|
Home > Archive > Macromedia Flash Server > August 2005 > when is flashcom 2 coming?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
when is flashcom 2 coming?
|
|
| heisen 2005-08-10, 8:45 pm |
| =EF=BB=BFhi,=0A=0Aany good news on flashcom 2 ?=0A=0Athanks,=0Aheisen.=
=0A_____________________________________
___=0AEmail in a Flash! http://w=
ww.goowy.com=0A
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Mark de Jong [NetMasters BV] 2005-08-10, 8:45 pm |
| Hiesen,
Don't expect it to come soon.  That is all I can say.=20
Kind regards,=20
Mark de Jong=20
NetMasters BV
www.flashhosting.nl / www.netmasters.nl
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org =
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] Namens heisen
Verzonden: donderdag 11 augustus 2005 1:10
Aan: flash
Onderwerp: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
=EF=BB=BFhi,
any good news on flashcom 2 ?
thanks,
heisen.
________________________________________
Email in a Flash! http://www.goowy.com
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Tim Koppers // Ultim-o 2005-08-10, 8:45 pm |
| Soon as in 1 one week, or 2 months
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org =
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Mark de =
Jong [NetMasters BV]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 1:20 AM
To: 'heisen'; 'FlashComm Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Hiesen,
Don't expect it to come soon. That is all I can say.=20
Kind regards,=20
Mark de Jong=20
NetMasters BV
www.flashhosting.nl / www.netmasters.nl
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org =
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] Namens heisen
Verzonden: donderdag 11 augustus 2005 1:10
Aan: flash
Onderwerp: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
=EF=BB=BFhi,
any good news on flashcom 2 ?
thanks,
heisen.
________________________________________
Email in a Flash! http://www.goowy.com
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Dario De Agostini 2005-08-11, 2:46 am |
| >any good news on flashcom 2 ?
as far as i know there is something going on... but i don't think we can
hope to have it released before 2006.
who knows ?
Dario De Agostini
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| acolpitts-lrT4F1HGyz9Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane. 2005-08-11, 5:46 pm |
| Although the prototype style coding is a bit primitive on the server at
this point, I think we should master 1.5 before we start on FCS 2.0 Apps.
As long as the kind folks @ macromedia are working hard on FCS 2.0 (which
we all know they are), I don't care when it comes out... Let's push the
limits of 1.5!!!! (I just really hope application sharing is included in
FCS 2.0)
-AC
flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org wrote on 08/11/2005 04:26:38 AM:
>
> as far as i know there is something going on... but i don't think we can
> hope to have it released before 2006.
>
> who knows ?
>
> Dario De Agostini
>
>
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| subscriptions-ezkcfJexzPeaMJb+Lgu22Q@public.gm 2005-08-12, 7:45 am |
| A primitive 1.0 version forced FCS users to discover the basic design
patterns for multi-user architectures. However, there's a big cost
difference between mastering 1.5, and implementing scalable solutions wit=
h
reasonable time and effort. FCS doesn't scale easily, period. Even when
you figure out how to add clustering and redundancy to an FCS solution,
prototype-style coding makes class re-use and maintance difficult. The fc=
s
framework library is brilliant hacking that grows roses out of very poor
soil (with all respect to Srinivas!).
I'm sorry to sound harsh, but after FCS 1.0, it's like an entire team of
adventurous thinkers gave up trying to invent the future, like they almos=
t
did with FlashCom 1.0, and retreated to milking the e-learning cash cow.
There is not enough perceived value in e-learning technology to attract
the IT budget investments of businesses. However, there's a world of
opportunities within the telecommunications industry awaiting FlashCom to
either take share, or create new value.
-Sam
> Although the prototype style coding is a bit primitive on the server at
> this point, I think we should master 1.5 before we start on FCS 2.0 App=
s.
> As long as the kind folks @ macromedia are working hard on FCS 2.0 (whi=
ch
> we all know they are), I don't care when it comes out... Let's push the
> limits of 1.5!!!! (I just really hope application sharing is included i=
n
> FCS 2.0)
>
> -AC
>
> flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org wrote on 08/11/2005 04:26:38 AM=
:
>
an[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> =3D-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =3D-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Brian Lesser 2005-08-12, 5:45 pm |
| Hi Sam,
I think you missed the mark by ignoring the economic context.
You wrote: "it's like an entire team of adventurous thinkers gave up
trying to invent the future, like they almost did with FlashCom 1.0, and
retreated to milking the e-learning cash cow."
I don't see it that way. Macromedia is not a multi-multi-multi-billion
dollar company based on an operating system monopoly seeded by IBM. At
some point after the initial two year development cycle FlashCom had to
make real money to survive. Macromedia was fortunate to find two
branches for FlashCom that appear to be making them money: streaming
video and Breeze. If they had not followed those two paths with
significant energy then FlashCom might never see a 2.0 release. The
history of FlashCom is already very different and much brighter than it
ever was for Macromedia's initial socket server. Of course you could
argue Macromedia chose the wrong areas to focus on... that they should
have done something else in telecommunications... but I don't see how
they would have monetized that so quickly... and I'm amazed at their
level of success so far running up against entrenched competitors like
Windows Media.
In many respects Breeze Live was the completion of what Macromedia first
attempted with the component framework. It doesn't matter if you call
them pods or components. Breeze adds in the Web application integration,
room/user management, and better components with good performance that
was missing in the component framework. With the introduction of edge
servers it is also slowly moving out of the small room mold into larger
events - and it is still a relatively new product. To me, it looks like
respectable progress for the development team. However, it also
represents a shift in Macromedia's focus to a vertical application and
away from FlashCom as a developer's platform. I don't like that -
especially if features don't return to the platform like screen sharing
- but its not hard to imagine the economic realities behind it. Creating
a new platform for developers can be a big and very expensive problem.
Imagine the treasure Sun and Microsoft sunk into J2EE and .Net. There
are only a few companies on the planet that can afford to take the lead
in doing that on any real scale... and even they may not make money on
it if they use sensible accounting practices.
I also don't agree that FCS 1.0 was such "poor soil." I tend to look at
it differently. It was an exciting first release at the foundation
level. The problem for developers was that there was so little
scaffolding to help complete the job of building real applications. The
component framework was clever but it was based on some design choices
that made integration with Web applications too difficult and extensions
too labour intensive. The basic documentation was sparse and guidance
for real application building was missing.
With FCS 2 I think we'll see the foundation layer improving but we won't
really see the scaffolding that is needed for cost effective n-way
applications because some of that work is locked up in Breeze Live. I
guess you could say that the focus on streaming and Breeze Live are
pushing changes to the foundation layer in directions that don't always
add value in a telecommunications play or in FlashCom as a
cost-effective platform for developers.
Returning to the original thread I don't see anything in what Macromedia
has said to date to make me think there will be any break in continuity
between 1.5 and 2. So yes, develop in 1.5 now and then enjoy 2.0 when
they release it. Regarding release dates remember that anyone who really
knows anything can't say anything about it here.
Yours truly,
-Brian
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Asa Whillock 2005-08-12, 5:45 pm |
| Brian,
As always you are a breath of fresh air. A salient speaker with cogent
points in abundance! Well put.
Asa
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Brian
Lesser
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 1:59 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Hi Sam,
I think you missed the mark by ignoring the economic context.
You wrote: "it's like an entire team of adventurous thinkers gave up=20
trying to invent the future, like they almost did with FlashCom 1.0, and
retreated to milking the e-learning cash cow."
I don't see it that way. Macromedia is not a multi-multi-multi-billion=20
dollar company based on an operating system monopoly seeded by IBM. At=20
some point after the initial two year development cycle FlashCom had to=20
make real money to survive. Macromedia was fortunate to find two=20
branches for FlashCom that appear to be making them money: streaming=20
video and Breeze. If they had not followed those two paths with=20
significant energy then FlashCom might never see a 2.0 release. The=20
history of FlashCom is already very different and much brighter than it=20
ever was for Macromedia's initial socket server. Of course you could=20
argue Macromedia chose the wrong areas to focus on... that they should=20
have done something else in telecommunications... but I don't see how=20
they would have monetized that so quickly... and I'm amazed at their=20
level of success so far running up against entrenched competitors like=20
Windows Media.
In many respects Breeze Live was the completion of what Macromedia first
attempted with the component framework. It doesn't matter if you call=20
them pods or components. Breeze adds in the Web application integration,
room/user management, and better components with good performance that=20
was missing in the component framework. With the introduction of edge=20
servers it is also slowly moving out of the small room mold into larger=20
events - and it is still a relatively new product. To me, it looks like=20
respectable progress for the development team. However, it also=20
represents a shift in Macromedia's focus to a vertical application and=20
away from FlashCom as a developer's platform. I don't like that -=20
especially if features don't return to the platform like screen sharing=20
- but its not hard to imagine the economic realities behind it. Creating
a new platform for developers can be a big and very expensive problem.=20
Imagine the treasure Sun and Microsoft sunk into J2EE and .Net. There=20
are only a few companies on the planet that can afford to take the lead=20
in doing that on any real scale... and even they may not make money on=20
it if they use sensible accounting practices.
I also don't agree that FCS 1.0 was such "poor soil." I tend to look at=20
it differently. It was an exciting first release at the foundation=20
level. The problem for developers was that there was so little=20
scaffolding to help complete the job of building real applications. The=20
component framework was clever but it was based on some design choices=20
that made integration with Web applications too difficult and extensions
too labour intensive. The basic documentation was sparse and guidance=20
for real application building was missing.
With FCS 2 I think we'll see the foundation layer improving but we won't
really see the scaffolding that is needed for cost effective n-way=20
applications because some of that work is locked up in Breeze Live. I=20
guess you could say that the focus on streaming and Breeze Live are=20
pushing changes to the foundation layer in directions that don't always=20
add value in a telecommunications play or in FlashCom as a=20
cost-effective platform for developers.
Returning to the original thread I don't see anything in what Macromedia
has said to date to make me think there will be any break in continuity=20
between 1.5 and 2. So yes, develop in 1.5 now and then enjoy 2.0 when=20
they release it. Regarding release dates remember that anyone who really
knows anything can't say anything about it here.
Yours truly,
-Brian
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Graeme Bull 2005-08-12, 5:45 pm |
| he's so good, he almost made fcs 1.0 sound good! now that's a salient
speaker.
g
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Asa Whillock
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 6:41 AM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Brian,
As always you are a breath of fresh air. A salient speaker with cogent
points in abundance! Well put.
Asa
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Brian Lesser
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 1:59 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Hi Sam,
I think you missed the mark by ignoring the economic context.
You wrote: "it's like an entire team of adventurous thinkers gave up trying
to invent the future, like they almost did with FlashCom 1.0, and
retreated to milking the e-learning cash cow."
I don't see it that way. Macromedia is not a multi-multi-multi-billion
dollar company based on an operating system monopoly seeded by IBM. At some
point after the initial two year development cycle FlashCom had to make real
money to survive. Macromedia was fortunate to find two branches for FlashCom
that appear to be making them money: streaming video and Breeze. If they had
not followed those two paths with significant energy then FlashCom might
never see a 2.0 release. The history of FlashCom is already very different
and much brighter than it ever was for Macromedia's initial socket server.
Of course you could argue Macromedia chose the wrong areas to focus on...
that they should have done something else in telecommunications... but I
don't see how they would have monetized that so quickly... and I'm amazed at
their level of success so far running up against entrenched competitors like
Windows Media.
In many respects Breeze Live was the completion of what Macromedia first
attempted with the component framework. It doesn't matter if you call them
pods or components. Breeze adds in the Web application integration,
room/user management, and better components with good performance that was
missing in the component framework. With the introduction of edge servers it
is also slowly moving out of the small room mold into larger events - and it
is still a relatively new product. To me, it looks like respectable progress
for the development team. However, it also represents a shift in
Macromedia's focus to a vertical application and away from FlashCom as a
developer's platform. I don't like that - especially if features don't
return to the platform like screen sharing
- but its not hard to imagine the economic realities behind it. Creating
a new platform for developers can be a big and very expensive problem.
Imagine the treasure Sun and Microsoft sunk into J2EE and .Net. There are
only a few companies on the planet that can afford to take the lead in doing
that on any real scale... and even they may not make money on it if they use
sensible accounting practices.
I also don't agree that FCS 1.0 was such "poor soil." I tend to look at it
differently. It was an exciting first release at the foundation level. The
problem for developers was that there was so little scaffolding to help
complete the job of building real applications. The component framework was
clever but it was based on some design choices that made integration with
Web applications too difficult and extensions
too labour intensive. The basic documentation was sparse and guidance for
real application building was missing.
With FCS 2 I think we'll see the foundation layer improving but we won't
really see the scaffolding that is needed for cost effective n-way
applications because some of that work is locked up in Breeze Live. I guess
you could say that the focus on streaming and Breeze Live are pushing
changes to the foundation layer in directions that don't always add value in
a telecommunications play or in FlashCom as a cost-effective platform for
developers.
Returning to the original thread I don't see anything in what Macromedia
has said to date to make me think there will be any break in continuity
between 1.5 and 2. So yes, develop in 1.5 now and then enjoy 2.0 when they
release it. Regarding release dates remember that anyone who really
knows anything can't say anything about it here.
Yours truly,
-Brian
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=---------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=---------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Asa Whillock 2005-08-12, 5:45 pm |
| Almost? I worked on FCS 1.0.
;)
Asa
P.S. Babies are always beautiful to their mothers
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Graeme
Bull
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 2:53 PM
To: 'FlashComm Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
he's so good, he almost made fcs 1.0 sound good! now that's a salient
speaker.
g=20
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Asa
Whillock
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 6:41 AM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Brian,
As always you are a breath of fresh air. A salient speaker with cogent
points in abundance! Well put.
Asa
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Brian
Lesser
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 1:59 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Hi Sam,
I think you missed the mark by ignoring the economic context.
You wrote: "it's like an entire team of adventurous thinkers gave up
trying
to invent the future, like they almost did with FlashCom 1.0, and
retreated to milking the e-learning cash cow."
I don't see it that way. Macromedia is not a multi-multi-multi-billion
dollar company based on an operating system monopoly seeded by IBM. At
some
point after the initial two year development cycle FlashCom had to make
real
money to survive. Macromedia was fortunate to find two branches for
FlashCom
that appear to be making them money: streaming video and Breeze. If they
had
not followed those two paths with significant energy then FlashCom might
never see a 2.0 release. The history of FlashCom is already very
different
and much brighter than it ever was for Macromedia's initial socket
server.
Of course you could argue Macromedia chose the wrong areas to focus
on...
that they should have done something else in telecommunications... but I
don't see how they would have monetized that so quickly... and I'm
amazed at
their level of success so far running up against entrenched competitors
like
Windows Media.
In many respects Breeze Live was the completion of what Macromedia first
attempted with the component framework. It doesn't matter if you call
them
pods or components. Breeze adds in the Web application integration,
room/user management, and better components with good performance that
was
missing in the component framework. With the introduction of edge
servers it
is also slowly moving out of the small room mold into larger events -
and it
is still a relatively new product. To me, it looks like respectable
progress
for the development team. However, it also represents a shift in
Macromedia's focus to a vertical application and away from FlashCom as a
developer's platform. I don't like that - especially if features don't
return to the platform like screen sharing
- but its not hard to imagine the economic realities behind it. Creating
a new platform for developers can be a big and very expensive problem.=20
Imagine the treasure Sun and Microsoft sunk into J2EE and .Net. There
are
only a few companies on the planet that can afford to take the lead in
doing
that on any real scale... and even they may not make money on it if they
use
sensible accounting practices.
I also don't agree that FCS 1.0 was such "poor soil." I tend to look at
it
differently. It was an exciting first release at the foundation level.
The
problem for developers was that there was so little scaffolding to help
complete the job of building real applications. The component framework
was
clever but it was based on some design choices that made integration
with
Web applications too difficult and extensions
too labour intensive. The basic documentation was sparse and guidance
for
real application building was missing.
With FCS 2 I think we'll see the foundation layer improving but we won't
really see the scaffolding that is needed for cost effective n-way
applications because some of that work is locked up in Breeze Live. I
guess
you could say that the focus on streaming and Breeze Live are pushing
changes to the foundation layer in directions that don't always add
value in
a telecommunications play or in FlashCom as a cost-effective platform
for
developers.
Returning to the original thread I don't see anything in what Macromedia
has said to date to make me think there will be any break in continuity
between 1.5 and 2. So yes, develop in 1.5 now and then enjoy 2.0 when
they
release it. Regarding release dates remember that anyone who really
knows anything can't say anything about it here.
Yours truly,
-Brian
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D---------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Graeme Bull 2005-08-12, 5:45 pm |
| don't get me wrong, it was a good start. but dev'ing and running apps on it
was... well... umm..
Brian! give me a word here!
But that was a long time ago and now we have 1.5.2 and it rocks. I can't
wait for v2
G
-----Original Message-----
From: Asa Whillock [mailto:awhillock-14osZcCZf762oZ/6fjIToQ@public.gmane.org]
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 7:05 AM
To: graeme.bull-lB/6vUJvybQOPmVbiNFCMNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org; FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Almost? I worked on FCS 1.0.
;)
Asa
P.S. Babies are always beautiful to their mothers
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Graeme Bull
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 2:53 PM
To: 'FlashComm Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
he's so good, he almost made fcs 1.0 sound good! now that's a salient
speaker.
g
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Asa Whillock
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 6:41 AM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: RE: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Brian,
As always you are a breath of fresh air. A salient speaker with cogent
points in abundance! Well put.
Asa
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Brian Lesser
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2005 1:59 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] when is flashcom 2 coming?
Hi Sam,
I think you missed the mark by ignoring the economic context.
You wrote: "it's like an entire team of adventurous thinkers gave up trying
to invent the future, like they almost did with FlashCom 1.0, and
retreated to milking the e-learning cash cow."
I don't see it that way. Macromedia is not a multi-multi-multi-billion
dollar company based on an operating system monopoly seeded by IBM. At some
point after the initial two year development cycle FlashCom had to make real
money to survive. Macromedia was fortunate to find two branches for FlashCom
that appear to be making them money: streaming video and Breeze. If they had
not followed those two paths with significant energy then FlashCom might
never see a 2.0 release. The history of FlashCom is already very different
and much brighter than it ever was for Macromedia's initial socket server.
Of course you could argue Macromedia chose the wrong areas to focus on...
that they should have done something else in telecommunications... but I
don't see how they would have monetized that so quickly... and I'm amazed at
their level of success so far running up against entrenched competitors like
Windows Media.
In many respects Breeze Live was the completion of what Macromedia first
attempted with the component framework. It doesn't matter if you call them
pods or components. Breeze adds in the Web application integration,
room/user management, and better components with good performance that was
missing in the component framework. With the introduction of edge servers it
is also slowly moving out of the small room mold into larger events - and it
is still a relatively new product. To me, it looks like respectable progress
for the development team. However, it also represents a shift in
Macromedia's focus to a vertical application and away from FlashCom as a
developer's platform. I don't like that - especially if features don't
return to the platform like screen sharing
- but its not hard to imagine the economic realities behind it. Creating
a new platform for developers can be a big and very expensive problem.
Imagine the treasure Sun and Microsoft sunk into J2EE and .Net. There are
only a few companies on the planet that can afford to take the lead in doing
that on any real scale... and even they may not make money on it if they use
sensible accounting practices.
I also don't agree that FCS 1.0 was such "poor soil." I tend to look at it
differently. It was an exciting first release at the foundation level.
The
problem for developers was that there was so little scaffolding to help
complete the job of building real applications. The component framework was
clever but it was based on some design choices that made integration with
Web applications too difficult and extensions
too labour intensive. The basic documentation was sparse and guidance for
real application building was missing.
With FCS 2 I think we'll see the foundation layer improving but we won't
really see the scaffolding that is needed for cost effective n-way
applications because some of that work is locked up in Breeze Live. I guess
you could say that the focus on streaming and Breeze Live are pushing
changes to the foundation layer in directions that don't always add value in
a telecommunications play or in FlashCom as a cost-effective platform for
developers.
Returning to the original thread I don't see anything in what Macromedia
has said to date to make me think there will be any break in continuity
between 1.5 and 2. So yes, develop in 1.5 now and then enjoy 2.0 when they
release it. Regarding release dates remember that anyone who really
knows anything can't say anything about it here.
Yours truly,
-Brian
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=---------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=---------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Bill Sanders 2005-08-13, 5:45 pm |
| Just a note to add to Sam's concerns and Brian's reply....
I found that the real genius in FCS's use has not necessarily come
from the fertile minds of FCS developers and designers, but from
clients. The idea of "ads" or "subscriptions" for FCS steaming media
is pretty limited for FCS's wide range of talents. I know that one of
Phillip's FCS applications (an early one) was for a cattle auction.
I've had clients who have come up with needs, from editing TV
commercials to in-house "PowerPoint/ A/V" training presentations.
Others I've worked on include video security systems, simulation
training, and online dating. (These are just a few, BTW and do not
include the ones I've needed myself.)
When FCS was being developed, I doubt that Asa and the others who
worked on it were thinking, "This'll be great for cattle auctions..."
In future developments of FCS I hope that a conceptual high road of
possibilities can be envisioned around client needs and developers'
openness to such needs instead of a narrow idea of limited
functionality or development formulas.
Bill
bill sanders | www.sandlight.com | bloomfield, ct | 860-242-2260
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
|
|
|
|
|