This week at work I got 4 straight days of Silverlight training. The reason 6 of the media developers got this privilege is because one of our clients *cough MS* would like us to use their product instead of Adobe products. Totally understandable I think.
At the same time I canapos;t seem to embrace the software. Iapos;m not sure if this is due to a bias on my part for Adobe (even though I am biased for other companies compared to them... And I tried to be as objective and open as I could during the training) but I had a tough time swallowing the load.
First thereapos;s the matter that Adobe Flash and Adobe Flex were out before Expressions Blend. That doesnapos;t make Adobeapos;s products any better, it just means theyapos;ve been in the business longer. Longer market availability means several things: 1) Almost everyone has the flash player installed in their browser already, 2) up until now Flash/Flex is the only product of itapos;s kind and thus all interactive media developers/designers already work with it and know it well, 3) the product is tested much more and therefore much more dependable at this point in time.
Combine that with what Iapos;ve seen over the past few days and the only reason I can see that someone would switch from using Flash/Flex to Blend/Visual Studio is if they already know the programming language used in the Silverlight package (C#) better than actionscript. If thatapos;s the case I totally understand switching to the product... IF your intent is to make an internet application. If your intent is to create animations then stick with Flash. Now it might just be a new environment thatapos;s giving us so much trouble - new interface, new logic to how things work, new setup... But I have to say itapos;s hard to animate something as easily as it is in Flash.
But what really made me squirm in my seat was the presentation the instructor gave to the whole office, as well as colleagues who also took the training with me. It was presented as if all the things being done were amazing, new things. I was rather happy when a co-worker asked "So... Can Flash do all this as well?" And the answer was yes. It can. Itapos;s been doing it for way longer than the Silverlight package has. Demos? Yep, some nice demos to show what it can do. Guess what? Flash/Flex can do that too and has been for some time.
What also got me is that one of my co-workers tried to learn Flex a while back and complained it was too complicated. One complaint was about the format of the scripting langages (MXML and actionscript). But while weapos;re learning Silverlight (XMAL and C#) they proclaimed they thought these formats were good and powerful. MXML and XAML are the same format - XML. Just different node names to make the programs work. So thereapos;s no reason why they should like XAML any better than MXML. But what about C# vs. Actionscipt you might say? Maybe they didnapos;t like using actionscript with Flash/Flex but like C#? I highly doubt that, considering they had no previous C# experience at all and they know actionscript due to the fact that theyapos;ve been using it forever. And you canapos;t decide you like C# better than actionscript in a matter of 2 days (around abouts when they made the comment).
What it really comes down to is that Blend is a mix of both Flash and Flex in one program. Iapos;ve been wishing recently that Adobe would just combine Photoshop/Illustrator/Flash/Flex into one program and be done with it so we donapos;t have to switch between programs. But if this type of monster is the result, Iapos;m all for separation of jobs. But hereapos;s the problem - Flex is for developers to help them with the design of their apps, just as Blend really is for developers to design decent-looking apps. Why is this a problem? Because Microsoft tried to put an animation/design aspect on Blend (thatapos;d be like sticking Flash into Flex), and truthfully I think itapos;s just crappy. Donapos;t try to compete with Flash, Microsoft. Youapos;re area is coding, not design. If youapos;re gonna shine with the coding crowd (which MS already has a huge following in that respect), stick with competing with Flex. You have a chance there.
One of my co-workers mentioned that when the instructor said "itapos;s easy to design things with it" to the crowd they thought "no it isnapos;t." Granted that same person probably would have said the same thing if they tried to make an app in Flex - but thatapos;s the point. The instructor said itapos;s easy to design for because they were a programmer. Anything that makes their job easier and look better automatically means itapos;s easy to them. But for a designer, the more complex the user-interaction with the software and the more complex the steps to just make something work interactivity wise is harder. So, for designers, Flex and Blend are too complicated. For developers Flash is too restricted, crappy and not powerful enough.
The difference is also in the project youapos;re making. Something that has lots of design elements and little coding vs. Something thatapos;s all coding and just skinning a few buttons and maybe adding some pre-worked images from a photographer/designer. Animation vs. Application.
The point is that we wouldnapos;t use Flex in our development where I work because we can do all we need in Flash. Now weapos;re being asked to do the same work with a program that is a mix between Flash and Flex, but whose Flash-like properties are crappy. Iapos;ll learn it. But when I have a choice Iapos;m sticking to Flash and Flex. Why Flex over Blend? See paragraph 3.
data storage computers, data storage computer, data storage company, data storage companies in london, data storage companies georgia.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий