Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
Interesting. I'm curious if that is the reason.
On 10/14/06, hank williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for overlap, how about the Java implementation? Overlap there? Also, did Midnight tell you/the community they wouldn't do a language that Adobe has already done? In other words, did they say they would stifle WebORB for the sake of not competing with Adobe?
They have said on this forum that they do not intend to do a Java version of their AMF3 product. For me, that is the equivalent of end of lifing their java product. They did not say the reason ( i.e. for the sake of not competing with adobe) but their reason isnt really that important. The fact is, according to them, they wont be doing any more java.
RegardsHank
On 10/9/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us.Your opinions are based on speculation. Mine are based on facts. Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc).
Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't.
There is no overlap. WebORB is doing this on purpose to stay out ofAdobe's space. Adobe is not doing a .NET version... Allen ismistaken. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-)
Adobe doesn't have a .NET implementation and is not creating one. Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable).
The main premise for your argument is that Adobe is creating a .NETimplementation. They are not. WebORB is not competing in the samespace as Adobe's FDS. It complements the same space.
On 10/5/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space? Backends FDS WEBORB
Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes
By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2.
Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ups.com [mailto:flexcoders@
yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To:
flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython,
Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same.
I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration.
Anyone open to give a preso on WebORB (with any backend language it supports) I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist)
On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL?
Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.net fds) was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has been making an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF?
Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
If the founder says so, then so it is. I'd be curious to know if they will ditch their .net implementation if Adobe does one (same for Ruby, etc).
Also, your claim as to the .net implementation 2 years ago is hard to place against a new product (FDS) years later.
On 10/14/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They are not doing a Java implementation for the purpose of not competing with Adobe. These are the words from the founder of MidnightCoders. WebORB is intended to augment/compliment Adobe's FDS solution by offering AMF3 remoting for .NET, Ruby and PHP.
It is the MidnightCoders direct intention not to compete with Adobe.
I am sure that Adobe is not doing a .NET remoting solution because I was told 2 and half years ago that they were releasing one (in Oct 04) and it didn't materialized. The code name was Wonder Twin. The twin didn't make it. Our Macromedia sales rep confirmed the time of death when we asked them about it. It's not coming.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland IISent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:03 AMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.comSubject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
Clint, as I said I don't know what is going on in the .NET world with Adobe. I'm also curious how you are so sure of yourself when you say they aren't?
As for overlap, how about the Java implementation? Overlap there? Also, did Midnight tell you/the community they wouldn't do a language that Adobe has already done? In other words, did they say they would stifle WebORB for the sake of not competing with Adobe?
On 10/9/06, Clint Modien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us.Your opinions are based on speculation. Mine are based on facts.
Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc).
Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't.
There is no overlap. WebORB is doing this on purpose to stay out ofAdobe's space. Adobe is not doing a .NET version... Allen ismistaken. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-)
Adobe doesn't have a .NET implementation and is not creating one. Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable).
The main premise for your argument is that Adobe is creating a .NETimplementation. They are not. WebORB is not competing in the samespace as Adobe's FDS. It complements the same space.
On 10/5/06, Clint Modien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space? Backends FDS WEBORB
Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes
Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex.
I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2.
Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto:
flexcoders@ yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython, Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them).
I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same.
I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration.
Anyone open to give a preso on WebORB (with any backend language it supports) I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist)
On 10/4/06, Clint Modien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting.
Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
Clint, as I said I don't know what is going on in the .NET world with Adobe. I'm also curious how you are so sure of yourself when you say they aren't?
As for overlap, how about the Java implementation? Overlap there? Also, did Midnight tell you/the community they wouldn't do a language that Adobe has already done? In other words, did they say they would stifle WebORB for the sake of not competing with Adobe?
On 10/9/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us.Your opinions are based on speculation. Mine are based on facts. Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc).
Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't.
There is no overlap. WebORB is doing this on purpose to stay out ofAdobe's space. Adobe is not doing a .NET version... Allen ismistaken. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-)
Adobe doesn't have a .NET implementation and is not creating one. Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable).
The main premise for your argument is that Adobe is creating a .NETimplementation. They are not. WebORB is not competing in the samespace as Adobe's FDS. It complements the same space.
On 10/5/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space?
Backends FDS WEBORB Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes
By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2.
Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ups.com [mailto:flexcoders@ yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython,
Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same.
I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration.
Anyone open to give a preso on WebORB (with any backend language it supports) I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist)
On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL?
Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.net fds) was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has been making an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF?
Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing it?
How many developers in the world use Java, CF, .NET, PHP, Ruby ?? 75% ? How many people is that in the world? 50 million?
On 10/4/06, Allen Riddle
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I've been looking
RE: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
One of the demo videos on Adobes site said that there are plans create a .NET implementation, now weather they pulled the plug on it is another story. But I disagree with the point that just because there arent overlapping implementations that they are not competing. I was evaluating and was going to use Adobes FDS, because a Java implementation is a viable option. However, since I found a Ruby implementation that will let me do the same things, Adobe lost they lost my business. If I owned a pizza shop that didnt make pizzas with thin crust, and I found another pizza shop that had a thing crust recipe, and there were a lot of people that wanted pizza, but would prefer to have thin crust, you better believe Id acquire that recipe. Just smart business practice. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Clint Modien Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 11:29 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us. Your opinions are based on speculation. Mine are based on facts. Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc). Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't. There is no overlap. WebORB is doing this on purpose to stay out of Adobe's space. Adobe is not doing a .NET version... Allen is mistaken. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-) Adobe doesn't have a .NET implementation and is not creating one. Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable). The main premise for your argument is that Adobe is creating a .NET implementation. They are not. WebORB is not competing in the same space as Adobe's FDS. It complements the same space. On 10/5/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED]com wrote: How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space? Backends FDS WEBORB Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2. Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto:flexcoders@ yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython, Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same. I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration. Anyone open to give a preso on WebORB (with any backend language it supports) I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist) On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED]com wrote: I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL? Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.net fds) was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has been making an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF? Adobe needs to hold up
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
As for overlap, how about the Java implementation? Overlap there? Also, did Midnight tell you/the community they wouldn't do a language that Adobe has already done? In other words, did they say they would stifle WebORB for the sake of not competing with Adobe?
They have said on this forum that they do not intend to do a Java version of their AMF3 product. For me, that is the equivalent of end of lifing their java product. They did not say the reason (
i.e. for the sake of not competing with adobe) but their reason isnt really that important. The fact is, according to them, they wont be doing any more java.RegardsHank
On 10/9/06, Clint Modien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us.Your opinions are based on speculation. Mine are based on facts. Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc).
Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't.
There is no overlap. WebORB is doing this on purpose to stay out ofAdobe's space. Adobe is not doing a .NET version... Allen ismistaken. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-)
Adobe doesn't have a .NET implementation and is not creating one. Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable).
The main premise for your argument is that Adobe is creating a .NETimplementation. They are not. WebORB is not competing in the samespace as Adobe's FDS. It complements the same space.
On 10/5/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space?
Backends FDS WEBORB Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes
By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2.
Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ups.com [mailto:flexcoders@
yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython,
Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same.
I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration.
Anyone open to give a preso on WebORB (with any backend language it supports) I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist)
On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL?
Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.net fds) was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has been making an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF?
Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us. Your opinions are based on speculation. Mine are based on facts. Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc). Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't. There is no overlap. WebORB is doing this on purpose to stay out of Adobe's space. Adobe is not doing a .NET version... Allen is mistaken. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-) Adobe doesn't have a .NET implementation and is not creating one. Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable). The main premise for your argument is that Adobe is creating a .NET implementation. They are not. WebORB is not competing in the same space as Adobe's FDS. It complements the same space. On 10/5/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space? Backends FDS WEBORB Java Yes No CFYes No .NET NoYes Ruby NoYes PHP NoYes By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2. Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto:flexcoders@ yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython, Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same. I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration. Anyone open to give a preso on WebORB (with any backend language it supports) I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist) On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL? Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.net fds) was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has been making an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF? Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing it? How many developers in the world use Java, CF, .NET, PHP, Ruby ?? 75% ? How many people is that in the world? 50 million? On 10/4/06, Allen Riddle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been looking at The Midnight
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
Ahh man, you're off here but it is nothing but an opinion from both of us. Competition helps the technology thrive. A lot of people in the community stated the Adobe merger took the competition out of the market due to overlapping technology (Fireworks-Photoshop, DW-Go Live, etc). Now, unless WebORB is said to NEVER overlap with the technologies Adobe is implementing then I will understand. If not, there is overlap. Oh yeah, you might want to change .NET to YES and YES according to Allen. I don't know if Adobe is working on one or not but I don't see why they wouldn't. So, a question for you: if you build a product and someone else builds the same product, is that competition? I say yes. Is Fluourine a competitor to Adobe's $900 (or whatever it is) .NET implementation? Uhyeah. :-) Disclaimer: I'm not here to argue. From a business point of view, I just don't agree with you Clint and, seemingly, Adobe doesn't either (based on your comment about Adobe being uncomfortable). On 10/5/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space? Backends FDS WEBORB Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2. Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is "uncomfortable" with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. It's supressing the technology. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto:flexcoders@ yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John C. Bland IISent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.comSubject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython, Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same. I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration. Anyone open to give a preso onWebORB (with any backend language it supports)I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist) On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL? Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.netfds)was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has beenmaking an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF? Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing it? How many developers in the world use Java, CF, .NET, PHP, Ruby ?? 75% ? How many people is that in the world? 50 million? On 10/4/06, Allen Riddle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been looking at The Midnight Coder's WebOrb for Rails and I'm very impressed. Has Adobe given any thought to hiring these developers so they could get these implementations ported into Adobe's Flex Data Services? I know Adobe's working on a .NET implementation, but getting a Ruby implementation would be fantastic. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Spitzer Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Thanks Seth. I should have read the docs. :)... Preserves the class (type) of an object when the object is encoded in Action Message Format (AMF). I didn't know it was AMF specific.It /would/ be great to see some more support for this kind of thing. In the past we've done things like...response.__proto__ = User.prototype;Function(User).call(response); var user: User = User(response);Where response is the parsed anonymous object from the web servic
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython, Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same. I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration. Anyone open to give a preso onWebORB (with any backend language it supports)I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist) On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL? Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.netfds)was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has beenmaking an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF? Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing it? How many developers in the world use Java, CF, .NET, PHP, Ruby ?? 75% ? How many people is that in the world? 50 million? On 10/4/06, Allen Riddle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been looking at The Midnight Coder's WebOrb for Rails and I'm very impressed. Has Adobe given any thought to hiring these developers so they could get these implementations ported into Adobe's Flex Data Services? I know Adobe's working on a .NET implementation, but getting a Ruby implementation would be fantastic. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Spitzer Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:27 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.comSubject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Thanks Seth. I should have read the docs. :)... Preserves the class (type) of an object when the object is encoded in Action Message Format (AMF). I didn't know it was AMF specific.It /would/ be great to see some more support for this kind of thing. In the past we've done things like...response.__proto__ = User.prototype;Function(User).call(response); var user: User = User(response);Where response is the parsed anonymous object from the web service and User is the type. Now, I'm having to manually iterate the anonymous object and populate an instance of the type. best,PaulSeth Hodgson wrote: Hi Paul, registerClassAlias(...) is used by the Flash Player to drive AMF serialization/deserialization. In the web service scenario, you're not getting back AMF formatted data so this built-in function doesn't help out. For now, you'll need to write your own helper classes that take the e4x formatted result from your web service invocation and use it to create a typed instance(s) of your choosing. Streamlining this process is on our roadmap. Best, Seth From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Spitzer Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 10:13 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Or, a little less specific... is there a way to get the Web Service classes to return typed objects? Paul Spitzer wrote: Anyone know if there a way to use registerClassAlias with Web Services to get typed objects back? -- John C. Bland IIChief Geek Katapult Media, Inc. - www.katapultmedia.com---Biz Blog - http://blogs.katapultmedia.com/jb2Personal Blog - http://blog.blandfamilyonline.comhttp://www.lifthimhigh.com - Christian Products for Those Bold Enough to Wear ThemHome of FMUG.az - http://www.gotoandstop.orgHome of AZCFUG - http://www.azcfug.org __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Software development tool
RE: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
How is WebORB a competitor to FDS in the AMF3 space? Backends FDS WEBORB Java Yes No CF Yes No .NET No Yes Ruby No Yes PHP No Yes By promoting WebORB it would be good for the community it would be good for Flex. I would rather have flex support 5 remoting solutions instead of 2. Thinking of WebORB as competition has created the scenerio where Adobe is uncomfortable with promoting WebORB. Stop thinking this way. Its supressing the technology. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John C. Bland II Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:15 PM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails You make interesting points and I agree Adobe should think/act bigger in terms of other languages. Microsoft is even going it with .NET (IronPython, Ruby.NET; community driven but MSFT is supporting them/talking about them). I don't agree with every point though. WebORB is a competitor to FDS. Forget the implementation. The outcome is the same, right? That's all that matters. At least this is my opinion. If WebORB works just as good as FDS, I'd stick with ORB simply because I can change my backend and my front-end stay the same. I have yet to get it working (only tried once while I was in another preso so that doesn't count; lol) but I am highly interested in the Rails integration. Anyone open to give a preso onWebORB (with any backend language it supports)I can supply the Breeze room. :-) (hit me offlist) On 10/4/06, Clint Modien [EMAIL PROTECTED]com wrote: I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL? Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.netfds)was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has beenmaking an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF? Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing it? How many developers in the world use Java, CF, .NET, PHP, Ruby ?? 75% ? How many people is that in the world? 50 million? On 10/4/06, Allen Riddle [EMAIL PROTECTED]pital.com wrote: I've been looking at The Midnight Coder's WebOrb for Rails and I'm very impressed. Has Adobe given any thought to hiring these developers so they could get these implementations ported into Adobe's Flex Data Services? I know Adobe's working on a .NET implementation, but getting a Ruby implementation would be fantastic. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Spitzer Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Thanks Seth. I should have read the docs. :)... Preserves the class (type) of an object when the object is encoded in Action Message Format (AMF). I didn't know it was AMF specific. It /would/ be great to see some more support for this kind of thing. In the past we've done things like... response.__proto__ = User.prototype; Function(User).call(response); var user: User = User(response); Where response is the parsed anonymous object from the web service and User is the type. Now, I'm having to manually iterate the anonymous object and populate an instance of the type. best, Paul Seth Hodgson wrote: Hi Paul, registerClassAlias(...) is used by the Flash Player to drive AMF serialization/deserialization. In the web service scenario, you're not getting back AMF formatted data so this built-in function doesn't help out. For now, you'll need to write your own helper classes that take the e4x formatted result from your web service invocation and use it to create a typed instance(s) of your choosing. Streamlining this process is on our roadmap. Best, Seth From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Spitzer Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 10:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Or, a little less
Re: [flexcoders] WebOrb for Rails
I love how much buzz WebOrb is getting. Adobe is trying to keep the price of their java/flash remoting server high. Which is understandable. They need to make money on the product or we'll all be out of jobs. (Well I would be anyway.) But if Adobe were to aquire WebOrb how much do you think the .NET version would be? Would the ROR and PHP versions be GPL? Anyway licensing costs aside... Adobe is not making a .net version... as far as i know wondertwin (.netfds)was still born in 04'. I do however feel that Adobe is and has beenmaking an enourmous mistake by only supporting Java/CF. How do they expect to reach a million developers by only supporting Java/CF? Adobe needs to hold up WebOrb to the public and say... Look Flex/Flash/Apollo can support remote objects for multiple backends!!! WebOrb isn't even producing a Java remoting implementation to stay out of Adobe's space and allow them to capitalize on the Java market of the large corporations. WEBORB IS NOT A COMPETITOR TO FDS BECAUSE WEBORB DOES NOT SUPPORT JAVA. IT COMPLEMENTS IT. Why isn't WebOrb all over the dev center? Why isn't Adobe pushing it? How many developers in the world use Java, CF, .NET, PHP, Ruby ?? 75% ? How many people is that in the world? 50 million? On 10/4/06, Allen Riddle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been looking at The Midnight Coder's WebOrb for Rails and I'm very impressed. Has Adobe given any thought to hiring these developers so they could get these implementations ported into Adobe's Flex Data Services? I know Adobe's working on a .NET implementation, but getting a Ruby implementation would be fantastic. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com] On Behalf Of Paul SpitzerSent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:27 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]ups.comSubject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Thanks Seth. I should have read the docs. :)... Preserves the class (type) of an object when the object is encoded in Action Message Format (AMF). I didn't know it was AMF specific.It /would/ be great to see some more support for this kind of thing. In the past we've done things like...response.__proto__ = User.prototype;Function(User).call(response); var user: User = User(response);Where response is the parsed anonymous object from the web service and User is the type. Now, I'm having to manually iterate the anonymous object and populate an instance of the type. best,PaulSeth Hodgson wrote: Hi Paul, registerClassAlias(...) is used by the Flash Player to drive AMF serialization/deserialization. In the web service scenario, you're not getting back AMF formatted data so this built-in function doesn't help out. For now, you'll need to write your own helper classes that take the e4x formatted result from your web service invocation and use it to create a typed instance(s) of your choosing. Streamlining this process is on our roadmap. Best, Seth From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Spitzer Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 10:13 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [flexcoders] SOAP Web Services and registerClassAlias Or, a little less specific... is there a way to get the Web Service classes to return typed objects? Paul Spitzer wrote: Anyone know if there a way to use registerClassAlias with Web Services to get typed objects back? __._,_.___ -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com SPONSORED LINKS Software development tool Software development Software development services Home design software Software development company Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___
