Speak of the Devil

I just mentioned that Macromedia was throwing the idea around that Flash could be used for desktop apps a few days ago. Seems that ZDNET has picked up on it as well:

"...Macromedia Central will create an environment where Flash applications can run independent of the browser. Along with providing the client software--a free addition to the free Flash player--Macromedia plans to sell a wealth of downloadable Flash applications created by third-party developers. Macromedia will take 20 percent of any software sales, with the rest going to developers..."

"...Lancaster said one potentially significant market for Central is the corporate sector. Central could be incorporated into commonly used parts of corporate portals, such as employee directories, to make them available when a worker is away from the office and offline..."
[ZDNET]

I still stand by my original remarks. Why do I want to write a rich client app in Javascript (Flash's ActionScript is based off of JavaScript for those who don't know), when I can create it ten times faster, make it ten times as powerful, and have ten times the flexibility with a .NET rich client? As an experiment, try creating a rss aggregator like RSS Bandit in .NET and then try creating it in Flash. My guess is that:

1) The .NET one will take maybe an hour or two.
2) You will give up before finishing the Flash one.

If someone is up for it, I'd love to see a comparison of the time it takes someone to do this in each of the two environments. I am sure the results would illustrate my point quite nicely.

2 Comments

  • The reason why Macromedia's idea has merit has little to do with the actual programming tools, and much more to do with it's runtime.





    Flash(unlike the CLR) is already installed on tens of millions of PC's today, and also has already gained acceptance from a huge consumer-base.





    Microsoft is at the beginning stages of proliferation, so Flash succeeds merely with it's deployment model.





    Long-term, I have too have doubts about its viability, but it definitely can fill a short-term niche for lightweight apps, purely on the basis of its runtime.





    Lance

  • One, 'cause Flash is cross-platform. That won't matter to a large number of people, but large enough to make money from. Two, because it allows media types to become developers. As a programmer, I want my programming tools to become more powerful. As a designer, I would want my design tools to become more powerful. As a programmer, I wouldn't choose a design tool, and I wouldn't expect designers to choose programming tools, but I would expect both camps to want their tools to become more powerful. We're just not part of the target audience. For those who are, I would imagine this is a very big deal.

Comments have been disabled for this content.