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 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 > > > > > > -- > [ 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 >
_______________________________________________ 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
