Flash Builder rebrand FAQ
We at Adobe expected that the renaming of Flex Builder to Flash Builder would cause quite a bit of conversation in the community and indeed it has. After waking up this morning and reading all the reactions on various blogs and on Twitter, I feel like I need to answer some of the questions and concerns people have. So here goes:
Are you planning on phasing out the Flash IDE?
Of course not. The day that happens is the day I walk away from my job. Flash authoring will continue to be the premiere tool for design and animation for the Flash Platform. We are also putting some work into the code editor for Flash CS5 to help people who are writing frame scripts and/or just getting started with ActionScript.
Isn’t it going to be more confusing when talking with clients about Flex?
On the contrary, Flex is now much more understandable. Flex is an ActionScript framework for creating RIAs and that is not changing. This name change actually makes the Flex brand more solid and understandable.
This screws up my resume and will make job interviews confusing won’t it?
Here again, I feel the opposite will be true. You need to stop thinking in terms of tools and instead focus on the technologies. You are a Flex developer if you build applications using the Flex framework. Many people would say they know Flex when in fact they simply use Flex Builder.
Don’t you think this should have been done earlier?
Absolutely but nobody has a crystal ball at Adobe. When Flex Builder was created its primary purpose was to create Flex framework projects. But over the years we have seen a massive amount of people who use it for their pure ActionScript work, myself included.
Will Flash Builder still be based on Eclipse?
Yes it will continue to be an Eclipse-based product and apart from a ton of new features, Flash Builder 4 will continue to have the Eclipse experience.
Why do we need all these tools for creating Flash content?
I understand this sentiment and it would be nice if we could create a monster do-everything tool for the Platform but this just isn’t feasible nor would it be a good idea. Animators and designers are used to the Flash IDE and like its focus on creating completely custom Flash experiences. Flash and Flex developers generally do not like spending their time in the Flash IDE and prefer to be in a powerful code-centric environment like Eclipse. Of course there are also the hybrids like myself who enjoy both. We plan on making life much easier for hybrids who go back and forth between the two tools.
What about clients who cringe when they hear the word Flash?
Here you have two options. You can continue to simply use the term Flex or you can educate them that Flash is now a mature development platform and not simply annoying skip intro movies. We as a community need to spread the word about what Flash really is now. Also you really have to have your head under a rock to not realize that Flex applications run in the Flash player.
What about the Flex SDK?
There are no current plans to rename the SDK at this time. I realize that many use it to compile pure ActionScript projects. But again, you don’t need to be talking to clients about the SDK so this shouldn’t create a lot of confusion.
Lee
How does the Flex SDK name not cause confusion? I for one was still compiling pure AS applications in the Flash IDE because MXMLC seems superficially to be a completely Flex-centric solution, even when i was doing all my actual coding in FlashDevelop. Understanding that MXMLC and the Flex SDK was not only a viable option but HUGELY preferable in the vast majority of my projects changed my workflow completely for the better.
As for not having to talk to clients about the SDK, i think this is a false assertion. I quite frequently have to explain to project partners why we make the development choices we make, and telling a design studio accustomed to Flash authoring that we are doing our builds using the Flex SDK is almost ALWAYS a speed bump. Telling a client that expects access to the source post mortem that we will be creating the application using the Flex SDK when they are expecting a FLA is even worse.
The Flex SDK (as in the files necessary to write in the Flex framework) should, in my mind, have a separate identity to the general compiler and debug tools. I don’t understsand why the compiler needs to or even should remain so closely associated with the Flex framework, if the goal is to clear up confusion and strengthen brands on their own merits.
Otherwise, i’m 500% behind this decision. The name change has been needed for ages.
Hey Lee,
One question still seems to be left, what about the Flash IDE? It now seems to be the one poorly named. Is there a possible rename in the works there as well?
Great news!
This is a great announcement and about time! At least once a week I get into a discussion with someone trying to explain that a) you can use Flex Builder to write AS 3 only projects and b) that FLEX is simply a framework built on top of AS 3. I just wrote an extensive tutorial (http://flash.tutsplus.com/tutorials/workflow/setting-up-a-flash-development-sandbox-part-1 and http://flash.tutsplus.com/tutorials/workflow/setting-up-a-flash-development-sandbox-part-2) on setting up, configuring, and using Flex Builder 3 for writing ActionScript projects and am looking forward to playing with Flex Builder 4.
@Andreas Yes the Flex SDK also isn’t an entirely accurate name either but for now it is not being changed. One step at a time. But really you don’t need to talk about the SDK with clients or really at all for that matter so it is lower on the radar when it comes to rebranding.
@Tyler The honest answer is that I’m not sure about any upcoming name change for Flash authoring. I personally like the name Flash Designer. But I haven’t heard of any plans to change it right now. As far as I know the next version will be Flash CS5.
I totally agree with Andreas.
All the reasons to rebrand Flex builder should be used to rebrand Flex SDK. Other ways, it’s inconsistent!
[...] Flash Builder rebrand FAQ by Lee Brimelow [...]
[...] Builder devient Flash Builder 16 05 2009 Ryan Stewart (un flexeur) et Lee Brimelow (un flasher) viennent de dévoiler le nouveau nom de Flex Builder 4… qui devient Flash [...]
I don’t know about the hole re naming, for me it really doesn’t matter, I think people might be making a big issue over noting.
I use Flex for RIA, projects that have a lot of sever side data, projects that require lots of charts and graphs. And Flash for high end multimedia like presentations, or basic applications for touch screens.
Over all I am hybrid developer/designer I use both but I do think that designing is Flash is a lot easier.
About the hole issue with clients most clients don’t know the difference between Flash and ActionScript. When I talk about what I know then its Flash and Flex, ActionScript and mxml I consider them both just tools or frameworks, and ActionScript and mxml to me are skills.
At the end its more about the project and the right tool you think for yourself would be good to use. You should build your own work flow.
[...] Lee Brimelow’s Flash Builder rebrand FAQ The Flex Builder gets renamed as Flash Builder by David Gamez, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 2.5 Mexico License. Bookmark to: Hide Sites $$(‘div.d517′).each( function(e) { e.visualEffect(’slide_up’,{duration:0.5}) }); « Links for 2009-05-15 [...]
I don’t understand why these 2 tools are not simply named after what they are (I’ll spell it out because nobody seems to see the obvious):
“Flash Designer” and “Flash Developer”
I don’t care what you call it….just hurry up and let me download the beta!
…as long as I’m at it can I suggest Chicken Biscuit for the next code name?
I primarily do Flex projects and I love the name change. And I love your idea to the Flash IDE “Flash Designer”. That would really help clear up a lot of confusion.
In my experience the confusion is only when talking to other designer/developers. When I say Flex do I mean the Flex SDK or Flex Builder? And I can’t even count the number of times I’ve said “Flash IDE” to a designer who said, “What’s an IDE?”. So you know what? I say we just all start calling it “Flash Designer” right now. Those folks in Marketing will catch on soon enough.
@Miquel
Well, no. That’s why Adobe is doing this rebranding. To define what Flex really is : a bunch of as3 classes.
Totally great move. In long term, it’s going to build a strong brand and perhaps remove the patches from existing Flash brand.
Great stuff has been done for Flash Platform, it’s just those were being referred as different term “Flex apps” or whatever.
I believe, things are lot simpler to understand and sell (be it project requirement, specification or pitching the technology).
No more confusion and perhaps better job description.
I would love to see the plans for Flex SDK. Anyway, I see in some time Flex would be just a name, like Cairngorm or other. A lot of people who would come to Flash Platform in years, would not even realize the history unless they are told or they learn
-abdul
[...] were at it Lee Brimelow suggested the idea that the Flash Authoring Tool, aka Flash IDE, aka Flash CS2/3/4… could use a name [...]
[...] ilgili daha detayl? bilgiyi buradan ve buradan [...]
I love the rename. It ties the Flash Platform together much nicer. My only concern is that the Flash IDE is still called Flash Professional. For some people who are new to the technology, seeing the line up of Flash Pro, Flash Catalyst, and Flash Builder, you can see how the person might think that Flash Professional is much more superior than the others, simply because of the “Professional” in its name.
Although I do believe if Flash Pro does go through a name change, that would really turn the community upside down. At least at this point in time with the Flex Builder name change in all. However, I can see it happening in a few years.
The Flex Builder you used, gone it is. Consumed by Flash Builder.
Yoda
cool~~~~Thanks
Hopefully this might put an end to the Flash developer vs Flex developer thing
why don’t flash and flash builder ship together? I do all of my coding in the actions panel, and have never had a serious problem doing it that way.
So what is flex and how does it benefit the work? That is to say other than, all the skinnable components.
Is the flash builder going to have an eclipse style interface or work with the flash ide?
how will flash builder integrate my flashCS and AS3 projects?
In 2 years my job interview will be like:
- So how long do you use Flash for?
- I use Flash Builder for 5 years now.
- Oh, cool, so you know time line and all that crap?
- No sir, I use Flex SDK.
- Yyyyy, what’s Flex?
I generally think this is totally bad naming.
“So Flash as Flash CS4 Professional doesn’t let me build Flash applications any more? To do Flash I have to use Flash Builder? And why is it 4? I never heard of Flash Builder before! Can I sell my CS4 if I use Flash only? It is confusing. Flash IDE, Flash CS4, Flash Catalyst, Flash Builder.”
This might be interesting but until then… I have a little problem: I use this code :
var urlreq:URLRequest=new URLRequest(“http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=Adobe+Flash”);
var ldr:URLLoader=new URLLoader();
ldr.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE,doTrc);
ldr.load(urlreq);
function doTrc(e:Event){
var str:String=e.target.data;
trace(str);
}
When I publish with Flash PLayer I get the result that I want but when I publish with Adobe Air 1.5 I get a diffrent result. Ayone know why?
Will flash builder integrate better with flash IDE? ie publishing, flash components etc..I know you can do that stuff now, but just wondering if that will all be built in now.
at this time it’s a bad decision.
I agree that “Flash Professional” is not the best name now due to the fact that all the tools have Flash in the name. That is why I always refer to it as either Flash CS4 or Flash authoring. Again, this rebranding effort is going to happen over time and we may or may not see a name change to Flash authoring.
There will DEFINITELY be better integration between the two tools in the future, especially around using Flash Builder to write your code for Flash authoring projects.
Another point still doesn’t seem to getting through to everyone. You can and should still talk to your clients about Flex. There is no need to start calling Flex framework projects “Flash projects.” The same holds true for hiring Flex developers.
Is there a firm release date for Flash Builder? I’ve been spending a great deal of time exploring Flex lately and I’m absolutely astounded how easy and powerful it is. Conceiving and realizing ideas in Flex is an extremely fast process. I’m very anxious to see how Flash Builder compares to Flex 3.
What am I going to do with all these “Flex Builder rulz!” buttons?
=D
But seriously, I think it makes perfect sense to identify the tools separate from the frameworks. Just the other day people kept saying, “But Flex costs money doesn’t it?” even after I explained that the Flex SDK is opensource, and that Flex Builder is the IDE that you can purchase if you want.
BTW, I’ve got a bunch of Flash Studio t-shirts waiting to be used…
iBrent
i dont care what you call it, just make it run on linux.
Is there a release date for Flash Builder?
[...] Lee Brimelow [...]
I really like the idea of renaming Flash authoring to Flash Designer. It would finally give Flash a proper name, especially when compared to Flash Builder. It’s always been difficult to distinguish when describing the IDE/authoring tool from the player and the platform. Obviously don’t get too carried away with the renaming, or you’ll end up with a similar mouthful too the awful “Macromedia Flash MX Professional 2004″!
@Brad Manderscheid
I think Brad has raised an excellent question with regards to integration with Flash Professional. Is Adobe planning on having the two integrate tightly (like smart objects in photoshop, etc)? If I have to do a keyboard dance for another year waiting for Flash Builder 5, I’m gonna be pissed. For those of us doing Flash websites there’s really no good integrated solution, we have to script in a real editor (flex) then design in flash. I think adobe should wait until the two are tightly integrated to rightfully name it Flash builder.
[...] : A must read from Lee Brimelow, Flash Builder rebrand FAQ No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this [...]
I think this is/was a very bad decision from Adobe! As a developer I have to sell a project to my customers and that’s much easier with the name Flex in the background. Flex got a good reputation in the last years but if someone hears Flash than the most customers are very skeptical about it.
Flex / FlexBuilder has it’s own and very strong branding, so how can you rename that thing????
Sure it makes no difference the the Flash-developers but a big one for the Flex developers.
Right now I feel a bit weak about my decision for Flex. Maybe Silverlight would have been the better choice…
I’m fairly ambivalent about the rename.
Though I would like to say that if you’re already programming using Flex/AS3/AS2 you’ve probably got some smarts. Certainly enough to expound to anyone who’s willing to listen the difference between the various members of the Flash family. Seriously, the toughest part of my day is writing the code – explaining what I wrote it in is a piece of cake in comparison.
I do like the idea of aligning the two products with naming like Flash Developer and Flash Designer – but to be honest, if the actions editor in the Flash IDE had received an upgrade or two instead of remaining in the next to useless state that it is then I suppose that naming wouldn’t work either. This may seem a bit harsh, but considering the productivity increases from doing the actual coding outside of the Flash IDE, I can only imagine the increase if you could actually code within it and not have to continuously alt tab around.
[...] Brimelow makes a good point in his response to the community chatter, where he states that we as a community must educate the general population on the fact that Flash [...]
[...] Link: Flash Builder rebrand FAQ Escrito por: Pablo Davi e Gravado em: Flash, Flex, General, Notícias, Novidades google_ad_client = ‘pub-2288658221640313′; google_ad_slot = ‘7435641831′; google_ad_width = 468; google_ad_height = 60; [...]
[...] BIT-101 Blog The Flash Blog Tags: Adobe Flex Category: Adobe Flex You can follow any responses to this entry via RSS. You [...]
Not convinced by your arguments… Flex has gained such a good reputation vs. Flash, I’m not sure why you’d want to lose it. If you were merging the two tools (Flash IDE and Flex Builder) I can understand, but if you’re still going to have the Flash IDE, why mess with the Flex Builder?
And how do we justify using the Flex brand if the tools are going to have the Flash name? Saying it’s the Flex technology isn’t going to cut it IMO, and the Flex name could die out. And that’d be TERRIBLE.
Flash Builder, great name. Good idea to change it
[...] Builder starting with version 4 due out later this year(?). Lee Brimlow broke the news and has answered a few questions people have regarding what this means for the future of the Flash IDE and how this may effect [...]
[...] http://theflashblog.com/?p=998 [...]
Because its flash is it going to be in CS5 ?
It seems to be that since flash 9 and as3 Adobe hasnt been interested in making the flash IDE work for developers anymore. I was shocked that I had to hack around for remoting to work and gave up on porting alot of my as2 projects to as3 for this reason.
I had to fork out over 1k for each developer in my team to get flex builder. Im kinda getting the feeling Im getting sucked into buying another peice of software called flash catalyst to perform what we did in one IDE 3 years ago.
This is a concern to me, In 3 years we have changed from having one great tool to now having 3 to do essentially the same job, get creative RIA solutions onto the internet (and of course desktop now air is here).
I think this is a bad move on a whole and has discouraged me from using flash as a part of our RIA solutions.
Why don’t they stop fonts from shifting up and down 6 pixels depending on the phase of the moon?
Soooo… Flash Bundle(IDE, Catalyst, Builder) pricing is announced when?
I don’t really care what Adobe calls the tools, but it goes without saying that there is a clean separation of skill set between Flex and Flash developers. In fact, Adobe and Macromedia both did an admirable job of pointing this separation out at length when promoting Flex to the enterprise development community. I can only imagine that the companies chose to do this because of the Flash IDE’s image in the developer community as a tool for making animations and non-enterprise apps – a perception which frankly still holds true for Flash developers not using the Flex toolset.
For everybody who already uses Flash and Flex, renaming Flex Builder to Flash Builder is not going to cause any serious issues; we understand the roles of both tools and can differentiate. Where the name change will be confusing is with future students and professionals evaluating Flash and Flex for the first time, and trying to decide which tool set they need to master and for what purpose.
What I am most concerned about as a Flex developer is Adobe’s recent moves to blur the previously-clear definition between Flash media and Flash enterprise development skill sets. If Adobe continues this trend and decides to abolish the Flex name altogether and call it “Flash Enterprise” or something like that, people like me who develop purely with the Flex framework are going to have a much harder time targeting relevant employment opportunities. This will be just as difficult for Flash developers targeting rich media/non-Flex opportunities. The two specializations are individually necessary and distinct for different kinds of work, regardless of the platform’s capabilities.
You stated the following in your post: “We as a community need to spread the word about what Flash really is now.” So, what is Flash now? As far as I can tell, it’s the same as it has always been: the most pervasive platform for running rich, interactive applications. There are two common ways to do that: using the Flash IDE and working in a media-centric fashion on the timeline, or writing script-and-tag-based applications using the Flex framework. There are other less-common ways, such as generating Flash content programmatically using any of the many commercial and open-source authoring libraries. Renaming Flex Builder to Flash Builder doesn’t change any of these facts, doesn’t change what the Flash platform can do, and doesn’t spread the word any further about what the Flash platform is capable of.
I must ask: is this apparent need to change perception about the capabilities of the Flash Player really the purpose for renaming Flex Builder to Flash Builder? Is this the same reason behind renaming Flex Camps to Flash Camps? If so, then I’ll ask Adobe to please stop now. Adobe and Macromedia poured tons of marketing dollars in to promoting Flex development as a different activity from Flash development, and with good reason: they are different activities targeting different skill sets. Clearly Adobe agrees that this is the case, or they wouldn’t have two separate tools targeting each activity.
Call the tools whatever you like, but unless the goal is to merge all the Flash-related tools and skill sets altogether (a horrible idea for reasons already outlined), please keep the differentiation between Flash and Flex development apparent.
Lee,
Has there been a formal announcement regarding the public release of Flash Builder?
[...] evangelists Lee Brimelow and Ryan Stewart. I recommend you read Lee’s blog post called Flash Builder rebrand FAQ for a lot more detailed [...]
Personally I feel people are focusing to much on the name. It should be about the end product, not what your using. If you are a designer or developer, then you should be talking about your skills and what tools you use to harness them. I have dealt with clients that have had the worst opinions about flash. But when I show them the end product or a sample product, their is no confusion about what they are getting.
I do think the name change makes sense, but the name of a tool will never change what I do or how I do it.
A call to our community:
“We are Flash Platform developers/designers/programmers/hairdressers/tea-boys/etc. Everything we do –whether we choose Flex Builder, Flash IDE, Flash Develop, HaXe etc. to code in ActionScript; or, use Final Cut Pro or After Effects to create and edit our video/animation for delivery as Flash Video (FLV); or, compile our applications with Flash IDE or Flex SDK; or, build on top of the Flex framework; or, send stuff as AMF or XML; or muddle together every technology we can think of to help create content which is delivered within a SWF; or, and so on … — should be focused on delivering Flash Platform content to a Flash Platform runtime (Flash Player, AIR, Flash Lite, Tamarin virtual machine(?)). Flash Platform, Flash Platform. Amen”.
What used to be only Flash, tried then to become Adobe Engagement Platform, until settling finally into Adobe Flash Platform (less than a year ago, I think). I, for one, was appeased. Platform sounded right — and vague enough to help avoid lexial debates about Flash, Flex, Flash developer, Flex developer etc. I’m happy to code in ActionScript or MXML, animate with a timeline, deliver as SWF or FLV, and rely on the Adobe Flash Player or AIR runtime to render and serve up my content. I would be more than happy for my pencil & paper to join forces under the Flash Platform, if the end product could be packaged up easily into a SWF, and delivered to an ubiquitous runtime. ‘Our brand’ is out there already — hence, bicker ye not.
I agree with Julien. I hope this will strengthen the brand of the Flash Platform and get people understanding that multiple roles exist under the umbrella of the same platform.
Well stated Chris D. Amen
i liked gumbo … *sniff*
I’ve read a lot of the comments about this change on various blogs, and have spent some time thinking about it on my own. Here are a few of my thoughts (in no particular order) . . .
1. I don’t quite ‘buy’ Adobe’s explanation for the reasons for doing this. But no matter, because I believe I understand _why_ it is being done, from a Marketing perspective at least. For example, I suspect that it relates to: unifying/simplifying the branding; and, perhaps more importantly, not spreading scarce resources across more than one brand. Or, more tactically, to have a unified ‘message’ to counter Silverlight. Or, more cynically, to counter occasional negative perceptions of the Flash brand (especially in businesses) by folding the generally positive perceptions of the Flex brand into it.
2. I do think there is a high risk that the equity and positioning that Adobe has in the Flex brand (specifically) is going to be, at least, diminished. Quite possibly it is going to be lost altogether.
And, acknowledged or not, there definitely IS a problem with lingering negative perceptions of the Flash brand/technology among many prospects/clients/executives/managers/colleagues. In my experience, this problem is greatly diminished when I begin the solution discussion by talking about Flex. I don’t mention the F-word (sorry), I mean Flash, until we discuss how the project gets delivered to user’s desktops.
3. Others have pointed out the likely scenarios of _new_ Developers coming to Flash (nee FLex) Builder and then basing their perceptions on of what ‘Flash is’ on solely that experience. I think this runs the risk of a lot of marketplace confusion.
4. At the very least, it is going to make: job/gig searches; recruitment; project proposals more confusing in the short to mid term. Even today (before the name change), web-based job/gig searches are tedious to painful–you can’t effective search on only “Flex” as a keyword. Even using the words “Adobe” and “Flex” in the same query doesn’t work well (for example, you get hits on Administrative Assistant jobs that require Adobe Acrobat experience but are ‘flex time’ jobs. (Admittedly, searching on “Adobe Flex” as a _phrase_ works better.) Using the word “ActionScript” works OK, but (for Developers anyway) results in a lot of listings for Flash Animator/Designer jobs.
5. I think this change needs to be considered from both short-term and long-term perspectives. I think I can see why this might be a good idea, long-term. But in the short- or even mid- term, it doesn’t feel right. I wish that Adobe has postponed this change for, say, a year or two–so that “Flex” and the “Flash Platform” could have become more established–especially in the business community.
6. I don’t think that the way this change was communicated was handled well. I’m not so much dismayed by the lack of input on the decision (my opinion is that this is purely Adobe’s call). But I would have eased people into this gradually; possibly over a period of as long as a year plus. You might also have had some interim branding that helped communicate the transition. For example, Gumbo might have been released as, say, ‘Flash Platform Developer, with Flex’; or maybe ‘Flex & Flash Developer’. Then FB_5_ could be just ‘Flash Developer’. I’m also confused as to how this seemingly strategic change was introduced. Was there an announcement by an Adobe executive? If so, I missed the news of it (and didn’t get any ‘heads up’ about watching for it either. And no offense to the Flash evangelism team (who ALL seem like rock stars to me!), but I think hearing about this first from one of the evangelist’s blogs is not the right way to introduce this. (It would have been a great way to get the ‘heads up’ out, however.)
7. OK, this is getting long-winded, so last point (I promise).
If you’re going to go to the effort, cost, and risk of renaming a flagship product and, in particular, to tinker with the platform branding, then PLEASE do it consistently and thoughtfully. My humble suggestions:
OLD NAME –> SUGGESTED NEW NAME
Flex Builder –>
Flash Developer, with Flex (or maybe: Flex & Flash Developer)
Flash IDE –> Flash Animator
Catalyst –> Flash Designer
Flash Player –> Flash Virtual Machine
I don’t care what you call it, just make it suck less. FDT just destroys Flex Builder. Looking forward to Gumbo before I vote with my wallet.
[...] Yes, you read that correctly. See Lee Brimelow’s blog here: http://theflashblog.com/?p=998 [...]
[...] the most interesting question for me from theflashblog.com [...]
[...] the Flex framework with the Flex Builder IDE. Lee Brimelow has anwsered some questions on his blog for those of you that are confused: Are you planning on phasing out the Flash IDE? Of course not. [...]
Flash Builder?… “Flash Designer”?, to my eyes Flash Authoring is Flash Builder as it is the only tool that I need to create simple and complex Flash works, or it was…
Let’s see, Flash Builder == programmer?, so “Flash Designer” would be eye candy then?
Come on!, In the end you are supposed to have the same power with both tools, the only change is the way you accomplish the final result… or that’s how Adobe sold it to us, but that’s not 100% true.
I been pushing myself into AS3 hard enough enough to find out that any of the more recent code examples/tutorials are done in Flex.. sticking to Adobe story, I could just move all the AS code to Flash IDE and be done with it… yeah right!, try this on Flash Authoring (some FLARE code):
[Embed(source="../lib/camera_para.dat", mimeType="application/octet-stream")]
private var CameraParameters:Class;
it works?, of course not!, fix this kind of stuff first, make it uniform and then think about branding.
why you may ask?, well, it’s easy:
Adobe have created artificial branches for a tool that does not need them, and it is a tool with enough age to be a complex one aka “do it all monster”, want a working example? Photoshop… you don’t have to know every single detail to work with it, and for the most part it works the same way it has from the last 10 years. why is that hard to accomplish the same thing with Flash, having to learn not one but two tools to get any complex Flash work done?
Hard core programmers may not like the way Flash Authoring works and I’m fine with it, and they are too as they have Flex, but that does not mean the tool that some of us master both as designers and as developers should be put aside to be able to keep ourselves in the edge with AS development. bring back the power to Flash Authoring, enable it to be on the same league as Flex, then brand your apps any way you want
More of a heads-up would have been nice.
But I’m glad to see something being done to clear up the confusion in the general public. Ever tried explaining to your mom or a neighbor that you write applications to run in the movie player thats put out by the Acrobat people?
It does not take a marketing genius to tell Adobe that the best way to strengthen the brand is to improve the product. With Silverlight trying to catch up , it’s a must to improve FLASH the product. It’s ridiculous to have two products when in Silverlight there’s only one. It is not enough to rebrand it—INTEGRATE IT.
As it is FLASH Is a weak product, graphics-wise it is not a world-class product like ILLUSTRATOR and its IDE leaves much to be desired. Adobe is hiding the under the cloak of wide adoption of Flash, which may not last.Why not put it in one package? Or if you want as a compromise–FLASH BASIC, FLASH ADVANCED. Adobe has a duty to bridge the gap between designers and developers. For designers to be encouraged to be a bit of a programmer and vice-versa.
Lee, what are we expecting in Flash 11? Well, I expect features that Silverlight 3 has and better.
If it is possible to create a server-side program in AS3 for better integration, that would be nice.(Coldfusion in as3?, a new open-source server-side application written in as3?)
Flash should have its own 3D engine much like Papervision(which is really daunting to learn from a beginner’s standpoint because John L is bad at it. Publishing code is not TUTORIAL , JOHN, I learned more from Lee’s Papervision Tutorials, which sadly is now outdated) A very own 3d engine would be nice so we can drop Papervision altogether.
This is absolutely right.
Thanks Lee.
[...] ???????????????? ???????????????? ?????????Lee Brimelow?FAQ [...]
[...] http://theflashblog.com/?p=998 flash builder rebrand faq # [...]
[...] just caught this news “Adobe Flash Builder instead of Adobe Flex Builder as a name for Gumbo” over AXNA. I [...]
[...] many people agree with the renaming, I’ve heard some mention about this being a bad move. Quite frankly, in my opinion Flex developers who feel threatened that [...]
[...] Flash n’est pas indifférente, pour s’en convaincre, il suffit de lire les articles de Lee Brimelow et de Peter Elst (lisez les commentaires, c’est [...]
[...] FlashDevelop is an open source IDE for AS2 and AS3 projects. It’s one of the best alternative of the basic Flash IDE tool. As you may know, Flash doesn’t give us a great code completion of our own class. FlashDevelop does, as FDT or Flex Builder; but for free. It has a good synthax highlightning too, plus some other nice features. Note that, for today, FlashDevelop is only for windows. If you are on mac, you should take a look on Flex Builder, which will soon become Flash builder. [...]
[...] Fun for Eclipse (and thus Flash Builder) [...]
[...] Last week Axiis, an open source data visualization framework, was released. Axiis is built upon the Degrafa, an open source declarative graphics framework, and Adobe Flex 3. Thanks to Nathan Yau for pointing this out in his post “Open Source Data Visualization Framework – Axiis.” There were also great comments to Nathan’s post, including a comparison of Axiis to Berkley’s Prefuse Flare. Flare is also a visualization toolkit, but it is written for Flash in ActionScript 3. For a discussion of Flash, Flex, and ActionScript 3, check out Lee Brimelow post “Flash Builder rebrand FAQ.” [...]
Sorry Adobe, but I think you made a mistake. To me, and I think a lot of others, Flex was the serious, application side of the Flash Platform. I have been using Flash since v4 and so am a great fan. AS3 is wonderful. My wife said to me years ago, Why did they call it Flash? What a silly name. In 2009 I still have to show people what I can do before telling them it is Flash. Flash has a stigma – 2MB intros when the majority were still on dial-up – pop up ads that gave birth to Pop Up Blockers. None of this is the software’s fault of course, but the perception is there, still. The separation between Flex and Flash was perfect. Flash is a peerless animation tool and does a very good job for mini website applications such as contact forms, navigation systems, etc. Flex is an advanced application tool. I was happy wearing 2 hats – Flex Developer and Flash Developer.
@Xty
You still WILL be a Flex developer, Flex did’nt go anywhere..
I like to consider myself as a Flash Platform hybrid RIA creator. I like to design/code aesthetic ‘wow factor’ RIA’s in Flash Professional and I like to code intelligent, data centric, business tool format RIA’s in Flex Builder.
Point 3 in Lee’s post ends with the line ‘Many people would say they know Flex when in fact they simply use Flex Builder’…(does this mean that if I use Flex Builder I don’t actually know Flex?)
So now in trying to define who I am in the industry, following the rules, I should not confess to being a half breed Flex Developer anymore – as that would classify me as a person who doesn’t use Flash (Flex) Builder to implement the Flex ActionScript Framework? Or is the term Flex Developer now extinct and replaced by the title Flash Builder Developer, even though I am still implementing the Flex ActionScript Framework in my Flash Builder builds?
At present I think I am a Flash Designer and Flash Developer and a Flash Builder Developer … I also throw the term AS3 Developer loosely around when conversing with my java and c# buddies, is that still ok? (they still think ‘flash’ is for sissies). Or do I have to specify Flash AS3 FrameWork Developer and/or Flex AS3 FrameWork Developer or is this not a Flash Builder AS3 FrameWork Developer and is there even a such a thing as as Flash AS3 Framework Developer? … bzzzzz personal melt down…
So if anyone could help me re-define my indentity in relation to the above, I promise to give the name change a whopping two thumbs up!
[...] 4, renamed to Flash Builder 4 which raised a few eyebrows since its announcement. I read an interesting post a little while back at The Flash Blog by Lee Brimelow, Platform Evangelist for Adobe as he [...]
Does make sense that Adobe rebrand under the Flash platform banner, but the one problem I can see is that recruitment agents are going to send Flash Designers off for Flash Developer interviews. So whilst one argument is; “no, but there’s Flash Professional CS4 etc and then there’s Flash Builder” … you can be sure, that recruiters are going to ask “Can you use Flash?” … and bingo, Flash Designer ends up being sent for an interview where they get grilled with software engineering-centric questions. That was the one aspect I quite liked about the clear distinction. Mind you, it could also be said that there are some really skilled designers who didn’t even realize they were such brilliant software engineers, so I guess it cuts both ways.
[...] ????, Flash Builder. [...]
[...] any time here talking about visual layout but rather setting up FlexBuilder (or soon to be named FlashBuilder) to provide optimum compiler performance, connecting to the Flash CS4 code-base, a few of my [...]
[...] a User Group Tour to talk about the new versions of Flex and Cold Fusion. Have you read about the name change to Flash Builder? That’s just part of the [...]
[...] mas confusión que otra cosa (sobretodo entre los “managers” y “hunters”) a pesar que Lee Brimelow opine lo [...]
[...] B?n s? th?c m?c, và có th? s? tìm th?y câu tr? l?i t?i ?ây: http://theflashblog.com/?p=998 [...]
[...] The Flash Blog » Flash Builder rebrand FAQ. Share and Enjoy: [...]
i have a feeling most people feeling positive about it come from a flash background.
I think people coming from a Java or other higher language background maybe be worried, because they know what attracted them in the first place, was that this was flex seemed to be for serious developers.
This rename diminishes the Flex brand for serious developers interested in flex not flash, and IT departments who like what they see being built in Flex in a way that they’ve never felt with Flash.
[...] If you have any questions on the rebrand, there is an FAQ here. [...]