The flash player is actually a good thing as a simple distribution point for the VM. So it's just like downloading a browser or an app or anything else. The FUD has definitely already taken place via the attacks on Flash in general. A lot of those tech blogs have always been negative on Flash for years for whatever reason and Steve Jobs was sort of the king of it. The FUD was probably something he picked up from IBM all those years ago.
At any rate all of that is irrelevant. What would be helpful would be what makes sense to make good applications that run on lots of things well. Flash did that but was limited by reliance on the CPU and timeline based coding. Flex doesn't use the timeline unless you create separate animations and stage3d uses the GPU. It seems to me that flex could be good in a new iteration if it leveraged a new AS4 for stage3d but I don't know how you could emulate a lot of the old code outside of redoing the whole thing or having some way to emulate as3 code in the new runtime. What would be great is if you could knock all of things out and also add a native web view that's more integrated so you could do pretty much anything and everything. You could even dare I say run those new edge code animations in the runtime. That would probably be a lot of work though and I'm not sure if Adobe is brave enough to do anything interesting. David -----Original Message----- From: Gary Yang <flashflex...@gmail.com> To: dev@flex.apache.org Sent: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 10:34 AM Subject: Re: [Forward]To Adobe Leaderships - A very bold and crazy proposal about AS4 and Swift Opensource won't matter, because the core value is that end users trust Adobe Flash Player, and they install it. On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski <nicho...@spoon.as> wrote: > Andrei, > > There was a lengthy discussion at the 360|Flex conference a few weeks ago > about Adobe open-sourcing the player. It won't happen. > > The Flash Player is essentially the Red Tamerian project (open source) > https://code.google.com/p/redtamarin/ with a whole slew of properiety, > licensed codecs, tools and other addins. Things like video playback, text > rendering, etc. are all things that Adobe has licensed from others that > would prevent them from open-sourcing the player itself. They've already > open-sourced the VM. > > -Nick > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Me.Com <and...@leapingbytes.net> wrote: > > > I hate people who write opinionated articles without bothering to learn > > anything about the subject. Looks like Matt Baxter-Reynolds is one of > them. > > But then… I can not remember when I read anything really good at zdnet… > so > > it all fit together. > > > > Back to original idea - my only question is why bother? Personally I > > think the only thing we (flash developers) should be asking for - is for > > Adobe to open source the player. As of now - player is the weakest link > and > > the one which is beyond the rich of open source community. > > > > Just my $0.02 > > > > -- > > Me.Com > > Sent with Airmail > > > > On June 3, 2014 at 16:19:07 , Erik de Bruin (e...@ixsoftware.nl) wrote: > > > > > > > > > May I ask why you said "Technologically no"? > > > > > > > > > > Because Swift sucks > > > < > > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/apples-new-swift-development-language-highlights-the-companys-worst-side-7000030150/ > > > > > > > > > > This is not a forum to aid in the spreading of FUD. All this guy has to > say > > about Swift is that it sucks because it doesn't allow you to develop > > Android apps... If a tool sucks because it doesn't support each and every > > fragmented mobile OS out there, it seems to me they all suck. > > > > EdB > > > > > > > > -- > > Ix Multimedia Software > > > > Jan Luykenstraat 27 > > 3521 VB Utrecht > > > > T. 06-51952295 > > I. www.ixsoftware.nl > > >
