flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cortlandt Winters <c...@cortwinters.net>
Subject Re: Why Spark? (was Re: s:Spacer (was Re: Missing Spark components))
Date Sat, 03 Mar 2012 20:18:37 GMT
I totally agree with this and will try to help with it.

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 6:12 AM, s├ębastien Paturel <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi all,
> Im new to the mailing list so sorry if i do mistakes :)
> I'm personnally very concerned about the ease of learning curve of Flex
> for new users.
> Don't forget that the ease of use and power of this SDK suits to not only
> enterprise scale projects. It will be more true when the cross compilation
> to HTML5 will be a reality.
> I intend to create a new thread about this subject in the mailing list.
> But about Spark vs MX subject, i must say that MX components were very
> important to easely learn flex, and new spark components were harder to use
> at first to do only simple skinning, even if the flexibility made it more
> powerfull.
> That said, Spark vs MX war has no sens since they refer to very different
> use cases with pro and cons:
> MX: Ease of use and quick simple skinning
> Spark: Flexibility and power to create complexes skins and layout
> We need both!
> We could say that when the Spark components complete list will be
> finished, you will still have the possibility to choose between MX and
> Spark for your specific projects needs.
> BUT: The main drawback for MX components is that you cant use them for
> Mobile!
> Thats too bad to not have a simple quick way of skinning when working on
> Mobile projects.
> The fact that we oppose Spark and MX is only because of flex's history.
> But you should consider a components list dedicated to use cases for which
> we would have chosen MX components.
> This NEW components library would be (not like MX) based on Spark
> components and expose basic skinning attributes easely in MXML (as MX).
> That way a new lib equivalent to old MX could be used for Mobile.
> And when a developper is stuck by the limitations of skinning
> possibilities (like he would have been with MX) he still can use the Spark
> base to freely do what he wants.
> It should not be that much work to achieve that.
> It must be carefully defined to manage Desktop and Mobile for easy
> skinning components.
> In Conclusion in my opinion:
> Spark should be the base for all components from now on.
> MX should die mainly because we cant use it for Mobile and it is not based
> on Spark (that makes the SDK more hard to maintain).
> A new components list based on Spark should replace MX for easy and simple
> skinning use cases.
> What you think of it?
> Thanks for reading
> Seb

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message