With most enterprise (MS on .NET, Google on Angular, Facebook on React), I think it should just follow that Adobe perhaps start the process of having Flash open sourced so that all possible enhancements and security patches it needs can be performed by a community that believes in its capabilities - in media and enterprise.
Funny as a moment ago, I was just watching some video about Facebook's React framework and their mantra was - "Learn Once, Write Anywhere". Wasn't this already the option offered by Flex/AS3 even before the boom of fragmented devices/OS? The only thing that separates with this native frameworks is that Flex/AS3 requires a closed Adobe plugin, whilst the JS frameworks are open, but still dependent on what the browser could offer in terms of compatibility and implementation. Nonetheless, I still believe and this will hold true that Flex is the best platform to build enterprise, business-level application. 95% of businesses won't care what technology stack an application was build, nor the platform it is being delivered. If it performs the functionality desired and solves real world business problems, then they are more likely to approve of that project. I hope this project pushes through - to bring a new breathe of life for Flex app development. The functionality offered by Flex out of the box is simply too good to be left out for consideration in the realms of enterprise software development. On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Carlos Velasco < carlos.velasco.bla...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the flex framework and universe needs to pass a rebranding process > to separate itself from the Adobe products past and future destiny. I mean, > it is no more an Adobe product, but a new one with its own lifecycle... So, > moving to a new brand would throw away every Adobe's bad inheritances from > the past. > > The product, in my opinion, should focus on covering what it was made for > (and Adobe always failed to get the world to fully understand); what is: > Heavy Enterprise Rich Internet Applications. > > I mean. JS is for web development and so it should be, but it becomes a > nightmare when used in complex applications. That is where FLEX is the best > technology, and so it should take its market. > > I also think that if the community is to be taken in a serious way, it > should refactor some other things: > > - Create an open source virtual machine maintained by the community. > (Please run away from the Player word at the name, it is not a serious > name), but depending on Adobe is the tomb way in the near future. > > - Expand the AS language to get improvements and a roadmap. > > - Forget about basic web features and be centered in the big companies > world. > > - Encourage web developers to adopt JS or others as their platform. Focus > on enterprise developments where a big team is required to get the goal. > > - Clean the Framework API and extend it. > > > Flex was sold as the Web Technology for every project, so it got many > enemies in the way, but Adobe failed defending the product. Now the new > Apache product has to find its place in the market, needs a lot of > reliability from big companies, and having the Adobe's past so present is > resting so much to the technology's future. > > Do you agree? > > > > 2015-02-23 17:04 GMT-03:00 Stephane Beladaci <adobeflexengin...@gmail.com > >: > > > David, your suggested approach is actually being attempted by a client > > of mine, assuming I understand it correctly. I would be interested in > > getting involved and have a look at what you did so far. At this point > > I think the discussion is going to have to lead to a few labs > > experiments, I am setting up some infrastructure for source code > > management, code review, and community management. Maybe your approach > > is a good candidate for one of those labs. Feel free to contact me > > directly for details, we will then circle back to the mailing list > > with relevant info or topic open to discussion, that way we don't > > saturate the conversation. > > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:37 PM, <f...@dfguy.us> wrote: > > > I really think Stephane makes some great points. It's a good idea > though > > to keep things constructive and on topic in regards to Flex too as Erik > > mentioned. > > > > > > While work on a different player seems to have been something actively > > tried a few times, what I've been pondering is possibly trying to cross > > compile one of the browser sources to as3. That way we could leverage all > > of the good things about the web standards within a flex or air app. Some > > of the built in HTML views have a lot of limitations so this might allow > > for reusing a lit of the existing code out there, or combining project > > assets into a single codebase. > > > > > > I've done some initial work on it but don't have anything completed as > > of yet. > > > > > > David > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Stephane Beladaci <adobeflexengin...@gmail.com> > > > To: dev <dev@flex.apache.org> > > > Sent: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 1:24 PM > > > Subject: Re: "The Player", a case for an independent Flash Player > > > > > > I understand the possible distraction from the objective of the > > > mailing list, however it is concentrated on a single message thread > > > that anyone can easily ignore. It is also important to identify the > > > concerns and criticism from the community in order to define the right > > > path for an alternative player in an attempt to bridge the gap between > > > what Adobe seems incapable of accomplishing, what the browser war > > > render nearly impossible to accomplish, what the Jobs' Apple tries to > > > kill, and what the new Apple makes possible. > > > > > > You simply cannot consider the work, and future of Flex developers > > > without to have a holistic approach, analysis and understanding of the > > > business, corporate and technological of the developer communities, > > > browsers landscape, and app marketplaces. > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> > > wrote: > > >> This discussion was intended to start the development of a Flash > > >> Player alternative, and as such got a preliminary pass on being OT for > > >> this list. > > >> > > >> I think it has ended up being just a "bash the Player, Adobe, Apple > > >> and all let's include all browser vendors for good measure" thread, so > > >> I, again, respectfully ask that it is continued on another forum. > > >> > > >> This list is the dev list for the Apache Flex project, all discussion > > >> on it should at least be tangentially related to that topic. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> > > >> EdB > > >> > > >> > > >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Stephane Beladaci > > >> <adobeflexengin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> The "proprietary" tiny bit of the player, which is a fraction of the > > >>> whole Flash ecosystem mostly open source, is precisely what made it a > > >>> success and what made JS a failure. JS implementation is left to the > > >>> browser, and you can be sure they will use that last word to screw > > >>> each other, block each other, and make sure the browser never compete > > >>> with their app store. We have seen it over and over, bugs marked by > > >>> Apple "no to be fixed" by executive order to refrain Facebook from > > >>> building its HTML5 game platform codename "spartan"; H264 yanked by > > >>> Google to block Apple and MS. Safari on iOS 7 called by HTML5 expert > > >>> "the buggiest mobile Safari ever". > > >>> > > >>> Meanwhile Adobe keep adding features and move forward with no block, > > >>> no endless discussions and no matter the constant complaining from > the > > >>> developers community never happy with what we got, the player and AIR > > >>> are still half to full decade ahead of any <whatever>.JS technology > > >>> with decent browser penetration. > > >>> > > >>> It is because of the proprietary piece of the Flash player that the > > >>> same hypocrite browser vendors cannot mess with it, and Apple had to > > >>> ban it entirely to avoid having the Flash Platform take over its > > >>> AppStore with Flash 9, AS3, Flex and AIR. Good news is, that ban > > >>> exposed Apple much more than merely messing with JS implementation, > > >>> and I believe there is an antitrust class action lawsuit that can be > > >>> pushed by the Flash developer community. If I successfully lead this > > >>> to court, the discovery process might expose the whole nasty Silicon > > >>> Valley browser war. > > >>> > > >>> As far as security is concerned, my guess is that it is all a > question > > >>> of popularity, when every page on the web will contain HTML5 ads with > > >>> JS pushed to the limit as replacement for Flash, you will see JS > > >>> security risk rise to the sky. It already started, most security > > >>> reports warn of the HTML5 security risk. > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:49 PM, <f...@dfguy.us> wrote: > > >>>> That's probably true but what I'm wondering though is does this > > actually help right? So if Mozilla is then maintaining the code then it's > > dependent on them to fix any security flaws in terms of their own release > > cycle for fixes. Plus the ability of the implementation is again > dependent > > on whatever capabilities exist in the browser as the runtime like you > > mentioned. > > >>>> > > >>>> So what is occurring to me is that most likely media like that > outlet > > just don't like the idea of a "proprietary" runtime that's supported and > > maintained by a company in general, so it's sort of cool to promote an > > implementation by another company that's not deemed to be as proprietary > > like Mozilla. It's sort of an ideological argument I think that's really > at > > the root of all this stuff. I think there have been a bunch of swf > players > > out there for years right? But if this could allow all of that content to > > be played on iPads or etc then I'm sure it would help out. > > >>>> > > >>>> No one seems to care about all the other proprietary runtimes out > > there, or Apple's closed environment, or Android or anything else being > > closed in varying forms, or that whole Mozilla DRM plugin or etc. > > >>>> > > >>>> David > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>> From: Tom Chiverton <t...@extravision.com> > > >>>> To: dev@flex.apache.org > > >>>> Sent: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 9:23 AM > > >>>> Subject: Re: "The Player", a case for an independent Flash Player > > >>>> > > >>>> I think The Register's angle is the Adobe implementation of the > Flash > > >>>> runtime is bad and full of security issues. > > >>>> > > >>>> In theory Shumay runs in the JavaScript sandbox, so inherits all the > > >>>> protections and 'many eyes' of previous work on securing it. > > >>>> When was the last time there was a off-by-one arbitrary code > execution > > >>>> issue in a major JavaScript implementation ? > > >>>> > > >>>> Tom > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Ix Multimedia Software > > >> > > >> Jan Luykenstraat 27 > > >> 3521 VB Utrecht > > >> > > >> T. 06-51952295 > > >> I. www.ixsoftware.nl > > > > > >
