Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re:Question Re: place .swf in .pdf

Expand Messages
  • Roger Howard
    ... You don t have to buy and learn anything - I m just telling you what tools are right for the purpose. Note, Acrobat and InDesign are clearly not designed
    Message 1 of 32 , May 11, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mon, 11 May 2009 10:58:04 -0700, Robert Fisher <bob@...> wrote:
      > Well I already own a huge pile of Adobe apps that should support
      > this. Now I have to buy and learn several other apps to do what
      > should be supported in Acrobat Pro, InDesign, and Adobe reader!

      You don't have to buy and learn anything - I'm just telling you what tools
      are right for the purpose. Note, Acrobat and InDesign are clearly not
      designed for delivering multimedia - any such use is a stretch, which while
      possible will be bound to run into limitations...

      > I am a non coder type and I really don't want to spend my time doing
      > this, I would rather be shooting.

      Sorry... I'm just telling you what it takes to do what's been described.
      Everyone is free to NOT do things they don't want to.

      I'd love to spend all my time programming and have perfect pictures taken
      for me automatically...
    • Ken Warner
      Well, nobody really knows. I m just spouting off. It s a fun topic for converstation. But big business really doesn t like convergence. They like to have
      Message 32 of 32 , May 16, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Well, nobody really knows. I'm just spouting off. It's a fun topic
        for converstation.

        But big business really doesn't like convergence. They like to have
        unique products that forces you to buy their stuff. And they like
        to give lip service to "Standards" while at the same time tucking a
        few extra "features" into their product to make it "better".

        Panos are going mainstream. They have to. More information in the
        same place as a static picture. Sort of like the transition from B&W
        to Color. It will be interesting. 3D is next up...

        Roger Howard wrote:
        > On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:23:23 -0700, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...>
        > wrote:
        >
        >>IMHO I don't think so. Adobe is too powerful a force and it has
        >>a superb engineering staff. Apple and Google also have superb
        >
        > engineering
        >
        >>staffs but the three different staffs are focused on entirely different
        >>areas. Why should Google and/or Apple duplicate Adobe's efforts when
        >
        > Adobe
        >
        >>will always be one step ahead.
        >
        >
        > I don't think they are as different as they seem - I think things are
        > converging, at least between Flash and the browser; a few years ago the
        > idea of building a single application and compiling it to both SWF and
        > HTML+JavaScript was a pipedream; right now we're not far from it at all,
        > with the major advances in the Javascript compilers in the browser (thanks
        > to Apple, Mozilla and Google), the renewed effort to improve the multimedia
        > aspects of HTML, etc.
        >
        > OpenLaszlo hinted at this years ago, offering cross-compilation of OL
        > projects between Flash and DHTML with some limitations (on the DHTML side).
        > I expect we'll see enough convergence - in the platform capbilities of the
        > browser and in performance (which we're seeing now) that it'll mainly be a
        > business question, not an engineering question... in other words, does
        > Adobe value the SWF format more, or does it value its tools business more?
        > I suspect they'll, eventually, decide the latter, maintaining SWF but
        > allowing cross-compiling to HTML.
        >
        > -R
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.