I've been working with Flex since its alpha version. Before the release version was avaiable I had an application with AMFPHP ready. That is I really love Flex and i have been working with it since it's 1.5 version.
But I am a .NET developer, I have a huge legacy in .NET Framework 2.0 and 1.1. I don't know why Adobe, up to this moment, is maintaining exclusive focus on Java. There are a lot of .NET developers that would like to have a server framework developed directly from Adobe. Applications are not only Client, they need a strong and consistent server Framework. I beleive that if Adobe maintains its exclusive focus on java it will loose, very soon a good number of .NET developers. Communications Foundations is really good and it will be better very soon. And it's price is very good, it is free !!!!! I am still working on the Microsoft framework. But I beleive that WPF and SilverLight can be very soon a real competitive alternative. Marcus Baffa NOVA Consulting --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Demling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Version 1 of Microsoft products have historically been slow, > unapologizing in their copycat nature, and hampered by large numbers > of major bugs and gaps in functionality. > > However, their astronomical cash reserves and relentless commitment to > establish market share has almost always led to vastly improved > products in version 2 and beyond. So of course, Silverlight is no > match for Flex - right now. But if Microsoft sustains its commitment, > it's not a question of *if* it could be "almost as good" as Flex - > just a matter of when. > > I don't say this as a criticism of Microsoft (I use several of their > products daily and love them), but rather to point out that they are > more of a market force than a true software company - and so the > relative success of Silverlight (or any other MS offering) is > pre-ordained, so long as they decide that's what they want to do - > it's independent of the present quality of the actual product. > > -Peter Demling > Lexington, MA > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Barnes" <scott.barnes@> > wrote: > > > > Claus, > > > > Yup, so that's why FLEX does have its unique offering vs SilverLight and > > once developers & designers unsubscribe from the notion it's a "Flash > > Killer" and do more of what you are doing (exploring it's upcoming > release) > > you'll decide on what you think it's merits are vs aren't. It's > early days > > yet, so wouldn't worry to much about it folks ;) just keep an open mind > > should you want to take it for a test-run post MIX07 :) > > > > WPF & SilverLight are going to have interesting prospects just like > Apollo > > and FLEX will have it's own, I think the two will do different > things for > > different people. Keep fingers in all barrels I'd say :) > > > > > > > > On 17 Apr 2007 03:30:22 -0700, Claus Wahlers <claus@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If you read FUD crap, ignore it on both sides and just be opened > to the > > > > idea that theres yet another channel of delivery in rich interactive > > > > applications. > > > > > > Reading through the Silverlight docs, XAML looks to me like some weird > > > kind of microsoftified SVG, spiced up with MP3 and WM codecs. I'm > still > > > searching but so far i couldn't find anything close to what Flex > offers > > > (what i found are some barely working and butt ugly component > > > experiments). I'd guess that Silverlight will get some video market > > > share, but it has a long way to go to enter the RIA market. My 2 > centavos. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Claus. > > > > > > -- > > > claus wahlers > > > côdeazur brasil > > > http://codeazur.com.br/ > > > http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Scott Barnes > > http://www.mossyblog.com > > >
