Re: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price

Thu, 31 Mar 2005 22:06:45 -0800

Have you looked at FLOW?  If you ask Ted about it, he'll be more than happy to discuss it, it's uses, and how you can integrate it into your projects.
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 4:41 PM
Subject: AW: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price

Why no open source Flex?

I mean the swf format is open. The tools are their. Merging components, creating Actionscript components

It`s all doable and there is nothing magical about flex. In fact I think that a flex like system is just the

next logical step for flash development. All this �we need to get the enterprise developers� on board is

just shareholder talk. Flash developers have for a long time pushed the limits of flash and i`m sure that

it`s possible to built something like flex as open source. You would say there is Laszlo but for me

it`s not an alternative. I want something compatible to flex and that uses actionscript and that recognizes my

components built  in flash. So I want flex for free!

Don`t get me wrong. I love Flex. It`s a great product but in my opinion there is enough space for an open source

Project that fits for smaller (budget wise) projects.

 

For my final thesis i`m working on such a project. I have successfully built a Linker/Loader System and an

MXML parser.  (I will post about the progression here www.richapps.de )

 

I think a real open source Flex alternative would be great even for Flex itself. It is the only

way to win against the xaml, xul whatever rivals.

 

My2Cents

 

Benz

 

 

Von: Simon Fifield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. M�rz 2005 23:15
An: [email protected]
Betreff: RE: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price

 

Hi Lucian,

 

I will need to speak to my clients ( I can't remember if they purchased the Flex License at v1 or v1.5 ).

 

I'm sure that there is an amicable agreement that can be reached - price increases are an ongoing problem for everyone around the world but particularly for the small to medium whoever/whatever. Although larger companies must be careful to count the pennies (therefore looking after the pounds) they are in a much better position to find the cash to make larger purchases if it makes sense in the bigger picture.

 

I imagine ( and I may be wrong ) that most of us are a little disturbed by not being able to see a price on a tag. Hardly anyone in the UK is used to haggling, and personally I'm not keen on squeezing as much out of someone as I can. I am not the one who authorises purchases, and I imagine that most of us here are in the same boat.

 

It just feels very uncomfortable seeing a price tag for a small bag of sweets, a price tag for a large bag of sweets, but for medium and jumbo bags you have to haggle with the shop keeper. I'm not saying its wrong - I just think that lots of developers like me have a hard time having to go back to the people who make the purchasing decisions and trying to get them to pay an unknown but considerable amount of money for something that they are not sure that they want, and we are the ones that have to persuade them that they want it.

 

For my part, I sold Flex based on the knowledge that my clients wanted to develop their webapps using the Flash Player. My experience of creating webapps in the Flash environment was most unpleasant (especially when having to work with designers that can't program and aren't at all tidy!) so I pushed the fact that the webapps would be developed much much faster using Flex than with Flash. Yes, there has been a bigger learning curve than I thought, but if I had tried to do this using Flash only - well I think that I would be in a hospital room with nice padded walls to dampen the sound of my screaming!

 

I love Flex. And I'm glad someone else has bought it for me to work with.

 

Kind Regards,

Simon Fifield

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucian Beebe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 March 2005 21:17
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price

Maintenance will be calculated based on the CPUs or Quick Start price if you go that route. . I think that�s pretty consistent with other software industry norms.

 

I�ll make you the same offer, Simon. Where you have serious projects running, lets talk directly and find a way to make this work out.

 

Lucian

 

From: Simon Fifield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 11:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price

 

My clients have also stretched themselves to purchase the 2cpu license, which cost more than the Dual Processor server they purchased to match the spec. 

 

Now that the license for Flex is either 1 or 4 cpu does this mean that my clients are going to have to more than double the original purchase price when they need to renew their maintenance license?

Or will the 1 cpu license cover the whole server? (i.e. does cpu mean server or does it mean processors?)

 

Simon

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Shirey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 March 2005 18:17
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flex 1.5 price

What about a 2cpu license?  Please answer.  Your 'starter kit' is
overkill for us.  If our price is based on a minimum 4cpu price, then
this is no longer a joke at all.  We will have to drop Flex and never
look back.  We will have wasted months of training and actual
development time.  This is NOT a price I can justify to anyone.

We're seriously disappointed in Macromedia at this time.  We're a very
small shop and its starting to look like Macromedia does not care
about the little guy at all anymore.

-- Matthew


On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:00:13 -0500, Darron J. Schall
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jeff Steiner wrote:
>
> >Lazslo, while the samples look great, is still based upon Flash player 5
> >(Beta 3 of Lazslo is player 6).  It is one of those things where you have to
> >wonder - how does Lazslo know what to extend of the Flash Player.  The
> >people that are contributing to it make guesses and try to extend the
> >capabilities as far as they can, but they are still limited in their
> >knowledge.  I have never seen an API to the Flash player made readily
> >available to the public.  Also - as the Flash Player gets more complicated
> >it will become more difficult to code hooks into the player to give
> >developers the same functionality that is provided by Flex, and Breeze, and
> >Flash, ........
> >
> >
> As a Flash developer, I'd like to chime in here..
>
> The fact that Lazslo works on Flash Player 5 really isn't an issue.  In
> fact, I'd say it's a bonus!  Here's why:
>
> * Because Lazslo outputs to Flash Player 5, it has a larget target
> audience.  See the penetration stats:
> http://www.macromedia.com/software/player_census/flashplayer/version_penetration.html
> -- FP 5 is 97%.  FP7 is 82% - so apps created in Laszlo have a better
> chance of being viewed
>
> * There are no "older is slower" arguments.  The v7 player will play a
> v5 swf faster than the v5 player, because the v7 player itself is faster
> than the v5 player.
>
> * The internals are abstracted away.  Right now your Lazslo code
> publishes to .swf, but it's not tied to the Flash Player in any way -
> there are no MovieClip references, etc in your lazslo code.  In fact,
> you don't even use ActionScript, you write in _javascript_.  There's
> nothing to stop someone from writing a new "player" and with a few
> tweaks to the Laszlo compilation process you could have output for that
> new player.
>
> When you develop an application, do you really care about the internal
> API calls of Flash Player 7?  If I'm a Lazslo developer, I say no.. I
> know what tags I can use in my markup, I know what the APIs are, and I
> use them and get a *working* .swf file.  As long as it works, that's all
> I care about.  If SWF5 is all it takes to make it work, then that's cool.
>
> Is there anything in v7 SWF that would benefit Lazslo apps?  Not
> really.  Some of the new things added in FP 7 over FP 6 is case
> sensitivty, depth management functions (getNextHighestDepth..) , context
> menu, etc,.  The biggest change would probably be embedded video, and
> that may be a show stopper for some.. but it's rare that an
> "application" needs video in it.  FP 6 adds some things over FP5 like
> ShardObjects, so I can see how upgrading to v6 in that respect would be
> benefitical.  FP 6 also added different event handlers than FP5
> (.onPress, vs on (press)) - but that has 0 effect on how I code my
> Lazslo markup.  The FP6 style event handlers are meant to make AS coding
> easier, but Lazslo doesn't care about that because it has it's own
> coding model.
>
> The fact that Lazslo accomplishes what it does on an old version of the
> SWF format is not a drawback, it's a benefit.  There's really no reason
> to use SWF7 if everything you need to do can be accomplished in SWF5.
> The fact that Lazslo separates itself from the Flash Player is another
> benefit as well..  If something should ever happen, maybe legal issues
> or whatever, Lazslo can output to, say, Java applets or whatever, since
> the code is all abstracted from the VM and the compilation process
> handles the dirty work of putting your code into a format the VM can
> understand.
>
> -d
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>


 


Yahoo! Groups Links

Reply via email to