I have two noobish questions about Flash, Actionscript, Flex etc.
1) With these technologies is it possible to create a simple web browser that can render websites?
2) Is it possible to run these technologies on the server side? I am guessing no as Flash requires a browser to run within?
Thanks all for any help
HTML in Flash
Technically you can write an HTML rendering engine in Flash. DENG is an old project that did exactly this. I don't think it's still be updated though.
http://osflash.org/deng
Adobe AIR supports rendering HTML in the embedded WebKit based engine within Flash.
Flash on server
The standalone Flash Player can be used on the server and is often used for unit testing within a continuous integration environment. When run from a background service I don't think it will actually display a UI, but it will run.
Take a look on this article http://www.adobe.com/devnet/air/flash/articles/air_browser_sample_application.html - it describes how to build your browser with Flash/Air (running on the desktop)
Related
Can a Flex application that was designed for use on a PC be run on an iPad, iPhone, or Android-based mobile device?
Seems like a simple enough question. Visiting http://www.adobe.com/products/flex.html yields a picture of a dude running a (presumably) Flex application on an Android. So at first glance, the answer would appear to be "yes." End of story.
but yet…
There is so much (mis)information out there on various tech sites that suggest Flash-based technologies simply won't run on iOS or other mobile platforms. Why is this? Perhaps they mean to say that Flex won't run "out of the box" and requires a plugin? Or do they mean it won't run at all?
Every time I think I've reached a definitive conclusion, some post on SlashDot or CNET directly contradicts it. So what's the scoop? Can one take an existing Flex application and run it on iOS/Android? (I realize there are screen size issues to consider so the app might not run effectively. I just want to know if the runtimes are available on the mobile devices to allow the Flex app to launch at all.)
Sorry for the noob question. My background is WPF / HTML5. Adobe technologies are completely foreign to me.
I wrote a lot below if you'd like to read it enjoy, if not sorry for taking your valuable bytes :) I directly answered the questions up here first:
Why is this?
It's a confusing matter read below for the why details.
Perhaps they mean to say that Flex won't run "out of the box" and requires a plugin?
Or do they mean it won't run at all?
Using the flash builder tools (the bin folder in the SDK) you can compile for native desktop application, desktop web browsers, native iOS application, native Android application. Android with FlashPlayer plugin installed will show Flash content within the web browser, iOS will only run the ones compiled with AIR, not in the the web browser but as a native app.
Every time I think I've reached a definitive conclusion, some post on SlashDot or CNET directly contradicts it. So what's the scoop? Can one take an existing Flex application and run it on iOS/Android?
Yes, if using AIR and run as a native app on all three platforms (the desktop Flex API is for the most part a superset of the web Flex API), your other points about performance and form factor are valid and should be considered though. The nice thing is you can write your model/controller code in a common library in AS3 then write separate presentation layer interfaces that all share the library.
Here's the very long version:
Using the flash compiler results in "bytecode" in the form of a file with a swf extension using the swf format, you can read a ton more about that here:
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf.html
To interpret the file you need some sort of run-time similar to some degree to running WPF/XAML/C# within a .NET framework context (either desktop or using silverlight on the web). In the case of adobe technologies (rough equivalence):
AS3 = C#
MXML = XAML
Flex = WPF+WCF (client side RPC not server side)
Flash Player = Silverlight
AIR (Adobe integrated runtime) = .NET
Framework Redistributable .dll(s)/.so(s) for desktop OSes
(Read this list very loosely please, I know XAML is preserved in the MSIL or whatever which is different because MXML is compiled to AS3 and only if a debug flag is set on the compiler does it include the debugging symbols, there's certainly tons of differences but I think this is an easy and correct enough model to use)
On iOS the browser does not allow for plugins in the traditional sense of netscape browser plugins or ActiveX plugins. For this reason you'll not be able to execute a plugin ie flashplayer or silverlight in the browser. Since Adobe did release a flashplayer for Android devices that does run in the browser it will work on those devices in the browser, however they have essentially thrown in the towel for supporting this long term, as they have to support the majority mobile device platform, iOS, in order to remain relevant (this was I think more a collective throwing in of the towel by Google, device manufacturers, carriers, Microsoft, all just following suit and trying to make the best business decision, WebKit and V8 or SpiderMonkey can probably do 99% of what Flash can do and better in some cases and WebKit will hopefully not splinter and will remain open source... frameworks and the browsers just need to get fleshed out and stabilized).
If the user installs AIR (or the runtime is packaged with the app) then a Flex/Flash (that is stuff coded in AS3 and/or MXML and compiled to a swf) can be transcoded/packaged to be interpreted by the run-time for that device correctly (be it iOS or Android or whatever RIM did, I don't think they have AIR for Windows Phone 7 and Win8 on ARM won't support browser plugins either). Part of the confusion is possibly from the fact that Apple denied the distribution of Apps that were "cross-compiled" which kept AIR out of the list of options for iOS for a good year, just after Adobe started announcing it was usable for that purpose (kicking Adobe while their down). Another part of the confusion probably comes from real vids of people who have 1 hacked their device or 2 were able to get open source alternatives to the flash player run-time to work on their iOS device (gnash was one I'm aware of from some occasional Linux tinkering, also possibly FAKE vids).
You can run Flex applications on mobile devices, but you cannot simply run any Flex project.
In Flash Builder ( Flex Ide) or in Flash Professional you can create mobile projects. These projects generate native applications for iOS and Android.
Last time I tried, the result and the available components where less than what I expected. So, if you can, I'll much recommend you go for something like Appcelerator.com or similar, which turns HTML5/Js code into native apps. I tried them, worked a lot better than Flex.
Short answer: No
Long answer: You can use Adobe's tools to compile your Flash/Flex app for use as a native iOS app. So you won't be able to embed the app in a web page like you normally could with Flex, but you can build it as a native app. Note you have to have Flash Builder 4.5 to do this.
It won't run on iPhone as a .swf file, but it will run on Android based devices that have adobe flash installed. It will also run on the BB playbook, which also has flash.
Flex is a framework.( Anyway it is very beutiful one which even sometime looks like complete different language ).
As soon as you are building AIR application it can run on various platforms like : Windows, iOS, Android, upcomming TV's, PlayBook, even .. into the future ( maybe/hopefuly ) on Windows Phone, plus Linux ( which AIR future is not very clear anyway ( but hopefuly Adobe will reconsider ) ).
So - application created with Flash Builder 4.5+ would probably run everywhere as soon as it is AIR application.
The compilation methoods is really simple, and you almost simultaneously compiling for everything you wanna to.
And one of the most important things here - your applications will run, work, look and feel the same way you were designed on one device. Flex is the thing which is responsible for everything to looks beutiful on each platform it is running.
For instance i am compiling currently for Android, and without even test i can clearly say that it will looks and feel the same way under iOS and Windows, and it will.
I am using Fedora 12 (linux) Installed Packages adobeair.i386 2.0.2-12610 #adobe-linux-i386.
I want to make a simple "hello world" application which is able to run in my desktop and also via http://localhost/air/index.php
Can someone please show me step by step, a working example?
Thank you
Regards
N.B: What are the differences between Adobe Air and Adobe Flex? Can you share please, seems very confusing, i could use C++ (which is Air) and i could use PHP (which is Flex), like that kind of difference?
The AIR app won't work in a browser. For the web version, you would use Flex and for the desktop version you would use AIR. Both applications can be written in Actionscript 3 however, unlike Flex apps, AIR apps can also be written in HTML/JS. If you write your apps in Actionscript 3, your Flex and AIR apps could use almost identical code. Obviously, there are a few classes which can only be used in AIR as these related to desktop functionality. If you look at the Actionscript 3 reference (http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform/reference/actionscript/3/), you can see which of the classes are AIR only and which can be used in both Flex and AIR.
AIR files are exported as .air files while Flex file are exported as regular Flash .swf files.
As far as, "C++ (which is Air) and i could use PHP (which is Flex)", that is sort of right. AIR is a replacement for C++ in that you can write desktop apps with both. However, because of the AIR runtime, you do not have to write different versions for different operating systems. the one AIR app will work on Windows, Mac, Linux and now Android phones. With C++, you'd have to modify your codebase for all of these environments. Flex is not like PHP however, it's client side so is more like a more-powerful Javascript. You can have a Flex app talking to a PHP backend (using AMFPHP or Zend_AMF to communicate) which handles all the server-side stuff like retrieving data from a database and sending it back to the Flex app running in the browser on the client. Flex is sort of like a collection of components (it's officially an SDK) to make writing web apps easier. So, for example, there's drop-down menus, date-pickers, datagrids, trees, video displays, etc, plus everything else that's available in Flash. IMO, the best thing about Flex development over HTML/JS development is the layout model. You can make some very complex fluid layouts very easily in Flex which adapt to different screen sizes. You also don't have to do much in the way of cross-browser testing - it looks the same in all browsers on all OSes as long as the user has the approriate Flash Player. It's also very fast when handling lots of data and makes it easy to mix many different multimedia components, video, audio, etc, in the same app. Some good apps written in Flex are Aviary, Photoshop.com and Buzzword. Some good AIR apps are the eBay desktop client, Feedalizr, Seesmic Desktop, etc.
This could've been solved by googling "adobe air tutorial hello world", but here's the link to Adobe's official air beginner hello world tutorial: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/AIR/1.5/devappshtml/WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e3d118666ade46-7ecc.html
For an internship, I'm gonna have to develop a desktop application. The focus is creating a rich UI ( cool effects, sound etc ). Which tech should I go with ?
- Flash ? ( in this case, shoud I go with a flex project ? AIR ? what is the gain between this and a simple raw flash project )
- C#/Silverlight ?
Any other possibility ?
If experienced developers could give their advice, that would be great thanks.
The best technology to use is probably the one you're most familiar with, unless you mean you're going to be learning on the fly. But for the various options I'll take a stab.
Flash itself (the runtime) is a browser plugin, so that's not what you want, but if you build your application in Flash or Flex (the authoring tools), then you can publish it as an AIR application. AIR is also a runtime - basically it's Flash, plus a bunch of extra APIs for running outside the browser. The advantages to making an AIR app are:
The same app runs on win/mac/linux
You can make it with the same skills/tools you use for Flash (dubious utility if you don't have those skills/tools, of course)
Close tool integration with other Adobe tools (photoshop, after effects, etc.)
The main disadvantage is incomplete access to native (i.e. OS) capabilities. The way a runtime allows you to run the same app on win/mac/linux is by restricting you from doing some of the things that you could do with a native application.
As for Flex, whether you use Flex or not is a separate question. Flex is a framework within Flash - an AIR app can be made using Flex or not using it. Basically, if you expect your app to have a lot of controls, slider bars, charts, accordion panels, etc., you might look into Flex. If you expect it to have a lot of animations and pictures and sounds, plain-old-Flash may be better.
Apart from Flash, the other main choice for a runtime is Silverlight. The advantages there are, to be honest, basically the same. You use .NET instead of ActionScript, and the tooling integration is with MS' Expression suite instead of Adobe's creative suite, but the development process and the results are quite similar. The choice between AIR and Silverlight is really a choice between Adobe tools and MS tools, and between two programming languages of entirely comparable power. Most everyone simply uses the one they're more familiar with.
Finally, the other set of options is not to use a runtime, and to simply compile an app from any language/development environment you like - C, C++, .NET, Python, anything. The advantage here is you get (in general) full access to OS capabilities. The disadvantages are, you (in general) need to do extra development to run on multiple platforms, and also I don't think you'll find a language/environment that lets you work with multimedia as easily as you can in AIR and Silverlight.
Depends what programming languages are you proficient in. If you are .NET/C#/VB.NET guy go with SilverLight or WPF. If you know ActionScript, go with Adobe line of products.
My preference goes to the (slightly) most opened universe. Assumed that you know how to write Object-oriented programs, Adobe is using Eclipse as a base for his tools, using plugins.
Actionscript is just like Javascript syntax. You just have to learn the flex 4 libraries.
Then, publish you app as an Air desktop application that can run everywhere. Really everywhere
The only thing to know about MS tools and languages and libraries is that they are very well designed and usable. and it runs on Win and mac also. and Only.
If the main request is to have a rich UI the simplest approach is to build a Flex application running under Adobe AIR platform. The answer to the questions Flash or Flex is very simple: if you are a designer go with Flash, if you are a developer stay away from Flash and use Flex. The Flex framework was created for developers, and is really hard to replicate all its features in Flash (think only what you have to do in Flash if you want to resize your app).
On the other hand if you are coming from a .NET background it will make more sense to stick with Silverlight/C#
I'm not sure if this helps but I'm developing in Flex and now I have started to learn Silverlight and I can say that developing in Flex Builder is much more faster then developing in Silverlight( Visual Studios ) . For me Flex Builder is much better because you use only one IDE to develop both back and front end. And that's when it comes to web development. If you want to do desktop applications then you do the same thing and a plus is that you get everything in only one file. You also have a small SQL database that comes with it.
But on the other hand when you develop in Silverlight you have to use several IDE's or tools outside Visual Studios to make awesome graphics. But if you want to have more time for design then I would suggest to use Flex Builder and not Silverlight.
I recently stumbled upon flex/openlaszlo (OL). Both seem very useful and I have a few questions about them:
What is needed to deploy flex apps? From what I understand, the flex sdk
is open source, but the other tools
(for development and deployment) are
proprietary.
What is needed to deploy openlaszlo? Is it completely open
source (from development to
deployment), or does it have
development/deployment "gotchas" like
flex?
Specifically, I'd like to use flex or openlaszlo to either augment or
replace an editable table I created
using js, ajax, html, and css. Is this
the type of thing flex/OL can/should
be used for? Are there any drawbacks
or pitfalls to using flex/OL for this
rather than straight js, ajax, html,
css?
Thanks.
Edit: Are there any licensing (use) restrictions on applications built on flex? i.e. applications built on flex can be for only non-commercial use, unless a commercial license is purchased?
The following link has some discussion about openlaszlo and flex, it may help you:
Use the best open source client-side framework for cloud computing
You do not need anything special to deploy Flex apps. Just put the compile app (a SWF file) on any web server. Flex apps can talk to any back-end.
Flex SDK is free, but Flex Builder is not. You can use the free and open source FlashDevelop to write flex apps - it doesn't have drag-n-drop features like flex builder, but it offers code hinting and stuff. I don't know about openlaszlo.
Below is the link providing details of tools/IDEs for developing OpenLazlo applications
http://wiki.openlaszlo.org/Development_Tools
Re: "What is needed to deploy openlaszlo? Is it completely open source (from development to deployment)"
OpenLaszlo is OpenSource, but the typical versions you install come with the main components pre-compiled into a SWF for the SWF run-time. However, you can download the full source code if you wish to look at it and/or compile the core yourself:
Last official released version (4.9.0): http://download.openlaszlo.org/4.9.0/openlaszlo-4.9.0-src.tar.gz
Nightly builds:
http://download.openlaszlo.org/nightly/trunk/ (you will see "source" as an option after you click the link of the version you want)
OpenLaszlo does not require anything else to be deployed but itself, except if your application is compiled to the SWF run-time then the user will need the Adobe Flash player installed in their browser to use it.
I'll answer your last question: the biggest drawback to using Flex is that it requires the client to have the Flash Player plugin installed in their browser. Not that big a deal for most people since Flash Player is over 98% of all computers. With the straight Javascript, AJAX, HTML, CSS approach it should work on all browsers, assuming you wrote it correctly.
A quick glance at the present-day internet would seem to indicate that Adobe Flash is the obvious choice for embedding video in a web page. Is this accurate, or are they other effective choices? Does the choice of ASP.NET as a platform influence this decision?
Flash is certainly the most ubiquitous and portable solution. 98% of browsers have Flash installed. Other alternatives are Quicktime, Windows Media Player, or even Silverlight (Microsoft's Flash competitor, which can be used to embed several video formats).
I would recommend using Flash (and it's FLV video file format) for embedding your video unless you have very specific requirements as far as video quality or DRM.
Flash is usually the product of choice: Everyone has it, and using the JW FLV Player makes it relatively easy on your side.
As for other Video Formats, there are WMV and QuickTime, but the players are rather "heavy", not everyone might have them and they feel so 1990ish...
Real Player... Don't let me even start ranting about that pile of ...
The only other alternative of Flash that I would personally consider is Silverlight, which allows streaming WMV Videos. I found the production of WMV much better and easier than FLV because all Windows FLV Encoders I tried are not really good and stable, whereas pretty much every tool can natively output WMV. The problem with Silverlight is that no one has that Browser Plugin (yet?). There is also a player from JW.
One consideration would be whether video playback is via progressive download or streaming. If it's progressive download, then I would say use Flash because you get a wider audience reach.
For streaming wmv, it is out of the box functionality provided by Windows Media Services
For streaming flash, you will have to install a streaming server on your Windows box. Some options are:
Adobe Flash Media Server (Commercial)
Wowza Media Server (Free/Commercial)
Red5 Flash Server (Open Source)
If you have access to Microsoft Expression Encoder 2, you can use that to encode a video file and generate a Silverlight video player. Then if you have IIS 7, you can use Adaptive or Smooth Streaming also checkout Smooth HD for a really cool example.
You can also do streaming from the free Microsoft Silverlight Streaming Service. It's connected to a Windows Live account.
A consideration is that the client will need to have Silverlight installed, just like Flash, but Flash has been around longer.
<object width="660" height="525"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WAQUskZuXhQ&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WAQUskZuXhQ&hl=en&fs=1&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="660" height="525"></embed></object>
I have worked for a company that developed a system for distributing media content to dedicated "players". It was web based and used ASP.NET technology and have tried almost every possible media format you can think of and your choice really comes down to asking yourself:
does it needs to play directly out of the box, or can I make sure that the components required to play the videos can be installed beforehand?
If your answer is that it needs to play out of the box then really your only option is flash (I know that it is not installed by default, but most will already have it installed)
If it is not a big issue that extra components are needed then you can go with formats that are supported by windows media player
The reason why windows media player falls into the second option is because for some browsers and some formats extra components must be installed.
We had the luxury that the "players" were provided by us, so we could go for the second option, however even we tried to convert as much as possible back to flash because it handles way better than windows media player
"Does the choice of ASP.NET as a platform influence this decision?"
Probably not.