Director MX is here!!!!
- Thread starter agusgriego
- Start date
Joel Epstein
Registered
Call me Lazy.
Ever since I upgraded to OSX, I never switched my browser's home page away from apple.com.
Imagine my horror this morning when I launched IE and saw that Apple was touting the new Director product. Too bad the folks at Tribeworks couldn't get the same kind of support for their product. I've been a long-time Director user (from version 3.1 all the way to 8.5.1) but recently "Switched" to iShell. I'm glad I did.
Call me Lazy.
Sometimes I would spend days and days just trying to get Director to do some simple mundane task. And navigating that timeline (especially on really large projects) can be extremely frustrating.
With iShell, I can whip up anything I can dream about in a matter of moments. And navigating a project is super intuitive given that everything is just a series of nested objects and events.
Call me Lazy.
I remember spending hours with Macromedia "tech support" only to get a condescending person assuming the problem was mine. Often the problem was left unsolved.
With iShell, even if it IS me who has the problem, there's a community of folks out there who are eager to help, offer solutions, and make sure my project succeeds.
Call me Lazy.
I've made the "Switch" and I'm sticking with iShell
Ever since I upgraded to OSX, I never switched my browser's home page away from apple.com.
Imagine my horror this morning when I launched IE and saw that Apple was touting the new Director product. Too bad the folks at Tribeworks couldn't get the same kind of support for their product. I've been a long-time Director user (from version 3.1 all the way to 8.5.1) but recently "Switched" to iShell. I'm glad I did.
Call me Lazy.
Sometimes I would spend days and days just trying to get Director to do some simple mundane task. And navigating that timeline (especially on really large projects) can be extremely frustrating.
With iShell, I can whip up anything I can dream about in a matter of moments. And navigating a project is super intuitive given that everything is just a series of nested objects and events.
Call me Lazy.
I remember spending hours with Macromedia "tech support" only to get a condescending person assuming the problem was mine. Often the problem was left unsolved.
With iShell, even if it IS me who has the problem, there's a community of folks out there who are eager to help, offer solutions, and make sure my project succeeds.
Call me Lazy.
I've made the "Switch" and I'm sticking with iShell
Joel Epstein
Registered
iShell is a very robust and versatile multimedia authoring tool. Just about anything you can think of, it will do. Although you can't play finished titles within a browser, it does have sophisticated tools to communicate via the net. You can learn more at www.tribeworks.com
solrac
Mac Ninja
You need Director if you would like to create a 3D game or something very complicated, such as a multi-user environment connected to a database.
If all your doing is making a simple presentation on a CD-ROM, then of course, why use Director? Use Flash, or iShell if you prefer.
Use Flash if you want to duplicate your work on CD-ROM to a web site, and instantly 99% of the web can see it.
Use iShell only if it's a CD-ROM ONLY project, which Director is "over-qualified" for.
That iShell seems a little over priced, or I guess if you can't do the Lingo or Actionscript you have to pay the price to get it to look half as nice. Not saying great things can't be created with iShell, just not something that would give me the creative control and freedom. But the more i read and the more and the fact that you need 2 copies of Director to make a Mac and PC projector, that price isn't all that bad. I never heard of iShell, now i am curious about it's capabilities after seeing the showcase.
KrinkleCut
crispy subgenius
Actually, it's not at all. Unless they changed their business model recently. The way it works (or used to) is it's free, but you pay for support. So grab it, use it, figure it out. Have questions? Pony up the bucks.
As far as director's concerned, I got nothing nice to say about the company that killed mTropolis.
KrinkleCut
crispy subgenius
mTropolis was a develoment app that directly competed with Director (back in the early-mid 90's). Can't remember the name of the company - started with an m too. Anyway, it's been a while, so I can't remember exactly how it worked (have a copy of it around here somewhere) but basically you didn't need to know lingo (when you had to for Director - do you still?) - it was based on scripted actions. The interface took a little getting used to, but it just needed another version or two to get it all straight. Had a lot of potential, so Macromedia bought it to kill it.
These days I use Flash for pretty much everything I need to do. blah.
These days I use Flash for pretty much everything I need to do. blah.
Yea, I'm tired of Flash, I think i have a passion for video. Better to igure thaqt out now than later. I still like to make things in Flash and Director, either for freelance, my own company, or for fun(never thought it could be so much fun). My latest project is a quicktime/flash media skinned interface media player for my comapny. I have to work out a few bugs to stream my content, but it should be ready to go as soon as I get some free time to finish a few lines of code and my website. i wonder if Director will ever export to quicktime and keep the lingo, like a director track, that would make this way better.
toast
Gone !
[Please help a poor ignorant]
What are the differences between Director and Flash ? What can you create with Director you can't with Flash ? If the only difference is that Director can produce, in addition to Flash, applications you can put on a CD-ROM, I feel both products aren't really different.
What are the differences between Director and Flash ? What can you create with Director you can't with Flash ? If the only difference is that Director can produce, in addition to Flash, applications you can put on a CD-ROM, I feel both products aren't really different.
solrac
Mac Ninja
Ok, Director and Flash are almost the same thing. They are "Shockwave" Plugins.
However... they are two TOTALLY different plugins, so I don't know why Macromedia created such confusion by putting everything under "Shockwave". In fact, I think they stopped doing that.
The Director plugin (free) plays director AND flash movies. It is about 8 MB. It takes several minutes to install, or more. The flash plugin (free) plays only flash movies. It's under 1 MB. It takes about FIVE SECONDS to install on most PCs.
So... 99% of the web can see at least Flash 4 content. Around 90% can see Flash 5, and the number that can see Flash MX (Flash 6 content) is always growing bigger. Flash is ubiquitous which means basically EVERYONE can see it.
Director, on the other hand, was never meant to be a web-based plugin. There is a whole web site for director, and tons of online games done in Director, but nowhere NEAR as many people have the director plugin. That's' why Director is best done on CD-ROMs. Why?....
Both Flash and Director can be saved as executable files (programs). (EXE files on PC, Application Programs on Mac.) When saved that way, your file becomes around 1 MB bigger, and you don't need ANY plugin or anything to play the movie. You just double click.
Both Flash and Director can both be used to make an animated super cool web site, and BOTH can be used to make an interactive CD-ROM that launches in beautiful full screen.
Flash has always been much more limited than Director. Director has always been your "do anything" program, while flash has been your "vector animation and music" program, since the plugin / player are so small.
Nowadays, Flash MX is so advanced, it almost makes Director obsolete. However, Director still has a few cool things you could never do in Flash. Here's the differences:
Director:
1) Can make realtime 3D worlds. (Like a playstation game or something)
2) Can embed other filetypes WITHIN your movie. (HTML, PDF, MPG, MOV, etc. etc.)
3) People can make "XTRAS" for director which let you embed anything in the world. Someone could make an "XTRA" for director that lets you embed an Appleworks file, if you wanted, I guess.
4) The programming language is Lingo, which has more syntax than Actionscript (which is Flash's programming language)
Flash MX:
1) Nowadays, its programming language (Actionscript) is completely object oriented and you can do ANYTHING with it (except the things listed above for Director)
2) Works best with Vector graphics. (Director works better with sprites, but Director can use Flash movies whenever it wants, too.)
3) Flash MX can now import movie files and it has its own video format. It rocks! You no longer need Director to embed videos in your movies!!!
4) Can't embed anything within your movies except other Flash files, and now with Flash MX, you can import JPG files too. (I'm talking about run-time here, of course.)
Some other differences:
Flash runs slow as hell on mac. It's one of a macs biggest problems. I bought a PC just to watch flash web sites (and play Counterstrike). Director movies run JUST FINE on mac. So there's something wrong with Macromedia's brain. What's wrong with your brain???
Director can zoom in on sprites much better than flash. When flash zooms in (even by 1%) on a sprite it gets all choppy and crappy looking. If you force your flash movie to never grow or shrink and always stay at 100%, it's not a problem. (I heard Macromedia is working on this problem as you read this.)
If you want to make a CD-ROM that autolaunches, runs full screen, has a music track, has videos, and a very advanced interactive interface, you can now use Flash MX or Director. For this purpose YOU SHOULD ONLY USE FLASH! Because you could port your CD-ROM to a web site very easily! It's already Flash files!
Now... if you need to add embedded PDF files, or programs that install files directly to your computer, or run a 3D world or game, then you need Director.
If the above things are not on your required list of functionality on a CD-ROM.... USE FLASH PEOPLE!!!!! (or iShell if you don't do Flash.)
Director, nowadays is basically only 1 thing:
3D program that can embed other filetypes with a bit more robust language (scripting) system.
Flash MX is now everything Director is, just no 3D realtime programming and a little bit less robust language (Actionscript) which is SUPER AWESOME these days.
Also, some math geniuses have made their own realtime 3D worlds right in flash. (Like, built from scratch... EVERYTHING). It's insane. They are simple 3D worlds, like a spinning cube, or simple 3D scene, but it's insane. For pre-built 3D worlds, you can use something like 3D Studio Max and export your animation to vector graphics for Flash and voila, 3D animation in Flash!
So for 3D purposes, Director is only needed for something really good, on the level of a playstation game, in real time (programmable).
There you go, sorry for the long post.
-Carlos-
However... they are two TOTALLY different plugins, so I don't know why Macromedia created such confusion by putting everything under "Shockwave". In fact, I think they stopped doing that.
The Director plugin (free) plays director AND flash movies. It is about 8 MB. It takes several minutes to install, or more. The flash plugin (free) plays only flash movies. It's under 1 MB. It takes about FIVE SECONDS to install on most PCs.
So... 99% of the web can see at least Flash 4 content. Around 90% can see Flash 5, and the number that can see Flash MX (Flash 6 content) is always growing bigger. Flash is ubiquitous which means basically EVERYONE can see it.
Director, on the other hand, was never meant to be a web-based plugin. There is a whole web site for director, and tons of online games done in Director, but nowhere NEAR as many people have the director plugin. That's' why Director is best done on CD-ROMs. Why?....
Both Flash and Director can be saved as executable files (programs). (EXE files on PC, Application Programs on Mac.) When saved that way, your file becomes around 1 MB bigger, and you don't need ANY plugin or anything to play the movie. You just double click.
Both Flash and Director can both be used to make an animated super cool web site, and BOTH can be used to make an interactive CD-ROM that launches in beautiful full screen.
Flash has always been much more limited than Director. Director has always been your "do anything" program, while flash has been your "vector animation and music" program, since the plugin / player are so small.
Nowadays, Flash MX is so advanced, it almost makes Director obsolete. However, Director still has a few cool things you could never do in Flash. Here's the differences:
Director:
1) Can make realtime 3D worlds. (Like a playstation game or something)
2) Can embed other filetypes WITHIN your movie. (HTML, PDF, MPG, MOV, etc. etc.)
3) People can make "XTRAS" for director which let you embed anything in the world. Someone could make an "XTRA" for director that lets you embed an Appleworks file, if you wanted, I guess.
4) The programming language is Lingo, which has more syntax than Actionscript (which is Flash's programming language)
Flash MX:
1) Nowadays, its programming language (Actionscript) is completely object oriented and you can do ANYTHING with it (except the things listed above for Director)
2) Works best with Vector graphics. (Director works better with sprites, but Director can use Flash movies whenever it wants, too.)
3) Flash MX can now import movie files and it has its own video format. It rocks! You no longer need Director to embed videos in your movies!!!
4) Can't embed anything within your movies except other Flash files, and now with Flash MX, you can import JPG files too. (I'm talking about run-time here, of course.)
Some other differences:
Flash runs slow as hell on mac. It's one of a macs biggest problems. I bought a PC just to watch flash web sites (and play Counterstrike). Director movies run JUST FINE on mac. So there's something wrong with Macromedia's brain. What's wrong with your brain???
Director can zoom in on sprites much better than flash. When flash zooms in (even by 1%) on a sprite it gets all choppy and crappy looking. If you force your flash movie to never grow or shrink and always stay at 100%, it's not a problem. (I heard Macromedia is working on this problem as you read this.)
If you want to make a CD-ROM that autolaunches, runs full screen, has a music track, has videos, and a very advanced interactive interface, you can now use Flash MX or Director. For this purpose YOU SHOULD ONLY USE FLASH! Because you could port your CD-ROM to a web site very easily! It's already Flash files!
Now... if you need to add embedded PDF files, or programs that install files directly to your computer, or run a 3D world or game, then you need Director.
If the above things are not on your required list of functionality on a CD-ROM.... USE FLASH PEOPLE!!!!! (or iShell if you don't do Flash.)
Director, nowadays is basically only 1 thing:
3D program that can embed other filetypes with a bit more robust language (scripting) system.
Flash MX is now everything Director is, just no 3D realtime programming and a little bit less robust language (Actionscript) which is SUPER AWESOME these days.
Also, some math geniuses have made their own realtime 3D worlds right in flash. (Like, built from scratch... EVERYTHING). It's insane. They are simple 3D worlds, like a spinning cube, or simple 3D scene, but it's insane. For pre-built 3D worlds, you can use something like 3D Studio Max and export your animation to vector graphics for Flash and voila, 3D animation in Flash!
So for 3D purposes, Director is only needed for something really good, on the level of a playstation game, in real time (programmable).
There you go, sorry for the long post.
-Carlos-