Say hello to “Flash Builder”!
Word has been leaking out here and there via Adobe evangelists that the next version of Flex Builder will be rebranded as “Flash Builder”. I’ve actually known about this as a tentative change for a while now and have talked to a lot of Flex developers who think it is a horrible idea and that it will cause confusion.
As for me, I am overjoyed by it. OK, not overjoyed, literally. I’m not jumping up and down and squealing or anything. But I think it is a great move and I fully support it. Wanna know why? Of course you do! Even if you don’t, I’m gonna tell ya.
Actually, I’ve been calling for this since Flex 2 first came out: http://www.bit-101.com/blog/?p=929. The point is, the name Flex Builder is erroneous. Maybe erroneous is a strong word, but it doesn’t describe what the product does. It describes a subset of what the product does.
For example, take Visual Studio. Or even better, take a single language subset of Visual Studio, like Visual C++. This lets you code C++ Applications. As part of that, it includes the Windows Forms framework (are they still calling it that?) which lets you code Windows Forms applications – windows, UI controls, etc. But do they call it “Visual Windows Forms”? Nooooooo. Doing that would be product marketing suicide. It would create confusion. You’d have people creating command line utilities or DirectX games without a bit of Windows Forms code and calling them Windows Forms applications. And they’d even drop the “Visual” and say, “I built this command line utility using Windows Forms.” And you’d say “… huh? How is that possible?”
And don’t you DARE say that the above scenario is ridiculous because that’s EXACTLY what has happened with Flex Builder. Flex Builder lets you code AS3 Applications. As a part of that, it includes the Flex framework (they ARE still calling it that) which lets you code Flex Applications – windows, UI controls, etc. And you have people creating pure AS3 applications without a bit of Flex framework code and calling them Flex applications. They even drop the “Visual”“Builder” and say “I built this (obviously not Flex) game in Flex.”
I don’t do a lot of Flex work. But I use “Flex Builder” on a daily basis to do AS3 based Flash applications. I can’t say how many times I’ve had this conversation:
Bob: I’m doing a lot of Flex these days. You?
Me: Nope. I don’t really like Flex all that much.
Bob: Oh I love it. It’s great for making applications.
Me: That’s cool. I’m just not that into it.
Bob: So you actually WRITE CODE in the Flash IDE?
Me: NO! Of course not. Are you insane???
Bob: So you use FDT? Flash Develop?
Me: No, I use Flex Builder.
Bob: (confused look on his face) … but you said you didn’t use Flex …
Me: (sigh… here we go again) I don’t. I use Flex Builder to create ActionScript projects and code ActionScript in Flex Builder but I don’t create Flex-based applications using MXML or the Flex framework that often.
Bob: Oh! Yeah! That’s what I do. I don’t actually use MXML or the Flex framework stuff. I just code ActionScript. Flex is a really great ActionScript editor.
[Bob does not represent any single real person. As I said, I’ve had this almost exact same conversation numerous times.]
So, I’m hoping that naming the product “Flash Builder” will slowly help some of this type of confusion. As Lee Brimelow tweeted the other night, “Now when someone says ‘I built this in Flex’, you will actually know what they’re talking about.”
Now, of course this is going to have some repercussions. It’s going to cause some confusion. Some people aren’t going to like the name change. Particularly hard core Flex developers, who don’t want anyone to know that they are really creating Flash applications because they think that Flash has a bad name out there. Some people feel that Flash is still equated with overlong intros, garish, inaccessible content, and horrible coding practices, and want to pretend that Flex is not Flash. Flash is the black sheep of the family who you pretend doesn’t exist. Well, sorry. Flex IS Flash. But Flash is not Flex. Some people actually say that the word Flash will scare away potential Flex developers who are afraid of Flash. Well how many potential AS3 developers did Flex Builder scare away because they were afraid of Flex? That said, I think Adobe has a LOT more work to do in promoting what Flash IS, and pushing the concept of the Flash Platform a lot more.
It’s also going to cause a lot of confusion in what Flash Builder is and what you can do with it. Some people are going to think Flex is gone. Somebody thought that this would make it hard to search for info on Flex components like “the Flex DataGrid” because there was no more Flex, and “Flash DataGrid” would bring up wrong results. Flex is not going away! The Flex framework, MXML, an everything you know and love about Flex is here to stay. It will still be called Flex. The tool you know as Flex Builder will now be called Flash Builder, but will still be the same tool. You can still say “create a new Flex Project” in it. The Flex DataGrid is still the Flex Datagrid. Still, it IS going to create some confusion, so I hope Adobe gets out there with some VERY clear marketing on this point.
Well, that’s a lot longer post than I intended on writing. I imagine this is going to be a controversial issue, but I’m going to try to refrain from arguing the point more in the comments. The point is, the product IS going to be named that whether you personally feel it’s a good thing or a bad thing. So there’s not really a lot to argue about.
..but why is Flash (I mean the Flash IDE) still called Flash? FlashPlayer or FlashPlayer Plugin describes the runtime. FlashBuilder will describe a coding environment based on eclipse. FlashCatalyst describes a program to convert layouts from illustrator to templates for FlashBuilder. But the word “Flash” stands still for the IDE, the program where you can make tweens visually and code and paint and such.. So we still need to talk about the “Flash platform” to talk about all of this stuff.
I agree with Lee and you, that FlashBuilder weill help to have less confusion, but then Adobe should also call the FlashIDE by another name, maybe FlashModeler?
Just my opinion. Don’t get me wrong, I like all of this Flash platform stuff… 🙂
Matthias, actually, the Flash IDE is called “Flash CS4 Professional”, not just “Flash”. But I agree, it doesn’t really distinguish it much from Flash Builder. Actually, I’m not even going to say that “Flash Builder” is the best name in the world, particularly the “builder” part. But again, I think at this point it’s all decided and in motion. And it’s an evolution. Maybe Flash CS5 will get a more descriptive name. “Flash Designer”?
I totally agree.
As a Flex Framework Application developer, I have had countless conversations like the one you describe. -and also the other way around, trying to tell people that when creating stuff with Flex SDK, it’s still Flash, even though I don’t use Flash IDE to do so.
You touch on an sensible point; the Flasher’s staying away from Flex, as they are either confused or scared or both. In our community a lot of confusion have kept Flash Developers and Hybrids away from TIFKAFB (The IDE Formerly known as Flex Builder) as they didn’t know that they could use it for AS3 projects, or at least they thought it was a totally different ballgame to do so.
Many times have I heard people say, “I don’t get that Flex stuff, so I just use Flash Develop”.
So, to give this name change backward compatibility, I have created a Flash Builder Browser taking care of the confusing content out there 🙂
Check it out
http://asgerlaursen.com/2009/05/16/flash-builder-browser-the-world-as-it-should-be/
Thanks for a good post on the subject
Cheers
Asger
Keith, I totally agree with your sentiments here. We are all either Flash Developers or Flash Designers, regardless of the framework or process we use to develop. The name change makes perfect sense.
That conversation is something I can totally understand. I think from a branding point of view this will make more sense. Flash Catalyst in my opinion creates much more confusion..
Actually it would have been cool if they called Flex Builder “SWF Builder” and just have the Flex Framework clearly branded and included as a toolkit
I’m not so sure they should have kept the “4” if theyre changing the name like that.. should have just called it “Flash Builder”
Personally, I hope Flash and FlashBuilder merge at some point. I use both lots and can’t work without either.
Flash Creater
Flash Builder
Flash Catalyst
you know what I’m talking about…
Great way of explaining, liked the examples you gave there. Totally great move, love it.
I can’t believe how good that is. I recently had a horrible month trying to explain actionscript project vs flex project, of course everyone immediately thinks you mean timeline development. Or at least they pretend to, and management has no way of sorting out what is what. The assumption is you don’t need any knowledge of flash to make a good flex app (most people don’t even think they are related), which of course ends in tears every time. Way to go Adobe, and excellent points and pressure Keith, thank you!
Yep, totally agree. I’ve never worked with Flex, but I use the Flex Builder on nearly a daily basis. It amazes me how often people assume that as soon as you want to do anything that is beyond a simple banner ad, you have to use “Flex”. This should help to clear up some of the confusion around that.
I think it would have been cool if Adobe involved the community in the naming. Maybe they did and I missed it. Personally, I would have suggested “Flash Platform Studio” (FPS) to make it more clear to Visual Studio and Java Developers what the product is. This would also leave room in the future if Flash Builder’s output becomes broader than just exporting swfs made with AS. What if FB ever compiles .js or exports interactive PDFs, or gets Alchemy added for e.g. In other words, it might have more subsets one day similar to the language agnostic name ‘Visual Studio’. Thanks for the post.
There’s a saying in politics: if you have to explain it, you’ve lost the argument. That, was a pretty long and detailed argument.
Cheers
David
I’ve never really known what a Flex application is and how it’s different from an AIR application. What the **** IS Flex?
@Matthias, you’re right. I reckon “Flash Animator” would be appropriate.
But then again, as you mentioned Keith, it’s already called Flash CS4. So maybe the CS just needs to be expanded.
“Flash Creative Suite” – does the job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZftwcCzYyc
I’d like to see Flash Professional get renamed to Flash Designer.