An Architect's View

7 responses so far ↓

• 1 Rey Bango // Aug 12, 2005 at 8:46 AM

  Yeah. Its a very exciting technology. Its a shame that it doesn't work with Macromedia ColdFusion but at least BlueDragon users can take advantage of it.
  
  

• 2 Sean Corfield // Aug 12, 2005 at 10:54 AM

  Well, ColdFusion MX has always supported Flash Remoting natively - something that BlueDragon has lacked (for years) - so it's good to see Midnight Coders help New Atlanta play catch up.
  
  And, of course, broader support for the Macromedia Flash Remoting protocol has to be good for everyone involved in building Rich Internet Applications.

• 3 Rey Bango // Aug 12, 2005 at 11:14 AM

  Yep I agree. Its good to see that finally available without having to actually go out and buy Flash Remoting from MM (which IMO they should've offerred for free anyways). Its helps to further the acceptance of CFML.
  

• 4 Sean Corfield // Aug 12, 2005 at 12:00 PM

  As I said, Flash Remoting has been supported by ColdFusion MX (and JRun) for *free* since some time in 2002.
  
  There has been a free PHP Flash Remoting library for a long time too.
  
  FlashORB provided free Flash Remoting for Java (in their standard edition).
  
  FlashORB Professional Edition is $799/CPU - hardly free - and that seems to be the only way to get Flash Remoting for .NET if I'm reading their web site right.
  
  WebORB pricing is yet to be announced but I would gather from their site that providing Flash Remoting for .NET (and presumably BlueDragon.NET) is not going to be free.
  
  Do you think that The Midnight Coders should offer WebORB for free?
  
  As for "further[ing] the acceptance of CFML", I don't see that follows from a product that provides Flash Remoting commercially when ColdFusion MX has provided that functionality for free for years...?

• 5 Rey Bango // Aug 12, 2005 at 12:35 PM

  The simple fact that someone actually had to go out and build an alternative to Flash Remoting demonstrates that non-CF developers truly want to use Flash Remoting. Considering that MM's world tends to revolve around Flash, why wouldn't they offer it for free. Its amazing to here all of the RIA rhetoric being pushed but you can only do it if you use CFMX or spend $1,000. At least Midnight Coders offers a version for free and I'm sure will offer WebORB at a very nice price point.
  
  Finally, as for gaining more acceptance for CFML, just keep in mind that not everyone wants to be tied into CFMX. Having a path to retain your investment while leveraging other technologies such as .Net, all the while using CFML, is a VERY appealing option to some. As I said before, you guys should seriously go out and talk to your customers. I know I have.

• 6 K. Ensign // Aug 15, 2005 at 2:27 PM

  Flash Remoting Server is totally different animal. It allows many clients to interact with each other through a server application. Is this what the real issue is about?
  
  Let's be clear here. Who's responsibility is it to build the remoting capability into a platform? MM or the platform engineers? If the PHP group could do it for PHP, on thier own, then perhaps Microsoft or some other C# developers could too. It is too bad that it would come with any cost for any platform, but this goes without repeating what Sean has already stated: free since 02, as in ubiquitous access from any platform. Plus, flash can read xml real dang easy. If your platform or app can generate xml and have it available from a url, you're in business.
  
  As far as CFML goes. It rocks. Blaming MM for not distributing it on .Net or any other platform is a bit incredible. Should php run on .Net? you see my point.
  
  

• 7 Rey Bango // Aug 15, 2005 at 2:33 PM

  Actually, I never said anything about running CFML on .Net. I said that *Flash Remoting* should've been provided as an open and free protocol so that all languages could use it without having to go out an reinvent the wheel as the PHP folks had to do.

Leave a Comment