Director 11 or MX 2004?
in [Macromedia Director]
|
From: ytlevine on 25 Jun 2008 18:26 I am having a bunch of problems with Director 11. Should I just go back to MX 2004 - the changes don't seem to make too much of a difference to me. And where can I find a full list of changes? Thanks.
From: Sean Wilson on 25 Jun 2008 18:46 > I am having a bunch of problems with Director 11. > Should I just go back to MX 2004 - the changes don't seem to make too much of > a difference to me. If you don't need to natively support Intel Macs under Shockwave there are *no* compelling reasons to upgrade (and far too many to not) > And where can I find a full list of changes? You can't, because Adobe didn't bother to provide one, and no amount of badgering seems able to induce them to. There is a list of "fixes" provided at <http://blogs.adobe.com/shockwaves/2008/04/director_11_released.html> but since some of the fixes relate to new features it can't be taken seriously (while implementing such-and-such they introduced a bug which they subsequently fixed - that doesn't rate as a bug fix to my mind, rather it's what I'd call "programming")
From: alchemist on 25 Jun 2008 20:57 > If you don't need to natively support Intel Macs under Shockwave... Are you sure that the new version is required for that? From what I've checked, even when publishing with dir04, the browsers seem to be using the new engine for playback, if the new sw version is installed. Haven't checked this with OSX, since when developing, I'm usually in front of a w2k-like theme XP machine. But, I can't remember having any issues with shockwave content on intelMac - well, except with havok movies.. Then again, didn't spend too much time on osx testing or even browsing, lately. Btw, if the new engine is used automatically, existing non-english content that expect to get extended ascii codes when using the chartonum() function will have serious issues. "Sean Wilson" <webforumsuser(a)macromedia.com> wrote in message news:g3uht0$ip$1(a)forums.macromedia.com... >> I am having a bunch of problems with Director 11. >> Should I just go back to MX 2004 - the changes don't seem to make too >> much of a difference to me. > > If you don't need to natively support Intel Macs under Shockwave there are > *no* compelling reasons to upgrade (and far too many to not) > >> And where can I find a full list of changes? > > You can't, because Adobe didn't bother to provide one, and no amount of > badgering seems able to induce them to. There is a list of "fixes" > provided at > <http://blogs.adobe.com/shockwaves/2008/04/director_11_released.html> but > since some of the fixes relate to new features it can't be taken seriously > (while implementing such-and-such they introduced a bug which they > subsequently fixed - that doesn't rate as a bug fix to my mind, rather > it's what I'd call "programming")
From: Mike Blaustein on 26 Jun 2008 08:16 The primary new features that matter are: 1) Intel native code for Macs 2) Unicode text There are other smaller things like bugfixes, etc, but those are the compelling reasons as far as I'm concerned. The fact that Intel Macs can now natively run your content is pretty minor unless you are heavy into 3d. The old MX 2004 projectors would work fine in Intel Macs, since they run in Rosetta. There is almost no real speed drop. It is a little slower, but not enough for me to care about much... apart from 3d. If you do complex 3d stuff, then you will see a difference in native code vs Rosetta. On the subject of 3d, if you want physics on a Mac, then you have to use the new Ageia engine which requires D11. The Unicode thing is pretty much a non-issue if your target audience is English speaking people using English operating systems. If you do not need to put special Unicode characters in your text (like Greek or other languages with non-ANSI characters), then you will not see much of a difference. So basically which product you use for development will depend upon your target audience. If you are targeting high end Macs with 3d stuff or if you are targeting non-English speakers then D11 may be right for you. If not, then I would stick with MX 2004. I actually have both and I only use D11 for the one project I am working on that requires Greek text. All my other projects are still done in MX 2004 until they work out some of the bugs.
From: ytlevine on 26 Jun 2008 13:08
Thanks all for the help and details. |