flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hordur Thordarson <hor...@lausn.is>
Subject Re: Flex 5 in haxe
Date Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:42:51 GMT
PhoneGap is for sure a good solution for some developers allthough some of the apps they feature
on their website are really just shells around existing web sites.  I have the Wikipedia app
on my phone and it is written with PhoneGap.  It works, but is quite slow for what is really
a very simple app on top of a website.

But PhoneGap is mobile only, I need cross-platform desktop support as well and I am not interested
in a solution that deploys to one runtime on mobile and a totally different runtime on the
desktop because that to me is a recipe for increased testing/QA/support/bug workarounds etc
and I'll avoid that above all else.

Really, what I want is desktop quality apps seamlessly deployed via the web.  AIR does this
pretty darn well, Flash player even better if you are willing to sacrifice a few desktop related
features.  But those are my needs/priorities, others have different ones.

On 21.11.2012, at 09:39, Alain Ekambi wrote:

> Now not every company build apps at the scale of FaceBook.
> For most of the case HTML5 mobile apps + PhoneGap(Cordova) are  pretty good.
> 2012/11/21 Hordur Thordarson <hordur@lausn.is>
>> On 20.11.2012, at 22:14, Kevin Newman wrote:
>>> Mark Zuckerberg also said very publicly that Facebook "burned" (his
>> word) 2 years of development with HTML5, "We burned two years. That's
>> really painful. Probably we will look back saying that is one of the
>> *biggest mistakes* if not *the biggest strategic mistake* that we made." It
>> was less of a "cave" and more of a fundamental shift in understanding (and
>> a correct one).
>> Agreed and that's really what I ment by "caved in", they just realized it
>> was never going to be as good as a native app.  The problem with HTML5/JS
>> as an app mechanism is that it just wasn't designed for that.  Some changes
>> have been made to it in order to make it easier to write applications (as
>> opposed to web sites which is a totally different thing) but it really
>> isn't very good for that at all except maybe for small apps.  The JavaFX
>> crowd is having the exact same discussion the Flex crowd is, except pretty
>> much no one in the JavaFX crowd wants to deploy to HTML/JS.  They want
>> JavaFX runtimes for mobile so that they can have one set of code and the
>> same or very similar runtime everywhere (sound familiar ?).  And the
>> community is actually working towards a solution that gives them that.  But
>> Oracle, like Adobe, seems to have given into the "HTML5 for everything"
>> rhetoric so they are at least currently not backing this.
>>> This is where Adobe has an opportunity with AIR, that they seem intent
>> on failing to capitalize on (at least in their marketing narratives, and
>> the signals the decision makers are sending out into the market place - the
>> Flash engineers are doing pretty cool stuff with stage3D and whatnot).
>> Yep, very frustrating that Adobe gave up on this vision because they had
>> by far the strongest dev/deployment story out there with almost the best of
>> everything. with Flash player or AIR for the desktop and AIR for mobile and
>> almost single source for all the platforms (UI tweaks/diffs for
>> phones/tablets obviously).  This is of course still possible, we just don't
>> know how long it is going to last :-(  But while it works, I hope Apache
>> Flex will continue to be maintained/improved in it's current shape.
>>> Anyway, Apache Flex doesn't need to wait for Adobe's higher-ups to
>> figure it out - Flex can go HaXe, and have a multi-platform ubiquity story
>> and an open source story to boot.
>> Sure.  I have to say though that my clients don't really care if the tools
>> I use are open source or not or whether the language I write in is
>> ActionScript or Haxe or smth else.  They care about functionality,
>> usability, cross-platformness and ease of deployment/updating of the
>> resulting product, and they also want development to cost as little as
>> possible, hence the less problems I have during dev and the less testing I
>> have to do in multiple browsers or with multiple runtimes, the better.
>>> Kevin N.
>>> On 11/17/12 5:25 AM, Hordur Thordarson wrote:
>>>> Eventually FB caved in and created a fully native app.

View raw message