Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
>>Would be interesting to compare with recently released Screenweaver HX >>(http://haxe.org/swhx). > > > ...says one of the authors of Screenweaver HX. Being a shill doesn't > work unless you use a different name. ;) Steven. You're posting your self-made comparison proclaiming mProjector as the uber-wrapper. I don't see any moral problem at pointing you at a new - completely rewritten from scratch - version of ScreenWeaver so that you can compare it as well. Now I could come with my own comparison or "selling points", but I guess that would not be seen as something fair, so it's better to give links to people so they can start making their own opinion. Depending on the features needed by the end-user, there might not be one single "kill-them-all" choice. If you want to be impartial and be able to efficiently advise people about projector wrappers, you should stop throwing random facts without evaluating first other technologies. I'm in general quite reluctant to listen to people calling "crap!" before they even had a look at a given solution. Finally, I've been working with Edwin on SWHX and while I can't say about previous Screenweaver, I can ensure you about the code quality of SWHX. And you know what ? You can check it by yourself by browsing https://svn.motion-twin.com/haxeDesktop/swhx. If you find any bug, please report it to us ;) Nicolas ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
I think that's fair enough :) On 10/3/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm glad to hear the new version is performing better than the old one. Indeed, it appears that Screenweaver deserves another look. -- [ JPG ] ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
> 1. SWHX is completely new, open source and cross-platform Great news! > 2. The old version was the bench mark to which other's hoped to attain > and worked great. I disagree and there are many who would side with me. It wasn't stable and it wasn't easy to code against. > 3. The version you speak of, as I have heard, was a version that was > modified for a company you worked for - a company who's owner was a > liar/fraud and never paid for the services he hired Edwin to do. I > believe > also, that that version was left "buggy" BECAUSE of the non-payments and > therefore, was never completed/fixed/updated/made right. I am not speaking of the custom version but of the fully available version specifically. I would not talk about the custom version because I know it was written by Edwin from virtual scratch and I am aware of the bugs associated with that. You can ask developer friends of mine who worked at Turner whether or not they could use the publicly available Screenweaver for their projects and they will tell you resoundingly no. They tried but it was far too unstable and buggy. As to the other part, the non-payments and lying etc., I wrote out the other side of the story but I decided to delete it because it really doesn't belong on Flashcoders. Suffice to say the following: There are two sides to every story and painting Edwin as an innocent man who got screwed out of money hardly encompasses the entire story. I had used the public version of Screenweaver prior and attempted to use it after at a different company and had nothing but problems and other developers I know did too. It was written by somebody who didn't know C++ that well when he started (Edwin divulged to us that he was learning it as he wrote Screenweaver), and that's why it had the problems it did. It scored the worst on all the measurements when compared to three other wrappers. It had the largest executable file size, it had the largest base memory footprint, it had the worst frame rate performance, it used by far the most CPU during an animation and alpha blending test (it would spike to 25-40% cpu while other wrappers barely hit 5% and mProjector maxed at 2%) and it performed even worse when Outlook was open. > 4. Nicolas only did a port from C++ to C on the windows platform. > Edwin/team have taken it from there to the mac platform. Haxe/Neko make > everything else possible, crossplatform and very consistent with a > standard of coding that remains from platform to platform. That sounds promising. > 5. That's not true - and is a slap in the face to the guys who worked on > it. Of whom, I am good friends with. Screenweaver was for-profit with 3 > partners. The company folded and later, Edwin encouraged going open > source with it because it was collecting dust and there were alot of > requests for it to return. I apologize if any of the developers who came on after were offended. My comments had nothing to do with any developer who came on after Edwin decided to open the source to other developers. They had nothing to do with that decision and their efforts on the project since that decision are not what I'm discussing. If they whipped it into shape, great! If they rewrote it from scratch, fantastic! The bottom line is it had many problems before he opened it up and that says nothing about the quality or dedication of the developers who came on after. Why did the company fold if Screenweaver was so great? Is it because the demand for Flash wrappers was too low, or because the competition was too tough or perhaps because Screenweaver wasn't stable enough or maybe Edwin got busy doing other things? That's a separate discussion. > Mainly based on the buggy issues with OTHER wrappers. Unfortunately, almost nobody knows about mProjector because it wasn't marketed as heavily as the other wrappers, and yet, it's the best one out there as far as performance, stability and ease-of-development goes. It doesn't have some of the features some of the other wrappers out there have, though, and that's its primary weakness as I see it. > "I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector > > 6. Ok. The UI sucks and is completely off track with other wrapper > applications. In an attempt to be "innovative", they've left other's > behind who don't have time to "think" like their innovators. Fair enough. That's a fair critique since it is part of the wrapper. You could put a Porsche engine in a VW Bug and you could put a VW Bug engine in a Porsche. I'd opt for the VW Bug with the Porsche engine if my job was to win races. mProjector's UI is straightforward to me. I don't have a problem with it. That being said, the UI for the wrapper creation tool is not the only measurement one should use. mProjector has an extremely powerful and easy-to-code-against API. Beyond just that, the way it does things in general is very smart. Let's talk about the system tray, for instance. I
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
oh yeah, one thing i will mark against mProjector was application transparency on the mac. at the time there was a flaky kludge solution, not sure if it's still the same. On 10/3/06, Rich Rodecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: oh man... mProject does rock. Well, at least it did like about a year and a half ago, thats the last time I used it. cant vouch for any of the other ones. mike mountain - just say it and stick by it. don't apologize and act like you didnt mean to say it. you're allowed your opinon just as much as anyone else. On 10/3/06, John Grden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some updates on your knowledge of SWHX > > 1. SWHX is completely new, open source and cross-platform > 2. The old version was the bench mark to which other's hoped to attain > and > worked great. > 3. The version you speak of, as I have heard, was a version that was > modified for a company you worked for - a company who's owner was a > liar/fraud and never paid for the services he hired Edwin to do. I > believe > also, that that version was left "buggy" BECAUSE of the non-payments and > > therefore, was never completed/fixed/updated/made right. > 4. Nicolas only did a port from C++ to C on the windows platform. > Edwin/team have taken it from there to the mac platform. Haxe/Neko make > everything else possible, crossplatform and very consistent with a > standard > of coding that remains from platform to platform. > > "IMO, the reason Screenweaver was made open source is because it was a > mess and the only way to clean it up was to invite other coders to get > involved and help fix all its problems. I'm all for open source, but > the original Screenweaver code was so bad, I can't bring myself to rely > on it." > > 5. That's not true - and is a slap in the face to the guys who worked > on > it. Of whom, I am good friends with. Screenweaver was for-profit with > 3 > partners. The company folded and later, Edwin encouraged going open > source > with it because it was collecting dust and there were alot of requests > for > it to return. Mainly based on the buggy issues with OTHER wrappers. > > "I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector > (I've never seen or heard a single one), but you can search the archives > and there are plenty of developers in the community who have had plenty > of negative experiences with Screenweaver. Other wrappers like > SWFStudio and Zinc, while not as solid as mProjector, were far more > stable than Screenweaver. I would trust any wrapper except Screenweaver > to handle functionality that mProjector doesn't have." > > 6. Ok. The UI sucks and is completely off track with other wrapper > applications. In an attempt to be "innovative", they've left other's > behind > who don't have time to "think" like their innovators. They assume WAY > too > much for you and like I said, the interface is so counter intuitive it > makes > it impossible for advanced users to use it in powerful ways. Now, it's > been > a while since I've tryied mProjector, and I've heard plenty of good > things, > but my last experience basically left me with asking Edwin "where the > hell > is screenweaver?!?". So, I apologize if it's come along way with the > UI/tools. Good for them. > > creating a SWHX app is cake and updating the SWHX engine/files to the > latest > releases is a commandline away - it's so easy, a caveman could do it. > > In fact, I've been running Xray with it for the past 3 weeks and it's > run > wonderfully and has been a beauty to maintain/update. > > Also, Edwin/Nicolas are very responsive - any time a feature is asked > for or > a bug is reported, they are either fixing already, or adding that > feature > overnight in many cases. > > anyway, I hope that helps clear up the confusion. > > > On 10/3/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Promoting it is one thing, but his post was not a promotional post, > but > > more that of a call to action from an impartial party, which he is > not. > > > > I don't think Screenweaver being open and free makes it better > > considering Screenweaver before it was open and free was, simply put, > > bad. Here are some facts about Screenweaver. > > > > It was extremely buggy, > > had features that simply did not work, > > was unstable and would crash without warning and with no notification, > > had issues with ATI cards when Microsoft Outlook was open, > > had issues where the CPU usage would spike to 99% and never release > > making Windows (and the SW app) unresponsive requiring a task manager > > force quit, > > had a terrible API for doing the most simple things (something like > > 15-20 lines of code to make a system tray icon compared to ONE line of > > > code in mProjector, > > had many functions required 5+ arguments, which reflects poor > planning) > > > > And the list goes on and on. > > > > I wouldn't recommend trusting anything that was based on such bad code > > > unless it was completel
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
oh man... mProject does rock. Well, at least it did like about a year and a half ago, thats the last time I used it. cant vouch for any of the other ones. mike mountain - just say it and stick by it. don't apologize and act like you didnt mean to say it. you're allowed your opinon just as much as anyone else. On 10/3/06, John Grden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Some updates on your knowledge of SWHX 1. SWHX is completely new, open source and cross-platform 2. The old version was the bench mark to which other's hoped to attain and worked great. 3. The version you speak of, as I have heard, was a version that was modified for a company you worked for - a company who's owner was a liar/fraud and never paid for the services he hired Edwin to do. I believe also, that that version was left "buggy" BECAUSE of the non-payments and therefore, was never completed/fixed/updated/made right. 4. Nicolas only did a port from C++ to C on the windows platform. Edwin/team have taken it from there to the mac platform. Haxe/Neko make everything else possible, crossplatform and very consistent with a standard of coding that remains from platform to platform. "IMO, the reason Screenweaver was made open source is because it was a mess and the only way to clean it up was to invite other coders to get involved and help fix all its problems. I'm all for open source, but the original Screenweaver code was so bad, I can't bring myself to rely on it." 5. That's not true - and is a slap in the face to the guys who worked on it. Of whom, I am good friends with. Screenweaver was for-profit with 3 partners. The company folded and later, Edwin encouraged going open source with it because it was collecting dust and there were alot of requests for it to return. Mainly based on the buggy issues with OTHER wrappers. "I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector (I've never seen or heard a single one), but you can search the archives and there are plenty of developers in the community who have had plenty of negative experiences with Screenweaver. Other wrappers like SWFStudio and Zinc, while not as solid as mProjector, were far more stable than Screenweaver. I would trust any wrapper except Screenweaver to handle functionality that mProjector doesn't have." 6. Ok. The UI sucks and is completely off track with other wrapper applications. In an attempt to be "innovative", they've left other's behind who don't have time to "think" like their innovators. They assume WAY too much for you and like I said, the interface is so counter intuitive it makes it impossible for advanced users to use it in powerful ways. Now, it's been a while since I've tryied mProjector, and I've heard plenty of good things, but my last experience basically left me with asking Edwin "where the hell is screenweaver?!?". So, I apologize if it's come along way with the UI/tools. Good for them. creating a SWHX app is cake and updating the SWHX engine/files to the latest releases is a commandline away - it's so easy, a caveman could do it. In fact, I've been running Xray with it for the past 3 weeks and it's run wonderfully and has been a beauty to maintain/update. Also, Edwin/Nicolas are very responsive - any time a feature is asked for or a bug is reported, they are either fixing already, or adding that feature overnight in many cases. anyway, I hope that helps clear up the confusion. On 10/3/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Promoting it is one thing, but his post was not a promotional post, but > more that of a call to action from an impartial party, which he is not. > > I don't think Screenweaver being open and free makes it better > considering Screenweaver before it was open and free was, simply put, > bad. Here are some facts about Screenweaver. > > It was extremely buggy, > had features that simply did not work, > was unstable and would crash without warning and with no notification, > had issues with ATI cards when Microsoft Outlook was open, > had issues where the CPU usage would spike to 99% and never release > making Windows (and the SW app) unresponsive requiring a task manager > force quit, > had a terrible API for doing the most simple things (something like > 15-20 lines of code to make a system tray icon compared to ONE line of > code in mProjector, > had many functions required 5+ arguments, which reflects poor planning) > > And the list goes on and on. > > I wouldn't recommend trusting anything that was based on such bad code > unless it was completely rewritten from scratch, which I'm not sure it > was. > > Contrary to that, mProjector has always been rock solid and well thought > out and has had asynchronous support since the beginning while all other > wrapper developers could not figure how to do it for years. Let me > stress that - for years nobody knew how the author of mProjector > provided asynchronous support despite their best efforts, and there was > plenty of
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Some updates on your knowledge of SWHX 1. SWHX is completely new, open source and cross-platform 2. The old version was the bench mark to which other's hoped to attain and worked great. 3. The version you speak of, as I have heard, was a version that was modified for a company you worked for - a company who's owner was a liar/fraud and never paid for the services he hired Edwin to do. I believe also, that that version was left "buggy" BECAUSE of the non-payments and therefore, was never completed/fixed/updated/made right. 4. Nicolas only did a port from C++ to C on the windows platform. Edwin/team have taken it from there to the mac platform. Haxe/Neko make everything else possible, crossplatform and very consistent with a standard of coding that remains from platform to platform. "IMO, the reason Screenweaver was made open source is because it was a mess and the only way to clean it up was to invite other coders to get involved and help fix all its problems. I'm all for open source, but the original Screenweaver code was so bad, I can't bring myself to rely on it." 5. That's not true - and is a slap in the face to the guys who worked on it. Of whom, I am good friends with. Screenweaver was for-profit with 3 partners. The company folded and later, Edwin encouraged going open source with it because it was collecting dust and there were alot of requests for it to return. Mainly based on the buggy issues with OTHER wrappers. "I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector (I've never seen or heard a single one), but you can search the archives and there are plenty of developers in the community who have had plenty of negative experiences with Screenweaver. Other wrappers like SWFStudio and Zinc, while not as solid as mProjector, were far more stable than Screenweaver. I would trust any wrapper except Screenweaver to handle functionality that mProjector doesn't have." 6. Ok. The UI sucks and is completely off track with other wrapper applications. In an attempt to be "innovative", they've left other's behind who don't have time to "think" like their innovators. They assume WAY too much for you and like I said, the interface is so counter intuitive it makes it impossible for advanced users to use it in powerful ways. Now, it's been a while since I've tryied mProjector, and I've heard plenty of good things, but my last experience basically left me with asking Edwin "where the hell is screenweaver?!?". So, I apologize if it's come along way with the UI/tools. Good for them. creating a SWHX app is cake and updating the SWHX engine/files to the latest releases is a commandline away - it's so easy, a caveman could do it. In fact, I've been running Xray with it for the past 3 weeks and it's run wonderfully and has been a beauty to maintain/update. Also, Edwin/Nicolas are very responsive - any time a feature is asked for or a bug is reported, they are either fixing already, or adding that feature overnight in many cases. anyway, I hope that helps clear up the confusion. On 10/3/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Promoting it is one thing, but his post was not a promotional post, but more that of a call to action from an impartial party, which he is not. I don't think Screenweaver being open and free makes it better considering Screenweaver before it was open and free was, simply put, bad. Here are some facts about Screenweaver. It was extremely buggy, had features that simply did not work, was unstable and would crash without warning and with no notification, had issues with ATI cards when Microsoft Outlook was open, had issues where the CPU usage would spike to 99% and never release making Windows (and the SW app) unresponsive requiring a task manager force quit, had a terrible API for doing the most simple things (something like 15-20 lines of code to make a system tray icon compared to ONE line of code in mProjector, had many functions required 5+ arguments, which reflects poor planning) And the list goes on and on. I wouldn't recommend trusting anything that was based on such bad code unless it was completely rewritten from scratch, which I'm not sure it was. Contrary to that, mProjector has always been rock solid and well thought out and has had asynchronous support since the beginning while all other wrapper developers could not figure how to do it for years. Let me stress that - for years nobody knew how the author of mProjector provided asynchronous support despite their best efforts, and there was plenty of effort from all the wrapper developers. Now that the facts are out of the way, it's time for my opinions. I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector (I've never seen or heard a single one), but you can search the archives and there are plenty of developers in the community who have had plenty of negative experiences with Screenweaver. Other wrappers like SWFStudio and Zinc, while not as solid
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Just an update: I work as a contractor now - not employeed by Blitz since August 1st. On 10/3/06, Ray Chuan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Curiously, John Greden, who is from the same agency as you, happens to be an active promoter of Xray on this and other list(s). If John can do it, there's no reason why Nicholas can't. On 10/3/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Would be interesting to compare with recently released Screenweaver HX > > (http://haxe.org/swhx). > > ...says one of the authors of Screenweaver HX. Being a shill doesn't > work unless you use a different name. ;) > ___ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com > http://training.figleaf.com > -- Cheers, Ray Chuan ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com -- [ JPG ] ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
OK got to get this out of my system - I've been itching to post it for months but 'held my tongue', alas no more: Steven you're obviously a talented guy, but my God you have an attitude - is noone allowed to have a different opinion to you? You don't discuss, you object constantly, shoot down, or just plane dismiss out of hand other peoples ideas and opinions unless they follow your train of thought. It isn't polite. Please now accept my most humble apologies for posting that - completely out of character on my behalf but something (as aforementioned) I needed to get out of my system I too suffered with the original Screenweaver - but as of yet have not tried screenweaver HX on anything more than a fleeting demo, so will not pass judgement, or comment by posting a list of faults on a previous version. I'm sure mProjector is really brilliant, the db's, the bees knees, I can feel myself baked in it's golden rays as it bends over to tie its shoelaces (and if you haven't got a free copy by now Steven they really aren't watching this list properly.) Competition is healthy and to be encouraged As I read it Nicolas was proposing that as Screenweaver is "free", then it would undoubtdly do "no harm whatsoever" to give it a go and see if it does what the original post required. Apparently he was a little to succinct with his suggestion, a four page diatribe may well stand him in better stead next time. Keep on with the good flash man. Mike From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Steven Sacks | BLITZ Sent: Tue 03/10/2006 19:08 To: Flashcoders mailing list Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper Promoting it is one thing, but his post was not a promotional post, but more that of a call to action from an impartial party, which he is not. I don't think Screenweaver being open and free makes it better considering Screenweaver before it was open and free was, simply put, bad. Here are some facts about Screenweaver. It was extremely buggy, had features that simply did not work, was unstable and would crash without warning and with no notification, had issues with ATI cards when Microsoft Outlook was open, had issues where the CPU usage would spike to 99% and never release making Windows (and the SW app) unresponsive requiring a task manager force quit, had a terrible API for doing the most simple things (something like 15-20 lines of code to make a system tray icon compared to ONE line of code in mProjector, had many functions required 5+ arguments, which reflects poor planning) And the list goes on and on. I wouldn't recommend trusting anything that was based on such bad code unless it was completely rewritten from scratch, which I'm not sure it was. Contrary to that, mProjector has always been rock solid and well thought out and has had asynchronous support since the beginning while all other wrapper developers could not figure how to do it for years. Let me stress that - for years nobody knew how the author of mProjector provided asynchronous support despite their best efforts, and there was plenty of effort from all the wrapper developers. Now that the facts are out of the way, it's time for my opinions. I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector (I've never seen or heard a single one), but you can search the archives and there are plenty of developers in the community who have had plenty of negative experiences with Screenweaver. Other wrappers like SWFStudio and Zinc, while not as solid as mProjector, were far more stable than Screenweaver. I would trust any wrapper except Screenweaver to handle functionality that mProjector doesn't have. IMO, the reason Screenweaver was made open source is because it was a mess and the only way to clean it up was to invite other coders to get involved and help fix all its problems. I'm all for open source, but the original Screenweaver code was so bad, I can't bring myself to rely on it. All this being said, major companies trust mProjector as their wrapper of choice for mass deployment. Companies like The Weather Channel, DirecTV, Fox Interactive, Earthlink, and Turner Broadcasting. I think the paltry $199 (or $300 for both platforms) is worth the peace of mind of owning the most solid, well-built, best API, easiest to use Flash wrapper on the market. ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Promoting it is one thing, but his post was not a promotional post, but more that of a call to action from an impartial party, which he is not. I don't think Screenweaver being open and free makes it better considering Screenweaver before it was open and free was, simply put, bad. Here are some facts about Screenweaver. It was extremely buggy, had features that simply did not work, was unstable and would crash without warning and with no notification, had issues with ATI cards when Microsoft Outlook was open, had issues where the CPU usage would spike to 99% and never release making Windows (and the SW app) unresponsive requiring a task manager force quit, had a terrible API for doing the most simple things (something like 15-20 lines of code to make a system tray icon compared to ONE line of code in mProjector, had many functions required 5+ arguments, which reflects poor planning) And the list goes on and on. I wouldn't recommend trusting anything that was based on such bad code unless it was completely rewritten from scratch, which I'm not sure it was. Contrary to that, mProjector has always been rock solid and well thought out and has had asynchronous support since the beginning while all other wrapper developers could not figure how to do it for years. Let me stress that - for years nobody knew how the author of mProjector provided asynchronous support despite their best efforts, and there was plenty of effort from all the wrapper developers. Now that the facts are out of the way, it's time for my opinions. I invite anyone to share a negative experience they had with mProjector (I've never seen or heard a single one), but you can search the archives and there are plenty of developers in the community who have had plenty of negative experiences with Screenweaver. Other wrappers like SWFStudio and Zinc, while not as solid as mProjector, were far more stable than Screenweaver. I would trust any wrapper except Screenweaver to handle functionality that mProjector doesn't have. IMO, the reason Screenweaver was made open source is because it was a mess and the only way to clean it up was to invite other coders to get involved and help fix all its problems. I'm all for open source, but the original Screenweaver code was so bad, I can't bring myself to rely on it. All this being said, major companies trust mProjector as their wrapper of choice for mass deployment. Companies like The Weather Channel, DirecTV, Fox Interactive, Earthlink, and Turner Broadcasting. I think the paltry $199 (or $300 for both platforms) is worth the peace of mind of owning the most solid, well-built, best API, easiest to use Flash wrapper on the market. ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Screenweaver HX does just work with the SWF. It just means you can extend it's capabilities with haXe if you wanted. >From the blurb: the System layer : written in haXe and using the Neko API, you can access the local filesystem, databases, network sockets... You can also easily extend its capabilities by writing your own DLL. the Flash layer : written in haXe or any other technology capable of producing SWF, you can use this layer to display the graphical interface, handle user interactions, play sound and video... It's only downside as far as I can see is that it's not very user friendly, no pretty gui etc. M > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Derek Vadneau > Sent: 03 October 2006 15:30 > To: flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper > > "I'd be rather worried if Nicolas didn't want to promote it." > Except that the original poster was asking for opinions and > getting an opinion from someone who develops one of the > products is not as useful. > > Besides, getting a little off the original request. > > "I don't use haxe nor mtasc so for me I would prefer > something that just works based on the swf or the projector." > > > Derek Vadneau > > > > ___ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com > > ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
"I'd be rather worried if Nicolas didn't want to promote it." Except that the original poster was asking for opinions and getting an opinion from someone who develops one of the products is not as useful. Besides, getting a little off the original request. "I don't use haxe nor mtasc so for me I would prefer something that just works based on the swf or the projector." Derek Vadneau ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
...and throw in any Apollo facts that are available, and yeah, that would be a very useful comparison. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Mountain Sent: 03 October 2006 09:28 To: Flashcoders mailing list Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper I'd be rather worried if Nicolas didn't want to promote it. The difference being Screenweaver HX is open and free - a comparison would certainly be very interesting. M > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven > Sacks | BLITZ > Sent: 02 October 2006 19:00 > To: Flashcoders mailing list > Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper > > > Would be interesting to compare with recently released > Screenweaver HX > > (http://haxe.org/swhx). > > ...says one of the authors of Screenweaver HX. Being a shill doesn't > work unless you use a different name. ;) > ___ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com > ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
I'd be rather worried if Nicolas didn't want to promote it. The difference being Screenweaver HX is open and free - a comparison would certainly be very interesting. M > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Steven Sacks | BLITZ > Sent: 02 October 2006 19:00 > To: Flashcoders mailing list > Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper > > > Would be interesting to compare with recently released > Screenweaver HX > > (http://haxe.org/swhx). > > ...says one of the authors of Screenweaver HX. Being a shill > doesn't work unless you use a different name. ;) > ___ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com > ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Hi, Curiously, John Greden, who is from the same agency as you, happens to be an active promoter of Xray on this and other list(s). If John can do it, there's no reason why Nicholas can't. On 10/3/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would be interesting to compare with recently released Screenweaver HX > (http://haxe.org/swhx). ...says one of the authors of Screenweaver HX. Being a shill doesn't work unless you use a different name. ;) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com -- Cheers, Ray Chuan ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
> Would be interesting to compare with recently released Screenweaver HX > (http://haxe.org/swhx). ...says one of the authors of Screenweaver HX. Being a shill doesn't work unless you use a different name. ;) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
> http://www.screentime.com/software/mprojector/ > > mProjector is the best wrapper out there, period. It's completely stable and > has the absolute best performance and smallest memory and filesize footprint > (I've done metrics). The API is outstanding, well-thought out and easier to > use than any of the other wrappers. And while Flash 8 brought about External > Interface for asynchronous communication with the OS, mProjector has been > doing it for years while none of the other wrapper authors could figure out > how despite their best efforts. Oh, and it's cross-platform. Would be interesting to compare with recently released Screenweaver HX (http://haxe.org/swhx). Nicolas ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Wow, thanks a lot for your post. I had come across the mprojector, but as I am completely unexperienced in this field, I sure appreciate your words. :) Steven Sacks | BLITZ wrote: http://www.screentime.com/software/mprojector/ mProjector is the best wrapper out there, period. It's completely stable and has the absolute best performance and smallest memory and filesize footprint (I've done metrics). The API is outstanding, well-thought out and easier to use than any of the other wrappers. And while Flash 8 brought about External Interface for asynchronous communication with the OS, mProjector has been doing it for years while none of the other wrapper authors could figure out how despite their best efforts. Oh, and it's cross-platform. http://www.thespringbox.com/ That is made with mProjector. It's the technology Fox Interactive trusts to deploy to the tens of millions of users on MySpace and beyond. Nuff said. :) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
RE: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
http://www.screentime.com/software/mprojector/ mProjector is the best wrapper out there, period. It's completely stable and has the absolute best performance and smallest memory and filesize footprint (I've done metrics). The API is outstanding, well-thought out and easier to use than any of the other wrappers. And while Flash 8 brought about External Interface for asynchronous communication with the OS, mProjector has been doing it for years while none of the other wrapper authors could figure out how despite their best efforts. Oh, and it's cross-platform. http://www.thespringbox.com/ That is made with mProjector. It's the technology Fox Interactive trusts to deploy to the tens of millions of users on MySpace and beyond. Nuff said. :) ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
I'd go with SWFStudio or Screenweaver. Ian On 9/29/06, Telmo Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, but can you suggest a replacement? Telmo Ian Thomas wrote: > I disagree. > > Twice now, I have had Zinc upgrades break existing functionality that > I relied on, and those new bugs have only been fixed several versions > later. > > They keep introducing new functionality, and do very little to ensure > the stability of the existing codebase. Personally I'd rather they > fixed existing bugs than introduced spangly new features. > > Ian > > On 9/29/06, jcanistrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I use Zinc and it is fine, good support! > ___ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com > http://training.figleaf.com > > ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
Ok, but can you suggest a replacement? Telmo Ian Thomas wrote: I disagree. Twice now, I have had Zinc upgrades break existing functionality that I relied on, and those new bugs have only been fixed several versions later. They keep introducing new functionality, and do very little to ensure the stability of the existing codebase. Personally I'd rather they fixed existing bugs than introduced spangly new features. Ian On 9/29/06, jcanistrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I use Zinc and it is fine, good support! ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
I disagree. Twice now, I have had Zinc upgrades break existing functionality that I relied on, and those new bugs have only been fixed several versions later. They keep introducing new functionality, and do very little to ensure the stability of the existing codebase. Personally I'd rather they fixed existing bugs than introduced spangly new features. Ian On 9/29/06, jcanistrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I use Zinc and it is fine, good support! ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
Re: [Flashcoders] Projector Wrapper
I use Zinc and it is fine, good support! 2006/9/29, Telmo Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hi, I read a few of those posts regarding sfw/projector wrappers. I would like to create a small kind of widget that stays in the systray (windows only), and connects to the server to update info, from time to time. It should enable the user to login, and based on the info it gathers from the server, it should show alerts, I was thinking of some kind of alert similar to "msn buddy logged in" alert. Regarding the login I would want to use encrypted data, and ssl if possible. The core app is a regular swf with sound. I would ask those of you who are experts in this field to advise me as to the solution I should buy. Zinc, mProjector, northcode SWF Studio, flash jester ? Any other ? Which one is the best in your opinion? I don't use haxe nor mtasc so for me I would prefer something that just works based on the swf or the projector. Thanks. Telmo ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com -- João Carlos Santiago Certified Macromedia Flash MX 2004 Developer ___ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
