A few of our clients at work are asking for ID-ROMs, as well as training CD-ROMs.
What do you guys think of developing these CD-ROM pieces in Flash MX? Are there still advantages to using Director over Flash for CD-ROM applications?
I am very comfortable in Flash (started using it at version 3) and I have never created anything in Director. I am looking for assurance that I don't need Director, and that I can create CD-ROM and web pieces with MX's new features.
Yeah, sure you can use MX now. You can use now video, so for the most things, Flash MX is really enough.
A friend uses Director a lot, but based on his last CD-ROM project for a DJ, Flash MX can do all that stuff, too.
The only case where you still need Director is when you have to move around large bitmaps or other similar things where you need the graphic card acceleration, cause Flash only uses the CPU and the CPU can't do that as fast as the craphic card.
I'm a Director user and will be using Flash MX to be doing most of my CD and Pocket CD projects. I will, however, be using Director from time to time because of the Xtras feature that it has so that you can use Databases, read PDF files, do really cool transitions from one from to another, etc. I like Director for that but Flash MX seems to do everything you would normally do with Director only better.
Stick with MX. I don't know where they'll be pushing Director to. I'm guessing the 3D relm (only a lot deaper). That's the only direction I can see them going that Flash isn't.
One other thing I'd like to mention, is the cost comparison.
For Flash MX, you pay $600 for the PC version and can export to both PC and Mac format projectors (so you can make a hybrid cd), for Director you pay $1200 and can only export to the platform you're operating on. So creating a hybrid would actually cost $1200*2
Of course, this only matters if you're starting fresh and not upgrading -- and you're a small business to which this cost matters. But if this is the case, Director is pretty painful.