Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
--- Steven Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > BUT one thing puzzles me. You would think Adobe > would not make such a big > deal about the quality of their streaming server for > two reasons. One is as > I have mentioned they don't have multicast or even > multicast managment API. > This immediately removes them from the serious, > enterprise tier and firmly > on the small corporate tier. I got the feeling that this was some kind of marketing quirk at Adobe. I think that wide support for several streaming formats is solid technologically, but Adobe wants to promote their FMS product. As far as Multicasting goes, this is really an issue that needs to be addressed in much wider venues. I don't see why Adobe would even bother to support Multicast when few ISPs carry multicast packets. So such a technology could only be utilized in a local area deployment scenario( corporate training materials and video conferencing perhaps ). The reasons for the lack of multicast support are partly political and I wont expound on them here unless explicitly requested. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Multicast > > But more importantly is that FMS does not support > Quality of Service (QoS) > because Adobe uses its own proprietary (again) > streaming protocol, RTMP. > I'm pretty sure (99.9%) that Cisco, Brocade, et al > only provide QoS for > standards based streaming protocols, RTP/RTSP. So > it is more than slightly > oxymoronic that Adobe claims a higher level of > quality when they don't even > support QoS. > > have a great day! ... get some work done;) Steven, I appreciate your input here. Thanks. -jmz __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
On 9/22/06 12:06, "josh zeidner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steven, I think I misphrased that. This may be better: > > They claim that using "HTTP streaming" effects the quality of the video in > some way. > Hmmm. If you can find the exact reference I would like to take a look at exactly what they are claiming. In anycase the "quality" of video is a function of how it was originated (shot and produced) and then how it was encoded. Streaming does not introduce anything into either of these processes. Streaming can mean that frames are dropped which results in choppy audio and video (even out-of-sync audio and video when the player drops video frames while attempting to maintain playback rates) which is certainly unpleasant and not a "quality" experience. Adobe (and others) provide means to overcome these bandwidth problems, two of the most common are client caching and bandwidth negotiation. Client-caching means that the stream is delivered faster than realtime so that the client always has a buffer of material to playback (ususally 10s). This smoothes out the highs and lows of streaming bandwidth. Actually most of the time playback is only possible when the client has the mandated buffer. Bandwidth negotiation in its simplest form is like ping. Most streaming platforms which offer bandwidth negotiation provide a handshake which measures the ping time between client and server. Depending on this value the client could get a >128Kbps stream or a <32Kbps stream. Servers like Adobe can provide several different predetermined bandwidth streams from a single source. FMS can not only set the stream size initially but can dynamically change this during the streaming episode. BUT one thing puzzles me. You would think Adobe would not make such a big deal about the quality of their streaming server for two reasons. One is as I have mentioned they don't have multicast or even multicast managment API. This immediately removes them from the serious, enterprise tier and firmly on the small corporate tier. But more importantly is that FMS does not support Quality of Service (QoS) because Adobe uses its own proprietary (again) streaming protocol, RTMP. I'm pretty sure (99.9%) that Cisco, Brocade, et al only provide QoS for standards based streaming protocols, RTP/RTSP. So it is more than slightly oxymoronic that Adobe claims a higher level of quality when they don't even support QoS. have a great day! ... get some work done;) Steven - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
--- Steven Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/21/06 19:57, "josh zeidner" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > They claim that using HTTP streaming effects the > > quality of the video in some way. Have you > > experienced this? I know that Adobe would have > some > > serious problems by introducing incompatibilities > at > > that level. > > I'm not what you mean with "streaming effects". Steven, I think I misphrased that. This may be better: They claim that using "HTTP streaming" effects the quality of the video in some way. -jmz __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Sorry Timo, I fear my expansion of the topic from your focused "Flex license" to a more general Rich Clients has propogated and I apologize again for the offense. On the other hand this is part of what I wanted to find out, so thanks Steven. Michael Oliver CTO Alarius Systems LLC 6800 E. Lake Mead Blvd, #1096 Las Vegas, NV 89156 Phone:(702)866-9034 Cell:(518)378-6154 Fax:(702)974-0341 -Original Message- From: Steven Elliott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 7:24 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0? IMHO comparing the merits of Flex and Laszlo are relevant. They work in the same space to solve the same problem with the same technology. On the otherhand, while AJAX(J)(F) solutions work in the same space they require a different mix of technology including a significantly different view technology; Flash requires the proprietary Flash player (VM) while AJAX uses the browser's own script engine. So the comparison between Flex/Laszlo and AJAX is not quite apples to apples; more a discussion about fruit in general. One consideration at this level of generalization is if you already have a web application which platform is easier to integrate, Flex/Laszlo or AJAX. In my experience it has always been easier to integrate AJAX and AJAX is far less intrusive and creates less dependencies than Flex/Laszlo. If you are starting at ground zero then the discussion may be different but in my experience it would still depend on exactly what you were doing. The curve for AJAX can be low and will depend on your expectations or what you are willing to trade off. The curve will be higher as your expectations/specifications become more sophisticated not only because your Javascript skills will need to improve but also because you will need to master DOM and CSS to fully realize your interface. Use of Open Source Libraries like Dojo or Scriptaculous can help provide GUI widgets ranging from functional to just fun (BTW OpenLaszlo now ships with Dojo and can output components directly to DHTML). The skillset for Flex/Laszlo is not unlike that for mastering Swing/SWT. To make the most of it especially from an integration standpoint you need to know Java and be able to learn the components provided for by the Flex/Laszlo platform. Curiously though, to get the most from the client side you are going to need ActionScript which is ECMA-262 aka Javascript. In otherwords to some extent you are going to learn Javascript to get the most from either technology. So what does the matrix look like? In terms of reusable components Flex/Laszlo are ahead of AJAX although libraries like Dojo and Scriptaculous not to mention the whole OO revolution in Javascript (GWT and Yahoo) is quickly closing this gap. One thing to consider it that Flex is not open source so if you find a bug or need customization your options are limited. This is why I prefer Laszlo. For those that need multimedia Flash is a great client for streaming media and vector animation. BUT Flex/Laszlo does not include a streaming media server and the Flash Media Server is an expensive addition. You don't need FMS for streaming media to the client but Adobe/Macromedia likes you to think you do. What's more the .flv files (Flash audio/video) are a proprietary format. IMO you can get the same functionality with better quality using the Apple QuickTime Streaming Server or its open source equivalent Darwin Streaming Server (I also think you will see more about QT server strategy from Apple when it comes out with its home media center in January). I will say that if you have tried programming with JMF, Flex/Laszlo appear to be a no brainer. In almost all cases there is an alternative in AJAX for each one of the technologies provided by Flex/Flash, except one; server-to-client communication. Server-to-client communication is the ability for the server to initiate communication to the client. In reality it works by having an open port between the Flash client and Flex server which can be used by either party to send and receive asynchronously. A web browser on the other hand uses HTTP which is a request-receive protocol and once the information has been received the line of communication is closed. Why is asynchronous server-to-client protocol so important. Because it is the basis for collaborative environments where the server can provide a shared environment to multiple remote clients (i.e. Chat, live online learning environments, product demonstrations, JUG meetings...;) where all clients can participate equally. At this time AJAX uses HTTP 1.0 persistent connections and/or polling schemes informally known as Comet but nothing as robust as the RTMP/AMF protocol found in Flash. Providing collaborative environments from Flex is possible but to get all the bells and whistles at the level of comfort you are accustomed to if you a
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
On 9/21/06 19:57, "josh zeidner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > They claim that using HTTP streaming effects the > quality of the video in some way. Have you > experienced this? I know that Adobe would have some > serious problems by introducing incompatibilities at > that level. I'm not what you mean with "streaming effects". Flash Media Server (FMS) is a robust platform and supports real streaming (i.e. on-the-fly client bandwidth negotiation, pre-caching, no saving..etc) as opposed to basic progressive download. So there are advantages to using FMS over basic HTTP GET. But even FMS falls apart at some point (>1000 connections) simply for network reasons so it is not going to solve enterprise needs. Adobe doesn't have a product for multicast or multicast management. But if you needs are modest (and your pocket book is deep) then Adobe make it brain dead simple to create content for FMS and FMS can do the multi-bit conversions. They have an encoder and a well defined workflow so creating content and publishing it is simple. On the other hand their current encoder, ON2 VP6, is not as stellar as H.264 (QT) or Windows Media 9/10. One of the things included in Flash/FMS that you won't find off-the-shelf with other platforms is again the ability of the client to (realtime) upload audio and video to the server which can be recorded and/or shared with other clients; collaborative (i.e. chat, webcasts, jug meetings). This is probably the most compelling reason for FMS. Anyone who has tried this with JMF or OTJ knows the pain. > Is there any way to exploit the capabilities of > RTMP/AMF without an Adobe server-side product? Are > there any easy ways use this protocol with server-side > java? At the moment there exists a well supported open source OpenAMF Java port. This allows you to support AMF (1-3) to/from the Flash client. This basically substitutes Flash Communication Server. It has also given rise to AJAF, another AJAX derivative which uses AMF as the transport protocol. This in conjunction with a port server solves the problem of AJAX Comet allowing for true server<->client communication: OpenAMF <-> Flash client <-> Javascript Downside here is the time-to-talk between Flash client and the browser's Javascript which is so great (>1000ms) that many people prefer Comet polling. Red5 is now at 0.6 and already offers a subset of FMS capabilty. > I doubt that Flex will offer too many choices at the > client level for anything but Flash. To me that is > the clear advantage of Laszlo, as it is a technology > clearly independent of Flash or Adobe. I feel though, > that Flash is really going to dominate technology at > this level and all the different AJAX flavors will > play second fiddle to Flash apps. Some announcements > suggest that Google shares this view. Microsoft is > going to get squeezed because they have no opportunity > to replace Flash at the browser level, and may make > the mistake of trying to enter this market due to > their poor internal organization. My primary concern > is that Laszlo will be blown out of the water by > Adobe. Laszlo clearly runs the risk of having its > life support cut off, as it relies heavily on the > publication efforts of Adobe Inc. I would sooner use > Laszlo if I had some insurance that it would survive > in the long term. I would never stand on a Laszlo leg alone even if it does seem to be gaining traction. Remember that the number of Flex developers is still far less than the number of Flash developers. Everything you can do in Flex you can do in Flash at least I am not aware of any Flex functionality that is not provided for in Flash. Flash on the other hand has much more support for things like component development. Only when you get to Breeze level of service does Flex become a requirement (I think). Flex basically provides a convenient means for the professional programmer to access a robust view technology. Because it is server side it also means Flex can leverage server side resources (i.e. JDBC, JNDI, and container resources). Also remember that Flash doesn't mean an all or nothing proposition. You don't need to completely substitute your HTML page with Flash. 99% of the time Flash components are embedded alongside other HTML elements so you can have a slick Flash graph which animates over time next to the HTML text minutes of your last sales meeting(what Flex was about all along). As to the future of AJAX vs Flash I disagree. I think there is a great deal of ground swell behind AJAX and as more AJAX developers (like Google) provide interactive applications and public APIs to access them more people will create sites that use them. You can't say the same about AMF. Adobe will be smart if they continue to support these APIs. What I do find at issue is the stranglehold Adobe has begun to put on the SWF format. SWF is the Flash file format and until v.7 was as advertised very open source (i.e. you had free access t
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Steven, some valid points here... --- Steven Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So what does the matrix look like? > In terms of reusable components Flex/Laszlo are > ahead of AJAX although > libraries like Dojo and Scriptaculous not to mention > the whole OO revolution > in Javascript (GWT and Yahoo) is quickly closing > this gap. One thing to > consider it that Flex is not open source so if you > find a bug or need > customization your options are limited. This is why > I prefer Laszlo. > > For those that need multimedia Flash is a great > client for streaming media > and vector animation. BUT Flex/Laszlo does not > include a streaming media > server and the Flash Media Server is an expensive > addition. > You don't need > FMS for streaming media to the client but > Adobe/Macromedia likes you to > think you do. They claim that using HTTP streaming effects the quality of the video in some way. Have you experienced this? I know that Adobe would have some serious problems by introducing incompatibilities at that level. > > At this time AJAX uses HTTP 1.0 persistent > connections and/or polling > schemes informally known as Comet but nothing as > robust as the RTMP/AMF > protocol found in Flash. Is there any way to exploit the capabilities of RTMP/AMF without an Adobe server-side product? Are there any easy ways use this protocol with server-side java? > > I do not deny that Flex is powerful platform and if > you are going to build > collaborative environments it is even more > compelling. > > One final note is both AJAX and Flex ability to do > mashups or access remote > APIs via XML-RPC and REST. If you were going to > build a webapp which needed > a Google map or YouTube video you should be able to > do it in both (although > I haven't tried a Google map in Flash). This is the > next frontier. I doubt that Flex will offer too many choices at the client level for anything but Flash. To me that is the clear advantage of Laszlo, as it is a technology clearly independent of Flash or Adobe. I feel though, that Flash is really going to dominate technology at this level and all the different AJAX flavors will play second fiddle to Flash apps. Some announcements suggest that Google shares this view. Microsoft is going to get squeezed because they have no opportunity to replace Flash at the browser level, and may make the mistake of trying to enter this market due to their poor internal organization. My primary concern is that Laszlo will be blown out of the water by Adobe. Laszlo clearly runs the risk of having its life support cut off, as it relies heavily on the publication efforts of Adobe Inc. I would sooner use Laszlo if I had some insurance that it would survive in the long term. thx, jmz __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
IMHO comparing the merits of Flex and Laszlo are relevant. They work in the same space to solve the same problem with the same technology. On the otherhand, while AJAX(J)(F) solutions work in the same space they require a different mix of technology including a significantly different view technology; Flash requires the proprietary Flash player (VM) while AJAX uses the browser's own script engine. So the comparison between Flex/Laszlo and AJAX is not quite apples to apples; more a discussion about fruit in general. One consideration at this level of generalization is if you already have a web application which platform is easier to integrate, Flex/Laszlo or AJAX. In my experience it has always been easier to integrate AJAX and AJAX is far less intrusive and creates less dependencies than Flex/Laszlo. If you are starting at ground zero then the discussion may be different but in my experience it would still depend on exactly what you were doing. The curve for AJAX can be low and will depend on your expectations or what you are willing to trade off. The curve will be higher as your expectations/specifications become more sophisticated not only because your Javascript skills will need to improve but also because you will need to master DOM and CSS to fully realize your interface. Use of Open Source Libraries like Dojo or Scriptaculous can help provide GUI widgets ranging from functional to just fun (BTW OpenLaszlo now ships with Dojo and can output components directly to DHTML). The skillset for Flex/Laszlo is not unlike that for mastering Swing/SWT. To make the most of it especially from an integration standpoint you need to know Java and be able to learn the components provided for by the Flex/Laszlo platform. Curiously though, to get the most from the client side you are going to need ActionScript which is ECMA-262 aka Javascript. In otherwords to some extent you are going to learn Javascript to get the most from either technology. So what does the matrix look like? In terms of reusable components Flex/Laszlo are ahead of AJAX although libraries like Dojo and Scriptaculous not to mention the whole OO revolution in Javascript (GWT and Yahoo) is quickly closing this gap. One thing to consider it that Flex is not open source so if you find a bug or need customization your options are limited. This is why I prefer Laszlo. For those that need multimedia Flash is a great client for streaming media and vector animation. BUT Flex/Laszlo does not include a streaming media server and the Flash Media Server is an expensive addition. You don't need FMS for streaming media to the client but Adobe/Macromedia likes you to think you do. What's more the .flv files (Flash audio/video) are a proprietary format. IMO you can get the same functionality with better quality using the Apple QuickTime Streaming Server or its open source equivalent Darwin Streaming Server (I also think you will see more about QT server strategy from Apple when it comes out with its home media center in January). I will say that if you have tried programming with JMF, Flex/Laszlo appear to be a no brainer. In almost all cases there is an alternative in AJAX for each one of the technologies provided by Flex/Flash, except one; server-to-client communication. Server-to-client communication is the ability for the server to initiate communication to the client. In reality it works by having an open port between the Flash client and Flex server which can be used by either party to send and receive asynchronously. A web browser on the other hand uses HTTP which is a request-receive protocol and once the information has been received the line of communication is closed. Why is asynchronous server-to-client protocol so important. Because it is the basis for collaborative environments where the server can provide a shared environment to multiple remote clients (i.e. Chat, live online learning environments, product demonstrations, JUG meetings...;) where all clients can participate equally. At this time AJAX uses HTTP 1.0 persistent connections and/or polling schemes informally known as Comet but nothing as robust as the RTMP/AMF protocol found in Flash. Providing collaborative environments from Flex is possible but to get all the bells and whistles at the level of comfort you are accustomed to if you are a Flex client you will purchase a Breeze license (mucho $$). I do not deny that Flex is powerful platform and if you are going to build collaborative environments it is even more compelling. One final note is both AJAX and Flex ability to do mashups or access remote APIs via XML-RPC and REST. If you were going to build a webapp which needed a Google map or YouTube video you should be able to do it in both (although I haven't tried a Google map in Flash). This is the next frontier. my $0.02 Steven Remote APIs: http://www.programmableweb.com/ Flex Beta 2.0 vs. Laszlo : http://stimpson.flashvacuum.net/mt/archives/2005/08/openl
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
>do you have anything online that you've built? Not publicly. The work I've done is proof of concept internal stuff. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Tim, do you have anything online that you've built? -jmz --- "Tim Colson (tcolson)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I hadn't followed this development.tell us > more. To where > > has the licensing fee moved? (i.e. what are the > new > > deployment/licensing terms?). > > As you saw, I described them a bit in a prev email > that'll probably hit > your box a few seconds after you sent this one. :-) > > I'll add that the IDE, Flex Builder is a > separate charge. (It > is based on Eclipse, and Mr. Green will be happy to > hear I think they > did a great job with it. I like it. It's not as good > as if they'd used > Intellij of course... but I digress. ) > > If you need the "chart" components, they also cost a > few hundred bucks > per developer. > > > Also, does Flex require its own server?, or only > requires it > > to get some advanced feature set? > Just to re-iterate...not anymore. You can deploy > just the flash file. Or > you can leverage the Data Services server-side > component...J2EE, can > drop it into an existing JVM. > > > > BTW - (just an off-topic comment) per-CPU > licensing terms > > tend to be deal-breakers with gov't clients, who > often have > > machines with many CPUs. > Yeah, I understand the logic in trying to charge > based on CPU in that > smaller folks pay less than massive apps. But it > also hurts when two > 4-CPU boxen are in use in a cluster for an app-farm > and only 1 out of > 200 might actually use flex. > > My understanding is that $20K/cpu is really just a > starting point, so > like the $35K sticker on a car, careful negotiation > can probably hammer > out a deal for far less. > > > -Timo > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
> considered Flex but it's a little lower down on my list > because of the Flash plug-in requirement. The customer would > like a thin-client with no plugins. Yeah, the plugin is small and startup is fairly quick...but I hear what you're saying. The license change opens Flex 2.0 up for consideration for me... but the ultimate decision must still be based on the client needs. For "quick in and out tasks" HTML & AJAX seem to be just fine. (ex. lookup a single address and print a map: google maps) More involved task-based applications seem more ripe for Flex. (ex. lookup five addresses, and manually plot a traveling-salesman course to all of them: Yahoo Maps) Video is another interesting area for Flex -- say you wanted to create a customer service app where the service rep's were speaking to the client with video. Hard to impossible in "Web 2.0" but certainly doable in a Flex App. -Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
> I hadn't followed this development.tell us more. To where > has the licensing fee moved? (i.e. what are the new > deployment/licensing terms?). As you saw, I described them a bit in a prev email that'll probably hit your box a few seconds after you sent this one. :-) I'll add that the IDE, Flex Builder is a separate charge. (It is based on Eclipse, and Mr. Green will be happy to hear I think they did a great job with it. I like it. It's not as good as if they'd used Intellij of course... but I digress. ) If you need the "chart" components, they also cost a few hundred bucks per developer. > Also, does Flex require its own server?, or only requires it > to get some advanced feature set? Just to re-iterate...not anymore. You can deploy just the flash file. Or you can leverage the Data Services server-side component...J2EE, can drop it into an existing JVM. > BTW - (just an off-topic comment) per-CPU licensing terms > tend to be deal-breakers with gov't clients, who often have > machines with many CPUs. Yeah, I understand the logic in trying to charge based on CPU in that smaller folks pay less than massive apps. But it also hurts when two 4-CPU boxen are in use in a cluster for an app-farm and only 1 out of 200 might actually use flex. My understanding is that $20K/cpu is really just a starting point, so like the $35K sticker on a car, careful negotiation can probably hammer out a deal for far less. -Timo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Josh wrote: "From a Java perspective Laszlo still does appear more attractive. " I disagree. >From a license standpoint, Flex 1.0 and 1.5 were certainly unattractive. >From a "java" perspective -- my experience has been positive with Flex. For example, using the server component it takes only a configuration setting to enable the client to call an unmodified POJO, pass parameters, and use the returned object or collection of objects. It's a slick way to leverage existing code. > In your professional opinion, which platform offers more for > ~20K budget? ~50K? ~100K? It depends on the assessment of value for what is offered. If "open source" is of utmost importance, then Flex provides no value. If documentation, support, and speed of development are desired, then Flex provides a fair bit of value. -Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Thanks Tim, Although I didn't state my question very well, your reply to Josh answered the questions I had in mind. I'm just starting a project with a GUI component. I considered Flex but it's a little lower down on my list because of the Flash plug-in requirement. The customer would like a thin-client with no plugins. -tom p.s. haven't seen you at the meetings for awhile...you still around? I'm not currently using Flex because of the requirement. At 12:09 PM 9/21/2006, you wrote: Josh wrote: > I'm considering using Flex for a project. What are the > terms of this 'free Single CPU' license? If its free why > don't I just get another free one for another CPU? My understanding of the license is that you can run one App on one machine with One CPU. It forbids running the same app on many machines (ex. kiosks or clustered). Actually...that's not quite the full story. You *can* run the same app on a cluster/kiosk...if it does *not* use the Flex Express Data Services component. If you just have a Flex/Flash file that's connectig to basic HTTP-based web services... you can run it with as much load as you wish. Flex Data Services Express is the server component that provides declarative security, a binary RMI with auto marshalling/serializaing of objects, auto-conversion between Java and Actionscript objects, proxy-whitelists, and more. I'm betting the assumption by Adobe is that folks will try raw free Flex and like it. Then they will try free FDSE and like that more, and eventually need to scale up and spend $20K/CPU for the Enterprise version. If that works or not...time will tell. Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Hi Tim, I'm still struggling with Flex vs. Laszlo. Laszlo poses no licensing problems and long term costs are predictable. Furthermore it offers a deployment scenario that does not require Flash( I'm not sure how much this feature weighs in its favor ). From a Java perspective Laszlo still does appear more attractive. Whether the Laszlo community evolves into a scene with rich offerings I feel is dependent on the actions of Adobe. Right now Adobe has its hands full as they appear to be taking a swipe at Microsoft. This one could maim Microsoft permanently. If they win this battle, Adobe stock valuation will expand significantly. Naturally, in this situation Microsoft would offer indirect support of Laszlo, but being that it is based in Java this would be a difficult move for them. http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3633501 In your professional opinion, which platform offers more for ~20K budget? ~50K? ~100K? Thanks, Josh Zeidner --- "Tim Colson (tcolson)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Josh wrote: > > I'm considering using Flex for a project. What > are the > > terms of this 'free Single CPU' license? If its > free why > > don't I just get another free one for another CPU? > > My understanding of the license is that you can run > one App on one > machine with One CPU. It forbids running the same > app on many machines > (ex. kiosks or clustered). > > Actually...that's not quite the full story. > > You *can* run the same app on a cluster/kiosk...if > it does *not* use the > Flex Express Data Services component. If you just > have a Flex/Flash file > that's connectig to basic HTTP-based web services... > you can run it with > as much load as you wish. > > Flex Data Services Express is the server component > that provides > declarative security, a binary RMI with auto > marshalling/serializaing of > objects, auto-conversion between Java and > Actionscript objects, > proxy-whitelists, and more. > > I'm betting the assumption by Adobe is that folks > will try raw free Flex > and like it. Then they will try free FDSE and like > that more, and > eventually need to scale up and spend $20K/CPU for > the Enterprise > version. If that works or not...time will tell. > > Tim > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Josh wrote: > I'm considering using Flex for a project. What are the > terms of this 'free Single CPU' license? If its free why > don't I just get another free one for another CPU? My understanding of the license is that you can run one App on one machine with One CPU. It forbids running the same app on many machines (ex. kiosks or clustered). Actually...that's not quite the full story. You *can* run the same app on a cluster/kiosk...if it does *not* use the Flex Express Data Services component. If you just have a Flex/Flash file that's connectig to basic HTTP-based web services... you can run it with as much load as you wish. Flex Data Services Express is the server component that provides declarative security, a binary RMI with auto marshalling/serializaing of objects, auto-conversion between Java and Actionscript objects, proxy-whitelists, and more. I'm betting the assumption by Adobe is that folks will try raw free Flex and like it. Then they will try free FDSE and like that more, and eventually need to scale up and spend $20K/CPU for the Enterprise version. If that works or not...time will tell. Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
--- "Tim Colson (tcolson)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So now that the Flex 2.0 SDK and deployment to "a > single CPU" is free... I'm considering using Flex for a project. What are the terms of this 'free Single CPU' license? If its free why don't I just get another free one for another CPU? -jmz __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
I hadn't followed this development.tell us more. To where has the licensing fee moved? (i.e. what are the new deployment/licensing terms?). Also, does Flex require its own server?, or only requires it to get some advanced feature set? BTW - (just an off-topic comment) per-CPU licensing terms tend to be deal-breakers with gov't clients, who often have machines with many CPUs. -tom At 11:18 AM 9/21/2006, you wrote: So now that the Flex 2.0 SDK and deployment to "a single CPU" is free... has anyone here started to rethink Java + Flex for client projects? -Timo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
> Perhaps a better question is "What features or flexibility > does Flex 2.0 offer over Dojo or the Google AJAX toolkits?" No, that would be a *different* topic, and one I don't care to discuss. If you'd like to discuss it, by all means feel free to send an email with a different subject line, please do not rudely hijack this one. Thanks, Tim - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0?
Perhaps a better question is "What features or flexibility does Flex 2.0 offer over Dojo or the Google AJAX toolkits?" Michael Oliver CTO Alarius Systems LLC 6800 E. Lake Mead Blvd, #1096 Las Vegas, NV 89156 Phone:(702)866-9034 Cell:(518)378-6154 Fax:(702)974-0341 -Original Message- From: Tim Colson (tcolson) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 12:19 PM To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org Subject: [jug-discussion] Java Rich Clients with Flex 2.0? So now that the Flex 2.0 SDK and deployment to "a single CPU" is free... has anyone here started to rethink Java + Flex for client projects? -Timo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
