You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Ariel Jakobovits <ar...@yahoo.com> on 2012/04/17 19:30:36 UTC
bay area folks and flash
anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at adobe?
wondering what was said.
Ariel Jakobovits
Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
Phone: 650-690-2213
Fax: 650-641-0031
Cell: 650-823-8699
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com>.
Unity and Epic (and others) already have great tool chains for creating 3D gaming content that targets the Flash Player. I dont see why there is a need for Adobe to try to fill that niche when there are already great solutions in the market.
Instead, we are introducing a model where those third party tool chains drive revenue that goes directly back into Flash Player development (where as before they would potentially take resources away from the player).
Hope that helps...
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
On Apr 17, 2012, at 12:07 PM, Sanford Redlich wrote:
> Could you give a bit more detail about why they aren't going to compete
> with Unity and what that means for AIR development? Thanks, - S.
>
> On 4/17/2012 11:16 AM, Tony Constantinides wrote:
>> I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash on
>> Gaming and video (in that order)
>> Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
>> concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
>> little guy.
>> I understand the direction there going and they may be successful, but
>> they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions to
>> move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
>> money is involved.
>> There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will not
>> happen again. Umm, ok.
>> They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head in
>> the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge oppourtunity".
>> I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is sell
>> your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
>> Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that Flash
>> is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
>> "alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER had
>> to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They left it
>> to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
>> shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play with me
>> if I still cool".Umm, ok.
>> They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming field,
>> but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
>> companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
>> money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
>> I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
>> I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
>> guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already sold my
>> shares. Just my 2 cents....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits<ar...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>>
>>> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
>>> adobe?
>>> wondering what was said.
>>>
>>> Ariel Jakobovits
>>> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
>>> Phone: 650-690-2213
>>> Fax: 650-641-0031
>>> Cell: 650-823-8699
>>>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Sanford Redlich <si...@gmail.com>.
Could you give a bit more detail about why they aren't going to compete
with Unity and what that means for AIR development? Thanks, - S.
On 4/17/2012 11:16 AM, Tony Constantinides wrote:
> I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash on
> Gaming and video (in that order)
> Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
> concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
> little guy.
> I understand the direction there going and they may be successful, but
> they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions to
> move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
> money is involved.
> There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will not
> happen again. Umm, ok.
> They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head in
> the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge oppourtunity".
> I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is sell
> your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
> Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that Flash
> is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
> "alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER had
> to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They left it
> to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
> shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play with me
> if I still cool".Umm, ok.
> They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming field,
> but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
> companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
> money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
> I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
> I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
> guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already sold my
> shares. Just my 2 cents....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits<ar...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
>> adobe?
>> wondering what was said.
>>
>> Ariel Jakobovits
>> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
>> Phone: 650-690-2213
>> Fax: 650-641-0031
>> Cell: 650-823-8699
>>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Jitendra Jain <wa...@gmail.com>.
Hi
The following are some points by Adobe towards Future of Flex. They believe
that HTML5 will become an important technology. But it takes years and also
we are not sure whether HTML5 will accepted to fit enterprise applications.
As its a future thing, companies cannot afford to lose the present market.
They are still accepting Flex as a technology to suit the business
requirements.
some of the specific advantages of Flex for enterprise application
development include:
- Flex offers complete feature-level consistency across multiple
platforms, browsers, and devices.
- The Flex component set and programming model makes it extremely
productive when building complex user interfaces.
- ActionScript 3 is a mature object-oriented programming language,
suitable for large application development.
- Supporting tools offer a productive development environment with
respect to code editing, debugging, profiling, and testing.
Once Apache Flex's first release will be out, flex community will be
more confident. So we are waiting for the Apache Flex to announce the first
release.
--
Thanks and Regards,
JJain,
If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it --Margaret
Fuller:
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Jitendra Jain <wa...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
The following are some points by Adobe towards Future of Flex. They
believe that HTML5 will become an important technology. But it takes years
and also we are not sure whether HTML5 will accepted to fit enterprise
applications. As its a future thing, companies cannot afford to lose the
present market. They are still accepting Flex as a technology to suit the
business requirements.
some of the specific advantages of Flex for enterprise application
development include:
- Flex offers complete feature-level consistency across multiple
platforms, browsers, and devices.
- The Flex component set and programming model makes it extremely
productive when building complex user interfaces.
- ActionScript 3 is a mature object-oriented programming language,
suitable for large application development.
- Supporting tools offer a productive development environment with
respect to code editing, debugging, profiling, and testing.
Once Apache Flex's first release will be out, flex community will be
more confident. So we are waiting for the Apache Flex to announce the first
release.
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Ariel Jakobovits <ar...@yahoo.com>.
The truth is, it amazes me what exists in the ecosystem of software development on the client today. Adobe is giving up on flash for ria, windows works on only windows, apple only on apple, html and CSS suck across browsers and in terms of features...the only area with stability is the server side where you can work with anything you want and not care about portability.
On Apr 18, 2012, at 1:35 AM, איליה גזמן <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I remember some one say once, "*Write once, run anywhere*" (*WORA*)" witch
> latter became "Write once, bug anywhere" and this is the future that I see
> in HTML5.
>
> What is the biggest different from HTML5 to flash. Flash Player is managed
> by only one Company, Adobe.
> HTML5 is running above Chrome, IE, Safari and more... may be after long
> time HTML5 will stabilized, but then when you want to modify it, you need
> to speak with minimum 3 companies to so.
> Adobe is not immune to bugs, but she is the only one who fix
> them according to her own goals, more then that, same developers fix bugs
> on IE and Chrome.
>
> I am not sure about what is going to happen but it seams like everyone is
> going mad...
>
>
> 2012/4/18 jude <fl...@gmail.com>
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> From the newsletter, "Those of you who attended our meeting on April 16
>> were struck by Lee Brimelow's emphatic exhortation to ActionScript and Flex
>> programmers: 'If you want to continue to earn a living, you MUST get your
>> head out of the sand and learn about HTML5.'"
>>
>> We know what it is and what it does. In fact I was at an HTML5 conference
>> last weekend to see if anything had changed. Do you know what *the
>> speakers*said about JavaScript and HTML5? It's a fundamentally flawed
>> environment.
>> *They *said that. These weren't Flash developers. They said what we all
>> already know. They said Google, who has their own browser (so they would
>> know right?), is well aware that it's flawed which is why they were working
>> on Dart. But Dart is a lost cause as well because it has to compile down to
>> again, a "fundamentally flawed environment". There weren't any Flash
>> developers there except the one or two I knew and they didn't say anything.
>> They mentioned a lot of neat features spread broadly across browsers that
>> would be nice to have one day. BTW These were developers from every
>> background and all looking for answers.
>>
>> I humbly disagree with you. HTML5 is not the answer or an alternative for
>> Flash. It has major cross browser issues, bogs down on basic animations
>> when it works and it renders and behaves differently in every browser.
>> There's no substitute. Effectively, you're abandoning your Flash and Flex
>> developers and their clients. What are we supposed to do? HTML5 is not the
>> answer.
>>
>> You said, "...winning back trust and credibility was a long term process,
>> one that basically involved us being clear and open about our plans..."
>> That's not going to win back trust or credibility. When you take into
>> account how your plans affect us, your customers and our clients and your
>> business partners (RIM, Facebook, any anyone's that uses or relies on the
>> Flash Player) and make decisions that protect all of our interests and
>> future as well then you'll have it.
>>
>> When you say "we're not going to talk about Flex anymore", "HTML5 is a
>> better long term choice than Flash", "we're not developing mobile Flash"
>> you make a huge impact on all of the developers and businesses using your
>> technology. You've put some of them out of business by simple PR mistakes
>> (you still haven't fired or hired a PR team???) and by your current stance
>> on Flash and HTML5 and your current pigeon holed marketing you've called
>> all of our judgement into question because we chose and recommended Flash.
>> That marketing or lack of marketing directly affects us.
>>
>> Judah Frangipane
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I understand that there is still frustration around all of this, but
>>> mischaracterizing what we said doesn't help anyone.
>>>
>>> In regards to HTML5, we said that Flash is really good at a lot of things
>>> (animations, apps, video, casual games, branding experiences, art) and
>> that
>>> you could continue to use Flash for this type of content. But,
>> increasingly
>>> over the next couple of years, more and more of this type of stuff is
>> going
>>> to be done directly in the browser. It is in your interest to at least
>>> have a basic understand of the capabilities of HTML5, because your
>> clients
>>> ARE going to ask you about. Whether you actually learn and use it is up
>> to
>>> you and your individual projects, but it is in your interest to at least
>>> understand the capabilities.
>>>
>>> As far as the question of "how do we tell our managers that Flash isnt
>>> dead, or that Flash is the best choice for a project", you need to talk
>>> about the realities, which includes discussion technical details such as
>>> player penetration, Flash on mobile, alternative, and development costs.
>>> Again, this is something that you have to decide on a case by case
>> basis,
>>> and in same cases Flash is NOT the best choice.
>>>
>>> We did acknowledge communication missteps in Novemeber. However, I did
>> not
>>> say it would not happen again. I did say that we have taken steps
>>> internally and externally to try and ensure that we communicate clearer
>> and
>>> more effectively and ensure that internally teams are considering
>> community
>>> and developer needs when making these types of decisions.
>>>
>>> I also said that winning back trust and credibility was a long term
>>> process, one that basically involved us being clear and open about our
>>> plans, and then doing those plans. Basically, we have to tell you what we
>>> plan to do, and then do it. Even then some people are still not going to
>>> put their faith in us. We get it, we have to just move forward and try to
>>> be open about what we are doing.
>>>
>>> Again, I understand the frustration, but mischaracterizing the discussion
>>> really doesn't help anyone. It only makes it more difficult for people to
>>> understand what Adobe is doing and why.
>>>
>>> mike chambers
>>>
>>> mesh@adobe.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Tony Constantinides wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash
>> on
>>>> Gaming and video (in that order)
>>>> Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
>>>> concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
>>>> little guy.
>>>> I understand the direction there going and they may be successful,
>> but
>>>> they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions
>>> to
>>>> move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
>>>> money is involved.
>>>> There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will
>> not
>>>> happen again. Umm, ok.
>>>> They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head
>> in
>>>> the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge
>>> oppourtunity".
>>>> I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is
>> sell
>>>> your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
>>>> Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that
>> Flash
>>>> is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
>>>> "alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER
>>> had
>>>> to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They
>> left
>>> it
>>>> to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
>>>> shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play
>> with
>>> me
>>>> if I still cool".Umm, ok.
>>>> They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming
>> field,
>>>> but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
>>>> companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
>>>> money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
>>>> I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
>>>> I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
>>>> guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already
>> sold
>>> my
>>>> shares. Just my 2 cents....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits <
>> arieljake@yahoo.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
>>>>> adobe?
>>>>> wondering what was said.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ariel Jakobovits
>>>>> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
>>>>> Phone: 650-690-2213
>>>>> Fax: 650-641-0031
>>>>> Cell: 650-823-8699
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Flex/Flash/Android/C# dev
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by איליה גזמן <ga...@gmail.com>.
I remember some one say once, "*Write once, run anywhere*" (*WORA*)" witch
latter became "Write once, bug anywhere" and this is the future that I see
in HTML5.
What is the biggest different from HTML5 to flash. Flash Player is managed
by only one Company, Adobe.
HTML5 is running above Chrome, IE, Safari and more... may be after long
time HTML5 will stabilized, but then when you want to modify it, you need
to speak with minimum 3 companies to so.
Adobe is not immune to bugs, but she is the only one who fix
them according to her own goals, more then that, same developers fix bugs
on IE and Chrome.
I am not sure about what is going to happen but it seams like everyone is
going mad...
2012/4/18 jude <fl...@gmail.com>
> Hi Mike,
>
> From the newsletter, "Those of you who attended our meeting on April 16
> were struck by Lee Brimelow's emphatic exhortation to ActionScript and Flex
> programmers: 'If you want to continue to earn a living, you MUST get your
> head out of the sand and learn about HTML5.'"
>
> We know what it is and what it does. In fact I was at an HTML5 conference
> last weekend to see if anything had changed. Do you know what *the
> speakers*said about JavaScript and HTML5? It's a fundamentally flawed
> environment.
> *They *said that. These weren't Flash developers. They said what we all
> already know. They said Google, who has their own browser (so they would
> know right?), is well aware that it's flawed which is why they were working
> on Dart. But Dart is a lost cause as well because it has to compile down to
> again, a "fundamentally flawed environment". There weren't any Flash
> developers there except the one or two I knew and they didn't say anything.
> They mentioned a lot of neat features spread broadly across browsers that
> would be nice to have one day. BTW These were developers from every
> background and all looking for answers.
>
> I humbly disagree with you. HTML5 is not the answer or an alternative for
> Flash. It has major cross browser issues, bogs down on basic animations
> when it works and it renders and behaves differently in every browser.
> There's no substitute. Effectively, you're abandoning your Flash and Flex
> developers and their clients. What are we supposed to do? HTML5 is not the
> answer.
>
> You said, "...winning back trust and credibility was a long term process,
> one that basically involved us being clear and open about our plans..."
> That's not going to win back trust or credibility. When you take into
> account how your plans affect us, your customers and our clients and your
> business partners (RIM, Facebook, any anyone's that uses or relies on the
> Flash Player) and make decisions that protect all of our interests and
> future as well then you'll have it.
>
> When you say "we're not going to talk about Flex anymore", "HTML5 is a
> better long term choice than Flash", "we're not developing mobile Flash"
> you make a huge impact on all of the developers and businesses using your
> technology. You've put some of them out of business by simple PR mistakes
> (you still haven't fired or hired a PR team???) and by your current stance
> on Flash and HTML5 and your current pigeon holed marketing you've called
> all of our judgement into question because we chose and recommended Flash.
> That marketing or lack of marketing directly affects us.
>
> Judah Frangipane
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> > I understand that there is still frustration around all of this, but
> > mischaracterizing what we said doesn't help anyone.
> >
> > In regards to HTML5, we said that Flash is really good at a lot of things
> > (animations, apps, video, casual games, branding experiences, art) and
> that
> > you could continue to use Flash for this type of content. But,
> increasingly
> > over the next couple of years, more and more of this type of stuff is
> going
> > to be done directly in the browser. It is in your interest to at least
> > have a basic understand of the capabilities of HTML5, because your
> clients
> > ARE going to ask you about. Whether you actually learn and use it is up
> to
> > you and your individual projects, but it is in your interest to at least
> > understand the capabilities.
> >
> > As far as the question of "how do we tell our managers that Flash isnt
> > dead, or that Flash is the best choice for a project", you need to talk
> > about the realities, which includes discussion technical details such as
> > player penetration, Flash on mobile, alternative, and development costs.
> > Again, this is something that you have to decide on a case by case
> basis,
> > and in same cases Flash is NOT the best choice.
> >
> > We did acknowledge communication missteps in Novemeber. However, I did
> not
> > say it would not happen again. I did say that we have taken steps
> > internally and externally to try and ensure that we communicate clearer
> and
> > more effectively and ensure that internally teams are considering
> community
> > and developer needs when making these types of decisions.
> >
> > I also said that winning back trust and credibility was a long term
> > process, one that basically involved us being clear and open about our
> > plans, and then doing those plans. Basically, we have to tell you what we
> > plan to do, and then do it. Even then some people are still not going to
> > put their faith in us. We get it, we have to just move forward and try to
> > be open about what we are doing.
> >
> > Again, I understand the frustration, but mischaracterizing the discussion
> > really doesn't help anyone. It only makes it more difficult for people to
> > understand what Adobe is doing and why.
> >
> > mike chambers
> >
> > mesh@adobe.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Tony Constantinides wrote:
> >
> > > I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash
> on
> > > Gaming and video (in that order)
> > > Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
> > > concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
> > > little guy.
> > > I understand the direction there going and they may be successful,
> but
> > > they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions
> > to
> > > move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
> > > money is involved.
> > > There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will
> not
> > > happen again. Umm, ok.
> > > They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head
> in
> > > the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge
> > oppourtunity".
> > > I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is
> sell
> > > your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
> > > Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that
> Flash
> > > is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
> > > "alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER
> > had
> > > to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They
> left
> > it
> > > to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
> > > shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play
> with
> > me
> > > if I still cool".Umm, ok.
> > > They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming
> field,
> > > but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
> > > companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
> > > money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
> > > I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
> > > I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
> > > guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already
> sold
> > my
> > > shares. Just my 2 cents....
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits <
> arieljake@yahoo.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
> > >> adobe?
> > >> wondering what was said.
> > >>
> > >> Ariel Jakobovits
> > >> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
> > >> Phone: 650-690-2213
> > >> Fax: 650-641-0031
> > >> Cell: 650-823-8699
> > >>
> >
> >
>
--
Flex/Flash/Android/C# dev
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com>.
Again, please don't mischaracterize what I said.
--
> 'If you want to continue to earn a living, you MUST get your
> head out of the sand and learn about HTML5.'"
--
We said it is in your interest to be aware of the capabilities of HTML5 because your clients are probably going to ask about it.
--
> I humbly disagree with you. HTML5 is not the answer or an alternative for
> Flash. It has major cross browser issues, bogs down on basic animations
> when it works and it renders and behaves differently in every browser.
> There's no substitute. Effectively, you're abandoning your Flash and Flex
> developers and their clients. What are we supposed to do? HTML5 is not the
> answer.
--
We didnt say you HAD to use HTML5. We said increasingly this stuff would be done in HTML5. Regardless of the technical merits of the technology, this is the reality.
We also said if you wanted to continue to use Flash doing what you do today, you could.
--
> When you say "we're not going to talk about Flex anymore", "HTML5 is a
> better long term choice than Flash",
--
Sigh... again, we didnt say HTML5 was a better long term choice then Flash. Again, we did say that the reality was that a lot of the stuff that has traditionally only been possible via Flash, is going to be increasingly possible in the browser HTML5, and that increasingly it will be done via those technologies.
We didn't say you HAVE to use HTML5, and we didn't say HTML5 better. If you want to ignore HTML5 and pretend that its going to be a complete failure and not be widely use, that is your choice.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.xom
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by jude <fl...@gmail.com>.
Hi Mike,
>From the newsletter, "Those of you who attended our meeting on April 16
were struck by Lee Brimelow's emphatic exhortation to ActionScript and Flex
programmers: 'If you want to continue to earn a living, you MUST get your
head out of the sand and learn about HTML5.'"
We know what it is and what it does. In fact I was at an HTML5 conference
last weekend to see if anything had changed. Do you know what *the
speakers*said about JavaScript and HTML5? It's a fundamentally flawed
environment.
*They *said that. These weren't Flash developers. They said what we all
already know. They said Google, who has their own browser (so they would
know right?), is well aware that it's flawed which is why they were working
on Dart. But Dart is a lost cause as well because it has to compile down to
again, a "fundamentally flawed environment". There weren't any Flash
developers there except the one or two I knew and they didn't say anything.
They mentioned a lot of neat features spread broadly across browsers that
would be nice to have one day. BTW These were developers from every
background and all looking for answers.
I humbly disagree with you. HTML5 is not the answer or an alternative for
Flash. It has major cross browser issues, bogs down on basic animations
when it works and it renders and behaves differently in every browser.
There's no substitute. Effectively, you're abandoning your Flash and Flex
developers and their clients. What are we supposed to do? HTML5 is not the
answer.
You said, "...winning back trust and credibility was a long term process,
one that basically involved us being clear and open about our plans..."
That's not going to win back trust or credibility. When you take into
account how your plans affect us, your customers and our clients and your
business partners (RIM, Facebook, any anyone's that uses or relies on the
Flash Player) and make decisions that protect all of our interests and
future as well then you'll have it.
When you say "we're not going to talk about Flex anymore", "HTML5 is a
better long term choice than Flash", "we're not developing mobile Flash"
you make a huge impact on all of the developers and businesses using your
technology. You've put some of them out of business by simple PR mistakes
(you still haven't fired or hired a PR team???) and by your current stance
on Flash and HTML5 and your current pigeon holed marketing you've called
all of our judgement into question because we chose and recommended Flash.
That marketing or lack of marketing directly affects us.
Judah Frangipane
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I understand that there is still frustration around all of this, but
> mischaracterizing what we said doesn't help anyone.
>
> In regards to HTML5, we said that Flash is really good at a lot of things
> (animations, apps, video, casual games, branding experiences, art) and that
> you could continue to use Flash for this type of content. But, increasingly
> over the next couple of years, more and more of this type of stuff is going
> to be done directly in the browser. It is in your interest to at least
> have a basic understand of the capabilities of HTML5, because your clients
> ARE going to ask you about. Whether you actually learn and use it is up to
> you and your individual projects, but it is in your interest to at least
> understand the capabilities.
>
> As far as the question of "how do we tell our managers that Flash isnt
> dead, or that Flash is the best choice for a project", you need to talk
> about the realities, which includes discussion technical details such as
> player penetration, Flash on mobile, alternative, and development costs.
> Again, this is something that you have to decide on a case by case basis,
> and in same cases Flash is NOT the best choice.
>
> We did acknowledge communication missteps in Novemeber. However, I did not
> say it would not happen again. I did say that we have taken steps
> internally and externally to try and ensure that we communicate clearer and
> more effectively and ensure that internally teams are considering community
> and developer needs when making these types of decisions.
>
> I also said that winning back trust and credibility was a long term
> process, one that basically involved us being clear and open about our
> plans, and then doing those plans. Basically, we have to tell you what we
> plan to do, and then do it. Even then some people are still not going to
> put their faith in us. We get it, we have to just move forward and try to
> be open about what we are doing.
>
> Again, I understand the frustration, but mischaracterizing the discussion
> really doesn't help anyone. It only makes it more difficult for people to
> understand what Adobe is doing and why.
>
> mike chambers
>
> mesh@adobe.com
>
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Tony Constantinides wrote:
>
> > I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash on
> > Gaming and video (in that order)
> > Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
> > concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
> > little guy.
> > I understand the direction there going and they may be successful, but
> > they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions
> to
> > move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
> > money is involved.
> > There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will not
> > happen again. Umm, ok.
> > They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head in
> > the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge
> oppourtunity".
> > I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is sell
> > your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
> > Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that Flash
> > is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
> > "alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER
> had
> > to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They left
> it
> > to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
> > shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play with
> me
> > if I still cool".Umm, ok.
> > They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming field,
> > but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
> > companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
> > money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
> > I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
> > I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
> > guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already sold
> my
> > shares. Just my 2 cents....
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits <arieljake@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
> >> adobe?
> >> wondering what was said.
> >>
> >> Ariel Jakobovits
> >> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
> >> Phone: 650-690-2213
> >> Fax: 650-641-0031
> >> Cell: 650-823-8699
> >>
>
>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by David Francis Buhler <da...@gmail.com>.
Despite the impact past events and decisions have had on companies and
developers using the Flash Platform (mostly Flex), I respect Adobe's
pursuit of a new business model, and one I believe will be more successful
than tooling and an ecosystem targeted towards the Large Enterprise with a
bent on Transactional software. Sencha seems to be doing well with a
business model that includes licensing different parts of their ecosystem,
and I personally believe Adobe is headed in the right direction. I wish
them the best in that endeavor.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Yep. Agreed.
>
> We had announced last year that we planned to monetize alchemy, and then
> announced earlier this year that as part of that we would be removing the
> domainMemory API.
>
> Based on community feedback we changed those plans so that domainMemory is
> still available (and officially supported), and that it would only be a
> premium feature when used in conjunction with Stage3D.
>
> mike chambers
>
> mesh@adobe.com
>
> On Apr 17, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Tink wrote:
>
> >
> > On 17 Apr 2012, at 20:37, Mike Chambers wrote:
> >
> >
> > IMO if you want to gain back trust a credibility with developers you
> still need to be clearer and more open about your plans. It should have
> been made plain and clear that some of these new features would come at a
> cost.
> >
> > Tink
>
>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Robert Smith <ro...@thedevprocess.com>.
While this thread doesn't really help move the cause of flex forward, I
think it's helpful to have these kinds of discussions. I'm sure there is
a more appropriate place to have them. Like others here, I feel like I'm
stuck between a rock and a hard place. The capabilities of HTML5 aren't
there yet, but I'm seeing flex work evaporate due to uncertainty. And I
really don't want to develop in HTML5 (head in sand...la la la la).
After reading all of the replies and seeing Mike Chambers attempt damage
control (and a noble attempt it was), we're still where we started.
Nothing is fixed. I don't think the vocal majority of the flex community
and Adobe's leadership will ever see eye to eye.
We've needed some kind of 3rd option for a while. If we (and by we, I
mean the people doing the real work) can be successful here, we'll have
that option. Jonathan is spot on.
On 4/18/2012 10:27 AM, Mike Chambers wrote:
> Agreed. Sorry about the off topic comments.
>
> mike chambers
>
> mesh@adobe.com
>
> On Apr 18, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Jonathan Campos wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Mike Chambers<mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I dont think that anyone was arguing that it was.
>>
>> Guys, I don't think this thread is helping anyone. I'd argue that this is
>> only adding to the issue. If you want to keep moving forward I would
>> recommend doing so and stop arguing about what was said. Start
>> contributing to the open source and keep moving forward.
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Campos
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com>.
Agreed. Sorry about the off topic comments.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
On Apr 18, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Jonathan Campos wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> I dont think that anyone was arguing that it was.
>
>
> Guys, I don't think this thread is helping anyone. I'd argue that this is
> only adding to the issue. If you want to keep moving forward I would
> recommend doing so and stop arguing about what was said. Start
> contributing to the open source and keep moving forward.
>
> --
> Jonathan Campos
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I dont think that anyone was arguing that it was.
Guys, I don't think this thread is helping anyone. I'd argue that this is
only adding to the issue. If you want to keep moving forward I would
recommend doing so and stop arguing about what was said. Start
contributing to the open source and keep moving forward.
--
Jonathan Campos
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com>.
I dont think that anyone was arguing that it was.
mike chambers
On Apr 17, 2012, at 2:11 PM, imagenesis@gmail.com<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
Javascript is not a better platform for applications or games.
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Konstantin Elstner <fl...@dashart.de>.
Hi,
at first, I think the way to send flash runtime evangelists to a world wide tour is a good step.
But the negative point is, that you are only showing demos, we all have already seen.
The informations you have provided are all facts, which we already can read in the whitepapers.
But we need clear future informations.
A speech like we are focusing on this, and when we will optimize this is nice, is okay.
But not really more I think.
Since the PR disaster around the stop of development of Flash Player mobile,
everybody in the management of our client companies is thinking flash and AIR is a sinking ship.
To have the possibility to argue against this we need more exact informations.
There are 2 points, which are very important for us:
1. Please update monthly the adobe site about the flash player penetration,
this is one of the primary fact for every decision maker.
2. Adobe is telling since around 2 months, that there are discussions with Microsoft,
about AIR support in Windows 8 RT, whats the progress?
Since the start of this your I heard from our clients the question about flash player penetration more often when ever ago,
when I answer, there are no new informations about this from Adobe, the most clients are thinking for there self:
Okay flash is dead and Adobe is afraid of publishing the actual stats.
Like: You can not not communicate.
Additional tablet pcs are the future, there is a big push from the html5-based native apps like sencha and phonegap.
If a client today thinks about starting a new project, he want to use a technic with a feature and the future is cross device.
So the future of AIR, I think, is coupled with support of Windows 8 RT.
Without a wide range of supported devices / OS's I see no really future for AIR, Flash and so also Flex.
The information are requested in blogs, at the forums and at the Flash Runtime events,
but there was never any answer from Adobe.
So it seems for us and our clients, like Adobe will, that we struggle through the fog.
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by "imagenesis@gmail.com" <im...@gmail.com>.
Objectively better from a development standpoint. *
Consumers*
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:11 PM, imagenesis@gmail.com
<im...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Javascript is not a better platform for applications or games. Look at
> EA's Command and Conquer online game. It's performance is horrible and it's
> just a turn based game.
>
> A lot of WEB developers have been forced to learn javascript because it's
> a standard and you're pigeonholed into it. They are screaming they want
> better UI frameworks and continued development because everyone knows how
> awful coding in mishmash of html/javascript is. There is a very vocal
> community of WEB designers who are screaming for a standardized Javascript
> display list framework. Give it about 5 years and they'll probably start
> screaming Javascript is dead and everyone should code for Native Client.
>
> Unless internet consumer's have a massive aversion to Flash games which I
> don't think they do, I don't understand why Adobe is second guessing
> itself. Convincing Flash developers, that Javascript is a *better*runtime isn't going to work I don't think.
>
> Consumer internet application are not written in Flash. Flash is mainly
> used for games and internal applications with Flex. Saying Javascript is
> sometimes the better choice, it sounds like Javascript is a better choice
> for either games or internal RIAs. Neither of which is true. Yah,
> Javascript is the better choice if you're making a consumer internet
> applications where users don't want to load Flash for their social
> networking fix. At this point, there is no good free Javascript UI
> framework. There is Kendo UI, JQuery UI and Sencha. Only JQuery is free.
> None of them are as comprehensive as Flex. They don't have containers for
> one thing. Even if they were as comprehensive, there isn't any good reason
> to write something in Javascript. The necessary APIs for rich UI's are
> finite. These equivalent API's are found in Java Swing, Windows UI APIs,
> Linux UI APIs. The point is that they are finite, there aren't any magical
> new developments that Javascript will bring. UI APIs are stable. The Flex
> API is more or less complete. A Javascript equivalent will not be much
> better.
>
> Fundamentally the only scary part of Adobe's announcements is that they
> sound like:
> We'll try to monetize Flash
> If it doesn't work than we can't tell you what's going to happen. We can't
> tell you we'll open source it. We might just stop developing the API. We
> might take more aggressive steps to monetize it. We might end it
> permanently. I think this is what some flash developers are hearing. In
> reality though, Flash will obviously not be discontinued. Look at
> Shockwave, it has been in zombie mode for years.
>
> Then again, there is the "lure" of javascript. We all know, pretty soon,.
> a developer will release a great Javascript game that will make a ton of
> money and become super popular and than it might fuel momentum in
> Javascript. Okay I'll give you that.
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Yep. Agreed.
>>
>> We had announced last year that we planned to monetize alchemy, and then
>> announced earlier this year that as part of that we would be removing the
>> domainMemory API.
>>
>> Based on community feedback we changed those plans so that domainMemory
>> is still available (and officially supported), and that it would only be a
>> premium feature when used in conjunction with Stage3D.
>>
>> mike chambers
>>
>> mesh@adobe.com
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Tink wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > On 17 Apr 2012, at 20:37, Mike Chambers wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > IMO if you want to gain back trust a credibility with developers you
>> still need to be clearer and more open about your plans. It should have
>> been made plain and clear that some of these new features would come at a
>> cost.
>> >
>> > Tink
>>
>>
>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Brent Arnold <br...@brentarnold.com>.
Until you try to play that game in a mobile browser. AIR FTW!
> We all know, pretty soon,. a
> developer will release a great Javascript game that will make a ton of
> money and become super popular and than it might fuel momentum in
> Javascript. Okay I'll give you that.
>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by "imagenesis@gmail.com" <im...@gmail.com>.
Javascript is not a better platform for applications or games. Look at EA's
Command and Conquer online game. It's performance is horrible and it's just
a turn based game.
A lot of WEB developers have been forced to learn javascript because it's a
standard and you're pigeonholed into it. They are screaming they want
better UI frameworks and continued development because everyone knows how
awful coding in mishmash of html/javascript is. There is a very vocal
community of WEB designers who are screaming for a standardized Javascript
display list framework. Give it about 5 years and they'll probably start
screaming Javascript is dead and everyone should code for Native Client.
Unless internet consumer's have a massive aversion to Flash games which I
don't think they do, I don't understand why Adobe is second guessing
itself. Convincing Flash developers, that Javascript is a *better* runtime
isn't going to work I don't think.
Consumer internet application are not written in Flash. Flash is mainly
used for games and internal applications with Flex. Saying Javascript is
sometimes the better choice, it sounds like Javascript is a better choice
for either games or internal RIAs. Neither of which is true. Yah,
Javascript is the better choice if you're making a consumer internet
applications where users don't want to load Flash for their social
networking fix. At this point, there is no good free Javascript UI
framework. There is Kendo UI, JQuery UI and Sencha. Only JQuery is free.
None of them are as comprehensive as Flex. They don't have containers for
one thing. Even if they were as comprehensive, there isn't any good reason
to write something in Javascript. The necessary APIs for rich UI's are
finite. These equivalent API's are found in Java Swing, Windows UI APIs,
Linux UI APIs. The point is that they are finite, there aren't any magical
new developments that Javascript will bring. UI APIs are stable. The Flex
API is more or less complete. A Javascript equivalent will not be much
better.
Fundamentally the only scary part of Adobe's announcements is that they
sound like:
We'll try to monetize Flash
If it doesn't work than we can't tell you what's going to happen. We can't
tell you we'll open source it. We might just stop developing the API. We
might take more aggressive steps to monetize it. We might end it
permanently. I think this is what some flash developers are hearing. In
reality though, Flash will obviously not be discontinued. Look at
Shockwave, it has been in zombie mode for years.
Then again, there is the "lure" of javascript. We all know, pretty soon,. a
developer will release a great Javascript game that will make a ton of
money and become super popular and than it might fuel momentum in
Javascript. Okay I'll give you that.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Yep. Agreed.
>
> We had announced last year that we planned to monetize alchemy, and then
> announced earlier this year that as part of that we would be removing the
> domainMemory API.
>
> Based on community feedback we changed those plans so that domainMemory is
> still available (and officially supported), and that it would only be a
> premium feature when used in conjunction with Stage3D.
>
> mike chambers
>
> mesh@adobe.com
>
> On Apr 17, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Tink wrote:
>
> >
> > On 17 Apr 2012, at 20:37, Mike Chambers wrote:
> >
> >
> > IMO if you want to gain back trust a credibility with developers you
> still need to be clearer and more open about your plans. It should have
> been made plain and clear that some of these new features would come at a
> cost.
> >
> > Tink
>
>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com>.
Yep. Agreed.
We had announced last year that we planned to monetize alchemy, and then announced earlier this year that as part of that we would be removing the domainMemory API.
Based on community feedback we changed those plans so that domainMemory is still available (and officially supported), and that it would only be a premium feature when used in conjunction with Stage3D.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
On Apr 17, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Tink wrote:
>
> On 17 Apr 2012, at 20:37, Mike Chambers wrote:
>
>
> IMO if you want to gain back trust a credibility with developers you still need to be clearer and more open about your plans. It should have been made plain and clear that some of these new features would come at a cost.
>
> Tink
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Tink <fl...@tink.ws>.
On 17 Apr 2012, at 20:37, Mike Chambers wrote:
> I also said that winning back trust and credibility was a long term process, one that basically involved us being clear and open about our plans, and then doing those plans. Basically, we have to tell you what we plan to do, and then do it. Even then some people are still not going to put their faith in us. We get it, we have to just move forward and try to be open about what we are doing.
Hey Mike
You stated this at the event in London, then Lee went on to demo new gaming features which began to get a few devs back on side and interested in getting their hands on these features, then a couple of weeks later, Adobe announce the speed tax for these features.
IMO if you want to gain back trust a credibility with developers you still need to be clearer and more open about your plans. It should have been made plain and clear that some of these new features would come at a cost.
Tink
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Mike Chambers <mc...@adobe.com>.
I understand that there is still frustration around all of this, but mischaracterizing what we said doesn't help anyone.
In regards to HTML5, we said that Flash is really good at a lot of things (animations, apps, video, casual games, branding experiences, art) and that you could continue to use Flash for this type of content. But, increasingly over the next couple of years, more and more of this type of stuff is going to be done directly in the browser. It is in your interest to at least have a basic understand of the capabilities of HTML5, because your clients ARE going to ask you about. Whether you actually learn and use it is up to you and your individual projects, but it is in your interest to at least understand the capabilities.
As far as the question of "how do we tell our managers that Flash isnt dead, or that Flash is the best choice for a project", you need to talk about the realities, which includes discussion technical details such as player penetration, Flash on mobile, alternative, and development costs. Again, this is something that you have to decide on a case by case basis, and in same cases Flash is NOT the best choice.
We did acknowledge communication missteps in Novemeber. However, I did not say it would not happen again. I did say that we have taken steps internally and externally to try and ensure that we communicate clearer and more effectively and ensure that internally teams are considering community and developer needs when making these types of decisions.
I also said that winning back trust and credibility was a long term process, one that basically involved us being clear and open about our plans, and then doing those plans. Basically, we have to tell you what we plan to do, and then do it. Even then some people are still not going to put their faith in us. We get it, we have to just move forward and try to be open about what we are doing.
Again, I understand the frustration, but mischaracterizing the discussion really doesn't help anyone. It only makes it more difficult for people to understand what Adobe is doing and why.
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Tony Constantinides wrote:
> I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash on
> Gaming and video (in that order)
> Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
> concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
> little guy.
> I understand the direction there going and they may be successful, but
> they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions to
> move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
> money is involved.
> There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will not
> happen again. Umm, ok.
> They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head in
> the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge oppourtunity".
> I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is sell
> your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
> Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that Flash
> is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
> "alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER had
> to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They left it
> to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
> shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play with me
> if I still cool".Umm, ok.
> They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming field,
> but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
> companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
> money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
> I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
> I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
> guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already sold my
> shares. Just my 2 cents....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits <ar...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
>> adobe?
>> wondering what was said.
>>
>> Ariel Jakobovits
>> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
>> Phone: 650-690-2213
>> Fax: 650-641-0031
>> Cell: 650-823-8699
>>
Re: bay area folks and flash
Posted by Tony Constantinides <co...@gmail.com>.
I was there. Basically Adobe confirmed there moving ahead with Flash on
Gaming and video (in that order)
Lots of new functionality coming out for gaming, with video they
concentrating on the big media companies and there needs and screw the
little guy.
I understand the direction there going and they may be successful, but
they stated that they cannot please everyone and have to make decisions to
move ahead. Translation: We reserve the right to screw the community if
money is involved.
There acknowledge that they miscommunciated before and claim it will not
happen again. Umm, ok.
They also stated that too many Flash and Flex guys have there head in
the sand and now need to learn HTML 5.0 as they see a "huge oppourtunity".
I noticed they did not mention Flex anymore. My take on all this is sell
your Adobe shares while there stil over $30.
Many developers ask how they will expalin to their managers that Flash
is not dead. Adobe mumbled something about "technical choice" and
"alternatives". Its pretty clear that the engineers at Adobe have NEVER had
to explain to non-technical clients about technical direction. They left it
to consultants, and exsaperated employees of smal companies. I can only
shake my head. It sounds like 10 year olds saying "people will play with me
if I still cool".Umm, ok.
They mention there not going to compete with Unity in the gaming field,
but now they impose this "charge" on high-end gaming because gaming
companies say "we do not feel your heart in it, if Adobe is not making
money on Flash". I see the logic, and Adobe should make money.
I hope that works out for them. I cannot see how though.
I moving on to Android development in Java and so are many of the Flex
guys there. What happens to Adobe, I could not care less. I already sold my
shares. Just my 2 cents....
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Ariel Jakobovits <ar...@yahoo.com>wrote:
> anyone in the bay area attend the future of flash event last night at
> adobe?
> wondering what was said.
>
> Ariel Jakobovits
> Email: arieljake@yahoo.com
> Phone: 650-690-2213
> Fax: 650-641-0031
> Cell: 650-823-8699
>