4 ms·

I can't open the link, but from the main scratch site there is an example sketch celebrating the new version, and I see a lot of complaints in the comments abou

I can't open the link, but from the main scratch site there is an example sketch celebrating the new version, and I see a lot of complaints in the comments about this breaking existing projects: https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/276660763/ https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/276660763/ I hope that that is just due to a misunderstanding by the users (trying to load a 2.0 sketch in 3.0 or something), and not a sign of badly handling the upgrade?

benatkin 8y ago
There are also a lot of comments that say that scratch 3 is worse than scratch 2 in general. Doesn't surprise me because scratch 3 seems ambitious, and kind of reminds me of WordPress's Gutenberg. Whether the big problem is that scratch 2 is arguably better or it that it breaks scratch 2 projects, it would have been nice if they continued to fully support scratch 2, rather than just the "offline editor". I understand if they didn't have the resources to support it though.
- em-bee 8y ago
  flash is dead. that makes any application built on it unsupportable. that's not a question of not having resources, but one of not wasting them.
  - benatkin 8y ago
    They could have attached a disclaimer that said it only works on desktops, is no longer actively maintained, yada yada yada, but kept hosting Scratch 2 projects. And depending on how the servers were set up, it might not have been that expensive.
andrewstuart 8y ago
I'd be OK with see breaking changes if it's clearly explained and if it's a path to a much better technical foundation for the future for Scratch. As mentioned in a different comment - Scratch has the leading market position and incredible but wasted potential IMO.
- em-bee 8y ago
  scratch 2 is a technical dead end being based on flash. so yes, version 3 in javascript is most certainly on a better technical foundation than v2. personally, i wish they would have stuck with the original implementation in smalltalk, but javascript is at least a logical choice for today.
peterclary 8y ago
Two things that my son hated about the beta, and haven’t changed in the release, are they moved the playback pane from the left to the right, and the sound editor is less fully featured (e.g. can’t delete within sounds, only trim them).

benatkin 8y ago

There are also a lot of comments that say that scratch 3 is worse than scratch 2 in general. Doesn't surprise me because scratch 3 seems ambitious, and kind of reminds me of WordPress's Gutenberg. Whether the big problem is that scratch 2 is arguably better or it that it breaks scratch 2 projects, it would have been nice if they continued to fully support scratch 2, rather than just the "offline editor". I understand if they didn't have the resources to support it though.

em-bee 8y ago
flash is dead. that makes any application built on it unsupportable. that's not a question of not having resources, but one of not wasting them.
- benatkin 8y ago
  They could have attached a disclaimer that said it only works on desktops, is no longer actively maintained, yada yada yada, but kept hosting Scratch 2 projects. And depending on how the servers were set up, it might not have been that expensive.

andrewstuart 8y ago

I'd be OK with see breaking changes if it's clearly explained and if it's a path to a much better technical foundation for the future for Scratch. As mentioned in a different comment - Scratch has the leading market position and incredible but wasted potential IMO.

em-bee 8y ago
scratch 2 is a technical dead end being based on flash. so yes, version 3 in javascript is most certainly on a better technical foundation than v2. personally, i wish they would have stuck with the original implementation in smalltalk, but javascript is at least a logical choice for today.

peterclary 8y ago

Two things that my son hated about the beta, and haven’t changed in the release, are they moved the playback pane from the left to the right, and the sound editor is less fully featured (e.g. can’t delete within sounds, only trim them).