Yes, I agree with you. -----Message d'origine----- De : Deepak MS [mailto:megharajdee...@gmail.com] Envoyé : mardi 25 mars 2014 07:52 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: ApacheCon Slides
I looked into this slide: Why FlexJS? Adobe Flash Player used to be in every browser Adobe AIR used to run on most computers Executives no longer carry Flash-capable devices AIR apps require installation and upgrades AIR apps have some fidelity issues Flash-based solutions no longer desirable Large MXML and ActionScript code bases I honestly felt that it's depicting flex\flash in a negative way. Subject says 'Why FlexJS?', but instead it talks 'Why we shouldn't use flex\flash'. Flex is so popular because the way it is(running on flash player with super rich UI). Only problem is it cannot run on mobile devices on browser because of flash player limitation. And this is where FlexJS comes into picture. And I feel we need to portray FlexJS as a powerful alternative for running flex based apps on mobile browsers. I don't think FlexJS would give exact same output as flash player. And hence I would strongly encourage my customers to use our flex applications on desktops\laptops and I would give a alternative app(compiled with FlexJS) for their mobile browsers, which would be light weight. I am assuming that FlexJS would be used to convert MXML\ActionScript code. And if we say 'Flash based solutions no longer desirable' and if people stop creating flex applications, then the whole purpose of FlexJS would get defeated, I reckon. That was my perspective. I don't know, all those pointers may sound correct for some too. May be it all depends on how each individual would take it :) Agree with Om regarding a mention of new features\enhancements\skinning. On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>wrote: > Hi, > > > 2. The numbers on slide 32 is a outdated. We have more than 40,000 > > installs of the Flex SDK since we started keeping track. > > BTW where do you get the 40,000 number from. I can only see 30,000 in > the google stats. That only include 4.9 and up are you including 4.8 > in that and if so how did we measure that it got 10,000 downloads? > > Thanks, > Justin
