Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of apostolache.andrei@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.220.175 as permitted sender)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of apostolache.andrei@gmail.com
 designates 10.220.108.80 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.220.108.80;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJQBtgnv5AcT5RZM2j3g2zN6pUpcr+v0-xqhjSnCdc8W_R5zMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4F4B86F7.70507@dot-com-it.com>
	<1330350427.79921.YahooMailClassic@web126105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<CALorpXdwDNEhwBwj8Qkdb60a+zeGXuqYQCjF4YPyUg+u5osJHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F4B9558.6010901@dot-com-it.com>
	<CAJQBtgnv5AcT5RZM2j3g2zN6pUpcr+v0-xqhjSnCdc8W_R5zMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 15:16:24 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAO0WCdvknzysNqybLPx9H7f3e_4L5G4zouy-etm6awwrBoxRXw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Flex -> HTML, Linux and time to say goodbye?
From: andrei apostolache <apostolache.andrei@gmail.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043c0918f41e9f04b9f39795

--f46d043c0918f41e9f04b9f39795
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you. We are developers not users.
Users are the ones that can choose what device/OS to use. The developers
are the ones that need to test and build the application based on their
users requirements.
If my application is targeted to some device/OS I think is logical to use
that device/OS and not emulators or free OS.
If I want to built an application for iOS, I'll have to test it on a proper
iPhone/iPad. If your main target client are using Windows, use Windows not
Linux.
As developer you need to build & test your application using the OS/device
that the majority of users will have.


On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Left Right <olegsivokon@gmail.com> wrote:

> Andrei,
>
> please read my post above. Even if all Linux users at once used some
> application built for Flash runtime, that wouldn't make a significant
> difference from Adobe perspective as a company that provides the runtime,
> simply, because there aren't enough of them, and they aren't of the kind
> that pays for this kind of applications.
>
> However, there is a significant amount of Linux users who _write_
> applications for various platforms. This is entirely different thing, and,
> if you look at how many developers are on different kinds of operating
> systems, surprisingly, there may be equal number of programmers using Mac
> OS, for example, and Linux. I wouldn't be surprised if there were actually
> more programmers on Linux, then on Mac OS (hey, it's harder to convince a
> programmer to buy a cat in the sac, especially if there are vial free
> alternatives). So, targeting a commercial OS with possibly equal or less
> number of programmers using it is a "strange" move from Adobe... Especially
> so since it's also a Unix system, so, things shouldn't be "that" different
> (yeah, I know gdm and all that - we've talked about it before).
> This "strange" move might've been an historical tradition - Adobe just as
> Macromedia before, positioned Flash and development tools as targeting
> graphic artists for the most, and only marginally - programmers. It's not
> true any more, because the programmers sector grew, because the language
> and the runtime matured. Now, it would be only reasonable to admit the
> change in the situation, and start supporting the other kind of customers,
> but for reason that come unexplained, Adobe is devoted to support Flash
> Builder for Macs, regardless of the hardship of keeping up with all kinds
> of unexpected updates and secrecy policies Apple imposes on them, and
> totally disregards the opensource alternative, which, for once, isn't
> hiding anything form them and isn't putting any ultimatums of that kind...
> I find this weird, by, ya'know, that's the executes' decision anyway.
>
> Best.
>
> wvxvw
>

--f46d043c0918f41e9f04b9f39795--