Re: Flex is out
On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 12:14, Christian Cantrell wrote: > On Mar 31, 2004, at 7:42 AM, Whittingham, P wrote: > > > The main problem I have with flex and flash mx 2004 is the size of swf > > file. The download times suffer even on an intranet. > > What kind of file sizes are you seeing? We have seen that typical Flex > applications are around 100K to 150K. Typically, they achieve the > majority of their size very early on, then tend to plateau since assets > are shared very efficiently across components. 150K for an RIA might > seem hefty at first, but actually, it isn't. 150K is not big at all. Thats the size of a large image (most detailed screen shots are about that high). I have seen a bit of lag when first hitting a largish flash movie, is there a "fire up the flash player" lag time (I have a really slow computer btw)? and if there is, is it just the first time (like the Java JVM)? > I actually believe that Flex applications are much more bandwidth > efficient than comparable HTML applications. (My $0.0002) -- If they use soap (which flex says it can do) I would agree, because they are only passing the needed data as opposed to the full on page for every action. Unless they are passing huge structures or arrays that is. -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Mar 31, 2004, at 7:42 AM, Whittingham, P wrote: > The main problem I have with flex and flash mx 2004 is the size of swf > file. The download times suffer even on an intranet. What kind of file sizes are you seeing? We have seen that typical Flex applications are around 100K to 150K. Typically, they achieve the majority of their size very early on, then tend to plateau since assets are shared very efficiently across components. 150K for an RIA might seem hefty at first, but actually, it isn't. I pulled up an arbitrary eBay page the other day that was 87K *without* images. The Amazon home page is about 63K, again without images. Once all the images and other external assets have been fully loaded, both these pages are far larger than typical Flex applications, and you have to load that amount of data with every page refresh as opposed to just loading data with Flex. I actually believe that Flex applications are much more bandwidth efficient than comparable HTML applications. > I tried your flex sample and they are slow. MM needs to address > performance. I agree with you there. The online examples are not performing like they should, and not how I am seeing them perform locally. We're actually looking into this to see what's wrong. Thanks for the heads-up. > Also, MM needs more components like maps/graphs and reports. Agreed. From the Flex FAQ: Q: Does Flex include charting components? A: Charting components for Flex are currently in beta. To be notified about participating in the Flex charting components beta program, please sign up for the Flex News e-mail list. I'm sure other frequently requested components will follow. Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
SOT: RIA performance was Flex is out
A few of us have been critical of the implications of poorly-performing RIAs in general and the available Flex examples in particular. I am particularly disappointed in the performance of The Flex Code Explorer showcase app: http://macromedia.com/software/flex/?promoid=home_prod_flex_111703# Click Flex Code Explorer Link. This takes about 7 seconds to load on my DSL link, then about 7 seconds to render. Once that is done we (assumedly) are ready for a Rich Internet Application experience. On the left of the screen is a (logical) frame containing a familiar tree menu to navigate the rest of the application. While, functional, it is one of the slowest tree menus, I've seen. To contrast this RIA experience, I brought up the CFMX Administrator and the CFMX Docs -- it includes a PIA version of a tree menu. It is interesting to use these 2 (the RIA and the PIA) side by side -- the PIA wins hands down in speed and crispness and, yes "Richness" of the user experience, Why is this so -- the RIA system (Flex and Flash) have been designed to address this specific component of a web application? Why is the PIA useful and the RIA, well... let's just say that I would be embarrassed to show it to a client. I am all for RIAs -- they will be the norm in the long run. But we've got a ways to go... Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 19:35, Philip Arnold wrote: ... > In fact you had better avoid any company which sells a product as they > could drop their support, and only use open-source applications, but > what database server does that leave you with? mySQL is retail, as is > SQL Server, Oracle, and any of the other "major" ones - support for them > could be dropped by the current company ... nothing to do with what you are saying (and I mostly agree), but don't forget about postgresql "the worlds most powerful open source database" - regular expressions in there WHERE clause now *thats* thinking :) ... -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
> From: Dwayne Cole > > I predict that Macromedia is going to sell off ColdFusion > within the next 2 years. Their product portfolio is too > diversified and their customer segments have very little in > common - Flash, ColdFusion, Director, Fireworks, Breeze, and > now Flex - very different developer communities. I don't understand statements like this Look at Microsoft's portfolio - they have MANY diverse products, some of which have effect completely different markets, yet they continue to produce them Why wouldn't a company the size of Macromedia want to continue to produce products like ColdFusion? If they're making new versions of the product, would this indicate that they're going to continue with it? If you think they're going to back away from it, and other products, then I suggest you switch to a product that you KNOW isn't going to be dumped, as it's open-source. That'll discount ASP.NET then as Microsoft COULD possibly get rid of that... Oh, and you'd better avoid other non-open-source products, so that also includes IIS as Microsoft could dump that as well In fact you had better avoid any company which sells a product as they could drop their support, and only use open-source applications, but what database server does that leave you with? mySQL is retail, as is SQL Server, Oracle, and any of the other "major" ones - support for them could be dropped by the current company Or you can just enjoy using ColdFusion as it is now, with it's great community support, and stop complaining that MM "might" drop their support for a product that they only purchased a couple of years ago [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Dave, I would guess that not everyone runs on 1 CPU boxes, and many shops do run 2 or more CPUs in a box, so I was going somewhat middle of the road, also by only specifying 2 load balanced servers I was being light. I notice your arrangement doesn't include a license for your development box. I also referenced Tomcat (freeware), but did not list the price for Websphere either, again going middle of the road on that pricing. The ROI will depend on the value add of having RIA interface elements and widgets in your site or application. How much value will those items add to your product? Are we not doing them now because of cost? Keep in mind, I feel that any such decision needs to consider the procurement cost, and the resource cost. So whether the price of learning is not part of procurement isn't really important, it's that there are additional costs beyond the procurement price that is important. Best Regards, Calvin - Original Message - From: Dave Carabetta To: CF-Talk Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:09 AM Subject: Re: Flex is out >But the math never adds up to only $12,000, does it? It could theoretically be lessfrom a pure software procurement standpoint, not necessarily a development cost standpoint. >If you want to deploy the Flex application in a load balanced environment, >then it will require at least $24,000. If you want a separate >development/QA server (you're using Flex for enterprise development with a >team, right? You match the Flex project profile right?), then you'll be >looking at least $36,000. > That depends on your setup. In our environment, yes we're clustered across 2 servers, but each box only has 1 CPU, so I only need one license. (As I've mentioned before, you can split the CPU licenses across multiple boxes.) So I'm still technically at $12K (and that's before our discounts and negotiations kick in). >Oh, let's not forget procuring a Gold support agreement, I imagine that >$20,000 annually won't be unexpected, and by the way, all the prices >discussed don't include subscription pricing, which is typically around 40% >more. We want to protect our investment for the future yes? So for those 3 >licenses above, with subscription and Gold Support? $70,000 > Well, the Gold support agreement is your call (not really sure how necessary it is, quite frankly, seeing as there's a pretty responsive development community for Flex even now, let alone what will arise over the coming months). But I'm assuming by "subscription pricing" you mean annual maintenance contracts, which are indeed standard nowadays. It clearly states on the Flex pricing page: "Flex presentation server pricing starts at $12,000 for two CPUs and includes annual maintenance." http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/buy/ So your 40% goes out the window too. >Also if I'm not mistaken, you have to provide an application server for it >to run on. And by the way ColdFusion MX Standard does not count. ColdFusion >Enterprise does, which is a cost of $5,999 per server (2 CPU License). I >believe JRun may be the least expensive application server option (aside >from freeware) and that's $899 or so. > *Technically,* you are mistaken. You don't need ColdFusion to run Flex, and you can install this on Tomcat if you'd like. However, I say technically because to do any amount of heavy lifting regarding database access, etc., your life is probably made much easier by having a middle tier such as ColdFusion MX to handle it. >Let's assume you don't have an application server and need to provide one, >with of course some kind of software protection, we're up to $73,747 or so. > With the modifications above, we're nowhere near this number. >This is a significant amount of investment to improve your presentation >layer, and for larger shops, we can easily push into 100s of thousands of >dollars. > I'm not in any way trying to suggest that Flex isn't a significant financial investment (let's be honest, it is). However, I think you need to do a more thorough cost analysis for your own system before writing it off as well. Even if the total cost of procuring the software was $60K, if you have a project where you know the potential ROI is above that, then all of a sudden $60K isn't so bad. >Let's not forget the unspoken elements. MXML is a distinct and completely >new development language, with it's own constructs, syntax and >idiosyncrasies that must be learned and mastered. In addition to the above >costs, you have to consider training, and experimental efforts, people >don't learn
Re: Flex is out
On Mar 31, 2004, at 11:51 AM, Morgan Senkal wrote: > Thanks for the clarifications, Christian. One question tho: I have > checked out the samples explorer, and the one thing that I find > lacking as far as an example is accessibility - an issue of extreme > importance in my shop... On the features page, Flex claims to be > accessible, my question is how? And I would like to see it! This is something I actually don't know much about, but there's a whole Flex Accessibility center on our website: http://www.macromedia.com/macromedia/accessibility/features/flex/ Let me know if this material doesn't answer all your questions, and I'll see if I can dig up more information. Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Thanks for the clarifications, Christian. One question tho: I have checked out the samples explorer, and the one thing that I find lacking as far as an example is accessibility - an issue of extreme importance in my shop. There are in fact two levels of accessibility; allowing persons with mild vision disability to modify the GUI to meet their needs (i.e. larger fonts, contrasting colors for colorblindness, etc.) as well as enabling screen readers to navigate a site or page in an efficient and user-friendly manner. On the features page, Flex claims to be accessible, my question is how? And I would like to see it! thanks :-) >I've been traveling recently, so I wasn't able to address these >Flex-related posts as they came in. In the interest of efficiency, >rather than responding to each post, I've aggregated the main points >here: > >> I predict that Macromedia is going to sell off ColdFusion within the >> next 2 years. Their product portfolio is too diversified and their >> customer segments have very little in common - Flash, ColdFusion, >> Director, Fireworks, Breeze, and now Flex - very different developer >> communities. > >We absolutely have no plans to "sell off" ColdFusion. I don't know to >say it any more plainly than that. Macromedia is very dedicated to >ColdFusion as I think we will demonstrate with Blackstone. One of the >primary focuses of CFMX was obviously the port to the J2EE platform >which demanded significant resources. These are resources that we have >been able to dedicate to innovation with Blackstone. I think you will >like what we have planned. > >> FORGET flex! Go Laszlo! > >If you are considering Flex, it only makes sense that you will want to >consider Laszlo, as well. Make sure you thoroughly understand the >capabilities and limitations of each product, and make sure you fully >understand each product's pricing. Contact Laszlo Systems for >information on their enterprise pricing (it's not posted on their >site), and make an educated decision. By no means do we expect Flex >customers to be ignorant of Laszlo. > >> Maybe just another go nowhere Spectra product chasing tumble weeds... > >I've seen this statement in a few different places, and all I can say >is that Macromedia is extremely dedicated to Flex and to RIAs in >general. Although we know that traditional HTML-based web applications >aren't going anywhere for a very very long time, we also believe that >RIAs present huge opportunities for our customers, and Flex is key >technology for supporting those customers. I'd also like to add that >discontinuing products that are not performing where we need them to is >not a shameful thing. I think it's amazing how Macromedia experiments >with so many different technologies, and is willing to take chances. >Macromedia is constantly investigating, playing with and investing in >new technologies, many of which never see the light of day, but that's >what it takes to be a technology leader. That said, however, we feel >very very good about Flex and the opportunities it presents. > >> Flex... >> 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files > >Generating SWF files is only one thing Flex does. It is certainly the >functionality that gets most of the attention, but it does a lot more. >See the Flex Features page for more details: > >http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/productinfo/features/ > >> 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you >> could build anything created in Flex through other means ) > >It's true that Flex does not extend the capabilities of the Flash >Player. The fact that Flex applications run inside the existing Flash >7 player is a significant portion of its appeal, in fact. It is also >true that you could build Flex-like applications using just Flash, and >if that's efficient for you, than it makes sense just to stick with the >Flash authoring tool. Take a look at a sophisticated Flex application, >however, and ask yourself how long it would realistically take you to >build and maintain it with Flash versus with Flex. > >> I'm willing to bet you could do it in-house for less. > >If you can, then you should. But again, get to know the technology and >what it's capable of. Working for Macromedia, I have obviously been >exposed to Flex throughout its development cycle, but I can honestly >say that I was absolutely amazed with the finished product and what it >is capable of doing. I'm not too bad with Flash, but I couldn't >imagine building an extensive Flex-like application from scratch at >this point. Its capabilities clearly set a new standard for RIAs. >That said, if Flex can't save you enough time and/or resources, or >present enough opportunity, than it's simply not right for you. > >> ...while Flex is no doubt cool, it would be a tough sell convince a >> client to pony up $12K when UI development in either Flash or HTML >> would be far less than that. O
Re: Flex is out
Yea... Flash just has this sticky slo-mo feel to it. There is no "pop." - Original Message - From: "Dick Applebaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 10:32 PM Subject: Re: Flex is out > Yeah -- but this is a pretty bad example IMO > > Functionality --- great > > UI -- good > > Performance -- poor at best > > I addressed this in an earlier post that was lost in the flurry of > Flex responses > > Below is the relative snippet > > Certainly there must be some better examples with a realistic db > backend. > > Dick > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
hey mikey, did you get the cfloop to work with that flecks thing you were working with? tony -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:04 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out On Mar 31, 2004, at 4:42 AM, Whittingham, P wrote: > I love the idea of RIA and its capabilities, but RIA is about UI and > performance, not just UI. > > > apologies in advance... without performance, it's Rich, Reach, and Retch :) Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>But the math never adds up to only $12,000, does it? It could theoretically be lessfrom a pure software procurement standpoint, not necessarily a development cost standpoint. >If you want to deploy the Flex application in a load balanced environment, >then it will require at least $24,000. If you want a separate >development/QA server (you're using Flex for enterprise development with a >team, right? You match the Flex project profile right?), then you'll be >looking at least $36,000. > That depends on your setup. In our environment, yes we're clustered across 2 servers, but each box only has 1 CPU, so I only need one license. (As I've mentioned before, you can split the CPU licenses across multiple boxes.) So I'm still technically at $12K (and that's before our discounts and negotiations kick in). >Oh, let's not forget procuring a Gold support agreement, I imagine that >$20,000 annually won't be unexpected, and by the way, all the prices >discussed don't include subscription pricing, which is typically around 40% >more. We want to protect our investment for the future yes? So for those 3 >licenses above, with subscription and Gold Support? $70,000 > Well, the Gold support agreement is your call (not really sure how necessary it is, quite frankly, seeing as there's a pretty responsive development community for Flex even now, let alone what will arise over the coming months). But I'm assuming by "subscription pricing" you mean annual maintenance contracts, which are indeed standard nowadays. It clearly states on the Flex pricing page: "Flex presentation server pricing starts at $12,000 for two CPUs and includes annual maintenance." http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/buy/ So your 40% goes out the window too. >Also if I'm not mistaken, you have to provide an application server for it >to run on. And by the way ColdFusion MX Standard does not count. ColdFusion >Enterprise does, which is a cost of $5,999 per server (2 CPU License). I >believe JRun may be the least expensive application server option (aside >from freeware) and that's $899 or so. > *Technically,* you are mistaken. You don't need ColdFusion to run Flex, and you can install this on Tomcat if you'd like. However, I say technically because to do any amount of heavy lifting regarding database access, etc., your life is probably made much easier by having a middle tier such as ColdFusion MX to handle it. >Let's assume you don't have an application server and need to provide one, >with of course some kind of software protection, we're up to $73,747 or so. > With the modifications above, we're nowhere near this number. >This is a significant amount of investment to improve your presentation >layer, and for larger shops, we can easily push into 100s of thousands of >dollars. > I'm not in any way trying to suggest that Flex isn't a significant financial investment (let's be honest, it is). However, I think you need to do a more thorough cost analysis for your own system before writing it off as well. Even if the total cost of procuring the software was $60K, if you have a project where you know the potential ROI is above that, then all of a sudden $60K isn't so bad. >Let's not forget the unspoken elements. MXML is a distinct and completely >new development language, with it's own constructs, syntax and >idiosyncrasies that must be learned and mastered. In addition to the above >costs, you have to consider training, and experimental efforts, people >don't learn without doing, and typically don't do for free. I don't have a >price tag for that one, that depends on your team. > Agreed. But this isn't in the realm of software procurement as much as it is development costs. >My current opinion is be very aware of potential hidden costs when it comes >to Flex, not only do you have to be careful on advocating investing money >in the technology, you also should be careful investing your time learning >it, there are simply too many technologies to spend your time to improve >your products and services in that don't require such a high financial >investment from your clients or shareholders. > This is a valid statement, and it's a decision that is entirely based on your team/environment. When you get in to development costs vs. software procurement costs, there's a big difference. But many people seem to be focusing on the software procurement costs as opposed to the development costs when they write the product off before even playing around with it. >I will be very curious to see hard numbers with success stories on ROI for >this product. Me too. Regards, Dave. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Mar 31, 2004, at 4:42 AM, Whittingham, P wrote: > I love the idea of RIA and its capabilities, but RIA is about UI and > performance, not just UI. > > > apologies in advance... without performance, it's Rich, Reach, and Retch :) Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
The main problem I have with flex and flash mx 2004 is the size of swf file. The download times suffer even on an intranet. I work at a large company and I personally can't justify the cost of flex. I tried your flex sample and they are slow. MM needs to address performance. If the performance is great then people will buy the product, if it is not, they will not. Also, MM needs more components like maps/graphs and reports. Concerning flash mx2004, the components are too bloated. If one is not using a given method/property then it should be eliminated at the compile time of the swf file. It is like having a large house (framework) without not much furniture (events/methods/property). I personally create dynamic dhtml/_javascript_ code (ie., inside custom tags) which creates only those methods/events neccessary for that application. I love the idea of RIA and its capabilities, but RIA is about UI and performance, not just UI. TIA, Patrick Whittingham United Space Alliance -Original Message- From: Christian Cantrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 8:27 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out I've been traveling recently, so I wasn't able to address these Flex-related posts as they came in. In the interest of efficiency, rather than responding to each post, I've aggregated the main points here: > I predict that Macromedia is going to sell off ColdFusion within the > next 2 years. Their product portfolio is too diversified and their > customer segments have very little in common - Flash, ColdFusion, > Director, Fireworks, Breeze, and now Flex - very different developer > communities. We absolutely have no plans to "sell off" ColdFusion. I don't know to say it any more plainly than that. Macromedia is very dedicated to ColdFusion as I think we will demonstrate with Blackstone. One of the primary focuses of CFMX was obviously the port to the J2EE platform which demanded significant resources. These are resources that we have been able to dedicate to innovation with Blackstone. I think you will like what we have planned. > FORGET flex! Go Laszlo! If you are considering Flex, it only makes sense that you will want to consider Laszlo, as well. Make sure you thoroughly understand the capabilities and limitations of each product, and make sure you fully understand each product's pricing. Contact Laszlo Systems for information on their enterprise pricing (it's not posted on their site), and make an educated decision. By no means do we expect Flex customers to be ignorant of Laszlo. > Maybe just another go nowhere Spectra product chasing tumble weeds... I've seen this statement in a few different places, and all I can say is that Macromedia is extremely dedicated to Flex and to RIAs in general. Although we know that traditional HTML-based web applications aren't going anywhere for a very very long time, we also believe that RIAs present huge opportunities for our customers, and Flex is key technology for supporting those customers. I'd also like to add that discontinuing products that are not performing where we need them to is not a shameful thing. I think it's amazing how Macromedia experiments with so many different technologies, and is willing to take chances. Macromedia is constantly investigating, playing with and investing in new technologies, many of which never see the light of day, but that's what it takes to be a technology leader. That said, however, we feel very very good about Flex and the opportunities it presents. > Flex... > 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files Generating SWF files is only one thing Flex does. It is certainly the functionality that gets most of the attention, but it does a lot more. See the Flex Features page for more details: http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/productinfo/features/ > 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you > could build anything created in Flex through other means ) It's true that Flex does not extend the capabilities of the Flash Player. The fact that Flex applications run inside the existing Flash 7 player is a significant portion of its appeal, in fact. It is also true that you could build Flex-like applications using just Flash, and if that's efficient for you, than it makes sense just to stick with the Flash authoring tool. Take a look at a sophisticated Flex application, however, and ask yourself how long it would realistically take you to build and maintain it with Flash versus with Flex. > I'm willing to bet you could do it in-house for less. If you can, then you should. But again, get to know the technology and what it's capable of. Working for Macromedia, I have obviously been exposed to Flex throughout its development cycle, but I can honestly say that I was absolutely amaze
Re: Flex is out
But the math never adds up to only $12,000, does it? If you want to deploy the Flex application in a load balanced environment, then it will require at least $24,000. If you want a separate development/QA server (you're using Flex for enterprise development with a team, right? You match the Flex project profile right?), then you'll be looking at least $36,000. Oh, let's not forget procuring a Gold support agreement, I imagine that $20,000 annually won't be unexpected, and by the way, all the prices discussed don't include subscription pricing, which is typically around 40% more. We want to protect our investment for the future yes? So for those 3 licenses above, with subscription and Gold Support? $70,000 Also if I'm not mistaken, you have to provide an application server for it to run on. And by the way ColdFusion MX Standard does not count. ColdFusion Enterprise does, which is a cost of $5,999 per server (2 CPU License). I believe JRun may be the least expensive application server option (aside from freeware) and that's $899 or so. Let's assume you don't have an application server and need to provide one, with of course some kind of software protection, we're up to $73,747 or so. This is a significant amount of investment to improve your presentation layer, and for larger shops, we can easily push into 100s of thousands of dollars. Let's not forget the unspoken elements. MXML is a distinct and completely new development language, with it's own constructs, syntax and idiosyncrasies that must be learned and mastered. In addition to the above costs, you have to consider training, and experimental efforts, people don't learn without doing, and typically don't do for free. I don't have a price tag for that one, that depends on your team. My current opinion is be very aware of potential hidden costs when it comes to Flex, not only do you have to be careful on advocating investing money in the technology, you also should be careful investing your time learning it, there are simply too many technologies to spend your time to improve your products and services in that don't require such a high financial investment from your clients or shareholders. I will be very curious to see hard numbers with success stories on ROI for this product. - Calvin - Original Message - From: Christian Cantrell To: CF-Talk Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 8:26 PM Subject: Re: Flex is out > ...while Flex is no doubt cool, it would be a tough sell convince a > client to pony up $12K when UI development in either Flash or HTML > would be far less than that. Obviously, the pricing is enterprise > level. Again, you have to do the math. Figure out: 1. If you think your business can benefit from a Flex application. 2. If so, how long (in man hours) would it take you build it without using Flex. 3. How much return do you think you can get from rewriting your application with Flex. 4. Do the math and compare the end result to $12,000. Just like any other business decision, it require careful analysis. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Mar 31, 2004, at 12:05 AM, Rob wrote: > Well I am running FireFox on a Debian linux box so I doubt you are > running that - and I doubt it is a supported setup anyway. That explains it. Flex requires Flash Player 7, which has not yet been released for Linux. It will be out shortly, however. Still, shouldn't be getting 404s, though. I will report it. Thanks, Christian [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
On Tue, 2004-03-30 at 19:17, Stacy Young wrote: > Weird! I can reach it from two diff machines.. *shrugs* Well I am running FireFox on a Debian linux box so I doubt you are running that - and I doubt it is a supported setup anyway. None of the apps work, but I guess thats for the best anyway as I cant swing it - better not to see. -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
oops here's the part of the prior post I noticed something that I had never really thought about. there is quite a price to pay for RIAs (over and above the Flash plugin and the swf download time). To test my program I had several open windows in multiple browsers all displaying versions of my RIA app. The overhead was quite noticeable. Each browser window had a swf with my RIA competing for resources on the client. "Well, that's unrealistic!": you might say. But, is it really? As RIAs gain popularity throughout the web won't there be a high probability of running multiple RIAs, (from the same or different sources) concurrently, on a given desktop? Whew, that was a mouth full! Of course, hardware technology advances will tend to mitigate the issue. All this recent Flex chatter has made me rethink RIAs in a broader sense. To illustrate: If you go to the flex product page: http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/?promoid=home_prod_flex_111703# and click the link to the Flex code explorer. Aside: I am an old cuss, but it bothers me (more than a little) that RIA links don't look like regular (HTML) links and the enter key doesn't submit a form and hints sometimes popup too fast... Anyway, the Flash Code Explorer pops up in another window. On my DSL link (and it's a good one), the popup takes about 7 seconds to load and about 3 seconds to render -- par for the course, I guess, But, this showcase app feels "heavy" or "sticky". The tree menu is one of the slowest I have seen... with noticeable pauses when you open the top folder and push down the others. Then, with the "sample" tab selected, click through the various tour items. With each change a little initializing box pops for a second or 2 and then the example is displayed. That seems awfully slow. Given this uneasiness with what I experienced, I did some rough timings to see if I could quantify the cost (at the client) of an RIA Here are my findings: Mozilla 1.6 Mac OS X 10.3.3 CPU % Threads Real Mem Virt Mem --- --- - -- No windows open. 1% 11 46M425M Mozilla Home page HTML (1).. 1% 12 53M432M Flex Product page (2)... 12-17% 19 60M443M Flex Samples (Code) Explorer Popup (3).. 25-29% 20 73M462M Flex Explorer Popup (4)11-15% 13 70M449M (1) Simple animation (gifs, etc) (2) http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/?promoid=home_prod_flex_111703# (3) takes 7 seconds to load and about 3 seconds to render) (3) these measurements have the flex product page and the popup open concurrently (4) Popup window is the only window open Not a scientific timing for sure... just a rough "eyeball" of some slices in time -- with a normal (for me) mix of other stuff going on. But, I think the exercise illustrates at least 3 points. 1) RIAs have a cost -- they continuously consume CPU cycles whether they are being used or not. 2) Multiple RIAs on the same desktop are highly probable and they compete for valuable client resources. 3) A RIA that performs poorly loses much of its advantage (or, its reason for existence). On Mar 30, 2004, at 7:32 PM, Dick Applebaum wrote: > Yeah -- but this is a pretty bad example IMO > > Functionality --- great > > UI -- good > > Performance -- poor at best > > I addressed this in an earlier post that was lost in the flurry of > Flex responses > > Below is the relative snippet > > Certainly there must be some better examples with a realistic db > backend. > > Dick > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Yeah -- but this is a pretty bad example IMO Functionality --- great UI -- good Performance -- poor at best I addressed this in an earlier post that was lost in the flurry of Flex responses Below is the relative snippet Certainly there must be some better examples with a realistic db backend. Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Weird! I can reach it from two diff machines.. *shrugs* _ From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 10:10 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Flex is out Thanks but: Home / Error: Page Not Found Error You may wish to try one of the following links: _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Ah i see its forwarding me to http://www.macromedia.com/flex/flex-internal/detection-kit/upgrade_flash/upgrade_flash.html which is a 404. Guess my system cant run flex? On Tue, 2004-03-30 at 19:10, Stacy Young wrote: > Try this: > > http://www.macromedia.com/flex/samples/explorer/explorer.mxml > > > > -Stace > > > > _ > > From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 9:52 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Flex is out > > > > Touch off topic, but is there a working demo of flex anywhere? Seems > like 50% of the flex app links on the MM site are 404s and the other > ones are just pictures of what a flex app looks like. > > Is there a live interactive demo somewhere? -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Thanks but: Home / Error: Page Not Found Error You may wish to try one of the following links: [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Try this: http://www.macromedia.com/flex/samples/explorer/explorer.mxml -Stace _ From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 9:52 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out Touch off topic, but is there a working demo of flex anywhere? Seems like 50% of the flex app links on the MM site are 404s and the other ones are just pictures of what a flex app looks like. Is there a live interactive demo somewhere? -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Touch off topic, but is there a working demo of flex anywhere? Seems like 50% of the flex app links on the MM site are 404s and the other ones are just pictures of what a flex app looks like. Is there a live interactive demo somewhere? -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
> We absolutely have no plans to "sell off" ColdFusion. I don't know to > say it any more plainly than that. Macromedia is very dedicated to > ColdFusion as I think we will demonstrate with Blackstone. One of the > primary focuses of CFMX was obviously the port to the J2EE platform > which demanded significant resources. These are resources that we > have > been able to dedicate to innovation with Blackstone. I think you will > like what we have planned. > I seem to recall a number of layoffs surrounding the release of CFMX. That would imply at least to me that Macromedia is not dedicating the same amount of resources to Blackstone as it did to CFMX. Of course, that makes perfect sense, but your comment seems to imply otherwise. -Matt [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
I've been traveling recently, so I wasn't able to address these Flex-related posts as they came in. In the interest of efficiency, rather than responding to each post, I've aggregated the main points here: > I predict that Macromedia is going to sell off ColdFusion within the > next 2 years. Their product portfolio is too diversified and their > customer segments have very little in common - Flash, ColdFusion, > Director, Fireworks, Breeze, and now Flex - very different developer > communities. We absolutely have no plans to "sell off" ColdFusion. I don't know to say it any more plainly than that. Macromedia is very dedicated to ColdFusion as I think we will demonstrate with Blackstone. One of the primary focuses of CFMX was obviously the port to the J2EE platform which demanded significant resources. These are resources that we have been able to dedicate to innovation with Blackstone. I think you will like what we have planned. > FORGET flex! Go Laszlo! If you are considering Flex, it only makes sense that you will want to consider Laszlo, as well. Make sure you thoroughly understand the capabilities and limitations of each product, and make sure you fully understand each product's pricing. Contact Laszlo Systems for information on their enterprise pricing (it's not posted on their site), and make an educated decision. By no means do we expect Flex customers to be ignorant of Laszlo. > Maybe just another go nowhere Spectra product chasing tumble weeds... I've seen this statement in a few different places, and all I can say is that Macromedia is extremely dedicated to Flex and to RIAs in general. Although we know that traditional HTML-based web applications aren't going anywhere for a very very long time, we also believe that RIAs present huge opportunities for our customers, and Flex is key technology for supporting those customers. I'd also like to add that discontinuing products that are not performing where we need them to is not a shameful thing. I think it's amazing how Macromedia experiments with so many different technologies, and is willing to take chances. Macromedia is constantly investigating, playing with and investing in new technologies, many of which never see the light of day, but that's what it takes to be a technology leader. That said, however, we feel very very good about Flex and the opportunities it presents. > Flex... > 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files Generating SWF files is only one thing Flex does. It is certainly the functionality that gets most of the attention, but it does a lot more. See the Flex Features page for more details: http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/productinfo/features/ > 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you > could build anything created in Flex through other means ) It's true that Flex does not extend the capabilities of the Flash Player. The fact that Flex applications run inside the existing Flash 7 player is a significant portion of its appeal, in fact. It is also true that you could build Flex-like applications using just Flash, and if that's efficient for you, than it makes sense just to stick with the Flash authoring tool. Take a look at a sophisticated Flex application, however, and ask yourself how long it would realistically take you to build and maintain it with Flash versus with Flex. > I'm willing to bet you could do it in-house for less. If you can, then you should. But again, get to know the technology and what it's capable of. Working for Macromedia, I have obviously been exposed to Flex throughout its development cycle, but I can honestly say that I was absolutely amazed with the finished product and what it is capable of doing. I'm not too bad with Flash, but I couldn't imagine building an extensive Flex-like application from scratch at this point. Its capabilities clearly set a new standard for RIAs. That said, if Flex can't save you enough time and/or resources, or present enough opportunity, than it's simply not right for you. > ...while Flex is no doubt cool, it would be a tough sell convince a > client to pony up $12K when UI development in either Flash or HTML > would be far less than that. Obviously, the pricing is enterprise > level. Again, you have to do the math. Figure out: 1. If you think your business can benefit from a Flex application. 2. If so, how long (in man hours) would it take you build it without using Flex. 3. How much return do you think you can get from rewriting your application with Flex. 4. Do the math and compare the end result to $12,000. Just like any other business decision, it require careful analysis. > what are the advantages of using Flex, when price is obviously not one > of them. I would encourage you to visit the Flex product page, view the sample applications, and install and experiment with the Flex trial. I think the functionality that Flex applicati
RE: Flex is out
I believe (someone pls correct me if I'm wrong) the MXML will only be recompiled if the dynamic portion changes. Ben F. actually had an example of this on his blog a while back. -Stace _ From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 5:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out Whoa, There is something that's not intuitively obvious (at least not to me). If I understand correctly: It may not be desirable to prime your swf with initial data, because the swf would have to be generated every time it is requested. However, with some effort, it may be possible to combine the pre-generated swf and the initial dynamic data in a single transmission, saving bandwidth, and client-server interaction. Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 1:02 PM, Stacy Young wrote: > 1) I agree 100%. Only trick is I think there'd have to be some > more > brains server-side as to avoid the 'recompile on every request'. > (essentially you're talking about dynamically created mxml) > 1) quite often the Initial download of a RIA needs to be populated > with > initial data... it would seem to make sense and be more efficient for > CFMX to get the initial data, manipulate it as necessary then generate > the swf with initial data already inbedded. Rather than the client > going to the Flex server,, downloading the RIA app, then that app > immediately hitting cf for the data? Seems like it would be less a > load on the server(s) and the client as well as significantly less > bandwith to ttransmit the data. > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Whoa, There is something that's not intuitively obvious (at least not to me). If I understand correctly: It may not be desirable to prime your swf with initial data, because the swf would have to be generated every time it is requested. However, with some effort, it may be possible to combine the pre-generated swf and the initial dynamic data in a single transmission, saving bandwidth, and client-server interaction. Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 1:02 PM, Stacy Young wrote: > 1) I agree 100%. Only trick is I think there'd have to be some > more > brains server-side as to avoid the 'recompile on every request'. > (essentially you're talking about dynamically created mxml) > 1) quite often the Initial download of a RIA needs to be populated > with > initial data... it would seem to make sense and be more efficient for > CFMX to get the initial data, manipulate it as necessary then generate > the swf with initial data already inbedded. Rather than the client > going to the Flex server,, downloading the RIA app, then that app > immediately hitting cf for the data? Seems like it would be less a > load on the server(s) and the client as well as significantly less > bandwith to ttransmit the data. > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
1) I agree 100%. Only trick is I think there'd have to be some more brains server-side as to avoid the 'recompile on every request'. (essentially you're talking about dynamically created mxml) We considered this fact but in the end decided that installing separate from CFMX had a bigger payoff. Side note: We're working on this really cool framework for loading string resource bundle at runtime which bind to all the UI elements to auto switch languages! This might lead us to co-locating cfmx and flex...that way we could detect the users locale then pass in the location of the resource bundle at runtime via flashvars. (to avoid recompile) 2) At least in the beginning...our flex apps (all but one) are working off pre-existing solutions. I would agree that the additional layer adds to the complexity somewhat but from a stability standpoint I would say it's actually more robust than a bundled solution. 3) Good question. I'm quite certain failover would function identical to CFMX (course there's an outstanding issue with cfmx clustering that we're waiting on) because it's relying on the pre-existing jrun connector module in apache up front. (we install web servers in their own cluster) 4) Yes...but they're not Flex only. They'll either be Flex + Web Services from WebLogic cluster (another system) or local java objects...or a combination thereof! Cheers! Stace _ From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out That really helps! What i was getting at with the taglibs -- I know you presently have to buy and install Flex to get the taglibs. What I think I would rather do is just by the tablibs and install them on the CFMX server -- if that makes sense -- then CFMX could do the entire app including generating the SWF. I don't know MACR will ever offer this as an option, but there have several comments about Blackstone that make me think that this is true. Why would I want to do this, I can think of several reasons: 1) quite often the Initial download of a RIA needs to be populated with initial data... it would seem to make sense and be more efficient for CFMX to get the initial data, manipulate it as necessary then generate the swf with initial data already inbedded. Rather than the client going to the Flex server,, downloading the RIA app, then that app immediately hitting cf for the data? Seems like it would be less a load on the server(s) and the client as well as significantly less bandwith to ttransmit the data. 2) With part of your app on 1 server (Flex) and part on another (CFMX) aren't you increasing your exposure to outages and creating additional confusion when they occur? Or if you opt to code your CFMX app to be able to run if the Flex server is down, doesn't that destroy most of the benefits? 3) I am not sure about this one, so I'll just ask: can Flex take advantage of the Clustering/Failover capabilities of a J2EE server like JRun? 4) Are there really that many apps that will be Flex only and not require services of CFMX or the like? Dick P.S Nice setup! On Mar 30, 2004, at 12:11 PM, Stacy Young wrote: AVIS IMPORTANTWARNING Les informations contenues dans le present document et ses pieces jointes sont strictement confidentielles et reservees a l'usage de la (des) personne(s) a qui il est adresse. Si vous n'etes pas le destinataire, soyez avise que toute divulgation, distribution, copie, ou autre utilisation de ces informations est strictement prohibee. Si vous avez recu ce document par erreur, veuillez s'il vous plait communiquer immediatement avec l'expediteur et detruire ce document sans en faire de copie sous quelque forme. The information contained in this document and attachments is confidential and intended only for the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any other use of the information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this document by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this document and attachments without making any copy of any kind. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
That really helps! What i was getting at with the taglibs -- I know you presently have to buy and install Flex to get the taglibs. What I think I would rather do is just by the tablibs and install them on the CFMX server -- if that makes sense -- then CFMX could do the entire app including generating the SWF. I don't know MACR will ever offer this as an option, but there have several comments about Blackstone that make me think that this is true. Why would I want to do this, I can think of several reasons: 1) quite often the Initial download of a RIA needs to be populated with initial data... it would seem to make sense and be more efficient for CFMX to get the initial data, manipulate it as necessary then generate the swf with initial data already inbedded. Rather than the client going to the Flex server,, downloading the RIA app, then that app immediately hitting cf for the data? Seems like it would be less a load on the server(s) and the client as well as significantly less bandwith to ttransmit the data. 2) With part of your app on 1 server (Flex) and part on another (CFMX) aren't you increasing your exposure to outages and creating additional confusion when they occur? Or if you opt to code your CFMX app to be able to run if the Flex server is down, doesn't that destroy most of the benefits? 3) I am not sure about this one, so I'll just ask: can Flex take advantage of the Clustering/Failover capabilities of a J2EE server like JRun? 4) Are there really that many apps that will be Flex only and not require services of CFMX or the like? Dick P.S Nice setup! On Mar 30, 2004, at 12:11 PM, Stacy Young wrote: > I'm not sure what ur getting at with the taglibs. The only time you > can use the JSP taglibs inside of CFMX is when Flex has been installed > along side. If you *have* installed alongside CFMX in the same jrun > instance then you *can* use the taglibs if you want to embed flex > output inside a CFM page...but a more likely scenario for most will > probably just have the user accessing MXML pages...after which the > flex app would communicate with CFMX via remoting or Web Service. > > I actually chose to physically separate CFMX and flex...mostly > because we'll have Flex apps that won't even touch the CFMX > instances...plus for redundancy sake I don't want to have to take down > ½ the available flex UI resources just to cycle a CFMX instance for > whatever reason. > > Here's our actual setup... > > 2 x 2CPU machine > > JRun 4 with CFMX 6.1 > > Total of 3 Jrun instances running on each machine. > > Two have CFMX, one has Flex. > > Each CFMX instance belongs to a cluster. Cluster #1 consists of > one instance on server A, on instance on server B. Same for Cluster #2 > > When the user access a Flex application it loads from the standalone > 3rd JRun instance. The Flex app now pulls data from multiple > applications running on either of those two CFMX clusters. In > addition, there is a whole other WebLogic cluster it ties into for > specific services. > > I hope I'm not clouding things further! > > Cheers, > > Stace > >_ > > From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 2:21 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Flex is out > > On Mar 30, 2004, at 11:13 AM, Stacy Young wrote: > > > I can tell you from experience...RIA development for most typical > j2ee > > development teams will be of a fraction of the cost vs traditional > > flash/remoting development. The difference in managing source code > > alone > > is worth big bucks to me...I've had my FLAs over-written a few too > > many > > times ;-) > > > > Stace > > > > > > Now that seems to be a very valid justification. > > Do you think that adding CFMX to that equation adds or detracts? > > If CFMX is a plus, would CFMX & the taglibs, alone provide the > justification? > > I don't know, and am assuming that there is a lot more to Flex than > the > taglibs... that the taglibs provide rhe UI components and generate the > swf from XML. > > TIA > > Dick > >_ > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
I'm not sure what ur getting at with the taglibs. The only time you can use the JSP taglibs inside of CFMX is when Flex has been installed along side. If you *have* installed alongside CFMX in the same jrun instance then you *can* use the taglibs if you want to embed flex output inside a CFM page...but a more likely scenario for most will probably just have the user accessing MXML pages...after which the flex app would communicate with CFMX via remoting or Web Service. I actually chose to physically separate CFMX and flex...mostly because we'll have Flex apps that won't even touch the CFMX instances...plus for redundancy sake I don't want to have to take down ½ the available flex UI resources just to cycle a CFMX instance for whatever reason. Here's our actual setup... 2 x 2CPU machine JRun 4 with CFMX 6.1 Total of 3 Jrun instances running on each machine. Two have CFMX, one has Flex. Each CFMX instance belongs to a cluster. Cluster #1 consists of one instance on server A, on instance on server B. Same for Cluster #2 When the user access a Flex application it loads from the standalone 3rd JRun instance. The Flex app now pulls data from multiple applications running on either of those two CFMX clusters. In addition, there is a whole other WebLogic cluster it ties into for specific services. I hope I'm not clouding things further! Cheers, Stace _ From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 2:21 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out On Mar 30, 2004, at 11:13 AM, Stacy Young wrote: > I can tell you from experience...RIA development for most typical j2ee > development teams will be of a fraction of the cost vs traditional > flash/remoting development. The difference in managing source code > alone > is worth big bucks to me...I've had my FLAs over-written a few too > many > times ;-) > > Stace > > Now that seems to be a very valid justification. Do you think that adding CFMX to that equation adds or detracts? If CFMX is a plus, would CFMX & the taglibs, alone provide the justification? I don't know, and am assuming that there is a lot more to Flex than the taglibs... that the taglibs provide rhe UI components and generate the swf from XML. TIA Dick _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Mar 30, 2004, at 11:13 AM, Stacy Young wrote: > I can tell you from experience...RIA development for most typical j2ee > development teams will be of a fraction of the cost vs traditional > flash/remoting development. The difference in managing source code > alone > is worth big bucks to me...I've had my FLAs over-written a few too > many > times ;-) > > Stace > > Now that seems to be a very valid justification. Do you think that adding CFMX to that equation adds or detracts? If CFMX is a plus, would CFMX & the taglibs, alone provide the justification? I don't know, and am assuming that there is a lot more to Flex than the taglibs... that the taglibs provide rhe UI components and generate the swf from XML. TIA Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
I can tell you from experience...RIA development for most typical j2ee development teams will be of a fraction of the cost vs traditional flash/remoting development. The difference in managing source code alone is worth big bucks to me...I've had my FLAs over-written a few too many times ;-) Stace _ From: Jeffry Houser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 10:46 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out At 08:01 AM 3/30/2004, you wrote: >Subject: Flex is out >From: Thomas Chiverton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 13:29:34 +0100 >Thread: >http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm/method=messages&threadi d=31535&forumid=4#158147 > >On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 13:22 pm, Jeffry Houser wrote: > > Which of these are true? > >Both. > > > 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files > >Well, it does. > > > 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you could > > build anything created in Flex through other means ) > >Yes, you could. Would that time cost you more or less than the 12K price >tag ? >I'm willing to bet you could do it in-house for less. : hmm: Interesting. I wonder how many other people think that the traditional flash creation method will be less costly than using Flex? Only having a general knowledge of Flash I am not qualified to even speculate. -- Jeffry Houser, Web Developer, Writer, Songwriter, Recording Engineer -- AIM: Reboog711 | Phone: 1-203-379-0773 -- My Books: Recording Music: Original Energetic Acoustic Rock: _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Thx Mike I like the 5 IPs on the developer -- but not perishable swfs Bet, hey, it's free! Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 8:33 AM, Mike Chambers wrote: > http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/productinfo/faq/#item-36 > > mike chambers > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - Original Message - > From: "Dick Applebaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Why is the Flex trial only available on CD -- Price isn't the issue, > > but delay is. > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/productinfo/faq/#item-36 mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Dick Applebaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Why is the Flex trial only available on CD -- Price isn't the issue, > but delay is. > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 16:45 pm, Jeffry Houser wrote: > traditional flash creation method will be less costly than using > Flex? Only having a general knowledge of Flash I am not qualified to even > speculate. The first few projects you do will involve writing your own objects for things like a data driven tree view, but subsequent products will get the functionality for free. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Rob asked: > Why does it cost so much? A few years back we used a product called HTMLTransit to convert Word documents, Excel documents and documents in other formats to HTML. After an initial investment in building a template that mapped the styles in the original document to HTML it was a simple matter of clicking a button to scan folders full of these documents to convert them to HTML. HTMLTransit cost all of $499. For a bit more money you could get the server piece that would sniff for new files and perform scheduled scans and upload the HTML files to your web server. It was a great product at a great price. Then along came Big Company who bought out the company that developed HTMLTransit. Big Company repositioned the product to $4999/copy and they gave everyone 60 days to extend their subscriptions at the old price (so we did, and of course they released no major updates during that two year period, but that's another story). When I asked our contact at the old company that had developed HTMLTransit why Big Company was increasing the price 10x he said it was because they believed HTMLTransit had hit a wall at its price of $499 and that there was a whole world of potential enterprise customers who would not take seriously a product priced at just $499. For each Big Customer they won they could lose ten small customers and still break even . . . they lost us . . . George [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
At 08:01 AM 3/30/2004, you wrote: >Subject: Flex is out >From: Thomas Chiverton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 13:29:34 +0100 >Thread: >http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm/method=messages&threadid=31535&forumid=4#158147 > >On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 13:22 pm, Jeffry Houser wrote: > > Which of these are true? > >Both. > > > 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files > >Well, it does. > > > 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you could > > build anything created in Flex through other means ) > >Yes, you could. Would that time cost you more or less than the 12K price >tag ? >I'm willing to bet you could do it in-house for less. : hmm: Interesting. I wonder how many other people think that the traditional flash creation method will be less costly than using Flex? Only having a general knowledge of Flash I am not qualified to even speculate. -- Jeffry Houser, Web Developer, Writer, Songwriter, Recording Engineer -- AIM: Reboog711 | Phone: 1-203-379-0773 -- My Books: Recording Music: Original Energetic Acoustic Rock: [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 16:04 pm, Dick Applebaum wrote: > Why is the Flex trial only available on CD -- Price isn't the issue, > but delay is. So all the people who did the beta can go 'nuh-nuh-nuh-nuhh' :-) -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>I should not have used rhetoric! > >The point I was trying to make (however lamely) was: > >Why aren't the RIA components in the Flex taglibs available to CFMX >without the need and expense of purchasing, installing and maintaining >another server? > >I think it was Ben;s preso or white paper that says the jsp taglibs >also do the rendering of the swf > 1) You can indeed run Flex and CFMX in the same server instance if you wish. Ben has a blog entry on doing that, and Steven Erat wrote a TechNote on how to get them to work together: http://www.macromedia.com/support/flex/ts/documents/samples_cfmx.htm 2) I think the disparate release cycles for CFMX and Flex currently makes for a kludgy integration (as you'll note by the TechNote above). However, I'd look for Blackstone to provide a much cleaner integration once the CF and Flex engineers put their heads together on an intregation strategy. Regards, Dave. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>But they don't do a similar job -- Flex has no mechanisms to access >databases, email, etc. > >As far as I can tell Flex relies on other components (written in CF, >JSP, whatever) to do the meat of the seerverside. > >What Flex appears to do (and it is difficult to tell how well) is >combine XML constructs (representing structure and data) with jsp >taglibs that represent RIA components and generate a swf. > >Unless your data is static and hard-coded (as are most of the examples) >in the Flex application, you need something else to do the heavy >lifting. > And that's fine by me. Flex is intended to follow the MVC pattern, where Flex is the "V" (View). Flex merely forces you to adhere to the strict separation between your presentation tier and your business logic tier. Coming from the ColdFusion world, it may be a bit "strange" for us (well, it is for me, at least) because it seems like such a rigid line, but it makes for cleaner separation and code re-use down the line. Regards, Dave. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Ahh.. shoulda' gone to the blog first. Now that makes perfect sense! My faith in the server-side technology is restored. All that remain (IMO) are packaging and pricing for Flex and the taglibs. There is another set of issues re: RIAs in general -- but that's for another time/thread. One issue I would like to see addressed, if you could. Why is the Flex trial only available on CD -- Price isn't the issue, but delay is. Laszlo (GIHTT) has a trial download as do most other MACR products! TIA Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 6:42 AM, Ben Forta wrote: > Dick, > > > Yes, you install Flex (with it's taglibs) and CF into the same J2EE > instance. See http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=e > &entry=1102 > and > http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=e > &entry=1042. > > > --- Ben > >_ > > From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 9:38 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Flex is out > > Tom > > What do you mean? > > AFAIK, the only way to get the taglibs is to install another server > instance on the same j2ee server and then (somehow) access them thru > the J2ee server facilities. > > Am I wrong? Can you purchase only the taglibs and instal them on a > CFMX server instance? > > That would be great (at the very least it would reduce the system > installation and maintenance overhead & associated on-going expenses) > > Dick > > On Mar 30, 2004, at 6:16 AM, Thomas Chiverton wrote: > > > On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 14:37 pm, Dick Applebaum wrote: > > > But if the Flex jsp taglibs were available for installation on > CFMX, > > > > No if about it. > > >_ > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Dick, Yes, you install Flex (with it's taglibs) and CF into the same J2EE instance. See http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=e &entry=1102 and http://www.forta.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=e &entry=1042. --- Ben _ From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 9:38 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out Tom What do you mean? AFAIK, the only way to get the taglibs is to install another server instance on the same j2ee server and then (somehow) access them thru the J2ee server facilities. Am I wrong? Can you purchase only the taglibs and instal them on a CFMX server instance? That would be great (at the very least it would reduce the system installation and maintenance overhead & associated on-going expenses) Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 6:16 AM, Thomas Chiverton wrote: > On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 14:37 pm, Dick Applebaum wrote: > > But if the Flex jsp taglibs were available for installation on CFMX, > > No if about it. > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Tom What do you mean? AFAIK, the only way to get the taglibs is to install another server instance on the same j2ee server and then (somehow) access them thru the J2ee server facilities. Am I wrong? Can you purchase only the taglibs and instal them on a CFMX server instance? That would be great (at the very least it would reduce the system installation and maintenance overhead & associated on-going expenses) Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 6:16 AM, Thomas Chiverton wrote: > On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 14:37 pm, Dick Applebaum wrote: > > But if the Flex jsp taglibs were available for installation on CFMX, > > No if about it. > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 14:26 pm, Danielle Romain wrote: > Sun ought to buy MM. Bit early for Fool's Day :-) -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Exactly, while Flex is no doubt cool, it would be a tough sell convince a client to pony up $12K when UI development in either Flash or HTML would be far less than that. Obviously, the pricing is enterprise level. I have looked at Laszlo and wondered how it differs from Flex. The answer's not obvious to me. One area where it loses big time is brand awareness; Macromedia are synonymous with rich content delivery because of the Flash product line. Since both Laszlo and Flex render XML code into Flash, what are the advantages of using Flex, when price is obviously not one of them. Also, I think we need to consider that even at the enterprise level, purchasing managers are conscious about costs. Where is the point by point comparison about why companies should choose Flex versus Laszlo (and MS XAML, to come)? Down here in the small development shops, we evangelize constantly on the strengths of ColdFusion versus competing technologies. We're armed with the information and hard-earned experience to answer even the most skeptical critics. So, naturally there's going to be disappointment about the Flex release. Shifting topic, though, seems with their relationship, Sun ought to buy MM. With MM's product suite, Sun's impressive enterprise platform and the hallowed status of Java, it would be a good combination. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 14:37 pm, Dick Applebaum wrote: > But if the Flex jsp taglibs were available for installation on CFMX, No if about it. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 13:38 pm, Dick Applebaum wrote: > But they don't do a similar job -- Flex has no mechanisms to access > databases, email, etc. Flex is 'new wave' in that in supports invoking services to do all the back-end stuff. > As far as I can tell Flex relies on other components (written in CF, > JSP, whatever) to do the meat of the seerverside. :nods It won't replace CFML, for instance, because you need an easy way to write web services (though the stuff you can do in a decent Java IDE these days makes writing them very easy too)... -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Of course you are correct But the CFMX application and (apparently) the Flex application are kind of mini-servers in themselves: 1) CFMX is passed a request for a template or service 2) CFMX locates the template and interprets/compiles it as necessary 3) CFMX executes the template making requests of other servers (db, mail, etc) as necessary) 4) CFMX combines the dynamic data with static and dynamic formatting and renders a page. 5) CFMX passes the page to a web server (or data packet to a web service) for return/consumption by the requestor. I know, I know CFMX doesn't do all this itself -- the j2ee app server is there at (almost) every step. But CFMX is delegated the control of the application flow.. and it does not rely on the J2EE app server for everything (I can't remember the last time I defined my CFMX datasources to the JRun server...oh yes I can... never!). Flex appears to do steps 4 & 5 (mainly) and relies on others for the rest. But if the Flex jsp taglibs were available for installation on CFMX, wouldn't we have everything we need that Flex provides and much more? I think it is artificial to package Flex the way it is -- by MACR's own admission it is not complete enough to stand on its own except for a very small subset of web apps. Laszlo (God I hate typing that) appears to be much the same. As a web developer I was looking for a procedural way to generate the RIA component of my web apps in CFMX. I am disappointed that so much effort went into Flex and that it missed the mark (IMO). But the market will decide. Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 5:07 AM, Jochem van Dieten wrote: > Dick Applebaum wrote: > > > > The point I was trying to make (however lamely) was: > > > > Why aren't the RIA components in the Flex taglibs available to CFMX > > without the need and expense of purchasing, installing and > maintaining > > another server? > > Flex is just a J2EE application that runs on top of a J2EE > Application Server. You don't need a separate server for it, you > can run it on the same J2EE Application Server that you run CF MX on. > > Jochem > > -- > I don't get it > immigrants don't work > and steal our jobs > - Loesje > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Dick Applebaum wrote: > > The point I was trying to make (however lamely) was: > > Why aren't the RIA components in the Flex taglibs available to CFMX > without the need and expense of purchasing, installing and maintaining > another server? Flex is just a J2EE application that runs on top of a J2EE Application Server. You don't need a separate server for it, you can run it on the same J2EE Application Server that you run CF MX on. Jochem -- I don't get it immigrants don't work and steal our jobs - Loesje [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
I should not have used rhetoric! The point I was trying to make (however lamely) was: Why aren't the RIA components in the Flex taglibs available to CFMX without the need and expense of purchasing, installing and maintaining another server? I think it was Ben;s preso or white paper that says the jsp taglibs also do the rendering of the swf Dick On Mar 30, 2004, at 4:32 AM, Thomas Chiverton wrote: > On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 04:50 am, Dick Applebaum wrote: > > But, given the jsp taglibs... is that all there is? > > That' all CFMX is, really. > > -- > Tom Chiverton > Advanced ColdFusion Programmer > > Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > BlueFinger Limited > Underwood Business Park > Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF > Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 > Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 > web: www.bluefinger.com > Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple > Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. > *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee > only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us > immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this > communication if received in error. No binding contract will result > from > this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf > of > the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the > completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted > over > public networks.*** > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Mar 30, 2004, at 4:24 AM, Thomas Chiverton wrote: > You can them individualy as far as I know. It was a comparrison, > because they > do a similar job - server side scripting of a high level language - > Flex > renders to Flash, CF to HTML. > > But they don't do a similar job -- Flex has no mechanisms to access databases, email, etc. As far as I can tell Flex relies on other components (written in CF, JSP, whatever) to do the meat of the seerverside. What Flex appears to do (and it is difficult to tell how well) is combine XML constructs (representing structure and data) with jsp taglibs that represent RIA components and generate a swf. Unless your data is static and hard-coded (as are most of the examples) in the Flex application, you need something else to do the heavy lifting. Dick [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Monday 29 Mar 2004 20:07 pm, Mark Leder wrote: > Ditto. As I watched the demo, I was brainstorming about all new products, > apps, etc. using Flex. So my bubble is burst. :nods I was mocking up GUI for the next major release of our web site recently, and wouldv'e loced to use Flex for it, and spread the good word. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 04:50 am, Dick Applebaum wrote: > But, given the jsp taglibs... is that all there is? That' all CFMX is, really. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 12:36 pm, Arden Weiss wrote: > Maybe just another go nowhere Spectra product chasing tumble weeds... The same thought occured to me at lunch time mulling things over with the rest of the guys here :-/ -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Tuesday 30 Mar 2004 13:22 pm, Jeffry Houser wrote: > Which of these are true? Both. > 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files Well, it does. > 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you could > build anything created in Flex through other means ) Yes, you could. Would that time cost you more or less than the 12K price tag ? I'm willing to bet you could do it in-house for less. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Monday 29 Mar 2004 17:14 pm, Rob wrote: > Can you just buy the Flex server and not buy cfmx? or do you have to buy > both? You can them individualy as far as I know. It was a comparrison, because they do a similar job - server side scripting of a high level language - Flex renders to Flash, CF to HTML. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44(0)1749 834997 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834901 web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG. *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Since there seems to be very little traffic about this on the flex list, I thought I'd post here. Which of these are true? Flex: 1) Is an alternative way to create swf files 2) Offers nothing new to the Flash Client (I.E. with enough time; you could build anything created in Flex through other means ) Based on what I've seen, conceptually, Flex is a great idea. I currently don't see a need for me to use it (on any current projects); but I'd probably be the guy on the project creating the web services for use with Flex. UI is not my thing. -- Jeffry Houser, Web Developer, Writer, Songwriter, Recording Engineer -- AIM: Reboog711 | Phone: 1-203-379-0773 -- My Books: Recording Music: Original Energetic Acoustic Rock: [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
>eloquently stated geoff. it's the quarterly, mm is getting bought, cf is >going to be gobbled up by .net, run and hide thread...its almost like we >should have anniversary parties for it... > >tw I'm not saying gobbled up by .net I'm saying bought and strengthen by someone else. It happens every day on wallstreet. Macromedia did not gobble up ColdFusion they did a good job with it. Maybe it's time for them to consider passing the torch or handing off one of their other product lines. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
But Macromedia is not Microsoft by far. Managing the diversity of product lines is essential to success and ever organization has a limit, and many organizations suffer significant failures becuase mismanage a brand or they go beyond their limit. > >Microsoft releases new version of SQL Server. Office users squeal that >they have been abandoned and that Microsoft have lost their focus. Or >was that... Microsoft releases ASP.NET and Exchange users squeal that >they have been abandoned and that Microsoft have lost their focus... Or >was that... > >Just because MM are increasing their portfolio of products does not >constitute a lack of developer focus. Has the release cycle for Studio [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
And if Microsoft buys MM for Flask etal, guess what -- Cold Fusion is dead -- just like they knifed FoxPro in the back... -Original Message- From: Dwayne Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 11:16 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out I predict that Macromedia is going to sell off ColdFusion within the next 2 years. Their product portfolio is too diversified and their customer segments have very little in common - Flash, ColdFusion, Director, Fireworks, Breeze, and now Flex - very different developer communities. Macromedia is all over the place and their strongest commitment is still to their original flagship product lines. ColdFusion was only valuable to MM because it provided the "dynamic" support that Flash was missing and it was much better than ultra-dev. Now that .NET and PHP is gaining strength, Macromedia is having a difficult time staying loyal. Don't get me wrong, with out a doubt, Macromedia has done a very good job with ColdFusion MX (I still think they made a serious mistake by abandoning ColdFusion Studio) but I do not believe that they are willing and better yet capable of providing the necessary support to ensure that "ColdFusion Development" stay ahead of the pack (.NET, PHP, ASP). From an operational perspective, I don't think it's sustainable effort. I respect Macromedia's apparent strategy but I believe that selling off ColdFusion to a very close and "up and coming" partner will do both Macromedia and ColdFusion a great deal of good. If they don't sell off ColdFusion they should and probably will sell off something else because they are struggling trying to hold it all (ColdFusion, Breeze, Authorware, SoundEdit, Director, Contribute, Flex, Dreamweaver etc.) together. If they have smart people on their board of directors, they are probably having this discussion as we speak, if not we should all be concerned. We should be greatful to MM for it's investment and support of the Community, but don't do to ColdFusion what Eisner did to Disney and what TimeWarner did to AOL. Dwayne Cole, MS in MIS, MBA Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer 850-591-0212 "It can truly be said that nothing happens until there is vision. But it is equally true that a vision with no underlying sense of purpose, no calling, is just a good idea - all "sound and fury, signifying nothing." The Fifth Discipline - Peter Senge -- Original Message -- From: Dick Applebaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:47:49 -0800 >After reflection: > >I was very upset, as are most of about a missed opportunity. > >But the market will decide > >yes, the market will decide > >Dick > >On Mar 29, 2004, at 7:15 PM, Dick Applebaum wrote: > >> Danielle >> >> I agree with most (if not all) of what you say. >> >> RIAs... yes >> >> Flex (half a job well done) --- yeah, in theory! >> >> But a separate, very expensive, server to do half a job --- why, >> little >> potential gain (IMO) and big potential loss (also IMO) >> >> if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be >> distracted >> and lose the war (IMO) >> >> Dick >> >> On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:01 PM, Danielle Romain wrote: >> >> > If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I >> > agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? >> > >> > Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content >> > delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which >> > some find very intimidating. >> > >> > In the next generation of Internet applications, it is going to be >> > tough to discern between a web app and a traditional desktop >> > application. This is the same motivation, I think, behind >> Microsoft's >> > XAML, due out with Longhorn. Given the delays in Longhorn, its deep >> > Flash development base and legions of ColdFusion developers, MM has >> > roughly 1 year to grab market and mindshare. While I'm sure the >> > niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough >> > enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive >> sales >> > volume in this product. >> > >> > It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a >> tremendous >> > technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. >> > >> > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Maybe just another go nowhere Spectra product chasing tumble weeds... -Original Message- From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:30 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 21:11, Geoff Bowers wrote: > So Flex is expensive.. its a product we all want to use today but > probably won't be able to till tomorrow. We all fall somewhere within > the developer spectrum but none of us are everywhere at once. > > If Flex is successful in the enterprise space as Contribute has been in > the consumer space Macromedia would be on a winner, no? I guess, back to the beta max analogy (which is apples to windows) - they still use beta maxes in TV studios. I think I get where they are coming from though, for example: IBM WebSphere Application Server Advanced Edition 4.0 (20P5323) for PC, Unix - $12,108 Microsoft Content Management Server Enterprise Edition (V04-00018) for PC - $12,031 Microsoft Content Management Server Enterprise Edition For PC - $34,841 and while its true that M$ has like 80 billion dollars in the bank, it seems like if that is the market they want - then they are in the right price range. If they don't want the poor playing with their stuff, then so be it. -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
> I'm still waiting for Flex to show up in the Education store, > but I have little hope of the discount percentage being high > enough to make it affordable in the near future. The educational discount in N. America is going to be 34%, so just under $8k. Government institutions will get a 20% discount. Tim. -- --- Maze Solver - http://tech.badpen.com/cfcontest/ --- RAWNET LTD - Internet, New Media and ebusiness Gurus. WE'VE MOVED - for our new address, please visit our website at http://www.rawnet.com/ or call us any time on 0800 294 24 24. --- This message may contain information which is legally privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorised disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information is strictly prohibited. Such notification notwithstanding, any comments, opinions, information or conclusions expressed in this message are those of the originator, not of rawnet limited, unless otherwise explicitly and independently indicated by an authorised representative of rawnet limited. --- [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
PC Wroble said: > > Laszlo has changed their pricing/version model. For most of it's > life they just had the Enterpise Edition which was out of reach of > small guys. Just a few weeks ago they were selling the Professional > Edition for $995 (or $999) and the Enterprise Edition for $2495 (or > $2499). Last week they rebranded the Professional Edition as the > Express Edition and changed the price to $1999 and you now have to > call the for pricing on the Enterprise edition. They probably had a > run on the Pro edition and realized they could get more for it plus > they must of had wind of the Flex pricing. Don't you love companies competing for your business :-) > With the outrageous pricing of Flex and considering most of my > clients are non-profits then Laszlo is for me. I'm still waiting for Flex to show up in the Education store, but I have little hope of the discount percentage being high enough to make it affordable in the near future. That is too bad, but considering the potential of Flex it would be silly to expect Macromedia to sell it for the same price as Laszlo sells their products. Jochem [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Rob said: > > If they don't want the poor playing with their stuff, then so be it. Sure they want everybody to *play* with it. That can only increase the Flex awareness of the general public. That is why you can get the trial for $8.99, familiarize yourself with it and build a demo to convince your boss to foot the bill. But they indeed don't want to ruin their pricing model by selling Flex for less then they can sell it for. Jochem [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
To be fair--- Lazslo (God I hate typing that) has a way of querying a DB... Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 10:02 PM, Dick Applebaum wrote: > It is late, but I offer you this: > > http://www.laszlosystems.com/developers/learn/documentation/tutorials/ > data_app_7.php > > To do a dril-ldown the Flash Client, Laszlo (God I hate typing that) > invokes a Web service that: > > 1) invokes a JSP program > 2) the JSP program Queries the DB > 3) the JSP Prog converts the query to XML > 4)the Laszlo (God I hate typing that) program manipulates the XML > 5) the XML is sent to the client > > Unless I am way 'round the bend, that's a lotta' crap! > > Is XML to become the internal lingua franca of web apps (computer > programs) -- if so we all better get jobs with SBC > > Dick > > > > On Mar 29, 2004, at 8:33 PM, PC Wroble wrote: > > > FORGET flex! Go Laszlo! > > > > I was sick of waiting for flex since the beta list was so small > so > > I've been playing around with Laszlo (LPS) for a while. It rocks! > I > > figured Flex would be priced out of range of us small guys and of > > course it is. I actually thought it would start at about $5000 per > cpu > > which is way out of range of us small guys but it's even more than > I > > imagined. > > I had previously noted: > > > > >>But, since MM gives away the Flash player and Sells The IDE, I > think > > >>anything that provides an alternative to buying the IDE is a > > >>competitor, No? > > > > > >Well, yes, if this were really an alternative IDE. Laszlo does > not > > have an > > >IDE that I see. They assume you'll use another IDE to code your > > Laszlo > > >applications (which is fine by me). Further, from what I read on > > various > > >mailing lists from the true Flash pros, most of *them* don't > even > > use the > > >Flash IDE for most of their development work (most of which is in > > >ActionScript). > > > > See how use Eclipse as a Laszlo IDE at: > > http://www.laszlosystems.com/developers/community/forums/ > > showthread.php?s=&threadid=751 > > > > >>One thing I haven;t been able to determine is what LZ (Hate > typing > > >>Laszlo) sells -- and how much it costs. > > > > > >They sell the J2EE EAR/WAR file that contains the Laszlo engine. > > It's akin > > >to how Macromedia (most likely) will be offering the Flex engine > > when it's > > >done (integration with Blackstone aside, perhaps). As for price, > > they seem > > >to be like any other vendor who sells a pricey productyou > have > > to work > > >through a sales person to negotiate cost! Macromedia does with > with > > products > > >like Breeze, for example. > > > > Laszlo has changed their pricing/version model. For most of it's > life > > they just had the Enterpise Edition which was out of reach of > small > > guys. Just a few weeks ago they were selling the Professional > Edition > > for $995 (or $999) and the Enterprise Edition for $2495 (or > $2499). > > Last week they rebranded the Professional Edition as the Express > > Edition and changed the price to $1999 and you now have to call > the > > for pricing on the Enterprise edition. They probably had a run on > the > > Pro edition and realized they could get more for it plus they must > of > > had wind of the Flex pricing. In version 2 of the Developer Edition > it > > supported simultaneous connections from up to 2 remote IP > addresses > > per hour. In version DE 2.1 that was released the other day they > > changed it to support simultaneous connections from up to 5 remote > IP > > addresses per hour. Last week they also released the > Non-Commercial > > Edition which is free for no-commercial use. That should make it a > hit > > with non-profits &! other non-commercial uses. > > > > With the outrageous pricing of Flex and considering most of my > > clients are non-profits then Laszlo is for me. I'll be deleting > the > > idea Flex from my memory now. > > > > PC > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
It is late, but I offer you this: http://www.laszlosystems.com/developers/learn/documentation/tutorials/ data_app_7.php To do a dril-ldown the Flash Client, Laszlo (God I hate typing that) invokes a Web service that: 1) invokes a JSP program 2) the JSP program Queries the DB 3) the JSP Prog converts the query to XML 4)the Laszlo (God I hate typing that) program manipulates the XML 5) the XML is sent to the client Unless I am way 'round the bend, that's a lotta' crap! Is XML to become the internal lingua franca of web apps (computer programs) -- if so we all better get jobs with SBC Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 8:33 PM, PC Wroble wrote: > FORGET flex! Go Laszlo! > > I was sick of waiting for flex since the beta list was so small so > I've been playing around with Laszlo (LPS) for a while. It rocks! I > figured Flex would be priced out of range of us small guys and of > course it is. I actually thought it would start at about $5000 per cpu > which is way out of range of us small guys but it's even more than I > imagined. > I had previously noted: > > >>But, since MM gives away the Flash player and Sells The IDE, I think > >>anything that provides an alternative to buying the IDE is a > >>competitor, No? > > > >Well, yes, if this were really an alternative IDE. Laszlo does not > have an > >IDE that I see. They assume you'll use another IDE to code your > Laszlo > >applications (which is fine by me). Further, from what I read on > various > >mailing lists from the true Flash pros, most of *them* don't even > use the > >Flash IDE for most of their development work (most of which is in > >ActionScript). > > See how use Eclipse as a Laszlo IDE at: > http://www.laszlosystems.com/developers/community/forums/ > showthread.php?s=&threadid=751 > > >>One thing I haven;t been able to determine is what LZ (Hate typing > >>Laszlo) sells -- and how much it costs. > > > >They sell the J2EE EAR/WAR file that contains the Laszlo engine. > It's akin > >to how Macromedia (most likely) will be offering the Flex engine > when it's > >done (integration with Blackstone aside, perhaps). As for price, > they seem > >to be like any other vendor who sells a pricey productyou have > to work > >through a sales person to negotiate cost! Macromedia does with with > products > >like Breeze, for example. > > Laszlo has changed their pricing/version model. For most of it's life > they just had the Enterpise Edition which was out of reach of small > guys. Just a few weeks ago they were selling the Professional Edition > for $995 (or $999) and the Enterprise Edition for $2495 (or $2499). > Last week they rebranded the Professional Edition as the Express > Edition and changed the price to $1999 and you now have to call the > for pricing on the Enterprise edition. They probably had a run on the > Pro edition and realized they could get more for it plus they must of > had wind of the Flex pricing. In version 2 of the Developer Edition it > supported simultaneous connections from up to 2 remote IP addresses > per hour. In version DE 2.1 that was released the other day they > changed it to support simultaneous connections from up to 5 remote IP > addresses per hour. Last week they also released the Non-Commercial > Edition which is free for no-commercial use. That should make it a hit > with non-profits &! other non-commercial uses. > > With the outrageous pricing of Flex and considering most of my > clients are non-profits then Laszlo is for me. I'll be deleting the > idea Flex from my memory now. > > PC > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
FORGET flex! Go Laszlo! I was sick of waiting for flex since the beta list was so small so I've been playing around with Laszlo (LPS) for a while. It rocks! I figured Flex would be priced out of range of us small guys and of course it is. I actually thought it would start at about $5000 per cpu which is way out of range of us small guys but it's even more than I imagined. I had previously noted: >>But, since MM gives away the Flash player and Sells The IDE, I think >>anything that provides an alternative to buying the IDE is a >>competitor, No? > >Well, yes, if this were really an alternative IDE. Laszlo does not have an >IDE that I see. They assume you'll use another IDE to code your Laszlo >applications (which is fine by me). Further, from what I read on various >mailing lists from the true Flash pros, most of *them* don't even use the >Flash IDE for most of their development work (most of which is in >ActionScript). See how use Eclipse as a Laszlo IDE at: http://www.laszlosystems.com/developers/community/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=751 >>One thing I haven;t been able to determine is what LZ (Hate typing >>Laszlo) sells -- and how much it costs. > >They sell the J2EE EAR/WAR file that contains the Laszlo engine. It's akin >to how Macromedia (most likely) will be offering the Flex engine when it's >done (integration with Blackstone aside, perhaps). As for price, they seem >to be like any other vendor who sells a pricey productyou have to work >through a sales person to negotiate cost! Macromedia does with with products >like Breeze, for example. Laszlo has changed their pricing/version model. For most of it's life they just had the Enterpise Edition which was out of reach of small guys. Just a few weeks ago they were selling the Professional Edition for $995 (or $999) and the Enterprise Edition for $2495 (or $2499). Last week they rebranded the Professional Edition as the Express Edition and changed the price to $1999 and you now have to call the for pricing on the Enterprise edition. They probably had a run on the Pro edition and realized they could get more for it plus they must of had wind of the Flex pricing. In version 2 of the Developer Edition it supported simultaneous connections from up to 2 remote IP addresses per hour. In version DE 2.1 that was released the other day they changed it to support simultaneous connections from up to 5 remote IP addresses per hour. Last week they also released the Non-Commercial Edition which is free for no-commercial use. That should make it a hit with non-profits & other non-commercial uses. With the outrageous pricing of Flex and considering most of my clients are non-profits then Laszlo is for me. I'll be deleting the idea Flex from my memory now. PC [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 21:11, Geoff Bowers wrote: > So Flex is expensive.. its a product we all want to use today but > probably won't be able to till tomorrow. We all fall somewhere within > the developer spectrum but none of us are everywhere at once. > > If Flex is successful in the enterprise space as Contribute has been in > the consumer space Macromedia would be on a winner, no? I guess, back to the beta max analogy (which is apples to windows) - they still use beta maxes in TV studios. I think I get where they are coming from though, for example: IBM WebSphere Application Server Advanced Edition 4.0 (20P5323) for PC, Unix - $12,108 Microsoft Content Management Server Enterprise Edition (V04-00018) for PC - $12,031 Microsoft Content Management Server Enterprise Edition For PC - $34,841 and while its true that M$ has like 80 billion dollars in the bank, it seems like if that is the market they want - then they are in the right price range. If they don't want the poor playing with their stuff, then so be it. -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
eloquently stated geoff. it's the quarterly, mm is getting bought, cf is going to be gobbled up by .net, run and hide thread...its almost like we should have anniversary parties for it... tw -Original Message- From: Geoff Bowers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:11 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out Dwayne Cole wrote: >> if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be >> distracted and lose the war (IMO) > > I agree Dick, In fact I felt this way when they deployed Contribute. > RIA has promise but not if these guys lose focus by chasing consumer > (including corporations) markets, and trying to be all things to all > developers. Here we go again with another round of product releases > that we feel completely left out of. MM is completely distracted, > which considering understandable. They have alot of challenges - > shareholders, banks, a vertical integration strategy, diversified > product portfolio, intense competition - hell that's enough to keep > even the best managed companies distrated. Bah.. phooey. Microsoft releases new version of SQL Server. Office users squeal that they have been abandoned and that Microsoft have lost their focus. Or was that... Microsoft releases ASP.NET and Exchange users squeal that they have been abandoned and that Microsoft have lost their focus... Or was that... Just because MM are increasing their portfolio of products does not constitute a lack of developer focus. Has the release cycle for Studio suddenly doubled or something?? So Flex is expensive.. its a product we all want to use today but probably won't be able to till tomorrow. We all fall somewhere within the developer spectrum but none of us are everywhere at once. If Flex is successful in the enterprise space as Contribute has been in the consumer space Macromedia would be on a winner, no? -- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
but we aren't MMs only customers. _ From: Dwayne Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 29, 2004 10:39 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out >if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be distracted >and lose the war (IMO) > I agree Dick, In fact I felt this way when they deployed Contribute. RIA has promise but not if these guys lose focus by chasing consumer (including corporations) markets, and trying to be all things to all developers. Here we go again with another round of product releases that we feel completely left out of. MM is completely distracted, which considering understandable. They have alot of challenges - shareholders, banks, a vertical integration strategy, diversified product portfolio, intense competition - hell that's enough to keep even the best managed companies distrated. _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Dwayne Cole wrote: >> if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be >> distracted and lose the war (IMO) > > I agree Dick, In fact I felt this way when they deployed Contribute. > RIA has promise but not if these guys lose focus by chasing consumer > (including corporations) markets, and trying to be all things to all > developers. Here we go again with another round of product releases > that we feel completely left out of. MM is completely distracted, > which considering understandable. They have alot of challenges - > shareholders, banks, a vertical integration strategy, diversified > product portfolio, intense competition - hell that's enough to keep > even the best managed companies distrated. Bah.. phooey. Microsoft releases new version of SQL Server. Office users squeal that they have been abandoned and that Microsoft have lost their focus. Or was that... Microsoft releases ASP.NET and Exchange users squeal that they have been abandoned and that Microsoft have lost their focus... Or was that... Just because MM are increasing their portfolio of products does not constitute a lack of developer focus. Has the release cycle for Studio suddenly doubled or something?? So Flex is expensive.. its a product we all want to use today but probably won't be able to till tomorrow. We all fall somewhere within the developer spectrum but none of us are everywhere at once. If Flex is successful in the enterprise space as Contribute has been in the consumer space Macromedia would be on a winner, no? -- geoff http://www.daemon.com.au/ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Dwayne Rob said it all: "(Bit disenchanted sorry)" On Mar 29, 2004, at 8:38 PM, Dwayne Cole wrote: > >if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be > distracted > >and lose the war (IMO) > > > > I agree Dick, In fact I felt this way when they deployed Contribute. > RIA has promise but not if these guys lose focus by chasing consumer > (including corporations) markets, and trying to be all things to all > developers. Here we go again with another round of product releases > that we feel completely left out of. MM is completely distracted, > which considering understandable. They have alot of challenges - > shareholders, banks, a vertical integration strategy, diversified > product portfolio, intense competition - hell that's enough to keep > even the best managed companies distrated. > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be distracted >and lose the war (IMO) > I agree Dick, In fact I felt this way when they deployed Contribute. RIA has promise but not if these guys lose focus by chasing consumer (including corporations) markets, and trying to be all things to all developers. Here we go again with another round of product releases that we feel completely left out of. MM is completely distracted, which considering understandable. They have alot of challenges - shareholders, banks, a vertical integration strategy, diversified product portfolio, intense competition - hell that's enough to keep even the best managed companies distrated. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
While I'm sure the niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive sales volume in this product. > >It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a tremendous technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. > DITTO! Dwayne Cole, MS in MIS, MBA Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer 850-591-0212 [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
I predict that Macromedia is going to sell off ColdFusion within the next 2 years. Their product portfolio is too diversified and their customer segments have very little in common - Flash, ColdFusion, Director, Fireworks, Breeze, and now Flex - very different developer communities. Macromedia is all over the place and their strongest commitment is still to their original flagship product lines. ColdFusion was only valuable to MM because it provided the "dynamic" support that Flash was missing and it was much better than ultra-dev. Now that .NET and PHP is gaining strength, Macromedia is having a difficult time staying loyal. Don't get me wrong, with out a doubt, Macromedia has done a very good job with ColdFusion MX (I still think they made a serious mistake by abandoning ColdFusion Studio) but I do not believe that they are willing and better yet capable of providing the necessary support to ensure that "ColdFusion Development" stay ahead of the pack (.NET, PHP, ASP). From an operational perspective, I don't think it's sustainable effort. I respect Macromedia's apparent strategy but I believe that selling off ColdFusion to a very close and "up and coming" partner will do both Macromedia and ColdFusion a great deal of good. If they don't sell off ColdFusion they should and probably will sell off something else because they are struggling trying to hold it all (ColdFusion, Breeze, Authorware, SoundEdit, Director, Contribute, Flex, Dreamweaver etc.) together. If they have smart people on their board of directors, they are probably having this discussion as we speak, if not we should all be concerned. We should be greatful to MM for it's investment and support of the Community, but don't do to ColdFusion what Eisner did to Disney and what TimeWarner did to AOL. Dwayne Cole, MS in MIS, MBA Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer 850-591-0212 "It can truly be said that nothing happens until there is vision. But it is equally true that a vision with no underlying sense of purpose, no calling, is just a good idea - all "sound and fury, signifying nothing." The Fifth Discipline - Peter Senge -- Original Message -- From: Dick Applebaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:47:49 -0800 >After reflection: > >I was very upset, as are most of about a missed opportunity. > >But the market will decide > >yes, the market will decide > >Dick > >On Mar 29, 2004, at 7:15 PM, Dick Applebaum wrote: > >> Danielle >> >> I agree with most (if not all) of what you say. >> >> RIAs... yes >> >> Flex (half a job well done) --- yeah, in theory! >> >> But a separate, very expensive, server to do half a job --- why, >> little >> potential gain (IMO) and big potential loss (also IMO) >> >> if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be >> distracted >> and lose the war (IMO) >> >> Dick >> >> On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:01 PM, Danielle Romain wrote: >> >> > If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I >> > agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? >> > >> > Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content >> > delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which >> > some find very intimidating. >> > >> > In the next generation of Internet applications, it is going to be >> > tough to discern between a web app and a traditional desktop >> > application. This is the same motivation, I think, behind >> Microsoft's >> > XAML, due out with Longhorn. Given the delays in Longhorn, its deep >> > Flash development base and legions of ColdFusion developers, MM has >> > roughly 1 year to grab market and mindshare. While I'm sure the >> > niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough >> > enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive >> sales >> > volume in this product. >> > >> > It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a >> tremendous >> > technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. >> > >> > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
(Bit disenchanted sorry) On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 19:46, Dave Carabetta wrote: > > If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I > agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? > > > > To a certain extent, it helps to establish legitimacy among larger (read: > enterprise) organizations. Why not make it a billion dollars then. Then they'll really think it's great. I don't know many CTOs (let alone CFOs) that would want to spend 12,000 on a technology that is not totally proven. You think it's a good idea, I think its a good idea... but c'mon. > And along the way, they can generate some revenue to > make up for the R&D that went in to the Flex development process. ... whatever ... > I don't > know if I see the $12K price tag and the be all, end all of Flex pricing. In > the future, with the potential integration with CFMX and increased small > business awareness, there will probably be multiple pricing points which > will make Flex more affordable to a broader development base. This confuses me to no end here. So this is like the trickle down theory? I guess thats it. > > Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content > delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which some > find very intimidating. > > > > I think that Flex succeeds because it opens the Flash development process up > to a wider developer community who don't think in terms of timelines. ... Don't think in terms of timelines and have 12,000 bucks - that's more than I spent on my car btw - so this product is definitely not for me or any of my clients (or anyone I speak to) > Flex may indeed have its issues that will take some growing pains to sort > out, but I don't think that pricing will be the make-or-break for the > product. Yeah... like the beta max right. The growing pain is orders of magnitude higher then any tiny like rib pain or something - more like fatal cranial trauma. I was so stoked to use it too... -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
But, given the jsp taglibs... is that all there is? On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:45 PM, Danielle Romain wrote: > Actually, I think MM is right not to have created a "full" server > product with Flex. It seems that their strategy is to incorporate > Flex functionality into the next version of CF. But I think it would > have been an equally poor choice to lock Flex with ColdFusion > development. Macromedia has done a good job in making products like > Flash, Dreamweaver, et al., applicable to developers using CF, .NET, > PHP or whatever. > > I think it's safe to assume that current Flash RIAs are sitting on > top of a separate web server (be it CF, or something else). So, the > frustration I among developers I have heard from today is not in Flex > being a separate server, but its price. > > I get the impression that developers see the need and usefulness of a > product like Flex today, but don't want to wait for Blackstone and > don't have an enterprise budget to work with. I am one of them. > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
After reflection: I was very upset, as are most of about a missed opportunity. But the market will decide yes, the market will decide Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 7:15 PM, Dick Applebaum wrote: > Danielle > > I agree with most (if not all) of what you say. > > RIAs... yes > > Flex (half a job well done) --- yeah, in theory! > > But a separate, very expensive, server to do half a job --- why, > little > potential gain (IMO) and big potential loss (also IMO) > > if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be > distracted > and lose the war (IMO) > > Dick > > On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:01 PM, Danielle Romain wrote: > > > If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I > > agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? > > > > Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content > > delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which > > some find very intimidating. > > > > In the next generation of Internet applications, it is going to be > > tough to discern between a web app and a traditional desktop > > application. This is the same motivation, I think, behind > Microsoft's > > XAML, due out with Longhorn. Given the delays in Longhorn, its deep > > Flash development base and legions of ColdFusion developers, MM has > > roughly 1 year to grab market and mindshare. While I'm sure the > > niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough > > enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive > sales > > volume in this product. > > > > It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a > tremendous > > technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
> If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? > To a certain extent, it helps to establish legitimacy among larger (read: enterprise) organizations. From a business standpoint, MM has a unique opportunity to present Flash-based RIAs to the enterprise and market its potential as something other than the annoying ads a lot of corporate execs associate with Flash. And along the way, they can generate some revenue to make up for the R&D that went in to the Flex development process. I don't know if I see the $12K price tag and the be all, end all of Flex pricing. In the future, with the potential integration with CFMX and increased small business awareness, there will probably be multiple pricing points which will make Flex more affordable to a broader development base. > Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which some find very intimidating. > I think that Flex succeeds because it opens the Flash development process up to a wider developer community who don't think in terms of timelines. > In the next generation of Internet applications, it is going to be tough to discern between a web app and a traditional desktop application. This is the same motivation, I think, behind Microsoft's XAML, due out with Longhorn. Given the delays in Longhorn, its deep Flash development base and legions of ColdFusion developers, MM has roughly 1 year to grab market and mindshare. While I'm sure the niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive sales volume in this product. > Why one year? Longhorn isn't slated until at least late 2006, and by some MS blog accounts, perhaps 2007. That's two to three years. On top of that, you can't assume that pople will race to adopt the Avalon platform if for no other reason than users, especially corporate users, will not flock to upgrade to the new release. At least with Flex, you get the ability to develop applications that can be used by people now, let alone two to three years from now. > It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a tremendous technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. > Again, I think it's a bit premature to determine what opportunity Macromedia does and doesn't take advantage of. I mean, this product has been out for one day!! To presume that what you see today is what you'll see in a year, if not earlier, is probably a bit short-sighted. If cost is indeed a factor for you and your clients, you can still use the developer version to get up to speed until such time as the pricing becomes more affordable. Flex may indeed have its issues that will take some growing pains to sort out, but I don't think that pricing will be the make-or-break for the product. Regards, Dave. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Actually, I think MM is right not to have created a "full" server product with Flex. It seems that their strategy is to incorporate Flex functionality into the next version of CF. But I think it would have been an equally poor choice to lock Flex with ColdFusion development. Macromedia has done a good job in making products like Flash, Dreamweaver, et al., applicable to developers using CF, .NET, PHP or whatever. I think it's safe to assume that current Flash RIAs are sitting on top of a separate web server (be it CF, or something else). So, the frustration I among developers I have heard from today is not in Flex being a separate server, but its price. I get the impression that developers see the need and usefulness of a product like Flex today, but don't want to wait for Blackstone and don't have an enterprise budget to work with. I am one of them. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Danielle I agree with most (if not all) of what you say. RIAs... yes Flex (half a job well done) --- yeah, in theory! But a separate, very expensive, server to do half a job --- why, little potential gain (IMO) and big potential loss (also IMO) if MACR sells 1.000 or even 10.000 Flex license they will be distracted and lose the war (IMO) Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:01 PM, Danielle Romain wrote: > If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I > agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? > > Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content > delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which > some find very intimidating. > > In the next generation of Internet applications, it is going to be > tough to discern between a web app and a traditional desktop > application. This is the same motivation, I think, behind Microsoft's > XAML, due out with Longhorn. Given the delays in Longhorn, its deep > Flash development base and legions of ColdFusion developers, MM has > roughly 1 year to grab market and mindshare. While I'm sure the > niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough > enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive sales > volume in this product. > > It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a tremendous > technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
If Macromedia sees the Internet's future in RIAs (a point to which I agree, BTW), how does a $12000 product enable that future? Flex succeeds because it bring the positives of Flash of a content delivery standpoint while freeing developers of the Flash IDE, which some find very intimidating. In the next generation of Internet applications, it is going to be tough to discern between a web app and a traditional desktop application. This is the same motivation, I think, behind Microsoft's XAML, due out with Longhorn. Given the delays in Longhorn, its deep Flash development base and legions of ColdFusion developers, MM has roughly 1 year to grab market and mindshare. While I'm sure the niche, enterprise market is lucrative, I think there is enough enthusiasm among the poorer folk to have driven some impressive sales volume in this product. It just seems like is overlooking a opportunity to build a tremendous technology advantage, catching Microsoft on its backfoot. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
For Flex: 1) MXML file which is your Flex XML source 2) Browser requests mxml file 3) Flex compiles the application (first time only) and delivers SWF to the client browser 4) Application residing in the client browser can now interact with systems using Web Services, Java Objects, Remoting, XML over HTTP etc Myself I use a CF backing using both WS and Remoting...but I also tie into other systems via Web Services...somewhat of a central UI. -Stace _ From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 9:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out Considered responses, both! After discovering that flex has no backend db capability (RIA with static data). i guess. I looked again at Laszlo (damn I hate typing that) & what they do is: 1) use a jsp (or somesuch) ti issue the SQL dbquery 2) convert the query to XML (pay attention) 3) manipulate the XML within the Laszlo app (kidding, right) 4) send pure XML (or variation) to the client (still with me) 5) the client manipulates tis XML and generations data for the Presentation layer (I am Joking, right) Tell me that Flex doesn't follow the same model. Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Barney Boisvert wrote: > If you take a look at Flash Remoting Server, it's $999 for a single > proc. > And yet CFMX Pro is $1399 for dual proc, and includes all the flash > remoting > stuff. We might all be pleasantly surprised to see that with CF 7 MM > decides to throw in a very potent Flex engine to help get market > penetration. If people are so fixed on non-CF J2EE or .NET that they > are > willing to spend $12K on Flex, it seems unlikely to me that they'll > suddenly > decide to bail on that and switch to CF, so I don't know that MM > would be > massively hurt in the enterprise sales area. > > Of course, I'm a coke monkey, not a business guru, so who knows. > > Cheers, > barneyb > > > -Original Message- > > From: Dave Carabetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 5:53 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: Flex is out > > > > >After reading Ben's preso and paper I am beginning to > > understand where > > >Flex fits vis-a-avis CFMX --- but it would be a lot clearer > > if the flex > > >jsp taglibs were available to CFMX. > > > > > >I am beginning to think that we are trying to slice web > > application pie > > >into too many slices (communication. help apps, demos, PIAs (Poor > > >Internet/Interface Apps), yadda, yadda, yadda! > > > > > >Do we really need separate servers for all these different slices > of > > >the same pie? > > > > > > > I don't think that we're slicing the "web application pie" > > into too many > > slices. I think Macromedia has made it abundantly clear that > > their vision of > > the internet's future centers around RIAs. Flex, in my mind, > > is their next > > logical step in that road map. They now have two products on > > the market that > > enterprise shops can look to to create two critical pieces of a web > > application -- the presentation and the business logic (let's > > leave the > > pricing aspect for another thread!). > > > > I think the current disconnect between Flex and CFMX is > > simply a result of > > completely different release cycles (obviously, since Flex > > never existed > > before today!). I would look for Blackstone (CF 7) to provide a more > > seamless integration of the CF/Flex libraries. My only > > hesitation with that > > is that I can only imagine what the integration of these two > > enterprise > > applications will mean to product pricing!! > > > > Regards, > > Dave. > > > > > > > > > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Considered responses, both! After discovering that flex has no backend db capability (RIA with static data). i guess. I looked again at Laszlo (damn I hate typing that) & what they do is: 1) use a jsp (or somesuch) ti issue the SQL dbquery 2) convert the query to XML (pay attention) 3) manipulate the XML within the Laszlo app (kidding, right) 4) send pure XML (or variation) to the client (still with me) 5) the client manipulates tis XML and generations data for the Presentation layer (I am Joking, right) Tell me that Flex doesn't follow the same model. Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Barney Boisvert wrote: > If you take a look at Flash Remoting Server, it's $999 for a single > proc. > And yet CFMX Pro is $1399 for dual proc, and includes all the flash > remoting > stuff. We might all be pleasantly surprised to see that with CF 7 MM > decides to throw in a very potent Flex engine to help get market > penetration. If people are so fixed on non-CF J2EE or .NET that they > are > willing to spend $12K on Flex, it seems unlikely to me that they'll > suddenly > decide to bail on that and switch to CF, so I don't know that MM > would be > massively hurt in the enterprise sales area. > > Of course, I'm a coke monkey, not a business guru, so who knows. > > Cheers, > barneyb > > > -Original Message- > > From: Dave Carabetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 5:53 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: Flex is out > > > > >After reading Ben's preso and paper I am beginning to > > understand where > > >Flex fits vis-a-avis CFMX --- but it would be a lot clearer > > if the flex > > >jsp taglibs were available to CFMX. > > > > > >I am beginning to think that we are trying to slice web > > application pie > > >into too many slices (communication. help apps, demos, PIAs (Poor > > >Internet/Interface Apps), yadda, yadda, yadda! > > > > > >Do we really need separate servers for all these different slices > of > > >the same pie? > > > > > > > I don't think that we're slicing the "web application pie" > > into too many > > slices. I think Macromedia has made it abundantly clear that > > their vision of > > the internet's future centers around RIAs. Flex, in my mind, > > is their next > > logical step in that road map. They now have two products on > > the market that > > enterprise shops can look to to create two critical pieces of a web > > application -- the presentation and the business logic (let's > > leave the > > pricing aspect for another thread!). > > > > I think the current disconnect between Flex and CFMX is > > simply a result of > > completely different release cycles (obviously, since Flex > > never existed > > before today!). I would look for Blackstone (CF 7) to provide a more > > seamless integration of the CF/Flex libraries. My only > > hesitation with that > > is that I can only imagine what the integration of these two > > enterprise > > applications will mean to product pricing!! > > > > Regards, > > Dave. > > > > > > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
If you take a look at Flash Remoting Server, it's $999 for a single proc. And yet CFMX Pro is $1399 for dual proc, and includes all the flash remoting stuff. We might all be pleasantly surprised to see that with CF 7 MM decides to throw in a very potent Flex engine to help get market penetration. If people are so fixed on non-CF J2EE or .NET that they are willing to spend $12K on Flex, it seems unlikely to me that they'll suddenly decide to bail on that and switch to CF, so I don't know that MM would be massively hurt in the enterprise sales area. Of course, I'm a coke monkey, not a business guru, so who knows. Cheers, barneyb > -Original Message- > From: Dave Carabetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 5:53 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: Flex is out > > >After reading Ben's preso and paper I am beginning to > understand where > >Flex fits vis-a-avis CFMX --- but it would be a lot clearer > if the flex > >jsp taglibs were available to CFMX. > > > >I am beginning to think that we are trying to slice web > application pie > >into too many slices (communication. help apps, demos, PIAs (Poor > >Internet/Interface Apps), yadda, yadda, yadda! > > > >Do we really need separate servers for all these different slices of > >the same pie? > > > > I don't think that we're slicing the "web application pie" > into too many > slices. I think Macromedia has made it abundantly clear that > their vision of > the internet's future centers around RIAs. Flex, in my mind, > is their next > logical step in that road map. They now have two products on > the market that > enterprise shops can look to to create two critical pieces of a web > application -- the presentation and the business logic (let's > leave the > pricing aspect for another thread!). > > I think the current disconnect between Flex and CFMX is > simply a result of > completely different release cycles (obviously, since Flex > never existed > before today!). I would look for Blackstone (CF 7) to provide a more > seamless integration of the CF/Flex libraries. My only > hesitation with that > is that I can only imagine what the integration of these two > enterprise > applications will mean to product pricing!! > > Regards, > Dave. > > > > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>After reading Ben's preso and paper I am beginning to understand where >Flex fits vis-a-avis CFMX --- but it would be a lot clearer if the flex >jsp taglibs were available to CFMX. > >I am beginning to think that we are trying to slice web application pie >into too many slices (communication. help apps, demos, PIAs (Poor >Internet/Interface Apps), yadda, yadda, yadda! > >Do we really need separate servers for all these different slices of >the same pie? > I don't think that we're slicing the "web application pie" into too many slices. I think Macromedia has made it abundantly clear that their vision of the internet's future centers around RIAs. Flex, in my mind, is their next logical step in that road map. They now have two products on the market that enterprise shops can look to to create two critical pieces of a web application -- the presentation and the business logic (let's leave the pricing aspect for another thread!). I think the current disconnect between Flex and CFMX is simply a result of completely different release cycles (obviously, since Flex never existed before today!). I would look for Blackstone (CF 7) to provide a more seamless integration of the CF/Flex libraries. My only hesitation with that is that I can only imagine what the integration of these two enterprise applications will mean to product pricing!! Regards, Dave. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
After reading Ben's preso and paper I am beginning to understand where Flex fits vis-a-avis CFMX --- but it would be a lot clearer if the flex jsp taglibs were available to CFMX. I am beginning to think that we are trying to slice web application pie into too many slices (communication. help apps, demos, PIAs (Poor Internet/Interface Apps), yadda, yadda, yadda! Do we really need separate servers for all these different slices of the same pie? Just thinkin' aloud! Dick On Mar 29, 2004, at 2:48 PM, Matt Robertson wrote: > Christine Lawson wrote: > >The pricing of Flex is a reflection of its value in its target > market. > > Which clearly isn't a lot of the development community. > > I'm reminded of what happened to the database world when Microsoft > released Access for US$99, and crushed a strong competitive field > permanently as a result. This seemed like another such long-term, > take-control opportunity. Looks like a different course is planned, > and its one that seems loaded with examples of failure. > > Thanks for listening anyway, Christine. Enough about this. I hope > you guys succeed with Flex. > > -- > --- > Matt Robertson,[EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > --- > > -- > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
In other words: Flex was not developed: -To give the power of Flash to the people out in the trenches using such products as DevNet/Studio MX everyday. Even though it could make their lives easier and their products more powerful. But it was developed: -Only for big (read "rich") businesses that are ready to lay down 10s of thousands of dollars on a couple of apps, therefore ensuring semi-high revenue/ROI from the new product. Later on you might give some alms to the poor. I know that's not exactly what you are saying, but it is what I am hearing-> Tyler "I'm not mad at ya, just pissed..." _ From: Christine Lawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 4:17 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Flex is out Hi, I just thought I'd jump in here. The pricing of Flex is a reflection of its value in its target market. Flex is designed to meet the needs of organizations who want to put the power of rich Internet applications to work for strategic business systems. We definitely have our ears open on this list for any feedback you have regarding pricing, functionality, etc., but I'd also suggest you post to the wish form: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/ Christine Lawson Macromedia Technical Support -Original Message- From: Phillip Beazley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 2:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Flex is out At 02:09 PM 3/29/2004, you wrote: >Why does it cost so much? Crack abuse? -- Phillip Beazley Onvix -- Website Hosting, Development & E-commerce Visit http://www.onvix.com/ or call 727-578-9600. _ _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Christine Lawson wrote: >The pricing of Flex is a reflection of its value in its target market. Which clearly isn't a lot of the development community. I'm reminded of what happened to the database world when Microsoft released Access for US$99, and crushed a strong competitive field permanently as a result. This seemed like another such long-term, take-control opportunity. Looks like a different course is planned, and its one that seems loaded with examples of failure. Thanks for listening anyway, Christine. Enough about this. I hope you guys succeed with Flex. -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>>To date I believe the only major players that have gone up against MS and survived -- over any sort of long term -- are Intuit and MM. ... and Oracle. -- ___ See some cool custom tags here: http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
>>Their sales dept accidentally typed an extra zero back a few months ago, and no one caught it until last week If it is like other bugs in their soft, they'll never admit it was a mistake ;-) -- ___ See some cool custom tags here: http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks. [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Matt Robertson wrote: > > Me, I wouldn't push my luck, and would grab market- and mindshare and > run with it, lengthening the lead I already have... but of course I'm > just a simple geek prone to idle speculation. I love speculation :-) Have you looked at the Blackstone speculation blurbs? Flash this, Flash that. Next to the Flash we already have of course. Have you seen that Flex can run on top of CF MX Enterprise? My speculation would be that Flex currently is and will continue to be targeted at enterprise customers. However, we will gradually see Flex features show up in CF. Not enough to eat away the enterprise market of Flex itself, but just enough to give CF an edge over competing languages. That way Macromedia can sell their work twice :-) Jochem -- I don't get it immigrants don't work and steal our jobs - Loesje [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Because development communities don't drive product sales? =P - Calvin - Original Message - From: Rob To: CF-Talk Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 2:09 PM Subject: RE: Flex is out On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 11:07, Mark Leder wrote: > >> The really sad thing is I have clients that own CF and love it now. I > was hoping to use Flex as the entre into revamping their older > in-office systems so that both web and desktop ran off the same system. > I can forget that idea, at least for now. > > Ditto. As I watched the demo, I was brainstorming about all new products, > apps, etc. using Flex. So my bubble is burst. Why does it cost so much? -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Hi, To my knowledge, Laszlo doesn't publish their pricing for the full featured version of their software. Christine -Original Message- From: Adrocknaphobia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 2:54 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Flex is out What does Lazlo price at? -adam > -Original Message- > From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 07:49 PM > To: 'CF-Talk' > Subject: RE: Flex is out > > Barney Boisvert wrote: > >Their sales dept accidentally typed an extra zero > > I could sell $1,200. $12,000 is enough to get me laughed out the door. > > They are charging that much because someone made the decision that the > loss of volume and alienation of their grass roots will be made up for > by cash income. > > Just like Allaire did with Spectra. > > I would argue that this is a short term view. MM isn't stupid, contrary > to what a lot of us are thinking right now. To date I believe the only > major players that have gone up against MS and survived -- over any sort > of long term -- are Intuit and MM. They *must* have decided they can > hold off on a generally available product for X months while MS catches > up to them. > > Me, I wouldn't push my luck, and would grab market- and mindshare and > run with it, lengthening the lead I already have... but of course I'm > just a simple geek prone to idle speculation. > > > Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Hi, I just thought I'd jump in here. The pricing of Flex is a reflection of its value in its target market. Flex is designed to meet the needs of organizations who want to put the power of rich Internet applications to work for strategic business systems. We definitely have our ears open on this list for any feedback you have regarding pricing, functionality, etc., but I'd also suggest you post to the wish form: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/ Christine Lawson Macromedia Technical Support -Original Message- From: Phillip Beazley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 2:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Flex is out At 02:09 PM 3/29/2004, you wrote: >Why does it cost so much? Crack abuse? -- Phillip Beazley Onvix -- Website Hosting, Development & E-commerce Visit http://www.onvix.com/ or call 727-578-9600. _ [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
Adam wrote >What does Lazlo price at? $1999 for a single-processor system. Free for approved non-commercial deployments. Something I would never have looked twice at until today. -- --- Matt Robertson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com --- -- [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
Re: Flex is out
What does Lazlo price at? -adam > -Original Message- > From: Matt Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 07:49 PM > To: 'CF-Talk' > Subject: RE: Flex is out > > Barney Boisvert wrote: > >Their sales dept accidentally typed an extra zero > > I could sell $1,200. $12,000 is enough to get me laughed out the door. > > They are charging that much because someone made the decision that the > loss of volume and alienation of their grass roots will be made up for > by cash income. > > Just like Allaire did with Spectra. > > I would argue that this is a short term view. MM isn't stupid, contrary > to what a lot of us are thinking right now. To date I believe the only > major players that have gone up against MS and survived -- over any sort > of long term -- are Intuit and MM. They *must* have decided they can > hold off on a generally available product for X months while MS catches > up to them. > > Me, I wouldn't push my luck, and would grab market- and mindshare and > run with it, lengthening the lead I already have... but of course I'm > just a simple geek prone to idle speculation. > > > Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] > MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com > [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
Barney Boisvert wrote: >Their sales dept accidentally typed an extra zero I could sell $1,200. $12,000 is enough to get me laughed out the door. They are charging that much because someone made the decision that the loss of volume and alienation of their grass roots will be made up for by cash income. Just like Allaire did with Spectra. I would argue that this is a short term view. MM isn't stupid, contrary to what a lot of us are thinking right now. To date I believe the only major players that have gone up against MS and survived -- over any sort of long term -- are Intuit and MM. They *must* have decided they can hold off on a generally available product for X months while MS catches up to them. Me, I wouldn't push my luck, and would grab market- and mindshare and run with it, lengthening the lead I already have... but of course I'm just a simple geek prone to idle speculation. Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSB Designs, Inc. http://mysecretbase.com [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
How about a Flex light (like maybe "Warm up") that has less features? Maybe? -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
RE: Flex is out
On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 11:21, Barney Boisvert wrote: > > Why does it cost so much? > > Their sales dept accidentally typed an extra zero back a few months ago, and > no one caught it until last week, but by then it was way to late to remake > everything with the right price. Hehehe, but I mean really. Flash is a time tested technology, but writing a whole site in flash is not. I guess they have some really big dogs lined up because it seems like bringing up technology through grass roots has been the way macr has become who they are. It would only make logical sense to price this in range of the lamers like us who would proliferate the market ... but what do I know I am a bad business man :( ... -- Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
