Couple more of my thoughts on this ...
1. Flex has a significant amount of server based data services (which effectively includes Flash remoting) which offer a significant value proposition, something which I feel would cost a great deal more than $12,000 USD to re-create. Some of benefits include the ability to directly interact with your business logic layer (calling EJBs / POJOs ) without web services or xml abstractions and a security model to communicate across domains.
2. With a .swf compiler in hand I really doubt anyone could recreate the Flex framework for anywhere near $12,000 USD.
cheers Mark
On 04/05/2004, at 5:24 PM, Scott Barnes wrote:
Chris Velevitch wrote:On Tue, 04 May 2004 15:19:22 +1000, Scott Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:It will kill existing sales. The FLEX is really two parts, first being the compiler itself, second being the FLEX framework (bunch of AS code). The two are coupled together for a reason, in that you get the whole controls and what not.I disagree. Following from you, Flex is really four parts. Certainly, there's a compiler and a framework of libraries, but that's no different from what the Flash IDE does. Flex does, using MXML, what the Flash IDE does using some propriety binary format (.fla). The other parts of Flex are, it's server based and it's dynamic.
Yes, but your still going to have to create your own component framework, which results in direct competition. If you take away the framework libraries form FLEX what are you left with? A standalone compiler awaiting specific instructions. So why spend 12k on a framework when you could buy your own compiler and build one for less THEN resell your framework cheaper? wouldn't that underpin the FLEX product itself?
Flash IDE is so different from FLEX, even in most parts of the v2 component framework (ie UIObject has different code to Flash IDE version).
Furthermore, FLEX compiler not only just translates XML/AS code into swf, but it also does some minor image manipulation (ie you can embed a png into a swf via FLEX code much like you would with an img tag in many ways). This is dynamically done by the compiler (ie Generator anyone?) so combine this with your framework and it would be a very competitive advantage over existing off the shelf modes of Flash/FLEX.
In order for you to buy the compiler on a standalone level you are most likely going to have to build your own AS based framwork, resulting in the ability to compete against Macromedias pre-made components. So in a nutshell it does compete.I believe the Flex components are simply Flash components. Take look at Flex/lib/framseworks/mx.swc file. It's 1.3Mb in size. It looks like all Flash components have been bundled into a single file. I think you'll find there's are fair amount of overlap between Flex and Flash. Afterall, the end result is .swf file designed to run on the standard Flash Player. Coming up with a single user MXML compiler should be not big deal.
Chris
--
Regards, Scott Barnes - http://www.mossyblog.com http://www.bestrates.com.au
---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004
--- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MXDU2004 + Macromedia DevCon AsiaPac + Sydney, Australia http://www.mxdu.com/ + 24-25 February, 2004
