> I disagree. I am not certain how Director works, since I've never > used it except to make movies that were then integrated into > Authorware, but Authorware has the ability to either incorporate the > runtime into the content file as a new exe or to provide it > separately. The fact that the AIR team chose only one of these > strategies is not compelling to me. >
Everything aint for everybody. But regarding the runtime issue, there is a big difference between a shipping two separate files i.e. a library and an application, and shipping a common runtime with the intent to install that runtime on every computer on the planet. Director never had that has a goal, and it would never have been a reasonable one if they had. > > > IMO, it does not make sense for Adobe to continue to develop Director > when AIR and Flash have the potential ability to replace it. Adobe > has already stopped development on Director, and I can tell you they > will never manage to convince Authorware users to pick up Director, > regardless of its innate capabilities, because we believe its days > are also numbered. However, for the replacement to happen, Adobe will > have to add more capability to AIR. > lol. Do you really think Adobe cares about supporting or capturing the Director or Authorware markets. They will never admit it publicly, but they are irrelevant. They are certainly not designing AIR with the idea of making sure that Director or Authorware users are happy. Hank
