Well said.
Paul Andrews wrote:
Having come from a background of bespoke database-driven development
where bare functionality is the primary consideration above gloss, I can
say that Flex is a breath of fresh air.
For many companies flash is dismissed as a serious contender for
"serious" work because as those companies know, flash is just for silly
animations and froth. There's always been a barrier to using flash for
serious development in large companies because it's not regarded as a
'serious' development platform and those companies will go with
Microsoft technologies or use Java. Flex is the development system that
can appeal to those companies because the development teams that work in
those companies can understand it's paradigm and they understand the
toolset and language.
This isn't some anti-flash statement it's just the way things are.
Traditional developers don't understand the timeline, don't want to
understand it and want a development system that works like the
'serious' languages they are used to. Flex gives them that and as a
bonus it gives them the sophisticated effects and UI they didn't have
access to before. It allows them to work with the server-side
technologies they are used to and they don't get the ribbing they would
be prone to if they suggested using flash for a front-end.
This is a Flash forum and everything seems to be being discussed as
though Flex is some kind of Flash killer or replacement. It isn't and
Flex goes where flash has not trod.
Flex is really complimentary to flash, not a replacement. There are
always going to be superb flash sites with timeline animation and all
kinds of bells and whistles. Flex doesn't compete with that. If a Flex
developer want's things that are better done in flash they'll use flash
and integrate that component with flex.
You can write badly in Flex. You can write badly in Flash. You can just
write badly even without either Flex or Flash.
Flex and Flash fit different niches with a broad crossover between them.
It's not Flex vs. Flash - it's Flex, Flex and Flash or just Flash,
depending on what you want to achieve.
Paul
----- Original Message ----- From: "Merrill, Jason"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Flash Coders List" <flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Flex vs. Flash
Sure - I mean again, it just comes down to what KIND of sites you are
comparing - a cool site RIA could be equally cool as a cool 3D Flash
site like EcoDaZoo (which was done with Papervision3d by the way, and
could have been done in Flex - if there was a need for the Flex
framework) - but comparing one site with another for "coolness" is
really subjective, it's like comparing apples and oranges. If a site
dynamically allows product selection interactions with effects was
seen as "cool" - and a site like EcoDaZoo was done with Flash +
Papervision and is thought of as "cool", well, which one is "cooler"?
You can't do the comparision because they are completely different
types of sites.
Yes, for sites that have a lot of UI "zing" - animations and effects,
and really wild transitions and layouts, well, Flex would not be the
best choice. That's why you have to decide which tool is best for
what kind of project you have.
Jason Merrill
Bank of America Instructional Technology & Media ยท GCIB &
Staff Support L&LD
Interested in Flash Platform technologies? Join the Bank of America
Flash Platform Developer Community
Interested in innovative ideas in Learning? Check out the Innovative
Learning Blog and subscribe.
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
_______________________________________________
Flashcoders mailing list
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
