2 ms·
What? Who's doing ActiveX or XUL for websites? Flash is already the most prevalent way to do a "media rich" website; it has nowhere to go but down from here. It
by tumult 18y ago
What? Who's doing ActiveX or XUL for websites? Flash is already the most prevalent way to do a "media rich" website; it has nowhere to go but down from here. It's also proprietary and a nightmare to work with, and the runtime sucks for too many reasons to name here.
Your comment reads like an ad.
- mahmud 18y agoSometimes when you spend too much time hating a proprietary technology and working hard to reverse engineer it and open its tools .. you might actually just end up accepting it. Adobe Flash didn't interest me at all until I couldn't find a nice portable platform that offers what it offers. My interest in flash is not for the love of flash, but flash as a target platform, using a language better than AS3 and development tools better than Flash or Flex builder. HaXe is an interesting experiment, but I would still want a Lisp on there. You will never see me defend Flex and AIR. I use Raphael.js now for my system's dashboard, for example. But the flash run time has replaced ActiveX and XPCOM as a non-standard standard that you can reach out to stuff like client-side storage, explicit sockets and data streams, audio and video, along with the usual eye-candy stuff. Accepting something as fate is not the same as advocating it.