> i�d like to hear from you that work as web developers why so many > sites in flash and so few written with director since director seems > to be more a complet product. > I know you asked for an answer in private, but I think it's a legitimate topic for a public discussion.
I think Flash is more popular on the Web for two reasons--size and ubiquity. 1. Size. The initial Flash plugin download is smaller, and the Flash movies themselves are a lot smaller than Shockwave. Broadband remains a small portion of the market, so size *does* matter. 2. Ubiquity. Macromedia has devoted a lot of resources to marketing Flash. While the Shockwave plugin is on about 70% of the machines out there, Flash is closer to 98%. I may be a bit off on my numbers, but not a lot. In addition, Microsoft is including the Flash plugin as part of Windows now, so Flash penetration will continue to climb. I think it's important to make a market distinction here. Flash is a competitor to HTML more than it is to Shockwave. Director/Shockwave is still the tool of choice for delivering high-end apps, either over the Web or as local apps (hard drive, CD-ROM, LAN-based). When you look at what you can do with Flash, especially MX, it looks to me like a very viable competitor to HTML. Of course, you still need the basic HTML skeleton to get your Flash movie up, but then you get a whole lot more bang for your buck. And, of course, if you want, say, 3-D, there's no reason that you can't have Shockwave *and* Flash on your site. I'd use Flash as the basic authoring environment, though. And this from a guy who spends 95% of his time with Director (and the other 5% playing solitaire). Cordially, Kerry Thompson [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
