<?xml version="1.0" ?>
	<rss version="2.0">
        <channel>
        <title>sendandload the url it is not passing from flash</title>
        <description>sendandload the url it is not passing from flash quotes</description>
        <link>http://www.quotesdb.info/efnet/flash/02Feb2006/9.html</link>
        <language>en-us</language>
	<item>
        	<title>sendandload the url it is not passing from flash</title>
        	<link>http://www.quotesdb.info/efnet/flash/02Feb2006/9.html</link>
        	<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.quotesdb.info/efnet/flash/02Feb2006/9.html</guid>
        	<description>&lt;0&gt; I suppose the use of the word &quot;may&quot; there would imply that that might not be the reason. Still, one would wonder
&lt;1&gt; NaHeMiA, hmmm :P have you checked the adobe shop for the same products maybe?
&lt;1&gt; man I'm lucky I went through that before the acquisition
&lt;0&gt; guess so.. I'm going to call them and see what the deal is, but I may have to go elsewhere.
&lt;0&gt; wonder if I could get it cheaper somewhere
&lt;2&gt; you know
&lt;2&gt; macromedia needs to make a &quot;learning&quot; version of flash
&lt;2&gt; s/macromedia/adobe
&lt;1&gt; MerZikain, Flash Basic it is
&lt;2&gt; something that like watermarks everything
&lt;2&gt; is it?
&lt;1&gt; MerZikain, ah
&lt;1&gt; MerZikain, nah, well but their Trial is fully functional
&lt;2&gt; well something that has the full functionality of the full version
&lt;1&gt; Basic is just cheaper 
&lt;2&gt; but with unlimited usage
&lt;2&gt; because no one can clearn flash in 30 days
&lt;1&gt; and still you can output non watermarked SWFs
&lt;2&gt; well if they watermarked the swfs it could be an unlimited trial
</description>
	</item></channel></rss>