http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/02/...es.air.flex.3/
Not that anyone here uses them...
Printable View
http://www.macnn.com/articles/08/02/...es.air.flex.3/
Not that anyone here uses them...
I've used AIR, good stuff :D
I'm no flex guy though.
Flex was my first contact with AS3,- the last days I noticed that it was a horible mistake (to begin with Flex learning AS3). Now in CS3 it makes so much more sense no cluttering classes forced to begin with.
air is a nice alternative to Dierector- will work with it propably in the future
I've been using Flex3 for a week or two ( Done all my as3 stuff in Flex2 before that ), but I've not been able to get down and dirty with the profiler yet ( Which I'm really looking forward to. Christ, what a geek ).
Squize.
I've used and appreciated AIR, time to look at all the features
Really looking forward to using AIR.
Wonder what's gonna happen to zinc? is it just going to be a budget solution?
I use Flashdevelop which compiles with Flex 2 SDK. I wonder does changing to 3 change anything
Quote:
Originally Posted by lesli_felix
i think there´s quite a confusion what standalone wrappers like zinc is about and what air is about.
yes, with air one can make standalone stuff, too, but its strengths are that you can develop stuff in several languages and development environments and then that you don´t have to release it as system/os specific binary file but can release it as air file that can then be shown by any system that has the air runtime installed (right now that´s not many, let´s see how that evolves).
zinc and other similar wrappers on the other side usually have their own script syntax/api and you have to use that "language" to use the wrapper custom functionality. Also usually you can only deploy to binary executables which are system specific.
On the upside though zinc for example comes with over 450 commands to add lots of custom functionality to your app, so air is VERY limited compared to that (and probably that point will always be the case because of adobe´s..let´s say "special" security restriction thoughts)
as some here may know malee and me worked on a tilebased map editor in air, for that it was pretty fine (although saving files was already done in cluttered up very limited functionality allowing way, hope they improved that since the betas). After trying both wrappers like zinc (for several years) and air (mostly in beta phase with the map editor) i´d say that you have to pick the right thing for the project.
If you´re pretty sure air will allow all functionality your app will use and you also like the freedom of developing in several adobe dev tools and have deploy right from the tool, can code in several languages etc, air is a cool solution.
If you want lots of custom command functionality with your app which air doesn´t offer,then yeah, zinc and other similar apps are still and always will be a way better solution.
Didn't realise it was that restricted, I knew it required a runtime, but I was under the impression it would be capable of running full-scale apps.
In that case they don't seem to be offering much that you don't already have with a browser, albeit quicker execution and stability (maybe)
stability is really good for me with the standalone wrapper tools (again, i can talk most about zinc as i use that for some years exclusively now after trying some others), so that is no argument for air.
a bit better runtime performance with air *could* be the case, i haven´t made any comparisons in that direction but it wouldn´t sound off regarding adobe has the direct access of integrating the flash player runtime functionality in best way.
But yeah,overall i´m fine with the performance of stuff when wrapped in stuff like zinc, too, there´s a slight (though noticable) fps drop of the content when comparing it to playback in standalone flash projector, the performance is still higher than in browser playback though, so yeah, not that bad.
and yeah, regarding air beeing restricted: you can look at the api reference on the adobe site to see what it allows and what it doesn´t, overall: yes, compared to wrappers like zinc it is very limited.
(In beta phase it mostly only added window, (limited) file i/o and some database functionality, all in all laughable compared to the command list of standalone wrappers like zinc. I´m sure Adobe will extend that api over time, but yeah, as i said i think it will never get close to what the standalone wrappers offer)
again: with air , in my eyes its more about how you get to the goal than what you can do: my comments about air might sound all negative, so yeah, i want to point out again that it really has a lot of nice workflow improvements to be able to write the app in various languages and in various dev tools you already use and deploy em right from those/test em right in those. That is definately a BIG plus for air dev.
But yeah, as said above, regarding the way more limited functionality you can use on api/commands side you have to decide which way to go based on your project requirements :)
I'm not pleased with how they force the CA. While AIR has some cool things that ZINC and others don't (dedicated html engine, html/ajax,etc) if I have to spend 300 to get an installer that doesn't scare the crap out of users (without a CA AIR installers consider you (the developer) an untrusted source and it's not a pretty presentation to end users) I'm going to plop it down on an app that gives me the biggest bang for the buck....and AIR isn't it. $300 will get me a shiny new ZINC 3, full blown installers, no need for runtime penetration, no forced CA and a whole bunch more for the same money.
What were they thinking? They entered an already huge arena (ZINC, SWF Studio, mProjector and others have been doing pretty much the same thing for years)......offer a free SDK (which I thought way back in alpha would be the key to it being a ZINC killer) and force a 300 dollar CA. Brilliant.
Don't really understand how other langauges than actionscript can be itnegrated to AIR. Does it mean you can develop an AIR application in javascript ?
Can you develop an AIR application ins the Flash CS3 IDE ?
I thought that the itnerest of AIR is that you can reuse your actionscript code to develop standalone apps, am I right ?
"300 dollar CA", oh, haha, that wasn´t the case of course when i tried it in beta phase, so yeah, that´s quite ridiculous in my eyes, too.
they have to spread the runtime and to do so they need lots and lots of apps that people spread. i don´t think in this stage its a good idea to ask for a sum where it then has to be comparable on all ends to other solutions.
to sietjp:
yes, one can develop air apps in several languages and dev tools.
right now with flash that means you can use flex builder or flash ide. to use flash ide you need to download an update for it, then you can test an air app just as if it was a flash app right in the ide (and you can also deploy it from the ide).
And the idea of air is that you can use the dev tools and languages you´re comfortable with to create apps that run on various platforms, so yes, you can alo use actionscript to make ones. Essentially when you make a flash/actinscript air app you can use most of the usual actionscript api and then the additional air api commands.
I won´t reiterate the whole process because its explained in detail on the adobe site, have a look :)
Thx tom, your explanation is shorter and better than the one on Adobe's site :) .
Even though Zinc offers Linux support, once AIR has Linux support too I think it's going to get very popular.
If AIR apps didn't have to be installed I think it would have a LOT of appeal. FOr me though, having to install EVERY AIR APP is a pain and not being able to simply run an AIR app from a CD is really bad.
As we're in the Games section of the forum, I think for games its really good as you dont have to worry about speed decreases.
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sietjp
would be good to have some air game<->same game wrapped with zinc performance comparison. but yup, i´m too busy with other stuff now so i won´t get to that soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cortana
$300 for air? seriously?
No offense but adobe should figure out the only reason we bought Zinc is because the projector that comes with Flash is extremely crappy, I mean seriously what is there in Zinc that couldnt and shouldn't be natively in flash maybe with a restriction model? (desktop mode? web mode?) all we use Zinc for is to access dbases, binary files and use fullscreen or stuff like that, is that hard to get those functions inside the regular flash projector? Director already has that.
Adobe wake up and smell the coffee, Nobody gives a crap about director anymore that ship sailed 10 years ago , and Air was cool while it was free but $300 for features we already have and we have to work our way through? making our users download a 20mb installer, runtime thingy, really? seriously?
Place AIR inside flash and make it possible or better yet get flash to work as stand alone apps or in kiosks. Seriously haven't you guys figured out we do that anyway?
Wait, what? There's a profiler? :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Squize
Oh yeah!
I'm amazed it's not been done to death here already, what with everyone loving shaving those ms off every loop.
( I've still not played with it, I'm busy porting a DS game to Flash, and although that's cool, it's sucking up all my time to the point where I can't play any more ).
I honestly thought a lot of people would have grabbed the beta long ago just to get the profiler.
It's the main reason I haven't bought FDT 3, as that's around the same price as Flex 3 ( Maybe more ? From memory there's not a lot in it ) and I'd rather have a profiler than fdt, as sexy as that is.
Squize.
Speaking of Air:
http://iopred.com/sundial/Sundial.air
A small little time management app that I created in half a day, was interesting to learn Flex/Air in such a small amount of time. I think Air + Flex is a really powerful combination for making applications, much more so than using Flex for the web (which all look generic and samey to me)
No. AIR is free. To create an installer that recognizes you as the author (and not UNTRUSTED SOURCE) you need a CA which is the rub. You really have to see a screenshot of an untrusted AIR installer to appreciate how it impacts the dream of AIR being "free"Quote:
Originally Posted by AzraelKans
See this section:
Signing of AIR applications
of this
True, but you only need to be signed once correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Seahorn
Also this money isn't going to Adobe, so its more of a security issue in my opinion.
I've heard all the arguments. For it or against it if the buy in is 2-300, I'm going to go with a more for my money, CD ability and no need for a CA or penetrated runtime if I'm plopping down cash.
Make AIR free and treat security the same way Zinc and the rest do (like all software...user beware and use common sense) and they would have taken the market and the runtime and AIR name would get pushed around the globe because more small time users could get apps out there that don't scare the crap out of people.
I love AIR...been with it from the start....hand crap out all the time for it....had an AIR movie in a MAX show but still think they cut off their own foot on limited OS integration (again for the sake of over the top security and with Zinc and the rest we already do things AIR can't even dream of) and the CA. Just my opinion :)
Found this nice tutorial if you want to use AIR with Flash CS3
http://flashthusiast.com/2008/02/25/...-cs3-what-now/
We're having a FLEX tutorial next week here. That will be the first time I try flex :)
Really sorry to bump this, but there's something that may be useful and it doesn't really need it's own thread.
flash.system.System.gc();
Forces garbage collection ( Which lots of people seem to be having issues with ), but requires the latest F9 release.
There, that's the reason to upgrade to Flex3 :)
Squize.
erm,it forces the garabe collector sweep run but it doesn´t change the way the gc work in as3 export,so yeah,if one has issues with stuff not getting removed at all this won´t help.
but yeah,handy if you want to affect when it runs
Why do you have to have flex to use that class?
because it´s adobe´s new favourite child? (development of flex propably faster & easier to update)Quote:
Originally Posted by lesli_felix
Can't you rip it somehow? an as3 class is an as3 class, surely?