On 8/28/07, dorkie dork from dorktown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this is just my opinion but i don't think adobe wants you to code outside of
> the box. i don't think they'll give you that much more access to the system.
> for one, security. any security issues would slow down adoption. two, c
this is just my opinion but i don't think adobe wants you to code outside of
the box. i don't think they'll give you that much more access to the system.
for one, security. any security issues would slow down adoption. two, cross
compatibility. cross compatibility is one of the enticing features f
No arguments. ;)
Tony Alves wrote:
>
>
> Hello Jeffry,
>
> I agree with you. I do not see a benefit of running a word processor in
> an online application unless it is maybe to edit some content in the
> application. I really do not want to run my word processor in a browser
> applicatio
hank williams wrote:
>
> > Software as a service feels like a move back to the 'dumb client'
> > model of mainframes. Even if it does take off en masse, I don't expect
> > it to replace traditional desktop apps.
> >
>
> Naw dude, not at all.
>
> Connected or software as service doesn't have
>
> Software as a service feels like a move back to the 'dumb client'
> model of mainframes. Even if it does take off en masse, I don't expect
> it to replace traditional desktop apps.
>
Naw dude, not at all.
Connected or software as service doesn't have to mean bad terminal
like software, t
Fair enough, good point. I'd say 99.9% of my usage with Flex Builder
/ Eclipse is non-connected, though.
Tony Alves wrote:
>
>
> Jeffry,
> What about the updates in Flex Builder? Updates check the internet.
>
> I do agree that not all apps are connected to the internet.
>
> Jeffry Houser
hank williams wrote:
>
>
> lol. You cant take my statement 100% literally. Yeah I know this is a
> programmers forum but how about allow for a little err... creative
> license.
Fair enough. ;)
> Really only a
> handful of companies today make money selling software, and they include
> M
lol. You cant take my statement 100% literally. Yeah I know this is a
programmers forum but how about allow for a little err... creative license.
There is almost nothing that is 100% true. But there are *very* few programs
that are sold today that do not have a connected component. I used to write
> I disagree. I am not certain how Director works, since I've never
> used it except to make movies that were then integrated into
> Authorware, but Authorware has the ability to either incorporate the
> runtime into the content file as a new exe or to provide it
> separately. The fact that
Jeffry,
What about the updates in Flex Builder? Updates check the internet.
I do agree that not all apps are connected to the internet.
Jeffry Houser wrote:
>
>
> Interesting perspective. I believe it is incorrect. I use many
> desktop applications that do not need /have connectivity. Flex Buil
>
>
> > AIR apps *cannot* currently be distributed on CD.
>
> I'm unsure of specifics, but why not? It will be a 'version 1'
> feature, per this FAQ:
>
>
> http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/AIR:Developer_FAQ#Can_I_create_CD-ROM_or_Kiosk_applications_that_leverage_Adobe_AIR.3F
>
> If they ha
hank williams wrote:
>> >
>> > Actually, AIR uses special non publicly available pieces of the flash
>> > platform to make installing totally seamless. When you click on an AIR
>> > app to download, it it leverages this not publicly available stuff to
>> > download the AIR runtime in the ba
Interesting perspective. I believe it is incorrect. I use many
desktop applications that do not need /have connectivity. Flex Builder
is one great example.
hank williams wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I'm saying that there is no market for AIR in non-connected desktop
> > applications.
> >
> >
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "hank williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On 8/25/07, Jeffry Houser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > hank williams wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > So in your mind, Adobe's goal of being cross platform
should be
> > > > > abando
The issue I was referring to was whether it would be possible to do so
without being online and Via CD. My understanding was that this was not the
case. These two concepts I suspect are not in conflict. The FAQ merely says
that people will be able to write their own installers. Writing your own
ins
On Aug 26, 2007, at 10:52 AM, hank williams wrote:
>
> AIR apps *cannot* currently be distributed on CD. The SDK can, just as
> the Flex SDK can or any library or compiler can. The SDK is just
> libraries, and distributing them via CD does not mean that the
> resulting apps can be distributed via
hank williams wrote:
> I think in 2007 we can almost safely say there is no market for *any*
> non-connected desktop applications, with or without AIR.
Bold words...
Cheers,
Claus.
>
> I'm saying that there is no market for AIR in non-connected desktop
> applications.
>
> --
I think in 2007 we can almost safely say there is no market for *any*
non-connected desktop applications, with or without AIR.
Hank
>
> >
> > Actually, AIR uses special non publicly available pieces of the flash
> > platform to make installing totally seamless. When you click on an AIR
> > app to download, it it leverages this not publicly available stuff to
> > download the AIR runtime in the background.
>
> That all s
hank williams wrote:
>
>
> > > You cant really compare AIR to authorware and director. These were
> > > both very thinly deployed tools (compared to flash)
> >
> > Shouldn't we be comparing them to AIR in this case? I'd be willing to
> > bet that AIR's deployment (at this stage) is very thin
On 8/25/07, Jeffry Houser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> hank williams wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > So in your mind, Adobe's goal of being cross platform should be
> > > > abandoned since there is no way to do cross-platform COM? Would you
> > > > find it acceptable if it allowed you
hank williams wrote:
>
>
> > > So in your mind, Adobe's goal of being cross platform should be
> > > abandoned since there is no way to do cross-platform COM? Would you
> > > find it acceptable if it allowed you to do Mac only desktop stuff or
> > > does windows only compatible == desktop so
> --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "hank williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > So in your mind, Adobe's goal of being cross platform should be
> > abandoned since there is no way to do cross-platform COM? Would you
> > find it acceptable if it allowed you to do Mac only desktop
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "hank williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> So in your mind, Adobe's goal of being cross platform should be
> abandoned since there is no way to do cross-platform COM? Would you
> find it acceptable if it allowed you to do Mac only desktop stuff or
> does w
24 matches
Mail list logo
