<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flash or Flex or Both?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:02:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Burhan</title>
		<link>http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/comment-page-1/#comment-12467</link>
		<dc:creator>Burhan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:20:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/#comment-12467</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;But adobe also sells the the product Flex Builder for $250. May be they are planning to make Flex more stable and improve the features, than sell it for $800, for example. Is that possible? I know Flex SDK is free but Flex Builder is much more userfriendly, isnt it? What do you think? Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But adobe also sells the the product Flex Builder for $250. May be they are planning to make Flex more stable and improve the features, than sell it for $800, for example. Is that possible? I know Flex SDK is free but Flex Builder is much more userfriendly, isnt it? What do you think? Thanks.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erwan</title>
		<link>http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/comment-page-1/#comment-12461</link>
		<dc:creator>Erwan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 16:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/#comment-12461</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for this explanation, it&#039;s exactly what I was looking for! I&#039;ve been trying flex, but I&#039;ve not been convinced at all... so i&#039;ll stick with the combination that works the best for me : flashdevelop/flash !&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for this explanation, it&#8217;s exactly what I was looking for! I&#8217;ve been trying flex, but I&#8217;ve not been convinced at all&#8230; so i&#8217;ll stick with the combination that works the best for me : flashdevelop/flash !</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hank</title>
		<link>http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/comment-page-1/#comment-12459</link>
		<dc:creator>hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 04:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/#comment-12459</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;been thinking about getting into flex, but after this interesting analysis, I&#039;ll stick with flash and just dive deeper into actionscript as needed. thanks.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>been thinking about getting into flex, but after this interesting analysis, I&#8217;ll stick with flash and just dive deeper into actionscript as needed. thanks.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/comment-page-1/#comment-1836</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:38:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatfilm.com/2007/09/23/flash-or-flex-or-both/#comment-1836</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Flash CS3 is the way of the future. Adobe is taking all the componets Flex had and putting them in Flash. Example: I came across a simple image loader app written in both Flex and Flash (Actionscript 3.0). The Flash version had 3 simple Actionscript files. The Flex version had a wopping 22 files, not only did it have 22 files, they were all different types of files too. Of, course the majority of people support Flex, but only because it is free unlike Flash fo what $800 bucks. Your going to get more people learning how to program in Flex if it&#039;s free. Here&#039;s the catch, Adobe is playing the hook line and sinker strategy. Adobe made Flex so people would learn how to code in Actionscript. Then they start to limit features in furture releases
of Flex, and improve the features in Flash. WHY?...Because Adobe wants all the people who learned Actionscript to go out and purchase Flash for the $800. Microsoft is doing the same thing with Silverlight. How else do you get people interested in a product, make the software free at first to get people hooked then start to charge them for the newer improved versions. Economics 101. Create a big demmand, then limit the supply, force people to pay big bucks. I know I wouldn&#039;t pay $200 - $800 for new software unless I got to try it first. And 30 day demos aren&#039;t enough to get people hooked. You may think I am wrong, but just wait you&#039;ll see.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flash CS3 is the way of the future. Adobe is taking all the componets Flex had and putting them in Flash. Example: I came across a simple image loader app written in both Flex and Flash (Actionscript 3.0). The Flash version had 3 simple Actionscript files. The Flex version had a wopping 22 files, not only did it have 22 files, they were all different types of files too. Of, course the majority of people support Flex, but only because it is free unlike Flash fo what $800 bucks. Your going to get more people learning how to program in Flex if it&#8217;s free. Here&#8217;s the catch, Adobe is playing the hook line and sinker strategy. Adobe made Flex so people would learn how to code in Actionscript. Then they start to limit features in furture releases
of Flex, and improve the features in Flash. WHY?&#8230;Because Adobe wants all the people who learned Actionscript to go out and purchase Flash for the $800. Microsoft is doing the same thing with Silverlight. How else do you get people interested in a product, make the software free at first to get people hooked then start to charge them for the newer improved versions. Economics 101. Create a big demmand, then limit the supply, force people to pay big bucks. I know I wouldn&#8217;t pay $200 &#8211; $800 for new software unless I got to try it first. And 30 day demos aren&#8217;t enough to get people hooked. You may think I am wrong, but just wait you&#8217;ll see.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
