When we named project “Thermo” Flash Catalyst, everyone started speculating about where we were going with this. Soon after, rumours about renaming Flex Builder started to float around in the community and today is that day… The next version of Flex Builder will be named Flash Builder 4. And I think it makes total sense. This change will provide better naming consistency for the Flash family of tools and position Flash Builder as the development tool for the Flash Platform. Not convinced? Let me try to persuade you.
When you build applications in Flex Builder, you’re building them with the open source Flex Framework and/or ActionScript. The applications then get compiled in to a SWF-file that runs in the Flash Player. When talking to customers, I regularly got asked if you needed “Flex Player” installed to run an application and that is exactly the type of confusion that we want to solve. By renaming Flex Builder to Flash Builder, there is no doubt what you are going to build using this product. You’re going to build an application that will run on the ubiquitous and trusted Flash Player.
While we are renaming the next version of Flex Builder to Flash Builder 4, it will still be the same Eclipse-based IDE with lots of exciting new features. We are not renaming the open source Flex Framework or the free Flex SDK. Also, if you’ve been calling yourself a Flex developer, there’s no need to go and print new business cards. You will still be building applications with the Flex Framework, so no change there. We will also continue to promote the use of the Flex Framework and Flex development in general.
I know all of you are really excited about the upcoming releases of Flash Builder and Flash Catalyst and while we haven’t announced any release dates yet, I can tell you that we will be releasing public beta versions of both products this summer. So if you haven’t planned your summer vacation yet, you may want to hold off on that and plan on playing with Flash Catalyst beta and Flash Builder 4 beta during the summer. That’s what I’m going to do ;-)
Also, you may want to check with your local Adobe User Group. We are doing a pre-release tour through 119 different locations in June. So if you want to find out more about what we are doing with the upcoming beta releases of Flash Catalyst and Flash Builder, this would be a great place to start.
If you have any questions or comments about this upcoming name change, feel free to leave a note below.
Update: Lee Brimelow just published an FAQ about the rebranding.
Flash on!
My very same thoughts, I replied to Duane at Twitter that this is the reason why I used swfgeek and not flashgeek or flexgeek as a nickname it’s a silly example but I think a good one, independent of what tool you use you’ll compile your work as a swf filethe renaming of Flash-Flex Builder it’s a good move and hope well see some more integration on the Flash tools in the near future.
Very exciting hear that the Flash Catelyst will be release public beta version.Good news!
I think this is a good move, a little scary but all changes are at first :) I am glad that you did not change the name of the Flex Framework or Flex SDK, this would have been a bad move imho.
From a marketing standpoint putting Flash IDE, Flash Catalyst and Flash Builder together like that sounds better
Maybe some are forgetting that the name was chosen to appeal more to the developer society that simply didn’t like the timeline development concept of Flash in the first place.
By changing Flex Builder “back” to Flash, will only lose Adobe the developer user-base who don’t already know about the Flex framework, and WILL cause confusion for those trying to developer for Flex on Air, which is also a major reason for the previous naming convention!
So why the change? Why confuse the newcomers to flex by naming it flash and confusing it with the Adobe Flash CS# ?
@Ahmad: Just to clarify: You will still be developing applications using the Flex Framework and we will continue to promote the use of the Flex Framework. With this name change, we want to make it clearer that you’re actually building an application on top of the Flash Platform. Flex is now “just” a framework that makes it easier to build applications. I hope that clarifies it a bit more.
Fail.
First Flex pricing was the nail in the potential coffin.
Then came the Eclipse swap out instead of the Dreamweaver path (so many lost web developers that could of
migrated easily onto the tooling had they stuck that out).
Then came the Flex open sourcing, which again staff were warned would end up limiting innovation as no sneak attacks on Microsoft etc could occur.
Now this. More confusion.
Time to dust off the Silverlight text books that are sitting on my shelf.
@Mike Jules: About pricing: If you want, you can build applications using the Flex Framework for free. Just download the free Flex SDK, code in your favorite text editor and compile using the Flex compiler which is part of the SDK. Price = €0. Our current version of Flex Builder Professional is about €600. We also have a lighter version that would set you back €250. If you want to dust off those Silverlight text books and start developing for that, you’ll have to shell out €1000 for Visual Studio.
I don’t see how open sourcing the Flex Framework could limit innovation. I think we are clearly showing that is not the case.
It makes sense. But I’m just afraid that you guys might be a little too optimistic about the reputation of the Flash brand. Yes I’ve heard many confusions about Flash and Flex and where each of those stand compared to Silverlight, JavaFX and stuff. But I’ve heard maybe as many people saying “Flash? This thing to do annoying splash screens and animations and disruptive user experiences?!”.
Yes the runtime is the same, but it’s been associated with designers and timelines and animations for so long, that I’m afraid painting some red on the black logo will not do only good. Maybe it would have been better to change the name of the platform and then have both Flash and Flex producing content for that runtime.
Anyway, as long as I’m still a Flex developer, it’s cool with me.
@Serge Jespers: “you’ll have to shell out €1000 for Visual Studio”
Visual Web Developer Express is free.
The Standard version is $250 and the Professional version is $650.
@SwfBuilder: thanks for pointing that out. I only looked on the site of a local reseller. I guess I couldn’t find my way through the 25 different SKU’s. But you are right, I now double checked. The standard version is €399 while the Professional version is €1090
If anything requires 5 paragraphs of explanation means it is not a good idea. I’m just say’n…
Flex On!
@David: It’s actually just 1 paragraph that explains it ;-)
Bring Flash Builder 4 to Linux! Vote now! http://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FB-19053
There are a lot of misconceptions around Flash, Flex, IDE, Builder, SDK, platform, and Silverlight evangelists surf on this confusion to compare apples to oranges.
Adobe needs to communicate a lot more about the platform – send articles around the web asap – MS is very active lately.
I for one am happy to hear about this change and I hope it brings more people coding in AS3 to the amazing IDE that Flex Builder currently is for coding AS3. I for one found out about Flex VERY late because a) I didn’t look into it b) I didn’t know that it could be used as an IDE for coding AS3 without having to use the flex components.
I’ll be at FlashCamp in SanFran at the end of May which I assume will have some more info. I’ll also be on the hunt here in TO to see if FITO gets one of them early previews as well :)
@Serge – absolute semantics – if it was that easy, a concrete message would have been 1-line announcement, with no justification required at all. But such a long explanation/justification for it just screams: “we think this sucks also – but here is why you should think it does not suck…”
It is a lot easier sell to simply say what we say today: “Flex Applications run the Flash Player – you got the Flash player, you are good!” when we talk tech with our customers. No debate or discussions required – we could change ‘player’ to ‘platform’ and be 100% fine. But this move by Adobe forces a sub-level discussion/clarification immediately when talking in the community and with customers as to what “Flex” Applications WON’T do relative to “Flash” Applications and visa versa – hello confusion!
The bottom line is that this will force a lot of extra clarification on the shoulders of partners and vendors trying to interface and market solutions based on Flex. It will also potentially introduce a lot of extra ’static’ in the lines of communication when people are looking for “flash” stuff (components) and finding “flex” stuff – just as “flex” community users will find all kinds of “flash” related materials when they need “flex” – argh!!! Who wants visitors and inquiries from people they DON’T want to talk to about things they DON’T support?
I wish Adobe would have consulted the community, it’s partners and the development community on this one before THAT decision was made. But it feels like a select group of corporate opinions is not willing to even consider alternative views or other opinions on this decision (rumors I have heard in the past week or two).
Remember the whole namespace debate for FlexBuilder!? I need not say more….
@David while I see your point, there is also the flipside. Introducing “Flex” as another term in the first place has created confusion. Now that people are latching on to the buzzword that it is, they are having to let go. I don’t see an issue with it.
It’s basically taking the core of the current builder and presenting it to the masses on what it really is… a superior IDE for programming actionscript (not to mention being able to install other eclipse plugins).
It will bring Flash developers to an IDE that promotes best practices, organization and SPEED. I’m not even sure how many developers are using the Flex IDE right now to code AS3, but I feel sorry for those who are not.
It will be hard though if you guys say that you are still calling the SDK Flex… I thought that was an odd choice to be honest. Go all or none IMO.
@Mike Jules: If a change of the IDE’s name is enough to make you switch to Silverlight, I can only imagine you were doing very little with the Flex Framework in the first place. Good luck with integrating Illustrator with Blend and Visual Studio, or good luck with telling your design team they have to use MS Paint from now on :)
@David: Believe me when I say that we did not decide this overnight! We have been working on this for many months now and I can assure we also consulted the community and our partners.
Which editor do I use to edit a FLAsh file (.FLA)?
When I’m in design mode in Flash Builder, the superior IDE for programming Actionscript, when I drag a component on the screen does it write the Actionscript for me?
Is Flash for CSx being renamed Flash Animator?
Can I write MXML into Flash CSx?
Where is my Library in Flash Builder?
Although i think association of flex and flash should always be made clear to all interested parties when RIA projects are discussed. As far as the client is concerned the outcome of any flash base project will be a flash player (SWF) file. hwere is the confussion? Flex Builder is a tool just like Dreamweaver or Photoshop, doe s this mean that Adobe will be renaming these product HTML writer or jpgDrawer, i think not. the down side to ant renaming of a tool is the downturn in association by name searches in google.
There is a real possibility that the name change will only ad to the confussion along with the desision to keep the flex framework and sdk name. am i now a flash developer or a flex developer.
Answer: i am a Flex developer i use the Flex Framework and i use the tools provided, the name makes no difference as long as the tool remains a excellent as it has been since version 1.5 (DW IDE). I use it everyday and never really think about the name other than need to open flex builder to work.
I do understand that Adobe need to focus on the flash platform as silverlight is making waves, but i for one prefer and will continue to fly the Adobe/Flex/Flash banners regardless of the name.
What would be the product line which will include Flash/Flex Builder? From one side we have different editions of CS#, which will feature integration with Flex Builder IDE through FXG, from the other side Catalyst. Are you going to feature something like RIA developer edition for CS# line, which will include staff like Photoshop/Illustrator/Catayst/Flex Builder? Other question is what would be different in positioning for Flash Professional and Flash Builder?
I don’t doubt there was discussion – but this past few weeks was the *FIRST* I heard of it, and I consider myself to be somewhat of an ‘insider’ on the subject of Flex Product/Community. I am by no means an ‘expert’ in either platform – but fundamentally they have two separate approaches and two separate target markets (JibJab would not develop a Flex Application for what they do, just as SAP would not develop a Flash Application for what they do) – seriously!
I will be at the 360|Flex this week in Indianapolis, IN – I plan to just sit back and let the discussion fly when it becomes more aware to those attending (I am sure there is already awareness out there by this point). But there will be over 300 Flex developers in the same room with Adobe, and IF Adobe announces this there, I will do my best to sequester all the pitch-forks and torches in the immediate vicinity.
Best of luck on this name change – we will do whatever we can to continue to support the ‘platform’ and direction. But my impression from other’s has been that Adobe will be ‘deliberately’ -not- accepting input/debate on the name change at this point or as a go-forward on the subject (which if correct – is unfortunate). Unfortunately I am predicting 30% of inbound interest within 1-year of the name change will be people calling us thinking we do “Flash” when we want to talk to “Flex”…
Again – look at the passion that came up on the proposed Namespace change within Flex a few months back. The lives of Kittens were in jeopardy at the hint of those changes… anyone remember this from Ben Stucki???: http://blog.benstucki.net/?p=53
(Classic! — but this ACTUALLY IMPACTED the quality of the product and the direction it was going – VERY QUICKLY — As an added bonus, we also apparently learned in that Matt Chotin actually cares about Kittens too!) :)
@Endoplasmic “Flex” has been out there for 3 years at this point… The market name and technology exists and is already accepted.
I absolutely agree with this decision. And “the old red app” should be renamed to “FA” (Flash Animator) or “FP” (Flash Professional), although “FP” might be confused with Flash Player…
I think it’s a good idea, and I’m looking forward to see the new features of Flash Builder 4.
Btw: “119 locations in june”!? Wow! :) Adobe really wants us to see that stuff, don’t they? :D
Ok so if it’s going to be called ‘flash builder’, at least they should provide is a direct and strong coupling with the flash IDE. So we will have a decent development environment for people who develop apps using the flash ide.
Some ideas: Debugging/profiling using flash builder (like flex apps), It should know which classes you are using in the library, “generate class from timeline” option :-), and so forth.
Because I’m just sick of alt-tabbing between eclipse and flash. And although FlashDevelop is a great tool, it’s not perfect (not cross platform, no debugging yet).
“When you build applications in Flex Builder, you’re building them with the open source Flex Framework and ActionScript”
That is usually not true. I build ActionScript-only projects with Flex Builder all the time, and only occasionally build projects using the Flex framework.
@Luke: You’re absolutely right. Changed it to “and/or”. Thanks for pointing that out.
@thebouv: You would still use Flash Professional to open up FLA files. Flash Professional isn’t going anywhere.
This is a business decision, and by that I mean based on money.
Let’s face it, outside of the Flash community, Flash still has a bad reputation from the days of annoying intros. Fast forward to today most people who enjoy the capabilities of Flash have no idea it is Flash, as it should be. Video: case and point. The problem is not the technology but the word. “Flash n the pan.” “All flash but no substance.” When Flex came out I thought it was a brilliant marketing move. Flex is a different class of web application and the word breaks from “Flash” and gives the technology a fresh base onto which to build. Flex is a part of the “Flash Platform” and works with the Flash Player. Works for me. This is why I am disappointed that the brand Flex is taking a step backward.
Back to my original point. The Flex SDK is free. Flash Professional is not. Flex Builder is a GREAT as3 editor, Flash IDE is not and is in danger of becoming a place only to hold assets and compile to swf. How long before the Flash IDE is taken completely out of the workflow? Also, it gets harder to justify charging money for FB when the SDK is free and open sourced. Solve this by pulling FB into the Flash package by renaming it an bundling the tools giving life back to Flash as a development product. Flex remains and can truly be called free.
In short, it’s my guess that this was a move to ensure the survival of Flash Professional as a money maker for Adobe.
I mainly use flashdevelop and the flex sdk to build flash apps, with or without the flex framework. So there you go.
I was always under the impression that flex is just another way to create flash files anyway :)
@David even if it’s been called “Flex” for 3 years, it doesn’t matter. You are still developing projects that REQUIRE the Flash plugin to work. The name change takes the confusion out of the puzzle.
You don’t need to explain that building something with the Flex framework publishes to the Flash plugin, you can simply say “I develop Flash RIAs” which eliminates HOW you do it, just that you can do it (like I don’t care how someone makes my sandwich, as long as it’s good, I’ll eat it).
I love that current AS3 developers still using the cs3/4 IDE to code will have some new light shed on the subject.
Now all Flash Builder has to support is CTRL + ENTER to tell Flash cs3/4 to publish the SWF and we are in business. (the amount of times I hit CTRL + ENTER in Flex would blow your mind).
@Endoplasmic — the problem is WE (reading this) ARE ‘CURSED’ WITH KNOWLEDGE!
The people WE (companies like mine) deal with are -not- blessed with this knowledge — so I get to add “Adobe Evangelist/Teacher/Customer-Coach” to my business card to help others without the knack to navigate “what” it is and “why” THIS is -not- what “their” impression is vs “what” it actually “is” – for probably a year or two. (Thanks Adobe!)
Developers like yourself don’t care about something as trivial – the tool still does what it does, and you will fly whatever flag Adobe pop’s up (kool-aid tastes good, and always will). People dealing with the business side (and the uneducated masses) get the short end of the stick when you have these glasses on. I’m just say’n…..
@David I understand what you are saying, but I think it comes down to communication of what you are offering a business vs. the end product.
If you are pitching “We will build you an RIA with the Flex framework” so that you can get around the “negative” relationship to Flash, then I believe it’s pretty poor communication. The end result is a SWF file, no matter what program or libraries you are using.
It’s how people leverage the Flash plugin that matters at the end of the day.
Most of my time is developing, but I’ve also been on the flip-side where I’ve had to pitch projects and explain why using the Flash plugin is the better choice. It doesn’t matter if I use Bob’s Builder or Slippery SWF Creator to build out the projects, because at the end of the day, it’s still Flash plugin content.
So I think it’s high-time for people to stop hiding behind a name (ie. Flex) to avoid the (imo extinct) notions that Flash is all skip intros and flippy menus.
I hope there will be subsequent terminology fixes – such as renaming the “Flex Project” / “ActionScript Project”… Every project should be simply “Flash Project” IMHO, with the “use Flex Framework” option.
And one more question: Flash Builder can be used without Flex Framework. Does this apply to Flash Catalyst as well? And are there any long-term plans to combine Flash Professional and Flash Catalyst into a single product? If not, it will be hard to explain to newcomers the difference between these two products (one as “low-level” and the second as “high-level”? – nobody will understand this!)
I don’t care what they call it as long as they fix all those gosh-darned bugs.
OK – so i saw Matt Chotin’s keynote this AM – and I see the pieces in place. “Flash Builder” does make sense – especially with Catalyst in the mix as the blending mechanism. I think this will work – but I still feel like we will get a lot of “mixed-message” phone calls over the next year or so… (ugh)
Never say my mind can’t be changed.
> We are doing a pre-release tour through 119 different locations in June.
Hi Serge, is there somewhere on the web a simple list with all the 119 locations? The link leads to the Adobe calendar which currently only has 20 entries. In many cases you have to browse the whole text of a calendar entry to find out where that meeting is going to take place.
the people at the head of adobe finally come around. it’s a naive mistake that those in charge should be embarrassed.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.
I have explained this to countless folks countless times…
The only negative thing is that all of us snooty Flex devs are now forced into the same pool of developers as the newbie Flash folks. Oh well, back to where many of us came from.
MG
This renaming is where “branding” gets in the way of actual usage of a technology. In case the Adobe folks haven’t noticed, Flex is bringing in a whole new HUGE wave of fans to use the Flash technology in a specific way (i.e. no spinning fire graphics and circling logos) for BUSINESS usage. Renaming this product not only will confuse people who hire people who use the technology, but, also confuse the people who want to invest in it…i.e. but, isn’t it just Flash?
Is a Flex developer also a Flash developer (NO!).
Is a Flash developer a Flex developer (Of course NOT!).
Is a Java developer a Flex developer (Probably!)
Is a Java developer interested in Flash development (99 times out of 100, NO!)
Is a Flex developer interested in Flash development (see above).
Come on Adobe, I believe you are better than this.
Saltmarch Media’s annual Great Indian Developer Awards honors software Products. The final shortlist consists of IBM’s Rational Application Developer; Microsoft’s Visual Studio 2010; Adobe’s Flex Builder; Popular open-source IDE – Eclipse and Microsoft’s Expression Studio. Oracle’s JBuilder was the first IDE to win this award in 2008 followed by Microsoft’s Visual Studio 2008 in the 2009 chapter of the same awards. So visit the 2010 Great Indian Developer Awards website and cast your vote. It counts! (developersummit dot com/gida3_llist)