FLASH: Flash going the way of the Dinosaurs?

[Troy M. Gilbert]

A few months back, there was a post to this list regarding the *new*

Director 7. Director 7 incorporated many more cool things for the web

including incredible support for Flash 3. This makes great sense, both

products are made my Macromedia and they should work together seamlessly.

But it also scares me...


Recently there has been a flurry of discussion regarding what we want in

Flash 4. And while this is not a new topic by any stretch of the

imagination, its the first resurgence of this topic since Director 7 was

released. And now I'm afraid we will see very few of our wishes come true.

Here's why:


Macromedia's flagship product has always been Director. I'm pretty certain

(and I think that Macromedia would agree) that without Director the company

would have gone belly-up during the rocky times they endured not too long

ago. But, with acquisition of FutureSplash and several strategic alliances

with browser makers, and Macromedia has once again become the killer app

maker of multimedia. And with Fireworks and Dreamweaver, they've become the

killer app maker of the new web.


Even with the success of Flash, Fireworks and Dreamweaver, their flagship

product is still Director. This is obvious: its the most powerful and the

most expensive. Its Word for Microsoft and Photoshop for Adobe.


The problem with Director being so prominent? Why should they add features

to their less expensive product (Flash) when these features already exist

in their more expensive product (Director). Take scripting more example:

Lingo is already established as Macromedia's Scripting Engine. Flashers

want a more powerful scripting engine in Flash. Hey, we want Lingo! But if

Lingo was added to Flash what would be the motivation behind Director?

Bitmaps and sound? Well, Flashers want better bitmap support, and better

sound support. Now what's left for Director?


Unfortunately, Flash is a business. It is a commercial product. It is a

commercial product rapidly coming in competition with its big brother. But

now big brother can do everything little brother can do. True, the Flash

player has a smaller footprint, but is it that much smaller? 200K compared

to 2000K? Adding the desired features could push it to 500K, making it not

much different, especially for a once in a blue moon download.


Well, this is a long rant and rave. And it's entirely opinionated on my

part, and could be grossly inaccurate. But the thought scares me. Trust me,

I've given it alot of serious thought with OpenSWF. My proposed Flash

enhancements: Java-based scripting, MPEG audio compression, tracker-style

independent audio timeline. If these things were added to Flash, would we

need Director?


Troy. (stepping down from my soap box)




------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com