Director never got the same developer audience that Flash did. The tool was out there - years ago, as you've said - but aparently no one knew or wanted to know how to program with it. I think it's an artifact of the original audience, who were largely graphics people instead of programmers. What more should Macromedia have done? Why should they waste capital on a product with no demand?
What more should Macromedia have done? Why should they waste capital on a product with no demand?
That's not historically true. Director is the product that "made" Macromedia what it became - it provided them the capital to buy out FutureSplash, for example. At some point MM decided that the Web, and Flash in particular, was the most important thing and promptly neglected Director, despite already having the DSW plugin in their stable.
Good point Joseph. For the length of time that Director has been around I'm sure there was a period where development efforts were better diverted to other technology at Macromedia to draw a larger development audience. I'm frustrated, however, that Director did not continue to develop, especially after being acquired by Adobe, to continue leading the way toward more complex content and interactivity through Shockwave. It seems your comment is part of the explanation, however. Director is perhaps a legacy program that created a unique niche, but ultimately got too cumbersome and had too much tainted market value to keep up with it. Now that developers are looking again for the benefits Director offered, it would be easier for Adobe to either acquire another spryer/younger product, or try to build similar functionality into one of their stronger brands.
Time to go cry in a beer before spending another evening learning ColdFusion. It seems to me that a reoccuring lesson of consumerism is that commitment to one companies line of products will always, at some point, turn into foolish masochism.
You aren't the only one brother...