Well, I don't know if Flash will return to being the solution for UI design. With all of the various mobile browsers, I don't know if Flash will be able to run in all of them.
But Flex, on the other hand, could. That's what I'm trying to make happen with FlexJS. FlexJS won't control every pixel like you could in Flash (at least, certainly not early versions), but it should provide the other benefits that folks have found missing, mainly in terms of developer productivity. Yes, Flex isn't as popular as it was before Adobe donated it to Apache. Adobe was spending serious money on getting folks to use Flex. But every day, some other product or idea goes viral without million-dollar marketing schemes. So, if you like Flex, take a look at FlexJS and tell us on the Apache Flex dev list (d...@flex.apache.org) what it needs before you'll start recommending it to others such that it can go viral. IOW, you have to do your own marketing if you want to see more Flex jobs, and you have to help shape Flex and/or FlexJS into something worth marketing. No big company is going to do that for you. FlexJS isn't out to compete against HTML5. In fact, it is simply out to leverage it. As I've been working on FlexJS and talking to Flex folks who are now developing in some JS framework, it is becoming clear to me that any application developer using any framework is really just attaching components together. There is a longer version of what I'm about to write on the Apache Flex LinkedIn discussion group, but basically, the problem with JS is that you can attach anything to anything. Newer languages (TypeScript, DART) have constructs to try to catch those mistakes. ActionScript can do an even better job, especially for really big apps. And MXML gives you a schematic of your components. These days, I'm hoping to find folks who can help those of us working on FlexJS prove that AS and MXML can make you more proficient at attaching nearly any JS framework's components together. Then someday, it won't matter what JS framework your client wants to use, you'll use MXML and ActionScript to assemble that JS framework's components into an application and make fewer mistakes along the way. But that someday will come sooner if folks can contribute their time and energy to the project. If you can help out, send an email to d...@flex.apache.org. -Alex From: "danielpr...@yahoo.com<mailto:danielpr...@yahoo.com> [flexcoders]" <flexcoders@yahoogroups.com<mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com>> Reply-To: "flexcoders@yahoogroups.com<mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com>" <flexcoders@yahoogroups.com<mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com>> Date: Saturday, August 16, 2014 8:39 AM To: "flexcoders@yahoogroups.com<mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com>" <flexcoders@yahoogroups.com<mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com>> Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Future Scope of Flex The original authors must be going nuts, in deep depression at least. They climbed mount everest to the pinnacle of human interface design and did it in a universally accessible way. At the bottom line if you can't mathematically relate every single pixel on the screen to every other one, over time, you are by definition inferior to flash. While I am currently working in Php/Mysql/ with Ajax on top due to the nature of the project (absolute universal access), I think there is still hope. More are taking flash to the browser native. Very smart move. If the standards are there it will in time inevitably dominate. To save face it will probably be called some "great new tech" called "bonzoshow" or something :) Everybody literally freaked out at jobs' dying statement, jumped on the "it won't run mobile" and like a herd of lemmings everybody dove for the exits. Well mobile was si! ngle core then its quad and more now. Flash was and will be again I think a universal solution to absolutely superior user interface design. Pixel by Pixel over time. A growing morphing button is a single mathematics equation, not an unpredictable herd of objects clattering around in an approximation.
