Digital Workshop

Has anyone taken a look at AutoMedia Studio by Indigo Rose?

The interface seems polished. I do like that. However, I haven't really seen a comparison between Opus and AMS. Has anyone done one?

Off the top of my head the big difference that comes to mind (for me at least) is the ability to output .swf files via Flex. AMS does not have a Flash output option. Therefore, the only distribution is via CD or an .exe file. Ideally, I want to be able to create more web based content utilizing Flash or the iO plugin even.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this? Thanks.

Scott

Hi,

Hadn't looked at AMS for a bit and your post promted me to do so.
Not bad, they've come along way recently. I like a lot of what they've done. Their video object is neat.
Facilities and object list is a little limited though and it doesn't seem to have the freedom as Opus or Director. Not cheap either.
And hey - plugins with a developer SDK promised - my hero. Perhaps the most single feature that makes it stand out. DW - take notice (please).
Your right the GUI is quite polished, perhaps over polished, because simply I hate wizards (with a passion).

Worth a look.

What would you want to achieve through a plug-in? It seems that it would be a feature used by a vanishingly small number of users - writing Win32 code is not something the majority of users would be comfortable with, or have the tools to do. You can write an ActiveX control right now and use that in Opus (or any other ActiveX container) if you want to do something complex.
(Note: This is just a personal question, not an official DW stance on plug-ins!)

Hi,

You suprise me a little Duncan being a developer. I thought you would see the benefits of plug-in technology gives a product.
The general user wouldn't be interested in developing a plug-in, true. But many could benefit the end result of various facilities a plug-in could offer.
For instance, the XE version could be distrubuted as a plug-in to Pro. Extra features available as plug-ins - you only pay for what you need.
As much as most people hate Macromedia, their products support plug-in technology very well and is supported well by the 3rd party industry.
Duncan, I don't think your looking past the initial purchase with your view on Opus and plug-in support. And being a fairly major cog in the Opus development wheel it sadens me to hear it.

That said - keep up the good work.

Apologies, perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by a plug-in. I assumed you meant something like PhotoShop plug-ins or some generic method of adding elements to the Opus editor. I can't see anyone other than DW wanting to develop plugins for Opus - unless we were to somehow get as big as Macromedia there simply wouldn't be any money in it.
Opus already uses a modular system that allows us to add and remove features relatively easily. This is how we can maintain four versions of the program without reinventing the wheel each time.
We are currently working on ways to make the whole upgrading procedure simpler, so that you will be able to go from Pro to Pro XE with only a (relatively) small download.

Swan,

I'm glad you took another look at AMS. Yes, the interface is VERY polished. I wish the Opus interface were cleaned up a bit. I don't know if everything has to be done via Wizards. The properties tab allows for some pretty quick changes too.

As for your comment on Macromedia - no joke. They have some good stuff but their pricing/upgrade strategy is a joke. I was a long time Presedia user. Their pricing for Breeze just blew me away. And as great as Flash can be, it sure is a pain to use.

As for the whole plug-in discussion, I don't think the average user really benefits from it. Yes, the extensions do help but I've got to think is a small audience. I'd rather see DW just build the features in.

Hi there,
Trying to bite my tongue here, however that isn't my way
Not a logical statement to make -- "everyone hates Macromedia" -- they have been very good to many developers financially, including me.
As far as pricing is concerned, like any company out to make a profit, they charge what the market will bear.
They have the same domination in the web world as Microsoft has with desktop operating systems -- you don't get that position by making overpriced software that doesn't deliver.
I find Flash a pleasure to use -- but then I spent the time learning to use it properly.
Having had a look at AMS before and dismissed it for serious use -- I had another look, opinion is still the same -- how does a "very polished interface" make it a better production tool?
Unfortunately for a lot of "Pretty" applications out there, the interface is the easy bit of the application to make.
The best products in the market, like Opus, have a Windows feel about them, anything else is just eye candy.

Paul

Paul,

Good points.

As for your comment "The best products in the market, like Opus, have a Windows feel about them, anything else is just eye candy. "

I guess that's why we're hanging out in the Digital Workshop Message Boards.

Hello Duncan you said:



I don't agree with you here. I think the level of user contribution with Opus is outstanding and I'd be very surprised if plug-ins weren't created if the means for doing so were made available. This would extend the functionality of Opus, draw more customers to the core engine/product and relieve the pressure on Opus to be all things to all people.

And just maybe the comparison between size of company (Macromedia) and plug-in capability is not a coincidence?



Maybe if DW supplied an sdk it would tempt more developers to use Opus as their front-end? Perhaps not the majority of current users, but future users???

But my real question is:

I have VB6 and can create ActiveX controls. How would an ActiveX control interface with Opus?

Thanks

Melanie

Chris Jones is the closest I've come to seeing someone who would want to add to opus. He's made a load of transitions that may well find their way into the next version of Opus and some that you can add now by putting them into the correct folder!

I'm sure he'd love to help devlop plugins???

Chris - any comment?

Having gone from early versions of Illuminatus, through early versions of OPUS, to the current 4.5, I've gotten very used to the OPUS interface. I like it just the way it is. I don't want it changed.

PaintShopPro thought by changing their interface to look more like PhotoShop would make everyone happy -- They were dead wrong. If I liked the PhotoShop interface better, I would have bought PhotoShop. To appease the majority of dissatisfied previous customers, they had to create a complex feature which allows you to turn the "old" interface back on. DW, please learn from their silly mistake. Leave the current OPUS interface just the way it is.

Attention newbies who would like to see a different interface: Learn to use the current one, and THEN you'll understand why it is the way it is. OPUS is an awesome product with unbelieveable features. It's ease of use coupled with it's "under the hood" power make it the best multimedia development tool on the market. Please don't waste one second of development time changing the interface. It's fine the way it is.

Hear, hear, Fred

Just in case this question gets lost in the discussion of IDE's and user interfaces:





Maybe I should post it in a new topic?

I will. Pity I can't delete this now...

Cheers, Melanie

Regarding AMS:

I've owned the Indigo Rose product since it was Autoplay Menu Studio 1.0 and I paid for several upgrades since then. I gave up on upgrading just prior to the recent release of their software. Why? Because I found that the release I was using did not provide the same functionality that Opus provides, and that upon publication it automatically created files and directories as part of its output -- over which I could exercise little or no control (not even being able to rename them!). With every new release, they promised greater functionality, easier use, more control; these did not materialize (if the program has finally achieved its potential, I applaud them, but my interest in their product has waned somewhat).

Don't get me wrong -- Indigo Rose is a fine company, and I use their installer software to make self-installing packages. They provide good support. I just think they missed the boat on AMS once too many times, and now they're too expensive for me to bother with another upgrade.

Regarding plug-ins:

They work great for PSP and PhotoShop. They were developed for Director because Macromedia didn't care to develop some things on their own -- in fact, for at least the first 6 releases of Director they didn't even think video playback was worth the trouble to include, which necessitated someone (Tabuleira de Brasil, I think it was called) developing what Macromedia should have pre-packaged in the first place. People ended up spending MORE money (assuming you're ethical & pay for shareware) just in order to get what should have been included with basic installation.

Regarding Opus:

I prefer Opus as it is, and I don't need a plethora of plugins of wildly varying quality and price which may or may not mess up my registry settings, my codecs, etc.

And -- just to complete my curmudgeonly rant in full flower -- I think the existing Opus interface is far and away more intuitive than any of the other interfaces, including Director. I don't want to see the interface cluttered with unnecessary options, and I hate Program Bloat (which can result from trying to make a program do everything every user requests).

OK, I'll take a chill pill and lie down now.

And now we've spared some forum time to discuss a competitor perhaps someone could reciprocate on the Indigo Rose site And indeed any other of the many pretenders to our throne as Kings of Usability and Productivity

As you all know we welcome all comers here - believers, unbelievers and prodigals. And they'll be just in time to witness a new release which is going to have our competitors gasping for breath and wondering how they will ever catch up.

Paul Harris

Paul --
Yeh, after I posted I realized I had slipped into the "let's discuss a competing product" trap into which we can sometimes fall. (Of all people here, I'm usually the irritable guy who complains when people chat about other products!) Sorry!