Hi Jeff, I have Coldfusion which includes the Flash Remoting Gateway. I would prefer it if the changes in Flex 2 did not force me to install new software on the server side and didn't break the authentication system I'm using by removing NetConnection.addHeader from the client - a useful, public, and documented method. I use addHeader in both Flash code and in Flash Communication Server code. Anyway, I think it would make my life simpler and a transition to standalone Flex 2 much easier for me to be able to write clients against my current server-side system. I have production code that people rely on and I really like having transition options that allow me to make a series of well-tested changes instead of one big one. At any rate I don't think Macromedia offered a Perl, PHP, Python etc.. Remoting Gateway. Did they? I have a great deal of sympathy for people who want to use a less network heavy protocol without being forced to change server technologies and/or buy servlet gateways at $999/CPU. I don't expect Adobe to do everything or that they will make every change completely painless. However, I do believe APIs should be gracefully retired whenever possible instead of just evaporating. I would like to see NetConnection.addHeader implemented and hope that converting to Flex 2 standalone with Coldfusion is not as difficult as it looks to me right now. Finally, anyone using remoting will recall going through a lot of API changes with two releases of Flash. Those changes were less than optimal for maintaining production software. During all these changes I was able to fall back on the NetConnection.call method and RecordSet classes. I'm not sure I can even do that now. Of course this is an alpha and I still have a lot to learn about Flex 2 and the various server-side options available to me. But I am concerned about what using Flex 2 will do to my existing applications and how much work will be involved in a conversion if I decide to go that way. Anything that clarrifies this at a technical - rather than a political level - would be hugely appreciated! Yours truly, -Brian
Jeff Tapper wrote: >I dont recall MM championing AMFPHP, OpenAMF or any of the other 3rd party >hacks to work with their proprietary AMF protocol. Perhaps I'm wrong, if >so, I'd love to see the references.... > >Anyhow, Those open source alternatives were specifically built for AMF1, >Flex 2 RemoteObject uses AMF2. If you want AMF1, take a look at Renaun's >solution. > >I wouldnt be surprised if the opensource community eventually caught up and >released versions for AMF2, but its really hard to blame Macromedia for >someone elses gateways not supporting their latest versions... > >I dont blame MTASC for not compiling for the Flash 8.5 player. They will >probably get their eventually, but still do a wonderful job for FP7 and FP8 > > >At 02:18 PM 12/15/2005, hank williams wrote: > > >>Dave, >> >>When you said POJO, I interpreted that as Plain Old Java Object. >>Correct me if I missunderstood, but thats where I got the Java >>reference from. >> >>With more clarity, I understand your argument about it being possible >>to expose php code using web services. >> >>But I really think that regardless of which is better (I have my way >>you have yours) that there is no good reason under the sun to be >>*forced* out of using a technology that macromedia championed and >>still does today with just a minor shift so the old stuff will be >>incompatible. >> >>Sorry if I am a little irritable on this subject, but I just think >>that what macromedia has done here, regardless of the web >>services/remoting benefits borders generates alot of mistrust in the >>developer community. I know it does with me anyway. >> >>Regards >>Hank. >> >>On 12/15/05, Dave Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>>A few thoughts. >>> >>>1) I didnt imply Java anywhere in my question/suggestion/answer? >>>Pretty much every servant technology today supports exposing language >>>artifacts as web services without any code refactoring. This is true >>>of Java, PHP, .NET, heck even PowerBuilder. Its actually a really >>>important point I think folks don't know. Take Java (as just a single >>>example). If you hava Java class exposed as a RemoteObject (only Java >>>and CFC supported as remtoe object via Flex1.5 now) did you know that >>>you can expose that *exact same* java class as a web service with >>>*zero* code changes to the class? Yup. It takes something like 2 >>>minutes of total work to do. You can try it youself with something >>>like the restaurant example. We had a new guy do that just this week. >>> He redid the restaurant example to be all web services in basically >>>no time flat. >>> >>>Thats why I asked the question. Step back and consider the fact you >>>could expose your PHP, or whatever, as a web service, totally drop any >>>dependancy on needing a server proxy at all, regardless of what >>>vendors proxy. >>> >>>2) I agree the thread on web service vs remote object has been >>>discussed over and over. But there are new folks joining these ranks >>>every day, and the question is still very much open. Like in all >>>debates everyone will pick a side. I think its pretty clear we prefer >>>web services over remote object, and have that decision based on many >>>points which we have often discussed. More so our decision is >>>validated by quite major production deployments of Flex solutions. >>>Our opinion is, given the choice, we tend to prefer a web service. Its >>>just that. An opinion. >>> >>>In either case, I just wanted to present the option to the questioner. >>> WebServices might actually be a great way to solve his issue, without >>>the risk of bringing in an unsupported third party product, and >>>without any license cost at all. I didnt feel a suggestion like that >>>was off topic. Apologies if it was seen that way. >>> >>>- >>>Dave Wolf >>>Cynergy Systems, Inc. >>>Macromedia Flex Alliance Partner >>><http://www.cynergysystems.com>http://www.cynergysystems.com >>> >>>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Office: 866-CYNERGY >>> >>> >>>--- In [email protected], hank williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Hmm... >>>> >>>>Thats an interesting response. >>>> >>>>So all of us who have developed solutions with remoting really didnt >>>>need it anyway. >>>> >>>>Aside from the fact that he was asking about amphp which has nothing >>>>to do with java, remoting does offer benefits over web services (aside >>>>from avoiding the reconfiguring ones server side implementation) which >>>>have been debated and discussed ad infinitum and I will not restate >>>>here. >>>> >>>>Regards >>>>Hank >>>> >>>>On 12/15/05, Dave Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>I don't understand why you can't simply use <mx:WebService/> to >>>>>replace <mx:RemoteObject> in most cases. Using AXIS you can use the >>>>>exact same POJO you might have used in a <mx:RemoteObject/> and do so >>>>>without the need for any gateway. >>>>> >>>>>- >>>>>Dave Wolf >>>>>Cynergy Systems, Inc. >>>>>Macromedia Flex Alliance Partner >>>>><http://www.cynergysystems.com>http://www.cynergysystems.com >>>>> >>>>>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>Office: 866-CYNERGY >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>--- In [email protected], hank williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>As far as I know there is not yet. >>>>>> >>>>>>There was some discussion about this on the flashcoders list when >>>>>>flex2 came out. I made a pretty big deal about the fact that the >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>docs >>> >>> >>>>>>seem to indicate that standard remoting will not be something >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>that is >>> >>> >>>>>>supported. >>>>>> >>>>>>Mike Chambers (a MM employee) indicated that it was supported. But >>>>>>what he meant was that it was supported at a super low level and you >>>>>>would essentially have to write all the low level remoting code for >>>>>>this. >>>>>> >>>>>>It seemed pretty clear to me that their intent was to, ahem, >>>>>>**encourage** remoting users to buy cold fusion or Flex Data >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>Services, >>> >>> >>>>>>in order to do painless remoting, and that they were essentially >>>>>>orphaning anyone who was not doing remoting with one of their pricey >>>>>>gateways. >>>>>> >>>>>>Now, perhaps this post will bring adobe employees out of the >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>woodwork >>> >>> >>>>>>crying foul and saying I am wrong. But the fact that there is any >>>>>>ambiguity about this isssue, is, in and of itself, a real problem. >>>>>> >>>>>>The fact that that there is not some strong statement of continued >>>>>>**full** support for traditional remoting is, to me, shameful. >>>>>> >>>>>>Regards >>>>>>Hank >>>>>> >>>>>>On 12/15/05, Flapflap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Hi there, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Because RemoteObject isn't available on Alpha is there a way to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>use flex >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>2 with amf php ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>By the way : Hello World ! >>>>>>> I'm new to this list. >>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>Flapflap >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>Flexcoders Mailing List >>>>>>>FAQ: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt >> >> >>>>>>>Search Archives: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >><http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com >> >> >>>>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>Flexcoders Mailing List >>>>>FAQ: >>>>> >>>>> >><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt >> >> >>>>>Search Archives: >>>>> >>>>> >><http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com >> >> >>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>>Flexcoders Mailing List >>>FAQ: >>> >>> >><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt >> >> >>>Search Archives: >>> >>> >><http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com >> >> >>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>-- >>Flexcoders Mailing List >>FAQ: >><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt >>Search Archives: >><http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com >> >> >> >> >> >>---------- >>YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS >> >> * Visit your group >>"<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders>flexcoders" on the web. >> * >> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >> * >><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> * >> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the >><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service. >> >> >>---------- >> >> > > > > > > > -- ______________________________________________________________________ Brian Lesser Assistant Director, Teaching and Technology Support Computing and Communications Services Ryerson University 350 Victoria St. Toronto, Ontario Phone: (416) 979-5000 ext. 6835 M5B 2K3 Fax: (416) 979-5220 Office: AB48D E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Enter through LB66) Web: http://www.ryerson.ca/~blesser ______________________________________________________________________ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Most low income homes are not online. Make a difference this holiday season! http://us.click.yahoo.com/5UeCyC/BWHMAA/TtwFAA/nhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com 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/
