Cross-platform compatibility?

Not addressed in product specs:
How does Muse handle cross-platform compatibility?
Does it use HTML5 features?
How does it handle audio and video?
Can it generate a 'functioning' contact form?

Muse handles output for most desktop browsers well.
Muse only produces HTML5.
Muse does not import audio or video files unless you paste code into this 'codeless' design tool.
Muse only produces client side javascript. It offers no server side scripting (contact forms, comment areas, user account registration, password protection, e-commerce). If you want that, you'll need to paste code into this "codeless" design tool.
It is possible to find more mature web design programs.

Similar Messages

Multi-platform compatibility issue with my fillable pdf

Hey guys/gals -
Here is the run down: I created a fillable PDF for use with my clients to collect data prior to meetings because the original fillable word document that my firm provided was running into issues - especially with mac users. The auxiliary goal that I had for a fillable PDF - in addition to cross platform compatibility - was for my busy clients to be able to complete the form on their iphones/ipads on the go. Unfortunately, I have been receiving emails from clients saying that the document wont save or saying that the completed document is attached and it is returned completely blank and I was hoping for some expert help. I've attached my document below and would really appreciate your thoughts/wisdom on how I can fix it.
To summarize:
Problems
Clients complaining that they can't save the document
Mac Preview destroys the document
Client's say the document is fully completed but when I open the attachment it is blank
Goals
Create a fillable form that works on mac & pc in addition to mobile devices
Cannot use form central or like online services due to data sensitivity
Thanks in advance for everyone's thoughts/help!

I'll repeat the recommendation to not use Preview. As the form author, you can't prevent it unless you add some JavaScript that activates the fields if it's used in a PDF viewer that provides sufficient support.
If you receive a form that was filled-in and saved with Preview, it may appear blank but actually contain form data. You can open the form in Acrobat and export the form data to FDF/XFDF and import it into a blank form, which you can then save.
For users who cannot save, you should Reader-enable the form in Acrobat or tell your users to use Reader 11. In Acrobat 11 you Reader-enable by selecting: File > Save As Other > Reader Extended PDF > Enable More Tools

Old Macromedia - Adobe cross platform font issues

This message is more directed to Adobe.
I am aware that currently OpenType fonts are cross platform compatible but only with Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign.
However, my primary workspace is Fireworks-Flash. There are serious cross platform issues with fonts - I have looked at truetype, postscript and opentype and they all have issues translating onto PC - many of the styles are not available.
In our studio I design on Mac but our Flash developers are on PC - our final renders and review renders always need to happen on Mac as a result of this cross platform issue. This is a little inefficient.
When is Adobe planning on resolving this issue?

"I am aware that currently OpenType fonts are cross platform
compatible but only with Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign."
No, they are fully cross-platform compatible. The Adobe products you
mention, along with a very few others, are the only applications
capable of taking full advantage of the advanced features available in
some opentype fonts. And even the three products you mention don't all
necessarily support open-type in the same way.
"However, my primary workspace is Fireworks-Flash. There are serious
cross platform issues with fonts - I have looked at truetype,
postscript and opentype and they all have issues translating onto PC -
many of the styles are not available."
If you are using the same application version on both platforms, you
should have identical functionality. If you're using an older version
of Fireworks.
The only cross-platform style issue with TT or T1 fonts is that
Windows doesn't recognize any styles other than Regular, Bold, Italic,
and Bold Italic. Also, there's a font menu difference between MacOS
and Windows. Mac display all available styles, whereas Windows only
displays the family name, and you have to select the variants from
somewhere else (typically "B" "I" "U" buttons). SOME font families
from some vendors use the style function to define such variants as
Small Caps, Light, etc. MS products get ... confused.
"In our studio I design on Mac but our Flash developers are on PC -
our final renders and review renders always need to happen on Mac as a
result of this cross platform issue. This is a little inefficient."
If you're using different applications for design and rendering, and
their functionality is different, then you have a cross-application
compatibility issue. You didn't mention what applications or versions
are involved.
"When is Adobe planning on resolving this issue?"
It may be more a Microsoft issue than an Adobe issue. In addition to
the style limitations, There are no MS products that yet support
open-type features.
Although Adobe personnel do sometimes visit here, this is not a
"talk-to-Adobe' forum. Since your problem is application related, I'd
suggest taking it to the appropriate application forumsFireworks
General Discussion looks right.
And, as Bob said, you might also contact Adobe support directly with
your concerns.

DW CS3 cross-platform check in/out file locking

Here is my setup:
* Apple X-Serve file server (as a mapped drive on several
Windows XPsp2
machines and a shared drive on one Mac 10.4)
* Up-to-date Dreamweaver CS3 on every machine (3 windows, 1
mac)
* Enable file check in and check out (site preference for all
installations)
* Contribute compatibility (site preference for all
installations)
The problem is that when a file is checked in on the mac, the
file becomes
locked such that the windows machines can't check out the
file. All of the
windows machines check out and check in files with no problem
if the mac hasn't
touched them. Once the mac has checked in a file, I have to
"unlock" the file
via the right-click context menu on the file. (This unlock is
called "Turn off
Read Only" on the windows version.)
Windows FTP Log on check out after mac check in:
/.../public_html/help/faq.php - locked
/.../public_html/help/faq.php - error occurred - An FTP error
occurred -
cannot get faq.php.
/.../public_html/help/faq.php - unlocked
Apparently the Mac DW CS3 version of "Check in" and the
Windows DW CS3 version
of "Check in" are different and incompatible. Has anyone else
had this problem
or know of a solution? Removing the Mac is not an option.
This may or may not be related, but whenever a file is opened
on the operating
system other than last edited (mac opens windows edited file
or windows opens
mac edited file), the "Overwrite local copy" dialog shows up
when checking out
a file. When a compare is made of the server/local files,
there are no changes.
Both mac and windows have the same line ending settings in
the preferences.
http://www.hostingforum.ca/700363-cs3-cross-platform-check-out-file-locking.html
I'm having exactly the same issue. Has anyone experienced
this before, and if so have a solution?
Thanks in advance!

In your Site definition, you need to specify the Remote Info
of your
server, and then "Enable file checkin and checkout".
HTH,
Randy
djdeel wrote:
> I am unable to check out a file using the context menu
when right clicking on the file.

Cross platform DVD burning - Mac/PC/home DVD player

All right, Geniuses, re: cross platform DVD burning, I have read and read and spoken to many people. Out of 6 1/2 billion people, NOBODY can answer this question. Shane Ross probably can't answer it with a straight face.
How, where, why, when, what do I use to burn a DVD - who knows, maybe up to 90 minutes - so that I can play the same DVD on my Mac, your DVD home player, your boss's PC, whether it's Real Player, Windows Media Player, QT, mmrphmm-mmrphmm, or quakiifrafermessendt (w/chrome) format.
I am running Mac G5, dual proc. 2Gig, 3.5 G. RAM, OS 10.3.9, Final Cut Pro HD 4.5 which includes FCP, Compressor Live Type, DVD Studio Pro 3, Cinema Tools.
The editing part is a cinch. Even with my eyes open. I've used Mac since 1978 and shoot broadcast. Oddly, dropped frames, A/V synch, phase shifting, etc are no problems.
Also, I have about 300 shows that I did on VHS, 3/4", Betacam, and DV. I have an A to D converter that works great converting these tapes to digital which I store on my hard drive. What I need to do, let me back up... about a year ago I had to buy a PC because Mac doesn't support Solid Works 3D program. So, there, I said it, I own a PC. And that's why I have a problem. Or more accurately, a quandry. Rather than tie up my Mac, I might as well use the PC to record my videos to, then burn to DVD, then to edit them or run them through DVD Studio Pro on my Mac for authoring, then back to my first problem, How, where, why, when, what do I use to burn a DVD - who knows, maybe up 90 minutes - so that I can play the same DVD on my Mac, your DVD home player, your boss's PC, whether it's Real Player, Windows Media Player, QT, mmrphmm-mmrphmm, or quakiifrafermessendt (w/ultrascuzzyectoplacticdefoid) format.
Of course, I want highest quality. Absolutely, my finished DVDs have to play on PC, Mac and home DVD players. If you've gone this far, someday I might need to put some of this on the web. I like options. It might be delivered as a stream, or a download. Another compression question?
Simple, huh? Is there anything else you need to know? Should I fire up my old wire recorder, or are you going to suggest another 3rd party peripheral? Which would make me wonder, why hasn't Apple addressed this obvious disfunction.
BTW/ I have found Memorex DVDs work best on my system. Any comments?
Regards.

Welcome to the forum!
Time for a reality check: burned DVDs (and even stamped DVDs) are NOT 100% compatible with all DVD-Video reading devices. Period. It just the Nature of the technology and that fact that player and drive manufacturers rush products to market that are not fully in compliance with the DVD-Video standard.
That said, I've had only two individual playback compatibility complaints in the last 6 years with well over 2000 DVD-R discs authored in DVD-SP and burned from my Macs on an external Sony DVD burner. Those two complaints were rectified by burning a DVD+R disc for the clients.
Things I have learned:
· Windows Media Player doesn't play nice with DVD-Video. ULead and other DVD players for the Windows platform do work very well (I have to WinXP systems to test on). PC playback compatibility is dependent on many, many things; the user's video card, RAM, drive type (and condition), processor speed ... the list goes on and on. It's impossible to predict if ANY disc will work in any given PC.
· Memorex is at the very bottom of the list for quality media. Don't get me wrong; they do have a wonderful warranty. If you send back any discs they will replace them with equally poor quality media at no charge. Memorex is simply a marketer - there's no telling what brand or quality of media you're actually getting when you purchase their brand ... but you can be assured it will be cheap.
That said; I'll agree that your workflow seems a bit backward. Authoring to DVD and then editing? Makes no sense. You're losing quite a bit of quality in that process as well as adding unneeded steps. If you must capture the footage with a Windows system and it needs editing, capture then convert to a QT codec that matches your FCP Sequence settings so when you move the files to your Mac for editing, everything actually plays nice.
If your program doesn't need editing and you just want to transfer it to tape, I'd recommend using a stand-alone DVD recorder so you don't have to tie up either computer.
-DH

Cannot move HD DVCPRO movies cross-platform unless all systems are 5.1

The 5.1 Crossgrade creates an awkward situation whereby an HD DVCPRO movie exported at full rez ('Current Settings') on an Intel box cannot be viewed on a G4 unless that system too has FCP 5.1 installed - the codec changed to allow the Intel compatibility. Earlier installs of FCP do not allow playback in Quicktime Player - you can hear the audio but the video is white.
The easiest answer is of course to ensure everyone's on 5.1, but that's not going to work in every case. So - before we launch into an export to another format that IS cross-platform compatible, do we have any advice? We need to export a 2.2 hour feature on a MBP, and long transcodes are going to be a pain.
DV would work fine, if the codec doesn't suffer the same problem. Does it? And if not, is transcoding >2 hours to 24fps DV going to be painful?
All advice gratefully receieved. As long as it's not from Mr.Ham.

Ouch indeed. I wish 'that fellow' the best! We don't have that problem though (we've got all the MXF's and a full backup of all the MXF's too, and everything was imported in 5.1). Our problem is a client who doesn't have 5.1, so he can't see the media we're exporting from 5.1 on his G4 with FCP 4.5. But he only needs to view the media, and it doesn't need to be in FCP - Quicktime Player would be fine. So we want to give him the material in a format that is compatible with his system So my question is - does DV exported from 5.1 suffer the same crossgrade format issues? And is it very timeconsuming to trasnscode out to DV from HD DVCPRO?
Worst comes to worst he can get 5.1. But it'd be great for budgetary reasons if we could avoid that.

What about cross browser compatibility?

HI
I was searching cross browser and platform compatibility
matrix.
Can any one give me info on this or point me a link?
Thank You,
Suketu Vyas
Rich Internet Application Architect
Macromedia Certified professional
http://www.suketuvyas.com

Hi Suketu,
We don't have a matrix like that yet.
We have been testing on the latest browsers on both
platforms. Obviously, we are shooting to support all major browsers
correctly. We will note browser specific issues that we and other
users find on the Spry wiki.
I note in my Web Photo Gallery article that Safari has a bug
where doesn't handle XML nodes named <image> correctly.
If you find any browser specific bugs, please let us know!
Thanks for your help,
Donald Booth
Adobe Spry Team

JSF Cross Browser Compatibility

In reading about JSF I find no promise for cross browser compatibility. Am I to assume that this has been missed because
i. JSF is a specification and not an implementation and I should be looking for the implementation to make that promise.
ii. it's basically to hard to promise this.
iii. I didn't look hard enough.
I am guessing it's a (i) with the likely hood of (ii) to follow. But I would be interested on any feed back that anyone cares to add. For example, a implementation that is trying to promise this.

In my opinion, the JSF specification (or better, any specification) can only refer to other specifications, but never to a concrete software product. Consider a sentence like:
        JSF 1.0 is compatible with IEWhat could that mean? Some possibilities:
(1)     As it happened, until now, we did not stumble over a
        faces application that broke when run on our Faces
        reference implementation (version 1_1_01) in a
        WSAD 5.0 container in combination with IE 5.5
        with patch 12345 on Windows NT4 SP6 patch 98765.
        (To breake means to produce a result not legitimized
        by the spec, or to produce no result when one is
        expected, at least not in a reasonable time.
        Breakdowns caused by power failure or other
        reasons outside the scope of the spec to be ignored)Well, not worth any further comment.
(2)     Implementations of JSF 1.0 Spec will not brake
        on any faces application when run in a
        WSAD 5.0 container in combination with IE 5.5
        with patch 12345 on Windows NT4 SP6 patch 98765
        (To breake means ...)That is ok... if you have just this combination of components and will never change. Keep in mind that (2) does not promise
anything if you use IE5.5 patch 12345a (and the saying is, there have been several patches to IE ;-)
(3)     Implementations of JSF 1.0 Spec will not brake
        on any faces application when run in any container
        in combination with IE 5.5
        with patch 12345 on Windows NT4 SP6 patch 98765.
        (To breake means ...)Same as (2)
(4)     Implementations of JSF 1.0 Spec will not brake
        on any faces application when run in any container
        in combination with IE 6.0 on any platform with
        any patches.
        (To breake means ...)Maybe what is intended, just impossible to promise. First, such a bold statement about some software can not be proven.
Second, even if you have gained good confidence by thorow testing, who knows which future changes Microsoft will apply to IE 6.0 (via patches, which offen not only correct bugs, but also introduce new and maybe incompatible features)
(5)     Implementations of JSF 1.0 Spec will not brake
        on any faces application when run in any JSP 1.2
        or higher container in combination any broser
        which supports:
           - HTML 4.0.1
           - JavaScript 1.3
           - CSS 1.0
        where IE 6.0 is a browser which supports these
        three standards on any platform with any patches.
        (To breake means ...)It's getting better. But why, for heavens sake, should a JSF specification make a statement about the compliance of IE with HTML 4.0.1, JavaScript 1.3 and CSS 1.0? I think it would be the job of Microsoft to declare the compatibilty of their products with standards (if any applies, whatsoever).
Therefore, lets get rid of these and we have:
(6)     Implementations of JSF 1.0 Spec will not brake
        on any faces application when run in any JSP 1.2
        or higher container in combination any broser
        which supports:
           - HTML 4.0.1
           - JavaScript 1.3
           - CSS 1.0
        (To breake means ...)Nearly finished, just a little bit wordy. It is (nearly) obvious what 'to breake' means. And that it is common wisdom that software breakes, not some specification (Or, as Bertrand Meyer put it, Bubbles don crash. Specifications may be contradictory or fail to describe an algorithm, but never crash). Common wisdom removed gives:
(7)     Implementations of JSF 1.0 need a JSP 1.2 container
        and a browser capable of HTML 4.0.1, JavaScript 1.3
        and CSS 1.0That's it. Specs exist for two reasons. First, to be discussed and thought about. Second, to be implemented. (To the supporters of agile methods: of course you can reverse the sequence ;-). Therefore, specs should be as short and concise as possible, omitting any useless blabla. If the specs are sufficently precise and of moderate complexity, we can even try to prove the compatibility of the specifications. 'COMPATIBLE WITH IE' is advertisement, not tech talk.
Conclusion: Mixing up specifications and implementaions is generally a bad thing. Exception: All sentences where a specification and a implementation are mentioned together should have the form:
         Implementation X does [not] conform to specification Y
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I have a follow up question, just inspired by yours. It does not especially concern JSF, but web pages in general.
Some time ago, I stumbled over quite a few web sites with big red eye catchers:
OPTIMIZED FOR INTERNET EXPLORER!!!
And really, they did not look good on Netscape Navigator. Now, my question is, what do you think when you hit such a page? My first thoughts (it's long ago) have been:
    - Oh, nice designers. They really care for the majority of people,
      my neighbor uses an IE.
    - They just skiped the work for other browsers and sell this as an
      optimization. And I didn't get it. Very clever.
    - Poor Guys. Probably they had no other browser at hand.
    - Obviously they had publish this tremendously important information
      under pressure, no time to also optimize for others browsers.Wolfgang Oellinger

Cross platform CS on PC to CS3 on Mac does not work like video says

Your video on cross platform workflow states that you can import older Premier CS files on a PC into CS3 on a Mac. I tried this and get the message, "this project was saved in a aversion prior to Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 and cannot be opened on a Mac. Please refer to the User Guide for import options." I guess I have to assume then that the video, www.adobe.com/go/vid0236, is wrong about this? Can someone please explain how I can salvage the work I did 3 years ago on Premiere Pro 1 on a PC when I am now exclusively working on the Mac in CS3?
Thank you.

Ty,
This has come up a few times and the solution is to find a PC CS3 user, who will Open the Project and then Save it in CS3-CS4 for you. I does mean that you'll have to befriend a PC-person, but who knows, maybe you can reciprocate later on. In each previous instance, this workflow, PC to PC to Mac worked perfectly. Note: the same holds for Encore Projects, and there is some PC to PC incompatibilities between very early versions and later versions. I had to Open and Save an Enocre 1.0 Project in CS2, so a CS4 (only) user could then Open in CS4. This stuff happens, and the skip in Mac porting can play a role in it. If I had CS3 on my PC's, I'd do it for you, but CS2 will not hlep you.
I believe that P 6.5 was the last previous version ported for the Mac, until CS3.
Good luck,
Hunt

Need Help in Cross Platform Migration

Hi Gurus,
can you please tell me best way to do Corss Platform Migration with minimum down time and we are planning to do from AIX TO HP-UX.
oracle version is 10g
and can we do the data sync using streems if it is can you give the steps to configure streems in cross platform.
Thanks in advance.

High Availability Customer Case Studies, Presentations, Profiles, Analyst Reports, and Press Releases
[http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/availability/htdocs/HA_CaseStudies.html?_template=/ocom/print]
Check under Transportable Tablespace at the bottom
[Multi Terabyte Database Migration|http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/availability/pdf/TheHartfordProfile_XTTS.pdf]
HTH
Anantha

External Hard Drive won't appear on PC (want cross platform)

I have an external USB Hard Drive. I formatted it using the Disk Utility, OS Format and Journaling. Did a small partition in case I needed a system boot drive. Now my sis needed to backup her laptop (Dell laptop), but the drive won't appear in My Computer, it recognizes there is a USB device on the lower task bar, but no drive anywhere.
Do I have to reformat? what steps do I need to make this USB drive cross-platform friendly?
Paul

Hi, Paul.
You may not want to reformat the drive as FAT-32 since there is a limit on the size of the partition, the maximum file size, and other issues, especially if her Dell's drive is formatted as NTFS (FAT-32 does not support NTFS extended attributes). FAT-32 is unsuitable for backing-up Mac OS X volumes as it cannot preserve the extended attributes (permissions, etc.) employed by Mac OS X.
It's really best if you each have your own external hard drive for backup, as part of implementing a comprehensive Backup and Recovery solution, such as I use and detail in my "Backup and Recovery" FAQ. You also don't want one person inadvertently writing over another person's backups, which could happen if one is not careful. Furthermore, it is often easiest for recovery.
How one handles backup in cross-platform environments is tricky and depends on the native formats employed by the different computers involved, and whether backup will be performed over a network or by directly connecting backup drives to the computers one is backing up.
To enable her Dell to use the Mac-formatted drive, install Mediafour's MacDrive for Windows on the PC. MacDrive for Windows is probably the state-of-the-art application for enabling you to use Mac-formatted disks and hard drives on Windows-based PCs.
Good luck!
Dr. Smoke
Author: Troubleshooting Mac® OS X
Note: The information provided in the link(s) above is freely available. However, because I own The X Lab™, a commercial Web site to which some of these links point, the Apple Discussions Terms of Use require I include the following disclosure statement with this post:
I may receive some form of compensation, financial or otherwise, from my recommendation or link.

Steps to create Cross-Platform Transportable Tablespaces

hi
what is the steps to do Cross-Platform Transportable Tablespaces.
i want to perform this in my pc, i have linux and windows in same PC, i want to migrate from linux to windows and vice versa.
so can i know complete steps and commands to perform Cross-Platform Transportable Tablespaces. to get complete knowledge i am doing this so i can implement this in my office when any migrate issues comes. so once i do this i will get confidence so that i can do the same in my office which saves my time.
veeresh s
oracle-dba
[email protected]

Hi, also you can review the Note:413586.1 into metalink site.
Good luck.
Regards.

Which product to purchase (cross platform necessary from Mac to PC) Adobe Photoshop 6.0.x to ???

I have ancient Mac photoshop and pagemaker files. i need best cross platform product for windows that can access these files. adobe photoshop is my primary concern. I understand the indesign cs2 will import old school mac photoshop 6.0.x but is not compatible with windows 7 ... thank you.
In particular we use windows 7 x64
So in summary, need to determine which Windows 7 x64 version of Indesign CSxx will still open archaic Mac Adobe files (layouts, EPS, etc). Or is there a similar product that must be obtained. I prefer to stick to Adobe products, however, if I must go elsewhere and you can help -- please advise.
Also, if you know what I should obtain, does this product have a trial download option that I can test functionality before purchase? Warranty when I do buy information -- and return policy in general?
Many thanks.

PM support has long been pulled from InDesign. You are going to need some old version like CS or CS2 and save an intermediate step to ID files. PS is not a probelm at all. All programs have 30day trials and Adobe has a general 14day return policy. Refer to the product pages on teh website.
Mylenium

PDF with special characters (é, ñ) needs to be legible cross-platform(mac & pc)

I am using Illustrator to design a PDF. Because it's in Spanish, accent marks and other special characters are needed (á, ñ).
When I export the PDF from the ai file and view it on my mac it looks fine. However, when I open it on a pc some of the special characters are completely missing.
I tried Creating Outlines with the text, although it will make it harder to update in the future and so less preferable to leaving the text editable. Creating Outlines works fine on the mac, however on the pc the L's appear thicker than they actually are.
Does anyone know how to make special characters legible cross-platform when creating a PDF using Illustrator?
Thanks!!

Does anyone know how to make special characters legible cross-platform when creating a PDF using Illustrator?
Yes. You use a correct OpenType font that has the glyphs in the place where they belong and can be embedded without limitations. Older TrueType or PostScript fonts are simply unsuitable as are fonts that cannot be emebdded and require to be installed locally. It all comes down to system language settings vs. the unified environment inside acrobat. This also requires any PDF to be created on systems with the language settings correct in the first place, i.e. creating Spanish text with a Japanese version of AI would be pretty desastrous due to how foreign language fonts are accessed... check these things and then try again. If possible, enforce embedding of the full font in the PDF settings, not just a subset and choose a suitable font.
Mylenium

Email images and signatures not displaying cross platform??

I have noticed something odd when emailing people who are using windows. For some reason, attachments and signatures that are images (.jpg files that WILL open in a browser on the PC) or PDF's do not show up in the body of the email I send to them. Yet they are using HTML email, and emails they send to ME do have images showing up correctly in both the body of the email and the signatures on my Mac. Is there something on my end that I need to do in the formating to make this cross platform? Has anyone else run into this?
I'm confused, I thought HTML was HTML....

Same here... in Outlook 2007 many times the Mac email signature ends up as an HTM attachment... Any news on this odd behavior!

Cross-platform compatibility?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for