Adam, the client you're talking about is the right client for Javascript... When talking about flex, the scope changes. Flex is intended for medium-high weight enterprise RIA developments and there is where Javascript is a piece of rubbish (dirty and expensive to maintain).
It is not a matter of venting, but of trying to separate both kinds of clients as their needs are different and also belong to different markets. Instead, there have been lots of movements trying to raise JS out of its "simple-buggy-dirty applications" development scope, which is what makes me feel like WTF!!! 2013/11/7 Adam Malejko <a...@malejko.com> > Carlos, I'm not sure if your comment was directed at mine, or if you were > just venting a bit, but when I said that I don't personally need it, I > meant it. > > What my clients want a lot of the time is a simple site for customers to > sign up, or do something fancy like their backend does, yet get it done > quick and dirty. Fussing with consumers or other enterprises who don't > necessarily have Flash even installed (yes, they exist) isn't something we > like to do. So, we often we will just write something in JavaScript that > connects to our backend. I would rather have something somewhat connected > to the backend app, written in the same language, but as it is, I can't do > that. Having the option to output a simple app / site in JavaScript is > appealing in that regard. Letting a JavaScript/CSS guy mess with and style > up the output; even more appealing. > > -Adam > > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 2:14 AM, Carlos Velasco < > carlos.velasco.bla...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I don't really know why people are so entusiast with the idea of porting > > FLEX to a "hell shit" (just my opinion) technology as Javascripy it is > just > > like throwing away HD smart TVs and making a party to welcome Black and > > White TVs... > > > > Sorry for the offtopic, but really tired of viewing so many "Ooooohhh > > Javascript is the future... " staff out there. > > > > > > 2013/11/7 Adam Malejko <a...@malejko.com> > > > > > Yeah, Shumway may or may not help; but I'm not holding my breath on it. > > > > > > What will hopefully help Flex a bunch is the JS output that Alex is > > working > > > on. Can't wait! I don't personally need it, but I know a lot of clients > > > that do! > > > > > > ... and as soon as my boss lays off a bit, I hope to start at least > > testing > > > it a bit. > > > > > > -Adam > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > This was discussed on dev@. Shumway may not help Flex at all. It > > seems > > > > more oriented to the rendering side of Flash, not the user > interaction > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/6/13 8:11 PM, "Thiago Maia" <a...@a00s.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >What I understood seens they are trying to build an opensource flash > > > > >player to replace adobe flash player. That would be great for us > flex > > > > >developpers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.ghacks.net/2013/10/02/mozillas-flash-plugin-replacement-shumway > > > > >-lands-firefox-nightly/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- > > > > >This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus > > > > >protection is active. > > > > >http://www.avast.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
