Flasher Archive

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject:	Re: FLASH: Flash going the way of the Dinosaurs?
From:	Arlen Nielsen
Date:	Fri, 8 Jan 1999 16:19:41 GMT

Troy,

You do make some great points. But here is a couple of points to remember:

1.) Yes, Director is Macromedia's flagship.
2.) FutureSplash was purchased because Macromedia was moving towards
the internet and Shockwave very rapidly and they realized that they could
have the dominant develpment platfoms for creating internet-based content.
3.) Macromedia is a HUGE company and needs to make products for a wide
range of users.

Taking those few points (there are many others) into consideration maybe
Macromedia should combine Flash and Director into a complete package. But
if they did that, they would loose revenue. The new Director/Flash product
would be extremely expensive (probrably $1899 US) and would be out of the
range of small developers. Another point is that I would love to control
things with lingo, and use the properties of Flash in Director. But
unfortunately, Macromedia needs to make money. You will see that in the
very near future, all of Macromedia's products will work 110% with each
other, and depending on what you need to do will depend on what software you
will need to purchase. This is where Macromedia will make it's money.

This is business.

Regards,
Arlen Nielsen
>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-manager