> The size of MM with their resources should have allowed them to build
> something from scratch which did the job perfectly, had no
> superfluous code and was optimized to the hilt would have made a
> better impression of the product as your pages would be the best they
> possibly could, rather than using MachII's coding/template structure
I suspect that MM's web team is as time-poor as the rest of the web
teams out there. Working at Macromedia doesn't remove the pressure of a
deadline or solve resourcing shortages. They're using Mach-II for some
smaller apps they need to build beyond the Dylan65 architecture.
> That's my opinion anyways, and it probably means nothing to MM itself
> as Sean and his team have already built the site using MachII, so
> it's a moot point.
No. The point is not moot.
Macromedia.com is *not* built in Mach-II. The Dylan65 project was
released well in advance of Mach-II emerging as a framework. Mach-II is
being used for some specific point-applications on the website.
How do I know all this? I actually bother to read Sean's blog:
http://www.corfield.org/blog/past/2003_11.html#000203
-- geoff
http://www.daemon.com.au/
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
