Physical disk solutions:
Several options having to do with physical disk structure may exist which are independent of development software, namely split content disks involving multilayered disks or doublesided disks. These physical parameters are defined in the DVD specs and are presently used for DVD-V movie releases. It's with these parameters that DVD achieves it's maximum potential of 8+ GB storage capacity.
These can be used in a number of ways, theoretically including separate layers for different platforms or multiplexed data from multiple layers. Examples may include a multiplayer disk that contains an ISO9660 folder for Mac & etc. and a layer for set-top DVD containing a standard UDF video_ts folder or a double-sided disk that can be "flipped" for different platforms. Another example is the possibility of a CDROM layer along with a UDF layer creating a disk that could play in both CDROM and DVD drives. Imagine one disk carrying the whole of Dig's product line!
There are some known can-do's here. Before I get your hopes up, nobody I'm aware of has used multilayer solutions to provide separate content, only to multiplex data from both layers. However,
1. You can do flipable DVD10 cross platform disk with CDROM on one side and DVD on the
other.
2. There is the possibility of using DVD9 to produce separate content for computer and
set-top platforms or for different computer platforms on separate disk layers. This
capability is theoretical. I want to see it pass proto testing.
However,
1. Per Steve, production issues presently prevent CDROM and DVD layers bonded to a
single side.
2. Flipable media can't be branded-the laser can't "see" through the label.
This does little to impact our search for solutions.
Flipable media gives us a way to separate Mac from PC content but the present product is cross platform already. We can separate CDROM and DVD but we already have a CDROM product and it's out of scope anyway. Finally, we have the opportunity to separate the DVD-V product from the ROM product which results in more or less the same development requirements as we started with. We build two products and try to make them live together.
I'd also point out that this doesn't really satisfy the requirement for one DVD disk that does it all since different layers will be read as different disks by the OS and will be at that point different products in literal terms, one layer's content capable of running off and living on a new medium without it's former partner layer content. On a more meaningful level, if we can achieve spec and provide content on multiple platforms within a few Mb of the same footprint, why would we not want this? For research purposes I decided to stay interested in multilayer but not to allow it to effect solutions definition.
Obviously, this factor is the most likely to impact ongoing disk production costs and not all shops have the capability to produce these disks. Fortunately, this type of solution is can theoretically be adopted at any future date utilizing already developed content. Associated increases in production costs will come down in years to come if no other technology replaces it (hello blue light?). There's some talk of labels that lasers can read through but I wouldn't bet a nickel on it.
Director MX04 pros:
1. As we now know, MX04 can call DVD-V content from a video_ts folder for presentation
on the ROM side utilizing a Shockwave player on the user computer.
2. MX04 will provide a porting path for existing Director and Lingo code. Nothing leverages
investment in code like using it.
3. The user development environment will be familiar to existing resources and install
itself nicely on existing file structures with minimal intervention and provide at least
minimal documentation on new capability.
4. Nothing else is arguably better or offers as comprehensive a solution. Lack of API
from Apple presents the same problem for them as it does anyone else. Additionally,
Interactual Player carries licensure fees that are pretty far from free.
5. Shockwave remains a capable, free and readily available player.
6. Shockwave supports Mac OS, Windows and OSX and Pocket PC (color devices), OS/2,
Solaris on Sun, SGI and "big iron", Solaris (Intel x86) HP-UX and SGI IRIX in various
combination with Netscape (Mozilla), Opera and Safari. There's unofficial support for
Linux from the major Linux distributors. Try and beat that, I double-dare you!
7. At around $1200 retail ($400 for upgrade) it's attractively priced.
8. Macromedia isn't going anywhere and we can count on continued support, a unique
quality on this playing field.
MX04's cons:
1. It might be buggy.
2. Re-read #1 above.
3. Kevin points out that Macromedia hasn't historically been the best about publishing
"how to" literature and when they do it generally ain't close to free. Most MX04 people
will have to battle training out with only each other for initial support or bug
verification. This will put a certain pressure on dev resources. The fact that
resources will enhance their value when they get used to it and issues are resolved
offsets this. Here's a fresh opportunity to be cutting edge with some degree of fanfare,
something that don't come around as often as it used to.