Re: More on ToolBook Vs. Metacard

1999-10-29 Thread Geoff Canyon
On 10/29/99 1:43 PM, Andu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Let's make things clear: MC doesn't run in a browser like say QuickTime but >you can configure your browser to use MC engine as a helper application >like you do with Acrobat but without opening the stack IN THE BROWSER but >in a separate wind

Re: More on ToolBook Vs. Metacard

1999-10-29 Thread Andu
Let's make things clear: MC doesn't run in a browser like say QuickTime but you can configure your browser to use MC engine as a helper application like you do with Acrobat but without opening the stack IN THE BROWSER but in a separate window. You can also use a stack as a browser that is: downloa

Re: More on ToolBook Vs. Metacard

1999-10-28 Thread Dave Cragg
At 11:18 AM +0100 28/10/1999, Kevin Miller wrote: > >IMHO, the best solution to delivering MC content over the web is to build a >standalone with a single stack attached (which would display information, >contain a splash screen, etc.) which starts downloading other stacks, or >even individual co

Re: More on ToolBook Vs. Metacard

1999-10-28 Thread Kevin Miller
On Wednesday, Oct 27 1999, Barry Boepple wrote: > Thank all of you for your great feedback about Metacard. Sounds great. > > I may sound kind of dumb here, but I am still not clear on how one would > deploy a Metacard Stack via a web Browser. I have only my ToolBook > experience to draw from. Wit

More on ToolBook Vs. Metacard

1999-10-27 Thread Barry Boepple
Thank all of you for your great feedback about Metacard. Sounds great. I may sound kind of dumb here, but I am still not clear on how one would deploy a Metacard Stack via a web Browser. I have only my ToolBook experience to draw from. With ToolBook you actually select a menu item that converts a