Comments on: But Flex is not open source… http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/ Conning people into thinking I'm intelligent. Since 1982. Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:41:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Wan Mohd Zabidi http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2246 Wan Mohd Zabidi Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:24:30 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2246 <p>Have work with Flex 2, Coldfusion 7.0.2 (linux), Flash 9 (action script 3) and it has been integrated very well. Now I'm really happy playing with it and look foward and hoping the new improvement on it.</p> Have work with Flex 2, Coldfusion 7.0.2 (linux), Flash 9 (action script 3) and it has been integrated very well. Now I’m really happy playing with it and look foward and hoping the new improvement on it.

]]> By: Pradeep Gowda http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2245 Pradeep Gowda Thu, 11 Jan 2007 05:52:35 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2245 <p>Ah! Thou shall ask and the lazyweb will give it to you.</p> <p>http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/articles/eckel_video.html</p> <p>Bruce Eckel's video on using Turbogears with Flex :)</p> Ah! Thou shall ask and the lazyweb will give it to you.

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/articles/eckel_video.html

Bruce Eckel’s video on using Turbogears with Flex :)

]]> By: Pradeep Gowda http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2244 Pradeep Gowda Wed, 10 Jan 2007 11:05:21 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2244 <p>Flex is fantastic for business applications. I've completely moved away from AJAX for building our web based business app. It is UI intensive with lot of charts thrown in. Flex was the answer to almost all of my requirements. </p> <p>The $799 price tag for ide+charting is a tad too steep. (We are buying it anyway, it is that good)</p> <p>My biggest complaint about adobe IDE is that it is not available for Linux. That has forced me to use a windows PC at work after 3 years :(. </p> <p>I started writing code on Linux, but the mix of MXML+Actionscript is completely new to me and having an integrated IDE eases the learning curve.</p> <p>How difficult is it to port the IDE to linux? After all its built on top of Eclipse... </p> <p>Adobe is doing little to promote Python as one of the server side languages. Python frameworks are better/at-par with PHP/Rails/J2EE. </p> <p>I'm using Flex with Pylons(python web framework). So, it is possible to build RIA apps with Python as a backend. As a fellow pythonista, do make a case for python :)</p> Flex is fantastic for business applications. I’ve completely moved away from AJAX for building our web based business app. It is UI intensive with lot of charts thrown in. Flex was the answer to almost all of my requirements.

The $799 price tag for ide+charting is a tad too steep. (We are buying it anyway, it is that good)

My biggest complaint about adobe IDE is that it is not available for Linux. That has forced me to use a windows PC at work after 3 years :( .

I started writing code on Linux, but the mix of MXML+Actionscript is completely new to me and having an integrated IDE eases the learning curve.

How difficult is it to port the IDE to linux? After all its built on top of Eclipse…

Adobe is doing little to promote Python as one of the server side languages. Python frameworks are better/at-par with PHP/Rails/J2EE.

I’m using Flex with Pylons(python web framework). So, it is possible to build RIA apps with Python as a backend. As a fellow pythonista, do make a case for python :)

]]> By: Swaroop http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2243 Swaroop Mon, 08 Jan 2007 16:59:47 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2243 <p>@Devdas : It's hard not to agree with you on that point, I have striked out the 'truly' part. Also, I <em>never</em> claimed that Flex is fully open specs or open source, as I have detailed in the post and I thought the title itself explicitly says that.</p> @Devdas : It’s hard not to agree with you on that point, I have striked out the ‘truly’ part. Also, I never claimed that Flex is fully open specs or open source, as I have detailed in the post and I thought the title itself explicitly says that.

]]> By: Devdas Bhagat http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2242 Devdas Bhagat Mon, 08 Jan 2007 15:41:07 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2242 <p><i>WPF/e development is on Windows only (please correct me if I’m wrong). You can however deploy to Windows and Mac. For Flex, the development and deployment can be done on all three platforms - Windows, Mac and Linux.</i></p> <p>Hmmm, lets see. Javascript, Perl, Python, C++, Tk, Gtk+, QT, ... are truly cross platform (think Solaris, Aix, HPUX, Linux, BSD, Win32, MacOS, etc on all different kinds of hardware). Notice the lack of Java in there. JVMs aren't available for all platforms yet.</p> <p>I am sorry, but a product which merely runs on x86 (and PPC) and even then on 3 specific operating systems on that platform is hardly cross platform. </p> <p>That sounds like Microsofts definition of integration "It works on all versions of Windows".</p> <p>Flex isn't exactly open specifications, or open source (the reasons are the same as why Java programs weren't fully open till recently or early versions of KDE).</p> WPF/e development is on Windows only (please correct me if I’m wrong). You can however deploy to Windows and Mac. For Flex, the development and deployment can be done on all three platforms – Windows, Mac and Linux.

Hmmm, lets see. Javascript, Perl, Python, C++, Tk, Gtk+, QT, … are truly cross platform (think Solaris, Aix, HPUX, Linux, BSD, Win32, MacOS, etc on all different kinds of hardware). Notice the lack of Java in there. JVMs aren’t available for all platforms yet.

I am sorry, but a product which merely runs on x86 (and PPC) and even then on 3 specific operating systems on that platform is hardly cross platform.

That sounds like Microsofts definition of integration “It works on all versions of Windows”.

Flex isn’t exactly open specifications, or open source (the reasons are the same as why Java programs weren’t fully open till recently or early versions of KDE).

]]> By: Swaroop http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2241 Swaroop Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:53:01 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2241 <p>@Sriram : The blog post was about my findings on the Flex licensing, NOT about other competitor frameworks. But since you started the topic, a few differences come to my mind:</p> <ol> <li><p>The Flex SDK is under an open license whereas C#, CTS/CLS are under an ECMA standard. In the latter, there is <em>no code</em> under an "open" license.</p></li> <li><p>If the MS/ECMA standards are truly open, then why doesn't Microsoft commit to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mono_(software)#Mono_and_Microsoft.27s_patents">not sue anybody for patents</a>, why does it pledge to keep only Novell's customers safe?</p></li> <li><p>WPF/e development is on Windows only (please correct me if I'm wrong). You can however deploy to Windows and Mac. For Flex, the development <em>and</em> deployment can be done on <em>all three platforms</em> - Windows, Mac and Linux.</p></li> </ol> <p>I'm just saying that 'openness' is very subjective and to me (emphasis on "me"), there's a significant difference in openness. Please feel free to correct me on any misunderstandings on my part, I have looked into details of Flex licensing and not WPF/C#/etc. :)</p> <p>@Toufeeq : Yes, Apollo is exciting. Regarding the Flash Player, no, the sources are not provided. Flex is a framework built on top of the APIs provided by the Flash Player but the Flash Player itself is not source-open.</p> <p>@Raghu : Yes, I've already mentioned that, but I hardly see Flash Player going fully open source.</p> <p>@Kartik : Thanks, I'm glad the post was useful. Regarding Flash Player for AMD64, please <a href="http://www.adobe.com/go/wish" rel="nofollow">make your voice heard</a> :)</p> @Sriram : The blog post was about my findings on the Flex licensing, NOT about other competitor frameworks. But since you started the topic, a few differences come to my mind:

  1. The Flex SDK is under an open license whereas C#, CTS/CLS are under an ECMA standard. In the latter, there is no code under an “open” license.

  2. If the MS/ECMA standards are truly open, then why doesn’t Microsoft commit to not sue anybody for patents, why does it pledge to keep only Novell’s customers safe?

  3. WPF/e development is on Windows only (please correct me if I’m wrong). You can however deploy to Windows and Mac. For Flex, the development and deployment can be done on all three platforms – Windows, Mac and Linux.

I’m just saying that ‘openness’ is very subjective and to me (emphasis on “me”), there’s a significant difference in openness. Please feel free to correct me on any misunderstandings on my part, I have looked into details of Flex licensing and not WPF/C#/etc. :)

@Toufeeq : Yes, Apollo is exciting. Regarding the Flash Player, no, the sources are not provided. Flex is a framework built on top of the APIs provided by the Flash Player but the Flash Player itself is not source-open.

@Raghu : Yes, I’ve already mentioned that, but I hardly see Flash Player going fully open source.

@Kartik : Thanks, I’m glad the post was useful. Regarding Flash Player for AMD64, please make your voice heard :)

]]> By: Sriram Krishnan http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2240 Sriram Krishnan Mon, 08 Jan 2007 12:22:51 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2240 <p>Lol! Kartik Mistry's comment exemplifies the kind of misinformation people have.</p> Lol! Kartik Mistry’s comment exemplifies the kind of misinformation people have.

]]> By: Kartik Mistry http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2239 Kartik Mistry Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:17:52 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2239 <p>Good post. I didn't know that Flash/Flex has this much of openness! I thought it is as closed as M$ products.</p> <p>I want to see Flash Player for AMD64 Platform!!</p> Good post. I didn’t know that Flash/Flex has this much of openness! I thought it is as closed as M$ products.

I want to see Flash Player for AMD64 Platform!!

]]> By: Raghu http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2238 Raghu Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:09:54 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2238 <p>Flash Player is going open.. bit by bit </p> <p>http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/press/mozilla-2006-11-07.html</p> <p>Raghu</p> Flash Player is going open.. bit by bit

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/press/mozilla-2006-11-07.html

Raghu

]]> By: Toufeeq Hussain http://www.swaroopch.com/blog/but-flex-is-not-open-source/comment-page-1/#comment-2236 Toufeeq Hussain Mon, 08 Jan 2007 10:57:59 +0000 http://www.swaroopch.info/archives/2007/01/08/but-flex-is-not-open-source/#comment-2236 <p>Apollo is what excites me the most. I was going through Mike Chambers' presentation on Apollo and it certainly looks like it's a good framework to bet on.</p> <p>On a different note, Does the Flex SDK include sources for the 'Flash Player' ?</p> Apollo is what excites me the most. I was going through Mike Chambers’ presentation on Apollo and it certainly looks like it’s a good framework to bet on.

On a different note, Does the Flex SDK include sources for the ‘Flash Player’ ?

]]>