Yet Another Closed Platform
When will Adobe/Macromedia learn?
Why would someone want to lock themselves into a proprietary, closed platform - like Apollo?
Unfortunately none of the (so-called) analyst, experts out there plugging Adobe - has brought this up yet. I’m not sure why they think that desktop based apps - connected to the Internet - are so new or different - or why locking yourself into an Adobe platform is smart, but both Scoble, Wilson and Arrington seem to love it.
One could argue that by enabling developers to easily connect media, web and the desktop together - that they’ll be able to get further faster - but would someone please mention to these poor schmucks who swallow this pitch that if you’re hopelessly locked into a proprieary platform - that the owner of the platform (Google, Microsoft, Adobe, MySpace) can do ANYTHING they want - at any time and discard you as fast as - well as fast as Macromedia ripped of Laszlo.
So if history is any guidance, the ONE company who you’d NEVER trust - as far as you can throw them - is exactly the people shoveling you this Apollo crap.
What open standards does Apollo support (besides http, HML and tcp/ip?) How could it have been done better - open? How many young companies have they already ripped off, stolen their IP or made promsies to - which they’ll break?
I can’t believe nobody is calling them on this atrocity of a platform? Well I am.
Everything Macromedia ever did to try and provide an integrated platform for developers - has failed. Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?
Well anyway - the platform sucks, stay away from it. But it gives me an excuse to use one of my favorite acronyms - YACP.
“Why would someone want to lock themselves into a proprietary, closed platform - like Apollo?”
Hi Marc, labels aside, what are you afraid might happen?
jd/adobe
“Why would someone want to lock themselves into a proprietary, closed platform - like Apollo?”
Hi Marc, labels aside, what are you afraid might happen?
jd/adobe
“Why would someone want to lock themselves into a proprietary, closed platform - like Apollo?”
Hi Marc, labels aside, what are you afraid might happen?
jd/adobe
What’s a better model for creating extremely rich user interfaces that are easily made to work cross-platform and, in Apollo’s case, can live outside the browser context, as an application? I’ve been using Apollo for a bit now and I’m loving it. Why is everyone afraid of proprietary platforms and systems? What’s to call them on? My only experience with developing stuff from Adobe other than Apollo has been with Flex and, frankly, the results were astoundingly good for us. We could have never built Eyejot as quickly and as easily with anything else except, perhaps, Lazslo. But the tools provided by Adobe are better and the UI objects, at this time, richer.
What’s a better model for creating extremely rich user interfaces that are easily made to work cross-platform and, in Apollo’s case, can live outside the browser context, as an application? I’ve been using Apollo for a bit now and I’m loving it. Why is everyone afraid of proprietary platforms and systems? What’s to call them on? My only experience with developing stuff from Adobe other than Apollo has been with Flex and, frankly, the results were astoundingly good for us. We could have never built Eyejot as quickly and as easily with anything else except, perhaps, Lazslo. But the tools provided by Adobe are better and the UI objects, at this time, richer.
What’s a better model for creating extremely rich user interfaces that are easily made to work cross-platform and, in Apollo’s case, can live outside the browser context, as an application? I’ve been using Apollo for a bit now and I’m loving it. Why is everyone afraid of proprietary platforms and systems? What’s to call them on? My only experience with developing stuff from Adobe other than Apollo has been with Flex and, frankly, the results were astoundingly good for us. We could have never built Eyejot as quickly and as easily with anything else except, perhaps, Lazslo. But the tools provided by Adobe are better and the UI objects, at this time, richer.
So will the market bring something better? If the OS and browser wars are any indication of future behavior, business in general cares not for “standards” being open… they just want them to work. Vendor lock-in? Can you say Microsoft? They don’t care dude. They just want a shiny whiz-bang demo from IT that promises the moon and delivers something akin to green cheese.
I’m on your side, but pointing out the sad reality of the situation.
So will the market bring something better? If the OS and browser wars are any indication of future behavior, business in general cares not for “standards” being open… they just want them to work. Vendor lock-in? Can you say Microsoft? They don’t care dude. They just want a shiny whiz-bang demo from IT that promises the moon and delivers something akin to green cheese.
I’m on your side, but pointing out the sad reality of the situation.
So will the market bring something better? If the OS and browser wars are any indication of future behavior, business in general cares not for “standards” being open… they just want them to work. Vendor lock-in? Can you say Microsoft? They don’t care dude. They just want a shiny whiz-bang demo from IT that promises the moon and delivers something akin to green cheese.
I’m on your side, but pointing out the sad reality of the situation.
Marc, I’m with you, but I think for most young companies (such as my own) who are looking into Apollo, we aren’t planning to lock ourselves into it. We are just looking for a highly usable and attractive way to hook our FOSS and standards-based backends into a user’s desktop. Once we cross out of the hosted world we are willing to bargain with the devil whether its .Net, XCode/Quartz, Second Life/LSL, MSIE, XUL, Flex, etc. We are ready to serve our users needs, and if they want something gooey and shiny, that holds up to some expected level of “Apple-ness” (especially if you are building media apps) then we might just have to provide it.
I’m personally hoping that XULRunner kicks Apollo’s ass, and am eagerly following the amazing work done by the Songbird and Democracy teams to push the limits there.
Regardless, if you have architected well, it doesn’t take much work to build any sort of client that offers some enhancement on the browser experience.
Marc, I’m with you, but I think for most young companies (such as my own) who are looking into Apollo, we aren’t planning to lock ourselves into it. We are just looking for a highly usable and attractive way to hook our FOSS and standards-based backends into a user’s desktop. Once we cross out of the hosted world we are willing to bargain with the devil whether its .Net, XCode/Quartz, Second Life/LSL, MSIE, XUL, Flex, etc. We are ready to serve our users needs, and if they want something gooey and shiny, that holds up to some expected level of “Apple-ness” (especially if you are building media apps) then we might just have to provide it.
I’m personally hoping that XULRunner kicks Apollo’s ass, and am eagerly following the amazing work done by the Songbird and Democracy teams to push the limits there.
Regardless, if you have architected well, it doesn’t take much work to build any sort of client that offers some enhancement on the browser experience.
Marc, I’m with you, but I think for most young companies (such as my own) who are looking into Apollo, we aren’t planning to lock ourselves into it. We are just looking for a highly usable and attractive way to hook our FOSS and standards-based backends into a user’s desktop. Once we cross out of the hosted world we are willing to bargain with the devil whether its .Net, XCode/Quartz, Second Life/LSL, MSIE, XUL, Flex, etc. We are ready to serve our users needs, and if they want something gooey and shiny, that holds up to some expected level of “Apple-ness” (especially if you are building media apps) then we might just have to provide it.
I’m personally hoping that XULRunner kicks Apollo’s ass, and am eagerly following the amazing work done by the Songbird and Democracy teams to push the limits there.
Regardless, if you have architected well, it doesn’t take much work to build any sort of client that offers some enhancement on the browser experience.
Marc asks: “What open standards does Apollo support (besides http, HML and tcp/ip?) ”
Here are a few of the open standards that Apollo supports:
HTML, CSS, ECMAScript, PDF (now an ISO Standard!), Web Services (SOAP, WSDL), XML, W3C Event Model, E4X, etc.
Marc writes: “Everything Macromedia ever did to try and provide an integrated platform for developers - has failed. ”
Evidence? Lets see. When you left Macromind in what, 1991, the company had *maybe* $10M in revenue and was unprofitable. When Macromedia sold to Adobe, it had half a billion in revenue, highly profitable, and was worth $3.4B. Back in 1991 there were maybe a few tens of thousands of Director developers (and maybe a few thousand Macromind 3D users). Years later, Macromedia built massive ecosystems of 3M Dreamweaver developers, 1M Flash developers, and are rapidly accelerating Flex developers today; Flash is on 200M cell phones and 700M desktops. Sour Grapes perhaps? Oh well. Perhaps your next venture…
Marc writes: “Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?”
That is a great point Marc. Given that everything Macromedia did failed, of course Jeremy would have to leave and start Brightcove. Oh wait. Whoops. Brightcove is built on that Macromedia (now Adobe) Platform. The front end is Flash and Flash video, the publishing system is Flex, they stream with FMS, and the (future) video editor Aftermix is Flex. Whoops. Maybe he left to beause he was so inspired by the Macromedia platform he wanted to build on it this whole new service, Brightcove. Maybe he just wanted to do a startup. Maybe he was sick of travelling. But he certainly doesn’t seem to think that Macromedia’s platform for developers failed, cause he is one of the showcase adopters of that platform.
Peace!
Marc asks: “What open standards does Apollo support (besides http, HML and tcp/ip?) ”
Here are a few of the open standards that Apollo supports:
HTML, CSS, ECMAScript, PDF (now an ISO Standard!), Web Services (SOAP, WSDL), XML, W3C Event Model, E4X, etc.
Marc writes: “Everything Macromedia ever did to try and provide an integrated platform for developers - has failed. ”
Evidence? Lets see. When you left Macromind in what, 1991, the company had *maybe* $10M in revenue and was unprofitable. When Macromedia sold to Adobe, it had half a billion in revenue, highly profitable, and was worth $3.4B. Back in 1991 there were maybe a few tens of thousands of Director developers (and maybe a few thousand Macromind 3D users). Years later, Macromedia built massive ecosystems of 3M Dreamweaver developers, 1M Flash developers, and are rapidly accelerating Flex developers today; Flash is on 200M cell phones and 700M desktops. Sour Grapes perhaps? Oh well. Perhaps your next venture…
Marc writes: “Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?”
That is a great point Marc. Given that everything Macromedia did failed, of course Jeremy would have to leave and start Brightcove. Oh wait. Whoops. Brightcove is built on that Macromedia (now Adobe) Platform. The front end is Flash and Flash video, the publishing system is Flex, they stream with FMS, and the (future) video editor Aftermix is Flex. Whoops. Maybe he left to beause he was so inspired by the Macromedia platform he wanted to build on it this whole new service, Brightcove. Maybe he just wanted to do a startup. Maybe he was sick of travelling. But he certainly doesn’t seem to think that Macromedia’s platform for developers failed, cause he is one of the showcase adopters of that platform.
Peace!
Marc asks: “What open standards does Apollo support (besides http, HML and tcp/ip?) ”
Here are a few of the open standards that Apollo supports:
HTML, CSS, ECMAScript, PDF (now an ISO Standard!), Web Services (SOAP, WSDL), XML, W3C Event Model, E4X, etc.
Marc writes: “Everything Macromedia ever did to try and provide an integrated platform for developers - has failed. ”
Evidence? Lets see. When you left Macromind in what, 1991, the company had *maybe* $10M in revenue and was unprofitable. When Macromedia sold to Adobe, it had half a billion in revenue, highly profitable, and was worth $3.4B. Back in 1991 there were maybe a few tens of thousands of Director developers (and maybe a few thousand Macromind 3D users). Years later, Macromedia built massive ecosystems of 3M Dreamweaver developers, 1M Flash developers, and are rapidly accelerating Flex developers today; Flash is on 200M cell phones and 700M desktops. Sour Grapes perhaps? Oh well. Perhaps your next venture…
Marc writes: “Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?”
That is a great point Marc. Given that everything Macromedia did failed, of course Jeremy would have to leave and start Brightcove. Oh wait. Whoops. Brightcove is built on that Macromedia (now Adobe) Platform. The front end is Flash and Flash video, the publishing system is Flex, they stream with FMS, and the (future) video editor Aftermix is Flex. Whoops. Maybe he left to beause he was so inspired by the Macromedia platform he wanted to build on it this whole new service, Brightcove. Maybe he just wanted to do a startup. Maybe he was sick of travelling. But he certainly doesn’t seem to think that Macromedia’s platform for developers failed, cause he is one of the showcase adopters of that platform.
Peace!
you said none of the analysts have covered the issue. i beg to differ. we have done extensive work looking at Adobe and openness issues.
http://www.google.com/custom?cx=009365913926268090452%3Abwkt-kj4fbq&q=adobe+open&sa=Search&cof=LH%3A25%3BCX%3ARedMonk%2520Related%3BFORID%3A1%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eredmonk%2Ecom%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eredmonk%2Ecom%2Fimages%2Flogo_banner%2Egif%3BLP%3A1&hl=en&client=ca-pub-9023901255191857&channel=5651410214
you said none of the analysts have covered the issue. i beg to differ. we have done extensive work looking at Adobe and openness issues.
http://www.google.com/custom?cx=009365913926268090452%3Abwkt-kj4fbq&q=adobe+open&sa=Search&cof=LH%3A25%3BCX%3ARedMonk%2520Related%3BFORID%3A1%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eredmonk%2Ecom%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eredmonk%2Ecom%2Fimages%2Flogo_banner%2Egif%3BLP%3A1&hl=en&client=ca-pub-9023901255191857&channel=5651410214
you said none of the analysts have covered the issue. i beg to differ. we have done extensive work looking at Adobe and openness issues.
http://www.google.com/custom?cx=009365913926268090452%3Abwkt-kj4fbq&q=adobe+open&sa=Search&cof=LH%3A25%3BCX%3ARedMonk%2520Related%3BFORID%3A1%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eredmonk%2Ecom%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eredmonk%2Ecom%2Fimages%2Flogo_banner%2Egif%3BLP%3A1&hl=en&client=ca-pub-9023901255191857&channel=5651410214
You know your just jealous …..
You know your just jealous …..
You know your just jealous …..
Adobe, like Microsoft, just wants:
DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS!
Adobe, like Microsoft, just wants:
DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS!
Adobe, like Microsoft, just wants:
DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS!
As far a I can see from a very quick look…. Apollo is shaping up to be an overweight, overengineered, restrictive platform, XulRunner is very open but might need help in getting taken seriously which in the RIA race leaves WPF/E as about the only one that has a successful development company backing it and appears to have a very open approach (the object model is exposed to javascript in the brower. Nothing is hidden and none of the tricks and techniques from the ajax world are precluded… it even plays nice with Flash) - in it’s current version you can even develop using nothing more expensive than Notepad and the (free) SDK… Coming down the track are rumors about a managed code solution which means the full power of Visual Studio and leveraging (I hope) existing skills rather than a whole new learning curve…
I’ve never been a fan of Flash. ColdFusion was an over-priced under-performing beast and Flex was slightly less fun developing in than banging my head against a wall and hoping to get code out. But I know it’s got its advocates so I’ll let ‘em slug it out while I get on with real work
As far a I can see from a very quick look…. Apollo is shaping up to be an overweight, overengineered, restrictive platform, XulRunner is very open but might need help in getting taken seriously which in the RIA race leaves WPF/E as about the only one that has a successful development company backing it and appears to have a very open approach (the object model is exposed to javascript in the brower. Nothing is hidden and none of the tricks and techniques from the ajax world are precluded… it even plays nice with Flash) - in it’s current version you can even develop using nothing more expensive than Notepad and the (free) SDK… Coming down the track are rumors about a managed code solution which means the full power of Visual Studio and leveraging (I hope) existing skills rather than a whole new learning curve…
I’ve never been a fan of Flash. ColdFusion was an over-priced under-performing beast and Flex was slightly less fun developing in than banging my head against a wall and hoping to get code out. But I know it’s got its advocates so I’ll let ‘em slug it out while I get on with real work
As far a I can see from a very quick look…. Apollo is shaping up to be an overweight, overengineered, restrictive platform, XulRunner is very open but might need help in getting taken seriously which in the RIA race leaves WPF/E as about the only one that has a successful development company backing it and appears to have a very open approach (the object model is exposed to javascript in the brower. Nothing is hidden and none of the tricks and techniques from the ajax world are precluded… it even plays nice with Flash) - in it’s current version you can even develop using nothing more expensive than Notepad and the (free) SDK… Coming down the track are rumors about a managed code solution which means the full power of Visual Studio and leveraging (I hope) existing skills rather than a whole new learning curve…
I’ve never been a fan of Flash. ColdFusion was an over-priced under-performing beast and Flex was slightly less fun developing in than banging my head against a wall and hoping to get code out. But I know it’s got its advocates so I’ll let ‘em slug it out while I get on with real work
Instead of creating a new browser engine, logical DOM, and easy-to-use, easy-to-read, self-documenting browser programming language, we are stuck with retarded solutions: Ugly, bug-ridden, craptastic Javascript; hacktastic, ready-to-break AJAX; and the proprietary, gaudy, add-another-layer-of-bugs scourge that is Flash.
Ephemeral, fragile interfaces built on a house of cards are the junky work of shortsighted fools.
Instead of creating a new browser engine, logical DOM, and easy-to-use, easy-to-read, self-documenting browser programming language, we are stuck with retarded solutions: Ugly, bug-ridden, craptastic Javascript; hacktastic, ready-to-break AJAX; and the proprietary, gaudy, add-another-layer-of-bugs scourge that is Flash.
Ephemeral, fragile interfaces built on a house of cards are the junky work of shortsighted fools.
Instead of creating a new browser engine, logical DOM, and easy-to-use, easy-to-read, self-documenting browser programming language, we are stuck with retarded solutions: Ugly, bug-ridden, craptastic Javascript; hacktastic, ready-to-break AJAX; and the proprietary, gaudy, add-another-layer-of-bugs scourge that is Flash.
Ephemeral, fragile interfaces built on a house of cards are the junky work of shortsighted fools.
“Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?”
Could it also be because he liked to build his own team in a bureaucratic-free environment?
Other than that, I call disingenuous on what you say. If Apollo takes off, its pieces will be reverse-engineered left and right, tools will be created and from that point on Adobe will not be able to cut the air supply like you said. You talk more like a disgruntled ex-MACR than anything else.
“Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?”
Could it also be because he liked to build his own team in a bureaucratic-free environment?
Other than that, I call disingenuous on what you say. If Apollo takes off, its pieces will be reverse-engineered left and right, tools will be created and from that point on Adobe will not be able to cut the air supply like you said. You talk more like a disgruntled ex-MACR than anything else.
“Why do you think Jeremy Allaire had to leave Macromedia to go do Brightcove?”
Could it also be because he liked to build his own team in a bureaucratic-free environment?
Other than that, I call disingenuous on what you say. If Apollo takes off, its pieces will be reverse-engineered left and right, tools will be created and from that point on Adobe will not be able to cut the air supply like you said. You talk more like a disgruntled ex-MACR than anything else.
Marc’s Vox
How I Spent My Apollo Camp Vacation
OK, I get your points Marc.
You know, people asked me some of your very questions when I started developing for Director {nay, VideoWorks Interactive} lo’ those many many moons ago. But I agree the worry going forward for developers is another abandoned effort like Central that leaves our good efforts in ruins. So, ‘this one-time at band-camp’ I arrived skeptical but intrigued and left feeling a real shift in the playing field at hand. Adobe buying Macromedia means tendrils reach into almost every home and office desktop in the world. Flash is like a magnificent worm now snaking it’s way through the vast majority of the world’s connected computers and Adobe is going to swallow the internet browser from the inside out.
Brilliant stratagem. I salute Adobe. Really.
To me developing for Apollo means to switch platforms like swapping sun-glasses w/o a dropped tag or font substituted & miss-aligned layout. A refocus on the designer, focus & simplicity, ease of development is in order - or else Adobe should just stick to the expensive corporate in-house model and those eager techno-preisthoods ready to invoice. With Apollo and the current momentum of Flex+Flash I can imagine a true author-once cross-platform web/RIA development system with an intrinsic graphical finesse that brings to mind high-touch glossy magazine aesthetics. Design & produce just once to deploy your services across the world from laptop to mobile phone without browser support hassles and platform agnostic in creation or playback. Heady stuff. I’m not getting locked in any more than Director locked me in. I can take my logic & systemic understanding, graphic resources, the business models in motion, and head full of product ideas and deploy them under other environments if Apollo should be burdensome instead of liberating, If your worried about lock-out/lock-in gatekeepers, consider MicroSoft {shudder} to understand biz doesn’t care if you make an ornate Walled Garden as long as it actually works. This has been true of any manner of business arrangements throughout the rise of modern financial markets and commerce for several hundred years. We don’t have to like it, it just is.
Just as Apple “Black-Boxed” the Macintosh toolbox, Adobe is abstracting both browser and OS in a bid to win the web today and ever greater media landscapes of tomorrow. I usually don’t get in the habit of cheering for the big-guy on the playground or the marketplace, but I do now. Making my html/css compatible with the variety of browsers is a huge time-suck and frustration-peaking process - most especially with standards-based mutants like IExplorer. I demand relief. To author just once is a real ray of hopeful light on a bloody battlefield at the bottom of Sisyphus Hill. My main concern is that the authoring be as clean and designer-oriented a process as possible {as opposed to nerdy} and with the ActionScript 3 looking ever-more verbose this is a worry.
Caveat: As an old Director hand I have viewed the rise of Flash with annoyance. When Buzz Kettles showed me a prerelease version over a decade ago I could see the value of interactive vector-based media… but I was underwhelmed by the severely limited scripting control: Flash initially struck me as something that should have been an export option for Director. I’ll leave the awfulness of the Flash interface to other screeds - too easy a target. Anyway, Form and Function had some real accomplishments under our belt deploying Director technology and the notion of stepping backwards {remains} unappealing.
So… here we are, a decade later Flash + Flex is technically about where Director was when Flash 1.0 appeared. Sure, the Flex and ActionScript3 information-engines are better tuned for our streaming world of the XXIst, but the coding tolerances more finicky. Flash compiling has always struck me as a backwards direction w/ActionScript 1+2 kinda-sorta half-baked and far too geeky for easy-entry or pleasurable development. Declaring variables is more work than in previous versions, for example. I’m a designer primarily, although I can sort my way through scripts and even code - but the win here is to make that go away and focus on the task at hand: making eBay flyers, Shopping Carts, Wanted Ads and myriad mundane commercial things the great unwashed do daily. Otherwise this effort should rightfully be dismissed as expensive coffee-talk thought bubbles. This should get easier and higher-level as time marches on and not more brittle and harder to master for the designer. Blame it on residual sour grapes, but whatever it’s limits Lingo was forgiving and helped a fault-prone new technology keep it’s best foot forward. I really think Adobe has the logic side down and they need to open up to the creative direction and be sure the UI is focused on the creative professional until easy development is polished smooth and not gearhead-centric. Certainly better than anything from a certain Northwest technology cartel.
I’m not so sure the guiding hands at Adobe will allow more half-baked measures like Central that all-too often littered the MacroMedia landscape. And very importantly they appear to be enforcing a level of quality control discipline that has been long overdue… and I dare say this was something of the legacy you left at MacroMind. I’ve worked under you directly as an independent developer and I will testify you can be demanding and exacting in the best sense of visionary activist entrepreneur terms, but MacroMind/Media was always too ready to ship before Prime Time. My daily struggles with DreamWeaver are the latest case in point. Compare the {so-called} WYSIWYG efforts of the last DW -vs- MicroSoft’s FrontPage : I listen to co-workers bitch vehemently over these differences daily.
If Adobe can just keep focused on the designer and not the geek, then Adobe scores a quick landslide victory before the other players can respond. They’ve got this year to hone the front end authoring. So, I’m holding my breath and jumping off the cliff into these waters. The risk is justified and upside enormous for breaking down technical barriers as they are doing and I have more confidence in Adobe staying power than anything else on the horizon. I do feel naked booting without QuickTime, but I know it’ll be a heckuva ride all the way down whatever temperature the water ends up. And it looks like I’ll have some company.
Viva, la revolucion!
PS - as an aside, the bulk of this commentary was posted to Apollo architect Kevin Lynch’s corporate-sponsored “personal” blog-thang [”Apollo alpha” http://www.klynch.com/archives/000086.html a week ago and he has not seen fit to pass it long to the public. If you look at the comments he’s allowed it’s all cheerleading and back-slapping. I think I can safely say that particular outlet is more PR than anything resembling the scientific method or an open-community and I am disappointed as I extend bull-shite detectors aquiver.
Marc’s Vox
How I Spent My Apollo Camp Vacation
OK, I get your points Marc.
You know, people asked me some of your very questions when I started developing for Director {nay, VideoWorks Interactive} lo’ those many many moons ago. But I agree the worry going forward for developers is another abandoned effort like Central that leaves our good efforts in ruins. So, ‘this one-time at band-camp’ I arrived skeptical but intrigued and left feeling a real shift in the playing field at hand. Adobe buying Macromedia means tendrils reach into almost every home and office desktop in the world. Flash is like a magnificent worm now snaking it’s way through the vast majority of the world’s connected computers and Adobe is going to swallow the internet browser from the inside out.
Brilliant stratagem. I salute Adobe. Really.
To me developing for Apollo means to switch platforms like swapping sun-glasses w/o a dropped tag or font substituted & miss-aligned layout. A refocus on the designer, focus & simplicity, ease of development is in order - or else Adobe should just stick to the expensive corporate in-house model and those eager techno-preisthoods ready to invoice. With Apollo and the current momentum of Flex+Flash I can imagine a true author-once cross-platform web/RIA development system with an intrinsic graphical finesse that brings to mind high-touch glossy magazine aesthetics. Design & produce just once to deploy your services across the world from laptop to mobile phone without browser support hassles and platform agnostic in creation or playback. Heady stuff. I’m not getting locked in any more than Director locked me in. I can take my logic & systemic understanding, graphic resources, the business models in motion, and head full of product ideas and deploy them under other environments if Apollo should be burdensome instead of liberating, If your worried about lock-out/lock-in gatekeepers, consider MicroSoft {shudder} to understand biz doesn’t care if you make an ornate Walled Garden as long as it actually works. This has been true of any manner of business arrangements throughout the rise of modern financial markets and commerce for several hundred years. We don’t have to like it, it just is.
Just as Apple “Black-Boxed” the Macintosh toolbox, Adobe is abstracting both browser and OS in a bid to win the web today and ever greater media landscapes of tomorrow. I usually don’t get in the habit of cheering for the big-guy on the playground or the marketplace, but I do now. Making my html/css compatible with the variety of browsers is a huge time-suck and frustration-peaking process - most especially with standards-based mutants like IExplorer. I demand relief. To author just once is a real ray of hopeful light on a bloody battlefield at the bottom of Sisyphus Hill. My main concern is that the authoring be as clean and designer-oriented a process as possible {as opposed to nerdy} and with the ActionScript 3 looking ever-more verbose this is a worry.
Caveat: As an old Director hand I have viewed the rise of Flash with annoyance. When Buzz Kettles showed me a prerelease version over a decade ago I could see the value of interactive vector-based media… but I was underwhelmed by the severely limited scripting control: Flash initially struck me as something that should have been an export option for Director. I’ll leave the awfulness of the Flash interface to other screeds - too easy a target. Anyway, Form and Function had some real accomplishments under our belt deploying Director technology and the notion of stepping backwards {remains} unappealing.
So… here we are, a decade later Flash + Flex is technically about where Director was when Flash 1.0 appeared. Sure, the Flex and ActionScript3 information-engines are better tuned for our streaming world of the XXIst, but the coding tolerances more finicky. Flash compiling has always struck me as a backwards direction w/ActionScript 1+2 kinda-sorta half-baked and far too geeky for easy-entry or pleasurable development. Declaring variables is more work than in previous versions, for example. I’m a designer primarily, although I can sort my way through scripts and even code - but the win here is to make that go away and focus on the task at hand: making eBay flyers, Shopping Carts, Wanted Ads and myriad mundane commercial things the great unwashed do daily. Otherwise this effort should rightfully be dismissed as expensive coffee-talk thought bubbles. This should get easier and higher-level as time marches on and not more brittle and harder to master for the designer. Blame it on residual sour grapes, but whatever it’s limits Lingo was forgiving and helped a fault-prone new technology keep it’s best foot forward. I really think Adobe has the logic side down and they need to open up to the creative direction and be sure the UI is focused on the creative professional until easy development is polished smooth and not gearhead-centric. Certainly better than anything from a certain Northwest technology cartel.
I’m not so sure the guiding hands at Adobe will allow more half-baked measures like Central that all-too often littered the MacroMedia landscape. And very importantly they appear to be enforcing a level of quality control discipline that has been long overdue… and I dare say this was something of the legacy you left at MacroMind. I’ve worked under you directly as an independent developer and I will testify you can be demanding and exacting in the best sense of visionary activist entrepreneur terms, but MacroMind/Media was always too ready to ship before Prime Time. My daily struggles with DreamWeaver are the latest case in point. Compare the {so-called} WYSIWYG efforts of the last DW -vs- MicroSoft’s FrontPage : I listen to co-workers bitch vehemently over these differences daily.
If Adobe can just keep focused on the designer and not the geek, then Adobe scores a quick landslide victory before the other players can respond. They’ve got this year to hone the front end authoring. So, I’m holding my breath and jumping off the cliff into these waters. The risk is justified and upside enormous for breaking down technical barriers as they are doing and I have more confidence in Adobe staying power than anything else on the horizon. I do feel naked booting without QuickTime, but I know it’ll be a heckuva ride all the way down whatever temperature the water ends up. And it looks like I’ll have some company.
Viva, la revolucion!
PS - as an aside, the bulk of this commentary was posted to Apollo architect Kevin Lynch’s corporate-sponsored “personal” blog-thang [”Apollo alpha” http://www.klynch.com/archives/000086.html a week ago and he has not seen fit to pass it long to the public. If you look at the comments he’s allowed it’s all cheerleading and back-slapping. I think I can safely say that particular outlet is more PR than anything resembling the scientific method or an open-community and I am disappointed as I extend bull-shite detectors aquiver.
Marc’s Vox
How I Spent My Apollo Camp Vacation
OK, I get your points Marc.
You know, people asked me some of your very questions when I started developing for Director {nay, VideoWorks Interactive} lo’ those many many moons ago. But I agree the worry going forward for developers is another abandoned effort like Central that leaves our good efforts in ruins. So, ‘this one-time at band-camp’ I arrived skeptical but intrigued and left feeling a real shift in the playing field at hand. Adobe buying Macromedia means tendrils reach into almost every home and office desktop in the world. Flash is like a magnificent worm now snaking it’s way through the vast majority of the world’s connected computers and Adobe is going to swallow the internet browser from the inside out.
Brilliant stratagem. I salute Adobe. Really.
To me developing for Apollo means to switch platforms like swapping sun-glasses w/o a dropped tag or font substituted & miss-aligned layout. A refocus on the designer, focus & simplicity, ease of development is in order - or else Adobe should just stick to the expensive corporate in-house model and those eager techno-preisthoods ready to invoice. With Apollo and the current momentum of Flex+Flash I can imagine a true author-once cross-platform web/RIA development system with an intrinsic graphical finesse that brings to mind high-touch glossy magazine aesthetics. Design & produce just once to deploy your services across the world from laptop to mobile phone without browser support hassles and platform agnostic in creation or playback. Heady stuff. I’m not getting locked in any more than Director locked me in. I can take my logic & systemic understanding, graphic resources, the business models in motion, and head full of product ideas and deploy them under other environments if Apollo should be burdensome instead of liberating, If your worried about lock-out/lock-in gatekeepers, consider MicroSoft {shudder} to understand biz doesn’t care if you make an ornate Walled Garden as long as it actually works. This has been true of any manner of business arrangements throughout the rise of modern financial markets and commerce for several hundred years. We don’t have to like it, it just is.
Just as Apple “Black-Boxed” the Macintosh toolbox, Adobe is abstracting both browser and OS in a bid to win the web today and ever greater media landscapes of tomorrow. I usually don’t get in the habit of cheering for the big-guy on the playground or the marketplace, but I do now. Making my html/css compatible with the variety of browsers is a huge time-suck and frustration-peaking process - most especially with standards-based mutants like IExplorer. I demand relief. To author just once is a real ray of hopeful light on a bloody battlefield at the bottom of Sisyphus Hill. My main concern is that the authoring be as clean and designer-oriented a process as possible {as opposed to nerdy} and with the ActionScript 3 looking ever-more verbose this is a worry.
Caveat: As an old Director hand I have viewed the rise of Flash with annoyance. When Buzz Kettles showed me a prerelease version over a decade ago I could see the value of interactive vector-based media… but I was underwhelmed by the severely limited scripting control: Flash initially struck me as something that should have been an export option for Director. I’ll leave the awfulness of the Flash interface to other screeds - too easy a target. Anyway, Form and Function had some real accomplishments under our belt deploying Director technology and the notion of stepping backwards {remains} unappealing.
So… here we are, a decade later Flash + Flex is technically about where Director was when Flash 1.0 appeared. Sure, the Flex and ActionScript3 information-engines are better tuned for our streaming world of the XXIst, but the coding tolerances more finicky. Flash compiling has always struck me as a backwards direction w/ActionScript 1+2 kinda-sorta half-baked and far too geeky for easy-entry or pleasurable development. Declaring variables is more work than in previous versions, for example. I’m a designer primarily, although I can sort my way through scripts and even code - but the win here is to make that go away and focus on the task at hand: making eBay flyers, Shopping Carts, Wanted Ads and myriad mundane commercial things the great unwashed do daily. Otherwise this effort should rightfully be dismissed as expensive coffee-talk thought bubbles. This should get easier and higher-level as time marches on and not more brittle and harder to master for the designer. Blame it on residual sour grapes, but whatever it’s limits Lingo was forgiving and helped a fault-prone new technology keep it’s best foot forward. I really think Adobe has the logic side down and they need to open up to the creative direction and be sure the UI is focused on the creative professional until easy development is polished smooth and not gearhead-centric. Certainly better than anything from a certain Northwest technology cartel.
I’m not so sure the guiding hands at Adobe will allow more half-baked measures like Central that all-too often littered the MacroMedia landscape. And very importantly they appear to be enforcing a level of quality control discipline that has been long overdue… and I dare say this was something of the legacy you left at MacroMind. I’ve worked under you directly as an independent developer and I will testify you can be demanding and exacting in the best sense of visionary activist entrepreneur terms, but MacroMind/Media was always too ready to ship before Prime Time. My daily struggles with DreamWeaver are the latest case in point. Compare the {so-called} WYSIWYG efforts of the last DW -vs- MicroSoft’s FrontPage : I listen to co-workers bitch vehemently over these differences daily.
If Adobe can just keep focused on the designer and not the geek, then Adobe scores a quick landslide victory before the other players can respond. They’ve got this year to hone the front end authoring. So, I’m holding my breath and jumping off the cliff into these waters. The risk is justified and upside enormous for breaking down technical barriers as they are doing and I have more confidence in Adobe staying power than anything else on the horizon. I do feel naked booting without QuickTime, but I know it’ll be a heckuva ride all the way down whatever temperature the water ends up. And it looks like I’ll have some company.
Viva, la revolucion!
PS - as an aside, the bulk of this commentary was posted to Apollo architect Kevin Lynch’s corporate-sponsored “personal” blog-thang [”Apollo alpha” http://www.klynch.com/archives/000086.html a week ago and he has not seen fit to pass it long to the public. If you look at the comments he’s allowed it’s all cheerleading and back-slapping. I think I can safely say that particular outlet is more PR than anything resembling the scientific method or an open-community and I am disappointed as I extend bull-shite detectors aquiver.
Flash/Actionscript is just a horrible development platform. Flash is now at the level we were developing in the late ’80s.
We are using it because we have to, there is no other 2d engines available for the browser.
“Hi Marc, labels aside, what are you afraid might happen?”
Marc, why would we give *you guys the power to decide about it?
Here I wrote more about it:
http://ivko999.blogspot.com/2007/03/response-on-adobes-apollo.html
Flash/Actionscript is just a horrible development platform. Flash is now at the level we were developing in the late ’80s.
We are using it because we have to, there is no other 2d engines available for the browser.
“Hi Marc, labels aside, what are you afraid might happen?”
Marc, why would we give *you guys the power to decide about it?
Here I wrote more about it:
http://ivko999.blogspot.com/2007/03/response-on-adobes-apollo.html
Flash/Actionscript is just a horrible development platform. Flash is now at the level we were developing in the late ’80s.
We are using it because we have to, there is no other 2d engines available for the browser.
“Hi Marc, labels aside, what are you afraid might happen?”
Marc, why would we give *you guys the power to decide about it?
Here I wrote more about it:
http://ivko999.blogspot.com/2007/03/response-on-adobes-apollo.html