On 17.11.2012, at 16:39, sébastien Paturel wrote: > Adobe's roadmap continue to believe in flash player and AIR. ok. but not at > all for enterprise Apps. > first consequence is that any new capability like workers will be only for > the new VM we cant access with AS3 flex. (which was quite a big surprise for > me)
Not so according to this page: http://blogs.adobe.com/mallika/2012/08/flash-builder-4-7-beta-now-available.html > if tomorrow a great platform comes out, and is well suited for enterprise > apps, but not for gaming. flex is screwed for sure. Great new platforms pop up in the dev community all the time, however very few of them make it through childhood, puberty and on to mature adulthood. Meanwhile, Flex will continue to work fine with the existing Flash player in all browsers at least up to the current versions and probably longer. > if tomorrow Adobe dont manage to make money on gaming, (don't forget that in > that area, theres already tools like Unity which are much more advanced and > widely used) they could decide to not continue to improve AIR on mobile etc. Absolutely. That however doesn't make HTML/JS any more attractive to me nor does it fix all the problems there are with HTML/JS development. And isn't it more likely than not that Adobe will at least give this new strategy a few years to play out? > even if Adobe continue to port AIR on new devices, flex will only use an old > abandoned VM. Again its like if you were still trying to maintain an AS2 > framework in an AS3 world (its even worse). Isn't AIR support on devices more about porting the runtime to the particular OS running on the device, rather than porting to the device itself ? Or maybe it's a bit of both, I'm not sure. In any case, Adobe are adding Flash based services themselves even now, they just added a big video management solution which uses the Flash runtime in Flash player / AIR for video playback with support for commercials and other stuff. Why would they release smth like that and then turn around and kill the delivery platform ? HTML5 video doesn't cut it for this and won't anywhere in the near future because of disputes between the browser vendors and the HTML standardization entities. > > And you pointed out the Adobe's roadmap for flash platform. But check also > their active work on HTML5 area. everyone is preapring itself for a less > plugins world, before a non plugin world. And the shift of Adobe was quite a > very early and brutal one. (which was a bad decision IMO, but flex has to > deal with it) Well, I understood Adobe's decision and reasoning quite well when they finally got around to explaining it properly. And if they are going be major players in the HTML business then they have to take part in that work. I never expected them not to and don't think this should be a surprise to anyone. > > Do you really want flex to be totally dependant on Adobe's decisions? even if > Their strategy has nothing to do with apps? > Did not the last year afraid you enough? Last year definately did frighten me. But I've been watching the development of HTML5/JS/CSS for a long time as well, and there are lots of very big problems there that just aren't getting resolved despite years of discussions/arguing/etc. I don't want Flex to be dependent on Adobe but it currently is and I don't see any better alternatives out there for the next few years anyway. But we'll see what Alex proposes, I'm looking forward to detailed suggestions from him and then we can go through this discussion all over again :D :D :D > > The flex future is out of Adobe depency, and it has to be prepared as soon as > possible. even if we still have a few years before the unevitable big shift > happens. > > > Le 17/11/2012 17:20, Hordur Thordarson a écrit : >>> If we have a solution like Haxe, we can debug in a local native output, and >>> use the HTML/JS output only as a release. >> That to me is a recipe for problems, test/debug on one runtime, deploy to >> another one, you'll get situations where smth works in testing/debug but >> doesn't or works differently in your release build. Not good. >> >>> but if you take the fact that the plugin word is getting to an end >> >> I don't agree with that. Here's Adobe's roadmap on this: >> >> "Adobe believes that the Flash runtimes are particularly and uniquely suited >> for two primary use cases: creating and deploying rich, expressive games >> with console-quality graphics and deploying premium video. This shift in >> focus for Flash does not mean that existing content will no longer run, or >> that Flash cannot be used for content other than gaming and premium video. >> However, it does mean that when prioritizing future development and bug >> fixes, gaming and premium video use cases will take priority." >> >> That to me says that Flash player/AIR aren't going away, quite the opposite >> in fact as Flash player/AIR (for mobile) are core components of Adobe's new >> gaming strategy for building a business on top of Flash. >> >>> but you don't get it anymore in the next flash builder versions, because of >>> the Adobe's strategy shift. >> Do we know this for sure ? I've not read anything that tells me this. And >> frankly, I can't see how Adobe is going to monetize Flash without top-notch >> dev tools. Indeed, their roadmap says this: >> >> "The Flash runtimes provide a number of key advantages and differentiators >> as a gaming platform, including the following: .... World-class creative and >> developer tooling including Adobe Flash Builder, Adobe Flash Professional, >> Adobe Photoshop, and Adobe Illustrator". >> >> But maybe I'm reading all this wrong or maybe I'm believing too much what I >> think I'm reading or maybe the people here advocating a HTML/JS strategy for >> Flex have been burned more by Adobe than I have. >> >> >> On 17.11.2012, at 14:47, sébastien Paturel wrote: >> >>> Why? as we said it before, its only to get rid of Adobe's runtime for the >>> long term future of flex. >>> The last year should have convinced you thats its too dangerous to be so >>> dependant to Adobes decisions. >>> And no one wants to turn the AS3/MXML code to HTML/JS. its only an >>> alternative as a runtime. You would still use the same AS3, the same Flash >>> builder. >>> If we have a solution like Haxe, we can debug in a local native output, and >>> use the HTML/JS output only as a release. >>> >>> "Flash builder with a pretty nice, WYSIWYG GUI builder" >>> but you don't get it anymore in the next flash builder versions, because of >>> the Adobe's strategy shift. >>> >>> "the code you run/debug will not be the actual code you wrote" >>> but if you take the fact that the plugin word is getting to an end, theres >>> not much choices left. and you have to rely on a new layer which will >>> replace the plugin. >>> >>> "like the man said, if it ain't broke, don't fix it" >>> Again, the flex future is broken, and we have to fix it. >>> >>> Le 17/11/2012 15:30, Hordur Thordarson a écrit : >>>>> if all says that HTML5 is not ready yet for RIA and enterprise apps that >>>>> flex can do very well, why the hell would we try to render flex on HTML5 >>>>> engine for >>>> My question exactly, why the heck, when we have the best cross-platform UI >>>> lib out there with allready pretty darn good deployment options (from a >>>> technical/ubiquity perspective), do we want to go and turn our AS3/MXML >>>> code into HTML and JavaScript for running in the browser? If the only >>>> thing that is gained by that is to get rid of the Adobe VM dependency then >>>> I say we're giving up much more than we are getting. >>>> >>>> I'm using Flex and deploying to Flash player / AIR specifically so I don't >>>> have to deal with HTML/JS/CSS. And someone please correct me if I'm >>>> wrong, but currently I have an excellent debugging experience for my Flex >>>> apps with FlashBuilder and Flash player, I can set breakpoints, step >>>> through my code etc, works like a charm. If Flex is rewritten and the >>>> decision is made to compile to HTML/JS, as far as I can see, this >>>> experience has been downgraded significantly because now I have to debug >>>> generated HTML/JS code, not my own code. This is the problem with >>>> cross-compilation. >>>> >>>> Also, what would the experience be on the dev tools side ? Currently we >>>> have Flash builder with a pretty nice, WYSIWYG GUI builder and as I said, >>>> a pretty nice compile-run-debug experience. If Flex is ported to Haxe or >>>> some other language, we are back to square one as far as this is >>>> concerned. If Flex sticks to AS3/MXML but then gets cross-compiled into >>>> HTML/JS, then as I said above, the code you run/debug will not be the >>>> actual code you wrote. All sorts of new problems will follow. >>>> >>>> I'm really hoping I'm wrong and way to pessimistic about all this, and >>>> will happily change my views on this if someone shows me some evidence >>>> that even though Flex is rewritten and the Adobe dependency ditched, we >>>> will not loose the nice dev experience that Flex has today. >>>> >>>> I'm a Apple/Mac guy and have been since the days of the Apple II. I've >>>> been programming for about as long. And as such, I've often had the >>>> problem that I wanted to develop on my Mac but be able to deploy to >>>> Windows, or both. Out of the countless number of frameworks and tools and >>>> programming languages that I've tried through the years, nothing at all >>>> matches the Flex/Flash player/AIR combo. Nothing, period. And I think we >>>> owe it to Flex to not just cut out most of what makes it great just to get >>>> rid of the Adobe dependency. At the very least, if a totally new Flex is >>>> started, possibly with another programming language and deployment >>>> runtime, I would hope that there would also be an ongoing lobbying effort >>>> concerned with showing Adobe what a great use of Flash player and AIR the >>>> Flex framework is, because there is nothing seriously wrong with the Flex >>>> platform as it is, and like the man said, if it ain't broke, don't fix it >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> On 17.11.2012, at 13:54, sébastien Paturel wrote: >>>> >>>>> i was in fact talking about enterprise app. >>>>> it is already quite rapidly heavy perf consuming. >>>>> if all says that HTML5 is not ready yet for RIA and enterprise apps that >>>>> flex can do very well, why the hell would we try to render flex on HTML5 >>>>> engine for native apps. >>>>> I was talking about 3D rendering, in a starling sens, as a background >>>>> rendering engine, not as application. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Le 17/11/2012 14:25, Nils Dupont a écrit : >>>>>> It really depends on which kind of application you want to deploy. I was >>>>>> more thinking of common "entreprise" oriented applications, e.g. a few >>>>>> views, with a few lists and a few forms. For 3D rendering I agree that it >>>>>> is not the best way to go. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2012/11/17 sébastien Paturel <sebpatu.f...@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Does not cordova only launch a web browser wrapped in an native app? >>>>>>> If so, its very bad result in terms of performances right? >>>>>>> in a native app environement, we can leverage from 3D rendering (the >>>>>>> best >>>>>>> performances), but with cordova solution, we will use the lowest >>>>>>> performant >>>>>>> renderer available, the HTML5 renderer. >>>>>>> it does not sound very promising to me, but maybe i'm wrong. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 17/11/2012 14:14, Nils Dupont a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Has anyone tried to make a bridge between Apache Flex and Apache >>>>>>> Cordova? >>>>>>>> I mean generating an Apache Cordova HTML5/JS application from a Flex >>>>>>>> Mobile >>>>>>>> MXML/AS3 application (at least for a subset of Flex Mobile components >>>>>>>> e.g. >>>>>>>> views & transitions, lists, input controls, native APIs access, web >>>>>>>> service >>>>>>>> access, etc.) >>>>>>>> Apache Cordova has the advantage to be able to target 7 different >>>>>>>> mobile >>>>>>>> OS >>>>>>>> and of course is open source. >>>>>>>> For the UI controls, it is possible to use different librairies (JQuery >>>>>>>> UI, >>>>>>>> Twitter Bootstrap, etc.) >>>>>>>> Maybe it is also an other way to consider in order to be able to deploy >>>>>>>> Flex Mobile applications to mobile devices without >>>>>>>> the use of Air runtime? >>>>>>>> Nils >>>>>>>> NB: Concerning desktop applications, Flash Player remains, in my >>>>>>>> opinion, >>>>>>>> the best way to deploy cross-browser applications. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2012/11/17 Maxime Cowez <maxime.co...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Are developers on this list still able to earn a living building new >>>>>>>>> Flex apps, or are you maintaining old ones? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I was actually hired 9 months ago by my current company to set up a >>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>> Flex development branch, as they wanted a share of the market in that >>>>>>>>> area. >>>>>>>>> As such I am mainly creating new "enterprise" apps for government >>>>>>>>> clients >>>>>>>>> so I can take full advantage of Spark and don't have to worry about >>>>>>>>> legacy >>>>>>>>> too much. From my experience in that short amount of time I can tell >>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>> this: we started by creating small(-ish), fairly risc-free projects, >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> we could deliver with very good quality and on time even though on a >>>>>>>>> tight >>>>>>>>> deadline. Because of Flex's RAD (rapid application development) >>>>>>>>> possibilities we were able to use prototypes to discuss functionality >>>>>>>>> early >>>>>>>>> in the development process. All of which lead to very satisfied >>>>>>>>> customers, >>>>>>>>> of which some were known to be "clients from hell". Bigger orders are >>>>>>>>> rolling in as we speak. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'd like to highlight one specific approach we took in selling Flex: a >>>>>>>>> customer wanted us specifically to use Dojo as a technology. We took >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> risk to develop a small prototype in Flex and presented it to them. >>>>>>>>> They >>>>>>>>> saw immediately that the UX was far superior to what they were used >>>>>>>>> to. >>>>>>>>> And >>>>>>>>> we told them we could *perhaps* deliver the same with Dojo, but it >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>> cost them at least twice as much (which is a true estimate - not just >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> selling purposes - and we had just proven by delivering the prototype >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>> time). They did not have to think very long about it... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We've been trying out various enterprise-level HMTL5/JS frameworks and >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> truth is, none of them comes even close to what Flex can do in terms >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> stability, possibilities, performance and most importantly (for the >>>>>>>>> customer) development time. And yes I've included performance in that >>>>>>>>> list: >>>>>>>>> none of those enterprise-level frameworks have decent performance >>>>>>>>> compared >>>>>>>>> to Flex when presenting lots of data; I'm only speaking of classic >>>>>>>>> web-applications here. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> @paul There's a team not far from my desk that's making a GIS >>>>>>>>> application >>>>>>>>> with GWT: the project is a total mess and we're loosing money on it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To sum it up: from my experience Flex as it is now still can be sold >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>> markets that are not too sensitive to buzzwords. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Paul Hastings >>>>>>>>> <paul.hasti...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Are developers on this list still able to earn a living building new >>>>>>>>>> Flex >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> apps, or are you maintaining old ones? >>>>>>>>>>>> in our neck of the woods flex is still kind of king for old school >>>>>>>>>> GIS >>>>>>>>>> applications (analytical/decision support/etc.) especially w/ESRI >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> backends. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mainly for desktops & some stripped down functionality for >>>>>>>>>> tablets--much >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> the processing is shared between client & backends. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> while i'm sure there are some big/complex JS/JTML5 apps for this >>>>>>>>>> market >>>>>>>>>> somewhere, haven't actually seen any. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> > >
