The problem with .NET and Flex is Adobe's stance that FDS is needed to build "enterprise-class" applications and that Remoting only works with FDS, both of which are flat out wrong.
If Adobe isn't willing to make a .NET version of FDS then they should embrace the many options available to non-Java developers to use Remoting--Fluorine, WebORB, AMFPHP, etc. Even if they do make FDS available for other platforms, it would be wrong for them to use their position as the creator of Flash/Flex to attempt to squash alternatives to FDS through incorrect and misleading documentation. Also at least in .NET the Fluorine gateway supports calling existing web services via AMF remoting so you get to use your existing code but the transport is actually AMF and not SOAP. Sam ------------------------------------------- We're Hiring! Seeking a passionate developer to join our team building Flex based products. Position is in the Washington D.C. metro area. If interested contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Weyert de Boer Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 11:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Will Microsoft's new Silverlight Player Kill our beloved Flex ? Yes, but web services aren't really meant for exchanging large sets of data anyways. Well, that's what I learned school about it ;) Indeed binary formats such as FDS/Remoting are fasters, but not something to use when you got legacy things or existing web services. At Yahoo we also XML over HTTP for exchanging the latest music/artist news. Yours, Weyert de Boer
