hank williams wrote: > > > > > You cant really compare AIR to authorware and director. These were > > > both very thinly deployed tools (compared to flash) > > > > Shouldn't we be comparing them to AIR in this case? I'd be willing to > > bet that AIR's deployment (at this stage) is very thinly deployed. Yes, > > AIR has Flash Player embedded, but AIR != Flash > > > > Actually, AIR uses special non publicly available pieces of the flash > platform to make installing totally seamless. When you click on an AIR > app to download, it it leverages this not publicly available stuff to > download the AIR runtime in the background.
That all sounds like heresay to me, since right now you have to download and install the SDK separately before you can install an AIR app. I wonder about non-web based distribution? It stated in an FAQ somewhere on the labs site that the SDK will be distributable for CD projects. Obviously in such a situation you won't be going to the web. > > I wouldn't consider AIR a browser connected tool. It does have an > > embedded browser, but... > > > > The ability to integrate with the local system (Via an execute type > > command) is almost mandatory for non-connected applications. > > It sounds like you are saying that there is no market for AIR. I'm saying that there is no market for AIR in non-connected desktop applications. -- Jeffry Houser, Technical Entrepreneur, Software Developer, Author, Recording Engineer AIM: Reboog711 | Phone: 1-203-379-0773 -- My Company: <http://www.dot-com-it.com> My Podcast: <http://www.theflexshow.com> My Blog: <http://www.jeffryhouser.com>
