Anyways… thanks all for your comments here are my replies:

@Thijs yeah I know.. that’s what I thought when I clicked install.

@David I would like to know more about signing apps. Do you have any information on how this is going to be achieved? I don’t believe Apollo will die soon.. but there is chance it might not spread widely as Adobe intended. Take a look at Macromedia Central… I’m pretty sure that had some big bucks behind it..

@akeem That is one more advantage for Apollo, that it’s “program once and run anywhere” As zwetan also mentions, Zinc has a less featured API for MAC apps.

@Steven I reckon that if that is all the security measure apollo uses then a lot of people will have a hard time deciding to install the app or not. It will be really simple to create a trojan or a malicious program… As for network access I have my firewall which lets me know if the app is trying to connect to the outside world, so that’s one less issue.

@zwetan I know it’s an alpha product. I’m just trying to understand why is everyone so hyped about it. It’s not something that I see as a new technological breakthrough..

I understand that the zinc executable has no security features whatsoever.. I’m still trying to understand what Apollo has.
I don’t think that it’s useful if every Apollo app I install has the same pop-up. All of a sudden clicking that install button after they warn you will become something common. Like installing ActiveX on IE.. then all the adware and trojans start popping up.

I went to a WSG meeting here in Sydney and Ted Patrick was explaining Apollo. There wasn’t much time left and only some few questions were asked. But several people believe Apollo is similar to Java Web Start..

I’ll update the article with more info I find.. I’ve gotta get back to work now.

cheers,

> MDM Zinc can also produce “cross-system” installers
> for Windows, Mac and Linux.

oh really ?
the Linux one is till in development for Zinc,
same as Apollo

> Zinc also has alpha transparency, socket connections and
> much, much, more…

you don’t have exactly the same API from one OS to another,
juste between WIN and MAC, MAC have much much less features.

> The only great advantage of Apollo I see at the moment,
> is that it’s free.

that’s not the only one, but still being able to use the Apollo SDK for free, allow to build open source desktop app AND release the source code, something you can not do with Zinc.

Zinc is very good, and I used it for years,
but here things it doesn’t have:

- install from a web page
- security warnings, sorry but any exe can do anything on a system, having the Apollo screen telling you what and how the application gonna access your system is a GREAT features,
this will give a chance for small shops to play in the ground of big shops, do you trust more Adobe Apollo app or joe software Apollo app ?
when you got this kind of message, joe software got a little more chance to get installed.
- auto updater
- real cross-platform design, Apollo from the ground up
is made to be cross-platform, that will avoid to have
Apollo-Windows-only app.

and this is from the top of my head, don’t even get me started with the HTML object supported by the WebKit, something that you can only have in Apollo, not in flash9 SWF wrapped in a Zinc executable.

Second – Apollo is not replacing the browser. Also, Apollo is not going to die – there is too much capital behind it. Several big companies have already jumped on the bandwagon.

Apollo apps are not for every situation. However, if you would like a good example – check out the Ebay Desktop Apollo Application.