just perfect, it had anything a beginner needed for coding, and really siple and easy to use, but 3.0 is the opposite.
Meh, I beg to differ.
1.4 was significantly more stable than 2.0.
guess you never experienced the Disappearing Text Bug
Sorry, but that was in 2.0 as well. Caused for different reasons, but still THERE. Also, PINK BLOCK GLITCH.
it was much less frequent and iirc eventually fixed. back in 1.4 it would be like a bi-weekly occurrence for me.

i've never even heard of the pink block glitch
Pink block glitches would occur when bitmap images and vector sprites were used in the same costume, most frequently when converting a bitmap image to vector. Every time a change was made to a bitmap-converted-to-vector costume, it had a chance of failing to render entirely and instead appearing as an opaque pink block. If the change was done quickly enough, it wouldn't even load properly in the sprite editor, and would be a permanent pink block. The only way to fix this glitch was to convert it back to bitmap, and even then it wouldn't always work. I know it's not a problem with my computer because it has happened on multiple systems.

I've had it.

_Portavia_

I agree. I think Scratch 3.0 has focused so much on looks, but ignored features and optimisation.

j12006

I have been got some errors on scratch 3.0, at backpack and costume editor. Also the interface is too sharp. I feel uncomfortable for my eyes. It become more childish. I have never been those errors on scratch 2.0. Old good scratch…

LegoManiac04

_Portavia_ wrote:
I agree. I think Scratch 3.0 has focused so much on looks, but ignored features and optimisation.

The features are missing because it was rushed… If Adobe hadn't decided that they are going to discontinue Flash, we would have gotten a feature-filled, practically bugless 3.0 sometime later this year, if not even later.

Foxlum

LegoManiac04 wrote:
_Portavia_ wrote:
I agree. I think Scratch 3.0 has focused so much on looks, but ignored features and optimisation.
The features are missing because it was rushed… If Adobe hadn't decided that they are going to discontinue Flash, we would have gotten a feature-filled, practically bugless 3.0 sometime later this year, if not even later.

Its not just that, 3.0 beta never really got a trial period on the site like 2.0 beta did. (most likely do to a restricting timeframe)
So a lot of issues were reported less than they should have been or, not at all. (posting a issue on github rather then the forums… (based on speed of reply (there are alot more ST member who work on technical scratch issues there then the forums) not preference) and a 8 year old having a github account is unlikely.) So (i think) the ST's priorities were abit more “get this apparently working editor out because there is no major issues with it in the community of our target audience”, then “I guess we need to fix these issues first before we can consider this out of beta.”

j12006

Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?

TailsDoll506

j12006 wrote:
Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?

Good idea, but that's assuming someone copied the HTML before 3.0 happened.

badatprogrammingibe

TailsDoll506 wrote:
j12006 wrote:
Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?
Good idea, but that's assuming someone copied the HTML before 3.0 happened.

I have, and I'm sure countless others have as well.
Also, the HTML itself probably isn't that important; you could probably easily hack together the HTML required for the scratch 2.0 swf to run.
There are also a few backups of the scratch 2.0 web editor, for example: https://scratchx.org/#scratch, and also https://s2online.github.io/.

Last edited by badatprogrammingibe (May 7, 2019 21:39:07)

infinitytec

badatprogrammingibe wrote:
TailsDoll506 wrote:
j12006 wrote:
Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?
Good idea, but that's assuming someone copied the HTML before 3.0 happened.
I have, and I'm sure countless others have as well.
Also, the HTML itself probably isn't that important; you could probably easily hack together the HTML required for the scratch 2.0 swf to run.
There are also a few backups of the scratch 2.0 web editor, for example: https://scratchx.org/#scratch, and also https://s2online.github.io/.

The big issue with doing this is the significant security risk that will be an issue after Flash is discontinued.

Green_Cookie

I support 3.0. I find it good. Although I like 2.0 better, 3.0 is still nice. The only thing I have to complain is the costume editor is so much harder to use. Other than that, 3.0 is good.

Jonathan50

infinitytec wrote:
The big issue with doing this is the significant security risk that will be an issue after Flash is discontinued.

There can only be a security risk if you run SWFs that you can't trust. ScratchX and s2online are both completely safe (supposing you only run trusted Scratch projects.)

TailsDoll506

badatprogrammingibe wrote:
TailsDoll506 wrote:
j12006 wrote:
Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?
Good idea, but that's assuming someone copied the HTML before 3.0 happened.
I have, and I'm sure countless others have as well.
Also, the HTML itself probably isn't that important; you could probably easily hack together the HTML required for the scratch 2.0 swf to run.
There are also a few backups of the scratch 2.0 web editor, for example: https://scratchx.org/#scratch, and also https://s2online.github.io/.

THANK

badatprogrammingibe

infinitytec wrote:
badatprogrammingibe wrote:
TailsDoll506 wrote:
j12006 wrote:
Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?
Good idea, but that's assuming someone copied the HTML before 3.0 happened.
I have, and I'm sure countless others have as well.
Also, the HTML itself probably isn't that important; you could probably easily hack together the HTML required for the scratch 2.0 swf to run.
There are also a few backups of the scratch 2.0 web editor, for example: https://scratchx.org/#scratch, and also https://s2online.github.io/.
The big issue with doing this is the significant security risk that will be an issue after Flash is discontinued.

Meh, I doubt there will be any massive security issues just because a program isn't regularly updated.
I have never updated my Windows 7 PC ever since I installed the SP1 image, and I have had no security problems. I suspect it will be the same with Adobe Flash.

infinitytec

badatprogrammingibe wrote:
infinitytec wrote:
badatprogrammingibe wrote:
TailsDoll506 wrote:
j12006 wrote:
Maybe we can have a non mit website to have an archive of scratch 2.0 web editor ?
Good idea, but that's assuming someone copied the HTML before 3.0 happened.
I have, and I'm sure countless others have as well.
Also, the HTML itself probably isn't that important; you could probably easily hack together the HTML required for the scratch 2.0 swf to run.
There are also a few backups of the scratch 2.0 web editor, for example: https://scratchx.org/#scratch, and also https://s2online.github.io/.
The big issue with doing this is the significant security risk that will be an issue after Flash is discontinued.
Meh, I doubt there will be any massive security issues just because a program isn't regularly updated.
I have never updated my Windows 7 PC ever since I installed the SP1 image, and I have had no security problems. I suspect it will be the same with Adobe Flash.

You should install updates…

Discuss Scratch