I saw it in action at the JPR. We fiddled with an interface for hours
and
came up with things that worked. It was a learning experience, so it
should be no surprise that it was a god-awful, but that's not the
point.
Even if we weren't learners, it would have taken a fair amount of
time
to code
So is the intention to install that for all the graphic manipulations
and then export as necessary, then switch to Netbeans with the JavaFX
plugin to do the coding? Will the Java FX Studio be instead of
photoshop, or complementary? I'm not sure I understand what I would
need to develop in
if you want to develop in javafx go to javafx.com and download the
sdk. that's all you need.
the designer tool is a tool for designers. Our main target is for
content assemblers. People who take content from photoshop,
illustrator, video editing tools, etc. and combine them into a single
The Adobe plug-ins allow the designer's Photoshop and/or Illustrator
work to be artifacts that you consume in the development process of a
JavaFX application. So there is no translation process of what it
looks like in photoshop to JavaFx. This can be a huge time saver,
especially when there
have you tried the current production suite? it does this already
today. you just don't get the nice visual assembler. you can take
photoshop graphics and directly export them to fx, add some code, make
changes in photoshop, recompile and it works without any code changes.
On Jun 18, 2009,
Ooh that name hurts my ears
On Jun 17, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Augusto augusto.sellh...@gmail.com wrote:
None that anybody is aware of.
BTW it's not called Java FX Studio although that name is a bit
better than the generic public moniker it has right now : JavaFX
Authoring Tool/JavaFX Design
