You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Timothy Jones <Ti...@syniverse.com> on 2012/02/06 23:50:46 UTC
RE: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5
- don't listen to Steve!
Just my two cents...
As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash runtime is always seems to be a few releases behind Adobe's Windows and Mac versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, CS3, and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL. It took Adobe FOREVER to produce a decent 64-bit Linux build of Flash. Seeing as how Mac OS is both Darwin/BSD AND Intel 64-bit-based, there is no technical reason it should have taken so long.
I joined this list because my team at work already has a significant investment in Flex, and finally Flex has an opportunity to realize its true potential as a fully open-source technology under Apache's guidance. I will be very happy to see any progress Flex makes away from Flash. If that means moving towards HTML5/js, that's even better. And it's not because Steve Jobs said so.
The end goal I want to see is to see a complete Flex development environment that runs on any FreeBSD/Linux distro, produces content that runs in Chrome/Firefox/any-other-modern-browser, (yes, also on Linux) and requires not a single executable byte from adobe.com. I'll be happy to help test Apache Flex on many variants of that configuration for you. :-)
tlj
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Raju Bitter <ra...@googlemail.com>.
> As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash runtime is always seems to be a
>few releases behind Adobe's Windows and Mac versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop,
> Dreamweaver, CS3, and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL.
I remember that I was fighting with the Flash Player unicode problem
on Linux for non-ASCII character input (which was never fixed until FP
11). When I did a quick test in OpenSolaris, the bug didn't exist,
which surprised me even more. The OpenSolaris version seemed to work a
lot better than the Linux version, which makes me wonder if it was a
management strategy to not fully support Linux.
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Abdul Sattar <sa...@gmail.com>.
+1 for Flex developers on Linux with IntelliJ. This IDE is great for
polyglot development.
Regards,
--
Abdul Sattar
(Director IT & Operations)
0321-6433805
www.powersoft.com.pk
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Jason Gardner <ja...@gmail.com>.
+1 for Flex developers on Linux, and I'm particularly eager to help work on
any tasks related to it, such as the sdk, AIR, Linux testing, transition to
HTML5.
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:39 AM, David Francis Buhler <davidbuhler@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Ignore my last comment. I have a Firewall problem.
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:19 AM, David Francis Buhler
> <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > FDT 5 Max is free for Open Source Devs:
> >
> > "Open Source Devs: Since FDT is a project driven by the community we
> > want to give something back. Therefor we offer free licenses to
> > contributors of Open Source Projects. Please fill out the form as
> > accurate as possible. This way we can guarantee quick application
> > process."
> >
> > However, the application form 404s when I try to access it. I emailed
> > powerflasher.com to let them know.
> >
> > [1] http://fdt.powerflasher.com/buy-download/new-upgrade/
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Maciek Sakrejda <m....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Conrad Winchester
> >> <co...@chiwestern.com> wrote:
> >>> You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a
> million times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
> >>>
> >>> Intellij Idea
> >>>
> >>> Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
> >>
> >> If you want to stay Eclipse-based, though (not entirely crazy--it's
> >> not a bad platform), I highly recommend FDT ( fdt.powerflasher.com ).
>
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by David Francis Buhler <da...@gmail.com>.
Ignore my last comment. I have a Firewall problem.
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:19 AM, David Francis Buhler
<da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FDT 5 Max is free for Open Source Devs:
>
> "Open Source Devs: Since FDT is a project driven by the community we
> want to give something back. Therefor we offer free licenses to
> contributors of Open Source Projects. Please fill out the form as
> accurate as possible. This way we can guarantee quick application
> process."
>
> However, the application form 404s when I try to access it. I emailed
> powerflasher.com to let them know.
>
> [1] http://fdt.powerflasher.com/buy-download/new-upgrade/
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Maciek Sakrejda <m....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Conrad Winchester
>> <co...@chiwestern.com> wrote:
>>> You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a million times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
>>>
>>> Intellij Idea
>>>
>>> Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
>>
>> If you want to stay Eclipse-based, though (not entirely crazy--it's
>> not a bad platform), I highly recommend FDT ( fdt.powerflasher.com ).
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by David Francis Buhler <da...@gmail.com>.
FDT 5 Max is free for Open Source Devs:
"Open Source Devs: Since FDT is a project driven by the community we
want to give something back. Therefor we offer free licenses to
contributors of Open Source Projects. Please fill out the form as
accurate as possible. This way we can guarantee quick application
process."
However, the application form 404s when I try to access it. I emailed
powerflasher.com to let them know.
[1] http://fdt.powerflasher.com/buy-download/new-upgrade/
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Maciek Sakrejda <m....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Conrad Winchester
> <co...@chiwestern.com> wrote:
>> You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a million times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
>>
>> Intellij Idea
>>
>> Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
>
> If you want to stay Eclipse-based, though (not entirely crazy--it's
> not a bad platform), I highly recommend FDT ( fdt.powerflasher.com ).
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Maciek Sakrejda <m....@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Conrad Winchester
<co...@chiwestern.com> wrote:
> You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a million times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
>
> Intellij Idea
>
> Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
If you want to stay Eclipse-based, though (not entirely crazy--it's
not a bad platform), I highly recommend FDT ( fdt.powerflasher.com ).
RE: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5
- don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Timothy Jones <Ti...@syniverse.com>.
Thanks for the tip.. I hadn't heard of IntelliJ.
-----Original Message-----
From: Conrad Winchester [mailto:conrad@chiwestern.com]
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 1:49 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 - don't listen to Steve!
You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a million times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
Intellij Idea
Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
Conrad WInchester
On 11 Feb 2012, at 15:52, Nicholas Kwiatkowski wrote:
> To say there is no technical reason why those products take so long to be
> produced on the Linux platform, that is a bit short-sighted.
>
> First off, while Linux users account for 60% of the tech news I read, they
> only really account for 2% of the desktop/laptop market-share. 1996 - 2011
> was always supposed to be the year of the "linux desktop", but it never
> happened.. This, to begin with is a show-stopper for most companies trying
> to make money.
>
> The other major problem is the instability of anything graphics within
> Linux. Do we make binaries that target X11? XFree86? The next thing on
> the block? Gnome? KDE? Oh? None of those give us access to the GPU
> through some common API or driver stack? Oh, half of the graphics drivers
> don't even expose the GPU? When they do they are broken? What? the OSS
> kids decided to make the API different because they wanted it to be
> different than the closed-source version the vendor provided? At least
> other platforms like BSD / Solaris / etc are not nearly as bad as this.
>
> If you build your tools on a platform like Eclipse, you leverage a LOT of
> work that others have already done -- but there are still some major
> differences between the Mac/Win/Linux versions of Eclipse. Again, if you
> don't care about graphics, it is not a big deal, but if you want to do
> something as simple as the Design view, it becomes much harder.
>
> Adobe at one time stated that they didn't push forward with a Linux version
> of Flash Builder because they would have needed to write a new licensing
> engine. They did the math, and decided that if they would have to charge
> for the product, most people won't pay for it (who pays for Linux software?
> really?). Heck, people won't install close-source software when it is
> free, because that isn't the Linux way! Just look at how much guff Adobe
> for for their Flash Player they published (and wouldn't OS it).
>
> I personally would like to see a descent Flex IDE that works under Linux,
> but I'm not holding my breath for somebody else to create it for me. Heck,
> just getting a Linux compiler back would be a huge step forward. But I
> also know it would be on the OSS community and us to do it -- and I doubt
> we will see that anytime soon.
>
> -Nick
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Timothy Jones
> <Ti...@syniverse.com>wrote:
>
>> Just my two cents...
>>
>> As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash
>> runtime is always seems to be a few releases behind Adobe's Windows and Mac
>> versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, CS3,
>> and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL. It took Adobe
>> FOREVER to produce a decent 64-bit Linux build of Flash. Seeing as how Mac
>> OS is both Darwin/BSD AND Intel 64-bit-based, there is no technical reason
>> it should have taken so long.
>>
>> I joined this list because my team at work already has a significant
>> investment in Flex, and finally Flex has an opportunity to realize its true
>> potential as a fully open-source technology under Apache's guidance. I
>> will be very happy to see any progress Flex makes away from Flash. If that
>> means moving towards HTML5/js, that's even better. And it's not because
>> Steve Jobs said so.
>>
>> The end goal I want to see is to see a complete Flex development
>> environment that runs on any FreeBSD/Linux distro, produces content that
>> runs in Chrome/Firefox/any-other-modern-browser, (yes, also on Linux) and
>> requires not a single executable byte from adobe.com. I'll be happy to
>> help test Apache Flex on many variants of that configuration for you. :-)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> tlj
>>
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 - don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
Slightly off topic I know but this may help someone.
> The main problem with eclipse is that the platform seems very unstable
> mainly due to m2e plugin and the relationship between all the plugins and
> the platform itself that causes the platform breaks from time to time
> making us to install from scratch
I feel you pain but you shouldn't have to reinstall, happens to me every other week or so generally when you have to force quit Flash Builder as it's frozen up.
Generally a -clean will fix things up if that doesn't work try to restore your .metadata and cascade directories (assuming you have a backup), if that doesn't work or you don't have a backup delete the ,metadata directory (doing this you'll lose your projects but they are easily imported again), if that doesn't work remove the cascade directory (doing this you will lose your plugin and have to reinstall them), hopefully less effort than reinstalling Flash Builder from scratch.
Justin
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@codeoscopic.com>.
I'm switching this days from Flash Builder to Intellij IDEA testing the
environment to see if it fit our needs...
I only can say that my first thoughts are very positive and seems more
featured, stable than eclipse + Fb combo.
The main problem with eclipse is that the platform seems very unstable
mainly due to m2e plugin and the relationship between all the plugins and
the platform itself that causes the platform breaks from time to time
making us to install from scratch, and in eclipse this is very prohibitive
since several hours has to be invested in the task.
Hope Intellij IDEA could be the IDE we was searching for all this time. In
the meanwhile, is very promising :)
2012/2/13 Conrad Winchester <co...@chiwestern.com>
> You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a million
> times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
>
> Intellij Idea
>
> Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
>
> Conrad WInchester
>
> On 11 Feb 2012, at 15:52, Nicholas Kwiatkowski wrote:
>
> > To say there is no technical reason why those products take so long to be
> > produced on the Linux platform, that is a bit short-sighted.
> >
> > First off, while Linux users account for 60% of the tech news I read,
> they
> > only really account for 2% of the desktop/laptop market-share. 1996 -
> 2011
> > was always supposed to be the year of the "linux desktop", but it never
> > happened.. This, to begin with is a show-stopper for most companies
> trying
> > to make money.
> >
> > The other major problem is the instability of anything graphics within
> > Linux. Do we make binaries that target X11? XFree86? The next thing on
> > the block? Gnome? KDE? Oh? None of those give us access to the GPU
> > through some common API or driver stack? Oh, half of the graphics
> drivers
> > don't even expose the GPU? When they do they are broken? What? the
> OSS
> > kids decided to make the API different because they wanted it to be
> > different than the closed-source version the vendor provided? At least
> > other platforms like BSD / Solaris / etc are not nearly as bad as this.
> >
> > If you build your tools on a platform like Eclipse, you leverage a LOT of
> > work that others have already done -- but there are still some major
> > differences between the Mac/Win/Linux versions of Eclipse. Again, if you
> > don't care about graphics, it is not a big deal, but if you want to do
> > something as simple as the Design view, it becomes much harder.
> >
> > Adobe at one time stated that they didn't push forward with a Linux
> version
> > of Flash Builder because they would have needed to write a new licensing
> > engine. They did the math, and decided that if they would have to charge
> > for the product, most people won't pay for it (who pays for Linux
> software?
> > really?). Heck, people won't install close-source software when it is
> > free, because that isn't the Linux way! Just look at how much guff
> Adobe
> > for for their Flash Player they published (and wouldn't OS it).
> >
> > I personally would like to see a descent Flex IDE that works under Linux,
> > but I'm not holding my breath for somebody else to create it for me.
> Heck,
> > just getting a Linux compiler back would be a huge step forward. But I
> > also know it would be on the OSS community and us to do it -- and I doubt
> > we will see that anytime soon.
> >
> > -Nick
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Timothy Jones
> > <Ti...@syniverse.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Just my two cents...
> >>
> >> As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash
> >> runtime is always seems to be a few releases behind Adobe's Windows and
> Mac
> >> versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver,
> CS3,
> >> and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL. It took Adobe
> >> FOREVER to produce a decent 64-bit Linux build of Flash. Seeing as how
> Mac
> >> OS is both Darwin/BSD AND Intel 64-bit-based, there is no technical
> reason
> >> it should have taken so long.
> >>
> >> I joined this list because my team at work already has a significant
> >> investment in Flex, and finally Flex has an opportunity to realize its
> true
> >> potential as a fully open-source technology under Apache's guidance. I
> >> will be very happy to see any progress Flex makes away from Flash. If
> that
> >> means moving towards HTML5/js, that's even better. And it's not because
> >> Steve Jobs said so.
> >>
> >> The end goal I want to see is to see a complete Flex development
> >> environment that runs on any FreeBSD/Linux distro, produces content that
> >> runs in Chrome/Firefox/any-other-modern-browser, (yes, also on Linux)
> and
> >> requires not a single executable byte from adobe.com. I'll be happy to
> >> help test Apache Flex on many variants of that configuration for you.
> :-)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> tlj
> >>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
Director de Tecnología
M: +34 607 22 60 05
F: +34 912 35 57 77
CODEOSCOPIC S.A. <http://www.codeoscopic.com>
Avd. del General Perón, 32
Planta 10, Puertas P-Q
28020 Madrid
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 - don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Conrad Winchester <co...@chiwestern.com>.
You want a decent IDE for flex on linux? How about one that's a million times better than Flash Builder, and cheaper :-)
Intellij Idea
Haven't used Flash Builder for about two years now.
Conrad WInchester
On 11 Feb 2012, at 15:52, Nicholas Kwiatkowski wrote:
> To say there is no technical reason why those products take so long to be
> produced on the Linux platform, that is a bit short-sighted.
>
> First off, while Linux users account for 60% of the tech news I read, they
> only really account for 2% of the desktop/laptop market-share. 1996 - 2011
> was always supposed to be the year of the "linux desktop", but it never
> happened.. This, to begin with is a show-stopper for most companies trying
> to make money.
>
> The other major problem is the instability of anything graphics within
> Linux. Do we make binaries that target X11? XFree86? The next thing on
> the block? Gnome? KDE? Oh? None of those give us access to the GPU
> through some common API or driver stack? Oh, half of the graphics drivers
> don't even expose the GPU? When they do they are broken? What? the OSS
> kids decided to make the API different because they wanted it to be
> different than the closed-source version the vendor provided? At least
> other platforms like BSD / Solaris / etc are not nearly as bad as this.
>
> If you build your tools on a platform like Eclipse, you leverage a LOT of
> work that others have already done -- but there are still some major
> differences between the Mac/Win/Linux versions of Eclipse. Again, if you
> don't care about graphics, it is not a big deal, but if you want to do
> something as simple as the Design view, it becomes much harder.
>
> Adobe at one time stated that they didn't push forward with a Linux version
> of Flash Builder because they would have needed to write a new licensing
> engine. They did the math, and decided that if they would have to charge
> for the product, most people won't pay for it (who pays for Linux software?
> really?). Heck, people won't install close-source software when it is
> free, because that isn't the Linux way! Just look at how much guff Adobe
> for for their Flash Player they published (and wouldn't OS it).
>
> I personally would like to see a descent Flex IDE that works under Linux,
> but I'm not holding my breath for somebody else to create it for me. Heck,
> just getting a Linux compiler back would be a huge step forward. But I
> also know it would be on the OSS community and us to do it -- and I doubt
> we will see that anytime soon.
>
> -Nick
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Timothy Jones
> <Ti...@syniverse.com>wrote:
>
>> Just my two cents...
>>
>> As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash
>> runtime is always seems to be a few releases behind Adobe's Windows and Mac
>> versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, CS3,
>> and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL. It took Adobe
>> FOREVER to produce a decent 64-bit Linux build of Flash. Seeing as how Mac
>> OS is both Darwin/BSD AND Intel 64-bit-based, there is no technical reason
>> it should have taken so long.
>>
>> I joined this list because my team at work already has a significant
>> investment in Flex, and finally Flex has an opportunity to realize its true
>> potential as a fully open-source technology under Apache's guidance. I
>> will be very happy to see any progress Flex makes away from Flash. If that
>> means moving towards HTML5/js, that's even better. And it's not because
>> Steve Jobs said so.
>>
>> The end goal I want to see is to see a complete Flex development
>> environment that runs on any FreeBSD/Linux distro, produces content that
>> runs in Chrome/Firefox/any-other-modern-browser, (yes, also on Linux) and
>> requires not a single executable byte from adobe.com. I'll be happy to
>> help test Apache Flex on many variants of that configuration for you. :-)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> tlj
>>
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Left Right <ol...@gmail.com>.
Well, that's not precise, you could disable the plugin through Chrome's own
interface, but I don't know whether it prevents the contents of <object>
tags from being loaded.
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 - don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Bryan Hunt <br...@sentimentmetrics.com>.
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:19:35 -0200, Rafael Santos <rs...@spectacompany.com.br> wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/alternative
> Flex is dumping Linux for good...
>
> Adobe is making one bad decision after another....
>
> We are heavily linux developers and we have been working with Flex for 3
> years now...
>
> First we started with Flex Builder and switched to IntelliJ... then Adobe
> decided not to make Flash Player Debugger anymore for Linux, and now
> this....
>
> http://www.itworld.com/software/252422/adobe-linux-users-get-chrome-or-forget-flash
>
> Have a look on their Player roadmap as well... seems to be going far away
> from Apache Flex vision... Games? Video boards?
>
> Rafael Santos
> CEO at Specta
Yeah, Chrome doesn't ship with any 'Flashblock'. "Do no evil", my arse.
Bryan Hunt
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Left Right <ol...@gmail.com>.
Usually, distros that are meant to be used for desktop come with Firefox
pre-installed. Other popular browsers would include:
Opera
Google Chrome
Seamonkey (using Mozilla, similar to Firefox)
Galeon (isn't precisely a web browser, it's a part of Gnome, but it can be
used to display web pages just the same, it's using Gecko, i.e. same as
Firefox and Seamonkey)
Konqueror (another Webkit browser, similar to Google Chrome)
All of the above are capable of running JavaScript and have NPAPI (well, I
think so...) implementation.
There are w3m and Lynx pagers / text-only browsers, they are of no
particular interest to Flash because they only display HTML+CSS. They are
good for reading stuff like technical documentation though, because they
are much faster and more accessible.
There might be few more, or probably some old not supported ones, but the
browsers I listed are likely to be found on an average Linux installation
of a web developer :)
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by ganaraj p r <ga...@gmail.com>.
What are the browser options you have on Linux?
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Rafael Santos <
rsantos@spectacompany.com.br> wrote:
> Flex is dumping Linux for good...
>
> Adobe is making one bad decision after another....
>
> We are heavily linux developers and we have been working with Flex for 3
> years now...
>
> First we started with Flex Builder and switched to IntelliJ... then Adobe
> decided not to make Flash Player Debugger anymore for Linux, and now
> this....
>
>
> http://www.itworld.com/software/252422/adobe-linux-users-get-chrome-or-forget-flash
>
> Have a look on their Player roadmap as well... seems to be going far away
> from Apache Flex vision... Games? Video boards?
>
> Rafael Santos
> CEO at Specta
>
--
Regards,
Ganaraj P R
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Rafael Santos <rs...@spectacompany.com.br>.
Flex is dumping Linux for good...
Adobe is making one bad decision after another....
We are heavily linux developers and we have been working with Flex for 3
years now...
First we started with Flex Builder and switched to IntelliJ... then Adobe
decided not to make Flash Player Debugger anymore for Linux, and now
this....
http://www.itworld.com/software/252422/adobe-linux-users-get-chrome-or-forget-flash
Have a look on their Player roadmap as well... seems to be going far away
from Apache Flex vision... Games? Video boards?
Rafael Santos
CEO at Specta
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Left Right <ol...@gmail.com>.
Linux users are usually happier with less bells and whistles then their
peers on other platforms. Probably because the platform itself provides
much more tools, so there's no real need to add even more on top of it.
You say it's difficult to get program with complex GUI to run both under
KDE and Gnome - I say, no one asked you to do that - if you can get it
running under Gnome only - that's fine! Now, building on top of Eclipse -
who asked Adobe to do that? A major mode for Emacs, but with normal
compiler integration would do. No, seriously it would. But this would show
commitment. Instead, there's FB3 with undefined license agreement (it's
probably illegal today to own that program because all agreements had
expired since the last time they were prolongated), and there's a
guerrilla-patched FB4 (obviously, illegal, because Adobe has nothing to do
with it - some good soul had patched a Windows version of FB4).
You say it's difficult to get the designer view straight - again, no one
asked to do that! FlashDevelop never had it, and no one complained,
obviously, because it's free and opensource. It's OK to only get the
essential features right, nobody was asking for more.
Intellij or Eclipse wouldn't even start on some weaker laptops :) well,
because it's Java with too much memory, so much memory students some times
cannot afford :)
Fancy video cards with rare drivers? Yep, I own one, and I fight my distro
for being stubborn and trying to replace my evil proprietary NVidea drivers
with free and opensource substitutes, which, however, can only run my video
card in 1024x726 mode. But I'm fully conscious of the reasons, and would
accept the difficulties related to my hardware, again, because it's a
different from Windows users mentality - I know what I'm doing and why do I
suffer, if I do. I don't expect any program to suddenly figure out how to
use my semi-standard hardware. If it doesn't function - that's my problem.
So far I can get the sources, I'd try to fix it. The problem is in not
having anything, neither the DIY nor a shrink-wrap.
Developing for Linux is not immediately profitable - it would be crazy to
expect that. It is however, profitable in the long run, because it is an
investment in future developers. Of that 1% of desktops running Linux,
0.99% are used by programmers, while of the rest 99% of PCs, maybe 1% is
used by programmers. Linux is a natural choice for young generation,
hackers and people otherwise interested in either computer-related
technologies, or scientific research. It's short-sighted to ignore that,
even though small, group.
RE: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5
- don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Timothy Jones <Ti...@syniverse.com>.
Companies that base development decisions on *_current_* market share is what is short-sighted and only reinforces the status quo. That's no better than the dark ages of webdevs coding for IE4 at 800x600 resolution.
tlj
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Kwiatkowski [mailto:nicholas@spoon.as]
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 10:52 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 - don't listen to Steve!
To say there is no technical reason why those products take so long to be
produced on the Linux platform, that is a bit short-sighted.
First off, while Linux users account for 60% of the tech news I read, they
only really account for 2% of the desktop/laptop market-share. 1996 - 2011
was always supposed to be the year of the "linux desktop", but it never
happened.. This, to begin with is a show-stopper for most companies trying
to make money.
The other major problem is the instability of anything graphics within
Linux. Do we make binaries that target X11? XFree86? The next thing on
the block? Gnome? KDE? Oh? None of those give us access to the GPU
through some common API or driver stack? Oh, half of the graphics drivers
don't even expose the GPU? When they do they are broken? What? the OSS
kids decided to make the API different because they wanted it to be
different than the closed-source version the vendor provided? At least
other platforms like BSD / Solaris / etc are not nearly as bad as this.
If you build your tools on a platform like Eclipse, you leverage a LOT of
work that others have already done -- but there are still some major
differences between the Mac/Win/Linux versions of Eclipse. Again, if you
don't care about graphics, it is not a big deal, but if you want to do
something as simple as the Design view, it becomes much harder.
Adobe at one time stated that they didn't push forward with a Linux version
of Flash Builder because they would have needed to write a new licensing
engine. They did the math, and decided that if they would have to charge
for the product, most people won't pay for it (who pays for Linux software?
really?). Heck, people won't install close-source software when it is
free, because that isn't the Linux way! Just look at how much guff Adobe
for for their Flash Player they published (and wouldn't OS it).
I personally would like to see a descent Flex IDE that works under Linux,
but I'm not holding my breath for somebody else to create it for me. Heck,
just getting a Linux compiler back would be a huge step forward. But I
also know it would be on the OSS community and us to do it -- and I doubt
we will see that anytime soon.
-Nick
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Timothy Jones
<Ti...@syniverse.com>wrote:
> Just my two cents...
>
> As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash
> runtime is always seems to be a few releases behind Adobe's Windows and Mac
> versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, CS3,
> and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL. It took Adobe
> FOREVER to produce a decent 64-bit Linux build of Flash. Seeing as how Mac
> OS is both Darwin/BSD AND Intel 64-bit-based, there is no technical reason
> it should have taken so long.
>
> I joined this list because my team at work already has a significant
> investment in Flex, and finally Flex has an opportunity to realize its true
> potential as a fully open-source technology under Apache's guidance. I
> will be very happy to see any progress Flex makes away from Flash. If that
> means moving towards HTML5/js, that's even better. And it's not because
> Steve Jobs said so.
>
> The end goal I want to see is to see a complete Flex development
> environment that runs on any FreeBSD/Linux distro, produces content that
> runs in Chrome/Firefox/any-other-modern-browser, (yes, also on Linux) and
> requires not a single executable byte from adobe.com. I'll be happy to
> help test Apache Flex on many variants of that configuration for you. :-)
>
>
>
>
> tlj
>
Re: Apache Flex suggestion - dumping SWF support in favor of HTML5 -
don't listen to Steve!
Posted by Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as>.
To say there is no technical reason why those products take so long to be
produced on the Linux platform, that is a bit short-sighted.
First off, while Linux users account for 60% of the tech news I read, they
only really account for 2% of the desktop/laptop market-share. 1996 - 2011
was always supposed to be the year of the "linux desktop", but it never
happened.. This, to begin with is a show-stopper for most companies trying
to make money.
The other major problem is the instability of anything graphics within
Linux. Do we make binaries that target X11? XFree86? The next thing on
the block? Gnome? KDE? Oh? None of those give us access to the GPU
through some common API or driver stack? Oh, half of the graphics drivers
don't even expose the GPU? When they do they are broken? What? the OSS
kids decided to make the API different because they wanted it to be
different than the closed-source version the vendor provided? At least
other platforms like BSD / Solaris / etc are not nearly as bad as this.
If you build your tools on a platform like Eclipse, you leverage a LOT of
work that others have already done -- but there are still some major
differences between the Mac/Win/Linux versions of Eclipse. Again, if you
don't care about graphics, it is not a big deal, but if you want to do
something as simple as the Design view, it becomes much harder.
Adobe at one time stated that they didn't push forward with a Linux version
of Flash Builder because they would have needed to write a new licensing
engine. They did the math, and decided that if they would have to charge
for the product, most people won't pay for it (who pays for Linux software?
really?). Heck, people won't install close-source software when it is
free, because that isn't the Linux way! Just look at how much guff Adobe
for for their Flash Player they published (and wouldn't OS it).
I personally would like to see a descent Flex IDE that works under Linux,
but I'm not holding my breath for somebody else to create it for me. Heck,
just getting a Linux compiler back would be a huge step forward. But I
also know it would be on the OSS community and us to do it -- and I doubt
we will see that anytime soon.
-Nick
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Timothy Jones
<Ti...@syniverse.com>wrote:
> Just my two cents...
>
> As a Linux user and developer, I have always hated how the Linux Flash
> runtime is always seems to be a few releases behind Adobe's Windows and Mac
> versions, how Adobe's content creation tools (Photoshop, Dreamweaver, CS3,
> and even Flex Builder) aren't available on Linux AT ALL. It took Adobe
> FOREVER to produce a decent 64-bit Linux build of Flash. Seeing as how Mac
> OS is both Darwin/BSD AND Intel 64-bit-based, there is no technical reason
> it should have taken so long.
>
> I joined this list because my team at work already has a significant
> investment in Flex, and finally Flex has an opportunity to realize its true
> potential as a fully open-source technology under Apache's guidance. I
> will be very happy to see any progress Flex makes away from Flash. If that
> means moving towards HTML5/js, that's even better. And it's not because
> Steve Jobs said so.
>
> The end goal I want to see is to see a complete Flex development
> environment that runs on any FreeBSD/Linux distro, produces content that
> runs in Chrome/Firefox/any-other-modern-browser, (yes, also on Linux) and
> requires not a single executable byte from adobe.com. I'll be happy to
> help test Apache Flex on many variants of that configuration for you. :-)
>
>
>
>
> tlj
>