On Jun 5, 2005, at 9:03 PM, Brian Yennie wrote:
Simply put, the majority of Revolution projects use features that
don't exist in Flash. Not to mention that moving from a card metaphor
to a frame metaphor barely even registers...
I think it's a noble idea, but the two environments are hardly similar
at all...
Exactly. And it isn't just the environments... it is the distributable
file too. SWF is a compiled format, based in OOP and a vector display
engine, with a security sandbox. Rev is non-oop procedural, with native
controls. They simply don't translate well.
I can only imagine the hideous SWFs it would create *AFTER* obeying the
HUGE list of caveats which would be required. The whole thing would be
so crippled, that no one would actually use it. Can you even imagine
the debugging process? Suffice it to say that only the most moronically
simple Rev project could even hope to survive the conversion.
Spend far more than the available resources, to do a poor job of
publishing to a competitor's proprietary runtime format, which
incidentally has very little in common with Rev at all... sure!!
Keeping in mind that Adobe could change the SWF plugin on a whim,
leaving Rev, where?
Noble, perhaps, but the whole idea makes no (business) sense
whatsoever. And after all, Flash isn't so hard to learn...
--
Troy
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
