To not allow existing SWFs to play where they currently play would “break the web” and Adobe has no interest in doing that.
The next generation of AS is supposed to be easy to migrate to if you just want to get your code to run, but there is a chance that to fully leverage the performance benefits of the new language you will have to learn some new constructs and refactor existing code. FlashBuilder will definitely be the IDE for developing applications for the new VM and new AS. On 12/21/12 10:41 AM, "John McCormack" <j...@easypeasy.co.uk> wrote: Brilliant. Thank you. I am pleased that existing SWF's will run in an embedded VM in the new player. Do you think the next-generation of ActionScript will be similar enough to make migration easy? and Is FlashBuilder likely to be the IDE that creates code for the new VM? John On 20/12/2012 05:50, Alex Harui wrote: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex alternatives Well, there are several pieces. ActionScript is a language. It is really only the dozen classes or so in the “top-level” in the ASDoc. String, int, RegEx, Array, Vector, a few functions like unescape, etc, plus a bunch of keywords and stuff like “var”, “class”, plus a grammar of how you put it all together. It hasn’t changed much in years, other than the addition of Vector. There are no plans to improve on its specification by adding things it is missing compared to other languages like Java such as method overloading, or mutiple inheritance. Instead, Adobe is tossing out the whole specification and developing a next-generation of ActionScript. It will have some of the same things you see in the current ActionScript, but there will be new keywords and grammar. The goal is to give up on backward compatibility in order to get significant speed improvements by making the language easier to execute at runtime. ActionScript currently only runs in a Virtual Machine embedded in the FlashPlayer or AIR. Both runtimes provide additional APIs that allow you to draw stuff and get network i/o, etc. The current APIs use ActionScript 3 syntax and are focused primarily on Sprites, Shapes and MovieClips on a display list. New features were added in every major release. Now, Adobe is working on embedding a new Virtual Machine that runs the next-generation ActionScript in the FlashPlayer and AIR. The focus is on gaming, and a new set of APIs that talk to a 3d rendering engine is being devloped in the next-generation ActionScript syntax. There will be no support for the old Sprites/Shapes/MovieClips and display list. However, the old virtual machine that runs ActionScript 3 will continue to be embedded in the FlashPlayer and AIR that run on tradtional desktops/laptops. I would not expect it to be co-existent on mobile versions of AIR because the new focus is on the captive runtime workflow where you pre-process your ActionScript code and the runtime libraries into a device-dependent executable. So, given all of that, you can continue to deliver ActionScript 3 content in AIR or FlashPlayer on desktops/laptops “forever”. And unless you have heard otherwise from the PDF team, they probably won’t eliminate support for Flash in PDF on desktop/laptops soon. I think Apache Flex exists because folks have found the Flex workflow easy and productive and also safe because it uses structured programming, and former Flex customers are now pitching in to continue to evolve Flex as much as we can given the constraints of the current environment. The problem for many is that, because Adobe is not evolving the ActionScript 3 language, VM and runtime APIs related to it, folks see it as a dead end and no longer want to develop apps on it. I can see their point, but there is a reason why DOS is still around on some custom handheld devices: it works, it is well known, and has a small footprint for a constrained environment. Flash/AIR and Flex on ActionScript3 continue to be excellent ways to create apps quickly, but it has been difficult to convince customers to stick with it. Anyway, so far, the most interest in Apache Flex seems to be around trying to leverage the Flex workflow to create apps that run on the HTML/CSS/JS stack (without Flash). It will have growing pains for sure, but to me, a question about CPU load is premature. There is 1000’s of people from all over the world working on improving the runtime environment for HTML/CSS/JS. They have made significant advances in the past several years and I don’t see a cap on it. So any pain points you experience now are likely to be solved in the near future. If you can continue to use Flash/AIR and let others suffer through the growing pains, consider yourself lucky. Otherwise, put on some pads and join the battle. On 12/19/12 9:29 AM, "John McCormack" <j...@easypeasy.co.uk> wrote: Thank you again. Although ActionScript is not being developed for the FlashPlayer, is it possible that it may still be developed separately for use in AIR? I could deliver content through AIR instead of PDFs. My problem is that the FlashBuilder / Flash Professional workflow is such a seductive one, with that easy marriage of graphics and code, that I don't want to lose it. I have used C++ to produce graphical programs and the AS3 route is a godsend in comparison. One wonders "Is HMTL5 going to use any less CPU cycles than AS3, once it is doing similar work?" John On 18/12/2012 05:38, Alex Harui wrote: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex alternatives Things get lost in translation, but one goal of the parallel frameworks is to not leverage things that get lost in translation. Otherwise, since JS and AS are ECMA-based, the translation works pretty well. Keep in mind that, while Adobe is no longer investing in ActionScript 3 on the Flash Player, and not developing Flash Player for mobile devices, and AIR may not run on all mobile devices, where the FlashPlayer is today, it will likely be there “forever”. So, if alll of your users are using desktops/laptops that have browsers that have Flash, you can continue to use Flex and/or ActionScript 3 to build applications and they will likely run there not just in five years, but even after that. There is no time-bomb in the players that will go off and stop running. Even though ActionScript Next and FlashPlayer Next are not compatibile with ActionScript 3, the AS3 VM will ship in the FlashPlayers that Adobe ships in the future. There is the possibility that the browser vendors will stop supporting plugins, but I would imagine they will keep a compatibility-mode somehow. I think there is too much Flash content out there and to block it from existing desktops/laptops would “break the web” and I don’t expect the browser vendors or Adobe take such a risk. There would be too much negative press. That doesn’t mean that new computers with new OS’s may not support Flash (that’s what Apple did with IOS), and many home users may forgo traditional computers for tablets in the future, so keep that in mind as well. I don’t know the PDF market that well, but again, I would expect PDFs to continue to support Flash “forever” as well. At least for the readers on traditional desktops/laptops. On 12/17/12 10:48 AM, "John McCormack" <j...@easypeasy.co.uk> wrote: Thank you. That's interesting and very helpful. One does wonder if a separate translation tool would do the job faithfully, and so creates doubt. For someone that wants to use SWFs in PDFs to deliver educational content that is fully interactive, what workflow would you suggest using for the next three to five years? John On 17/12/2012 16:31, Alex Harui wrote: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex alternatives Adobe has no plans that I know of to get ActionScript to work with HTML5 in the same way that Google is proposing Dart as an alternative to JavaScript. The Apache Flex project is working on a compiler that will translate ActionScript to JavaScript. In addition, the link I posted proposes a component framework that would enable you to build or prototype your app in Flash using FlashBuilder and ActionScript and then run a separate tool outside of FlashBuilder to translate it to JavaScript where it will run and leverage HTML or HTML5 components. Alternatively, the same ActionScript to JavaScript compiler would let you write the script portions of your website as ActionScript using FlashBuilder and have separate HTML files, then use the same separate tool outside of FlashBuilder to translate the ActionScript to JavaScript. And maybe variations will be created that can output to various JS frameworks. At this time, there are no plans to change FlashBuilder to integrate the translation workflow. Adobe’s focus for FlashBuilder is on building ActionScript gaming and premium video projects that run on the Flash player. I suppose if the JS workflow became wildly popular and Adobe could see a revenue stream by supporting such a workflow things might change, but I wouldn’t count on it. There is a better chance that someone in Apache Flex will start creating plugins for Eclipse to support the workflow or one of the other tool vendors will provide an integrated workflow. The future of ActionScript 3 in Rich Internet Applications (as opposed to ActionScript “Next” as mentioned in the Flash roadmap) is actually being given more attention by Apache Flex than Adobe. If you want to continue to use ActionScript 3 to develop RIAs, I would encourage you to get involved with the Apache Flex project. On 12/17/12 2:16 AM, "John McCormack" <j...@easypeasy.co.uk> wrote: On 17/12/2012 05:12, Alex Harui wrote: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex alternatives Adobe has spent the year donating the Flex SDK and Falcon compilers to the Apache Software Foundation. While Adobe has a small set of people contributing to Flex in Apache and a team that shipped Flash Builder 4.7 and is working on subsequent Flash Builder release, Adobe is not leading the development of Flex and has not been for a full year. The future of Flex is in the hands of the Apache Flex community. This document should have made Adobe’s plans clear: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/whitepapers/roadmap.html I followed this link through to http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplatform/whitepapers/roadmap.html Under Flash Player "Next" this says... " and provide a foundation on which Flash can move forward over the next decade." Does this imply ActionScript working collaboratively with HTML5 or is it an alternative to HTML5? I am asking because I am hoping Flash Builder will continue to offer me a way forward (AS3+HTML5). John -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
