Most Helpful Customer Reviews
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Covers the Flash essentials, May 31, 2004
This review is from: Macromedia Flash MX 2004 Certified Developer Study Guide (Paperback)
I just completed my Certified Flash MX 2004 developer exam, and after purchasing this book to swat up on my knowledge I found it quite helpful. Some of the questions in the exam were pretty hard and while I just failed, I think this was more due to my lack of knowledge (about Flash) and not enough prep time, rather than the book. After reviewing the book (after the exam) I found that most of the topics in the exam were all "broadly" covered by the book (as they should be), and if i'd actually taken time to read the book more thoroughly I think I would have definitely passed. While the review questions at the end each chapter are pretty easy, they're really only there to test your comprehension of the chapter you've just read. My only criticism is that the exam pass mark should be 65% instead of 70%. Because my mark of 66% would have seen me pass ;)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Good content overview, but poorly edited, October 20, 2004
This review is from: Macromedia Flash MX 2004 Certified Developer Study Guide (Paperback)
Executive Summary:
Overall the book helped me prepare for the exam, and I'm glad I had it for that purpose.
It is good for giving a broad overview of exam topics, but read it with caution and be prepared to research the content if it doesn't seem to make sense -- otherwise the occasional unclear writing and bugs in example code listings will give you grief.
Positive:
Since the author was one of the subject-matter experts for the test, he presumably knows the range of topics which will be covered on the exam. This book gives a good idea of what those topics will be, and provides a good introduction/overview to most of them.
Some other reviewers have mentioned that the practice questions don't match well with the actual exam questions. This was one of my biggest concerns going into the exam. I personally found that the practice questions match very well with the real exam questions, specifically in terms of how question style and difficulty. What doesn't match is that there are too few practice questions (even including the extra ones on the book's web site) to adequately cover the breadth of each chapter. So there are many areas that don't have any practice questions, but which are still tested on the exam.
Negative:
This book is in great need of editing for technical details and, in a few cases, clarity of writing. Here are my gripes:
- The book was apparently just adapted from the previous (Flash MX) edition of the book. There are numerous references to Flash MX which should have said Flash MX 2004. (There are also some legitimate references to Flash MX.) Most of these are benign, but it still makes me question the quality of the book. I found at least one case where the information was correct for Flash MX but is wrong with MX 2004.
- There have been a handful of places where the writing was unclear and gave a strong impression that the author was just skimming over the content and had difficulty explaining it clearly. In two such cases, I thought the writing was really confusing so I looked up the topic in the Flash help, only to find that (in both cases) the confusing text is word-for-word out of the Flash help!
- The book is plagued with bugs in the example code (most commonly changing variable names mid-way through the example).
- There are several examples of the (somewhat deprecated) ActionScript 1.0 Object-Oriented Programming. Some of these appear in early chapters which are talking about much simpler topics, which would have been very confusing had I not already read a book on OOP in AS1. I don't remember seeing anything using the AS1 style OOP on the actual exam.
- The code and content in the chapters on how to write ActionScript 2.0 classes are all very wrong and will not compile (and give misinformation and don't give important details). I honestly don't think that they tested the code on even an early Beta of Flash MX 2004 or they presumably would have found these things out. Admittedly this is a particular sore point for me, since I am a big fan of the new AS2 OOP model; it didn't seem to make a difference from what I saw on the exam. Don't expect to learn any valid AS2 from this book. (See Colin Moock's Essential ActionScript 2.0 for stellar coverage of that topic).
Note: I originally wrote this review before taking the exam. After taking the exam, I came back and made some changes based on how I think it really compares to the exam. So if you read it before, that is why it may look different now!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
The exam was a big suprise, July 29, 2004
This review is from: Macromedia Flash MX 2004 Certified Developer Study Guide (Paperback)
I purchased this book after taking the test online at forta.com. I scraped by with 75% and decided that I needed to study a little to be confident when I sat the exam for real.
After purchasing the book and studying each chapter carefuly, it vastly improved my score to around 90%.
I continued to study hard on the topics I was not acheiving good scores on for a following two weeks, and felt confident enough to take the test.
What a big mistake. I found the questions far more difficult and felt extrememly under prepared about five minutes into the exam. I found the questions structured quite differently and the choice between answers far more obscure than in the book.
The book has definitely clarified a lot of things for me, especialy web services, which I have not used very much, but I feel it does fall short in other places.
One thing I do know for sure is that you cannot rely on this books entirely as a study guide. If there are areas where you have little knowledge you would be better off researching it further online or through another book.
For the record I got 65%, so I agree, bring down the pass rate to 65%.
The difficulty of the exam is definitely reassuring and in my eyes, adds a lot more weight to the qualification. It means that not every Sam, Dick or Sally can get qualified.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|