Flash IDEs Need a Rebranding
The Flash world never sits still. Its drum beats relentlessly and recently the tempo has been significantly upped. Developers are slowly waking up to new tech terms such as Flex Builder, Flex Framework, AIR and “Thermo”. And trust me, a good number of “developers” find it hard to keep up. I can’t even express how sick I am of people referring to AS3 as Flex.
It used to be that the only thing Flash developers used to have to worry about was the version of the Flash player and its related Flash IDE. Now they have to deal with a whole platform family. Below is a brief list of the Flash IDE version timeline:
- FutureSplash Animator / Flash 1 (1996)
- Macromedia Flash 2 (1997)
- Macromedia Flash 3 (1998)
- Macromedia Flash 4 (1999)
- Macromedia Flash 5 (2000)
- Macromedia Flash MX (2002)
- Macromedia Flash MX 2004 (2004)
- Macromedia Flash 8 (2005)
- Adobe Flash CS3 (2007)
Apart form the whole MX period and the Adobe CS merge, the IDE version timeline appears to be quite simple and straight forward. But wait, I forgot to add Flex Builder right? or did I? Does it even live in this list at all? And what happens when “Thermo” is released?
The most prominent part of the Flash IDE has always been its timeline and rightly so, it’s an animation tool so I hear. But hold on, how many other animation tools do you use to create non-animations with? The problem is that Flash is now this ultimate multimedia platform, it ticks all six boxes extremely well - image, text, video, audio, animation and interaction. So, we need new IDE’s to deal with all of this richness and of course Flex Builder is the start of this and “Thermo” is following. But why is it all based so heavily around the Flex Framework?! I don’t get it (*confused look*). I mean, why is it even called Flex Builder? I use Flex Builder daily, but never touch the Flex Framework or code in MXML. (side rant: why can I only use MXML with Flex Framework anyway!).
I propose that the Flash Platform be repackaged into clearly named products:
- Flash Animator (currently know as Flash)
- Flash Builder (currently know as Flex Builder)
- Flash Designer (currently know as “Thermo”)
From this new starting block, the IDEs could then be sold individually or in bundles aimed towards specific markets (I waiting for Microsoft recruiting to give me a call any second now…)
- Flash Platform - Animator, Builder, Designer, Flex Extended (charting)
- Flash RIA - Builder, Designer, Flex Extended (charting)
- Flash Creative - Animator, Designer, Photoshop
Of course, the whole renaming idea could possibly only cause more problems. I know I hate it when stores always move their goods around for no reason and it’s the same with product names. But I think that the current naming scheme for the Flash Platform is really messy and it only seems to add confusion. Someone who has used Flash IDE all their lives is less likely to look at Flex Builder as it seems to be called something other than Flash. The player and the IDE in the past have always shared the Flash mark and it should continue stay this way for the platform to be approachable and accessible.
“I can’t even express how sick I am of people referring to AS3 as Flex.”
Amen.
Unfortunately, I think Adobe wants to distance Flex from Flash to quell the “Flash is bad. Flash is for animations. Flash is unusable.” talk. So they can now say, “Yeah, but this is Flex!”
So Flash (animation) is done in the IDE, and Flex is done in Flex Builder. Where is AS3 programming done? What is AS3 programming? It doesn’t really have a place in the current scene. I feel like AS3, non-Flex programmers are the lost children of the new Flash Platform. It’s really been bugging me.
Dude, Flex builder is mainly for Flex framework projects, if you are not willing to touch mxml, Flex builder you’d better to name it ‘Flash editor’.
Yes, but Flex Builder 2 is also the best ActionScript 3 editor which is why I use it.
Techs such as the Flex Framework/MXML and AIR should be companion features to the whole Flash IDE family.
quote:
So, we need new IDE’s to deal with all of this richness and of course Flex Builder is the start of this and “Thermo” is following. But why is it all based so heavily around the Flex Framework?! I don’t get it (*confused look*).
I don’t know if I like the whole create new IDE’s to handle each facet of the (fill in the blank) process. I mean, I like Flex Builder and FB3 has some great new features but for me, I’ve wanted to create RIA’s or Websites in Illustrator, Photoshop or Fireworks. In the whole workflow thing there has been this huge step in taking a graphic and turning it into a working application or website.
If you take a look at the steps in my workflow,
1. create graphic (prototype) - client approves
3. add functionality
4. deliver app online
between step 1 and 2 you have to take your one composite image with all its own individual pieces (layers, text, graphics) and then break them up into other pieces, switch programs, and try and rebuilt it all over again. Thermo looks amazing but I’m not sure where it is going or if it could be plugged in to the designers applications.
The reason they focus so heavily on the flex framework is prebuilt components and layout managers. they’ve done a lot of the work. its one of the nicest api’s for software dev i’ve used. when i work on the “RIA” type of programs i can make something in mxml much faster than any other tool and tech out there.
” I feel like AS3, non-Flex programmers are the lost children of the new Flash Platform. It’s really been bugging me.”
If your doing straight AS3 and don’t want to use FB you can always use tools like textmate with extensions, FDT, xcode, Primalscript, sepy, subethaedit or FlashDevelop(Keith has a whole writeup on that stuff pre ver 3).
I use textmate a lot and have the document class wired to the fla file so i just fire the command from textmate and it compiles in flash. Did that with AS2 as well. Throw in xash and basically the flash ide is used for compiling and any graphic assets i toss in the library. Plus it can edit the xml files i use quickly as well and is fast. Also you can set up workflows with those tools to target the flex sdk compiler without using the framework if you want. I got a lot of ideas from Keith’s site over the years so i’m surprised to hear he feels that that area is lacking tools.
Adobe stated that it didn’t bother with a more rebust AS3 editor in flash CS3 as so many of it’s focus customers already had their tool of choice. I think they have chosen to focus on certain areas and a general AS3 code editor is not going to be an Adobe branded product on its own.
Just my two cents.
I totally agree with Keith Peters, I’m one of those. After an enthusiastic start one year ago, now I feel… yes quite lost.
Ethan, it’s not that I don’t want to use Flex Builder. It’s an awesome tool. I like it. I just think it’s name is misleading.
An analogy would be to compare AS3 to C , in which case, you could then compare Flex to MFC or Windows Forms, and Flex Builder to Visual C .
You have a base language, a framework, and a tool. The tool is a tool for the language, not the framework. It may have many tools that are strongly linked to the framework, but really it is a tool for the underlying language.
You don’t have a tool called Visual Windows Forms Builder, which has, as an incidental, hidden feature, the ability to create C programs. You have Visual C , which has built in support for Windows Forms. Likewise, you should have Adobe AS3 Studio or something like that, which has built in support for Flex.
Rave Hentai Master…
…
I’m new to the whole Air, Flash, Flex, AS3…… debate. There seems to be a lot of overlap with all this stuff. Coming at this as a web developer who is familiar with HTML, javascript and php who wants to develop an Adobe Air application, I don’t want to use flash IDE or Flex Builder etc. I want to build an Air application that will access a simple web page, have the ability to dock to the system tray and be built using the Air SDK, html and javascript (mootools for me). I can’t seem to find any tutes out there that don’t immediately reach for Flex.