>An example would be Remoting, any here who have used Flash >Remoting in IDE form know its more tedious to implement then >FLEX.
I don't have this problem, but that may be because we internally use our own remoting components. On all other point I agree with u. We chose flex for another importend reason: the component framework. Allthough I personally don't like the V2 components, macromedia uses them in Flex and will continue to develop them. They are with a large team wich is capable of managing such a component library. We could develop components ourself wich would be half the size and more optimized, but the developing takes a lot of time and getting them completely bugfree would not be doable. Greetz erik -----Original Message----- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Barnes Sent: vrijdag 29 april 2005 3:00 To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Newbie: Flash vs. Flex, CPUs, Lazslo On 4/29/05, Jim Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. Could someone explain (or point me to a doc/faq) that tells me why > I would choose Flex over Flash. What can Flex do that Flash can't? > Even if it's more difficult in Flash, perhaps it's worth it given the cost of Flex. I'll take a stab at this one. As a Flash IDE developer for many a year, I've found that its really a bottle neck and a slow process at times. Flash IDE takes a lot of discipline and understanding of the concept of flash itself and you better be armed before taking on a large project. When developing in large projects you tend to be a one man show, as to share resources or code amongst other developers takes a lot of communication and patience. That alone improves why FLEX is a valid purchase. As for what can FLEX do FLASH can't? not much technically as FLEX is really an alternative approach to the end goal. It does bring a lot more to the table then FLASH IDE in terms of Rapid Development. An example would be Remoting, any here who have used Flash Remoting in IDE form know its more tedious to implement then FLEX. Its examples like this that change your perspective on FLASH vs FLEX. On top of that, FLEX handles a lot of your tasks for you, things like initialization modals, busy cursors, history management etc are all automated tasks within FLEX. In terms of costs, i've seen soooooo many projects take months to do what could be done in FLEX in half the time. These are also run by some very competent FLASH developers who have years of experience and know the language/tool off by heart. Its just cumbersome, slow and at times very tedious. That being said, you do a lot more control visually / debugging wise in FLASH IDE then you currently at present have in FLEX. On top of that your portability is much more open then at present with FLEX. Implementing Runtime Shared Libraries in FLASH IDE is awful and painful, just ask JessterXL all about that one, he's mastered it but he went through a learning curve and pain to get to that point. I like wise, i think i've got it mastered but found it took a lot of imagination and research. In FLEX? bah its next to easy as implementing a Tree component. In FLASH MX 2004 Pro, implementing even a Tree component (databinding aside) isn't a simple task and requires some extra work then compared to FLEX. Cost wise, you'll blow more money using FLASH IDE then you will via FLEX for a large application. If you are building a small RIA app that isn't as large and doesn't require a team of developers to work on, then yes FLASH MX 2004 Pro is the suitable resource. > 2. Speaking of cost, I read on MM's site that they recommend a typical > deployment of a Flex app have 6 - 8 CPUs. Is this true in practice? If > I have an app that has 50 users (would grow to perhaps 10K users) who > don't hit the system very hard, what are CPU requirements? Are there > any performance benchmarks that I can use as a guideline for what I > would need initially and at what point I would need to upgrade. As a > small company, we can probably chew off $12K, $70K is another story > (unless I misunderstand the licensing). Not sure on server-side, i've oftend wondered that my self and while i've read various optimization techniques and resources i'm still skeptical of its use in terms of high volume. That being said, we could easily use a DUAL CPU setup here at work for a FLEX application (approx 300-500 end users hitting it daily) and provided there is enough ram thrown at it, it should hold up fine. If need be i'd look into clustering the servers or throwing more RAM at it. I've FLEX Server tends to have ok automated garbage collection and simply apply the same server-side rules as i do with a CFMX server. > 3. Has anyone had any real-world experience/lessons-learned with > Laszlo and any comparisons with Flex? I've gone down the path of using Laszlo as a prototype concept, comparing it to FLEX? In many ways the XML flavour Laszlo brings to the table is more simplistic but at times limiting. FLEX also offers a much sweeter options in terms of packaging applications and say integrating with CENTRAL. On top of that its Flash Remoting capabilities from memory weren't there and keep in mind it's based on FLASH 5 which also means a reduction in flash technology advancements (6 had a significant increase in features alone) I've found Laszlo also to be 3 steps behind FLEX/FLASH IDE itself. It feels like they are simply picking up the bread crumbs and if anything i'd rather look at the XAMLON in terms of FLEX alternatives - mainly as i see that as being the darkhorse in the race for XML UI creation ;) Hope i helped? or just ranted... heh. -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com http://www.flexcoder.com (Coming Soon) Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
