> > I am not aware of the MM strategy for Flash. However, > > I found Flash to be more limited, specialized, and > > harder to learn than CF. If MM plan to make CF scripting > > available on the desktop, I applaud them, whatever > > vehicle they choose! > > This paper may be of great interest: > "Macromedia Flash MX -- A Next-Generation Rich Client" > Jeremy Allaire > http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/whitepapers/richclient.pdf > > Summary: Web applications which rely on the server sending > static pages have only limited scope. Clientside interactivity > and offline persistence are quite helpful for advanced web > applications, particularly as client machines become more > portable.
You're right, that Flash is more limited, more specialized, and harder to learn than CF. I think the same could be said of any event-driven programming environment. CF isn't easy just because of the language itself (although that certainly does help) but also because of the kind of programming you do with it. Server-side CGI programming is, in my opinion, simpler than most other types of programming, such as building event-driven desktop or client-server apps. Also, while that paper is good reading, it's worth noting that the idea of a "rich client" is in many ways a return to the days of client-server programming - which is, by nature, more complex than most typical web application programming. The use of "rich" clients will provide you with more application functionality and responsiveness, at the cost of complexity. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
