My question is that: why Design View will be removed from Flash Builder?
Will it be substituted by another way of doing the things visually? Will adobe provide other visual tool to design applications? Disabling Design view and extinguing Catalyst seams that we will not any more visual tools. Is there any other plans for visual tools or Flash Designers or they will have to do the things in code-only?
The cost of maintaining wasn’t justified by the number of people using it. It is just like when your favorite TV show gets cancelled.
There is a discussion of visual tools on the Apache Flex mailing list.
Alright, thats a good justify no to continue developing this functionality. I started to work more since today in Code view and i think its a metter of time to improve that skill. I wish good luck to Adobe at this time. It seams youre passing and will pass trought big changes.
I dont konw how open mind Adobe leaders are, but you could propose them not to take Design Mode out, but just transform it in a View only mode. The user would not be able to drag and drop the components, but just to see (and find) how the visual you are coding is looking like without compiling the project - Design mode is really usefull to find things - specially when you have lots of states and substates. Without Design View, Flash Builder will look like the Matrix, where only the Choosen ones can see the things just looking for the codes. I know that the major users are "root" developers... and really dont use this functionality. Thats because as i said, their code-only developers. But when you need a more refined designed software thats really necessary to gain time, and thats one reason Flash Builder is so good! So, finally, can you and Adobe employees think in another solution like that i propouse, or is it already defined? Design view as i propouse would not need a lot of work, Its already done, isnt it?
I assume you heard that DV is being removed from FB via the whitepaper Adobe recently published. In that whitepaper, it should be clear that all major Flex releases in the future will be coming from Apache Flex while FB will be turning its focus elsewhere. DV is tied to Flex versions so it is very fragile and couldn’t be guaranteed to work with future Apache Flex releases.
There have been discussions on the Apache Flex mailing list as to what to do about DV being removed. It is pretty unlikely that Adobe will devote resources to any sort of visual tooling for Flex. There is a better chance that Apache Flex might come up with some sort of tool or plugin.
Whaaaa...... XML was designed to me machine read not human read! How can any sane person prefer to work purely in a horribly confusing environment when you can put your widgets directly onto a form and go from there? If Microsoft told all developers to develop their apps in pure code and run them to see, Visual Studio would not exist! For an example, you only went inside the VB6 .frm files when somthing went very badly wrong, as the display layout was totally seperate from the language code, and the base of Rapid Application Development was that the IDE did the heavy lifting of setting up the GUI and eased your code into it. That family of development tools more or less dominated desktop development from 1996 till today... But only on Windows. And so you all want to go back on that and do things the hard and slow way? I'm gutted.
You have the perfect environment for a multi-platform IDE, a proven language, a multiplatform system even mobile support in a one stop shop for Rapid Application Development that can be deployed to anything. I do not want to play with your MXML. I find it messy, clunky and slow. I do not want to mess with hand crafting each and every component... I can do it without even having to think about it with a GUI builder that is supposed to help me. If I wanted to hack around manually in source files and fiddle with declarations, correct typecase, naming and options for hours to get a script to run, I can do that already and it's called HTML+AJAX... Flex Builder was supposed to be a step forwards. Why throw it into reverse?
I was seriously thinking about using Flex and Air as a VB6 and C# replacement but this is a deal breaker...Well, this version should be supported for 5 years by Adobe according to their roadmap so in time I just hope that now the builder evolves for the better under Apache in that time and not get managed by people who prefer coding in VIM and ignore everyone else
Well I will not miss it I have used it just when I first saw flex and never ever again. I have always seen it as a marketing tool "hey look it has a visual editor!" puaj!. I'm almost against this kind of visual ides that generates code automatically and does it as it wishes.
VB6! oh God.. that smells! Learn MXML it will not take you more than a week and it's far more flexible than a visual ide!
good one for adobe!
I agree, a structured design language based on XML, like MXML or even WPF, lends itself very well to in-code editing. Much the same as I never use the design view of Visual Studio while coding websites, I see very little use for the visual editor in Flash Builder.
We use design mode to do mockups quickly and to mix and match components to see how it would look like. Without, it is just not the same. I dont like the direction where Adobe is heading with Flex. I can teach anyone in 10 minutes how to use a visual designer and from there how to work with the code. We are not creating CLI applications here are we?
I am sure we wont be using flex for our future projects anymore, not only because they removed the visual designer but everything else too.
Using a code editor to define an application GUI? I stopped doing that in 1995 (Symantec C), and will not be going back. I cannot begin to fathom today how not seeing what your GUI looks like makes things more flexible! Plus, MXML is just plain ugly. XML is not the unique answer to everything, and doing all this by hand is what all major tools have been trying to avoid with the notion of "Rapid Application Design".
Anyway, if you like the application without it, and believe that you can code faster without it, good for you. I can't, and don't have any wish to waste time compensating for what the IDE should be doing to make things simpler. If I have to fight with an obscure interface code to get somthing done, I might as well invest my time in C# or plain HTML5.
Goodbye Flex. It was interesting knowing you. Shame that Adobe abandonned you to sink or swim. I'll try to look you up in a few years if you are still around.
I use Dreamweaver and have done since version 3 but have never used the Design View part of the application. Yet DV is still there to date...?
I don't think the move from Adobe to Apache has been very well thought out from the start. The initial announcement was shoddy and everyone saw it as "Flex is dead", but then Adobe wrote a brand new announcement and re-released it. Now you're saying Design View is gone and that's that. You have figures from somewhere (?) that no one uses it, but what about those that do!! Continuing to use Flash Builder 4.6 for the near future is not a viable solution unless you are still actively maintaining Flex 4.6 or plan to release Flex 4.7...? Otherwise what's the point? New features will be added to Apache Flex which is incompatible with Flash Builder 4.6 and those who need to use those new features will be forced to upgrade to a product that has no Design View.
In my honest opinion, more could have been done and I am disappointed this is the path you have chosen to take.
well I have to agree with you RandomReado, Adobe has managed everything in a very sloppy way, wrong announces, wrong decsitions, very unclear messages.
Why they have removed support for android mobile when all phones are getting more and more processing power?
why they have done it when android is gaining more and more market place?
they should have continued betting on the player even though it would mean to rewrite it entirely at some moment.
Why they don't opensource the player and allow each builder to compile it for they devices?
Now they switched to game design and have forgotten about the enterprise possibilities of Flex and flash as a platfom, this is so sad.
If the player fails they must assume part of the responsability for sure.
This absolutely s@cks. Good by Flash Builder. Good by Flex and Air.
They can make all of the lame excuses they want about Flash Builder hack, costs of development, etc. but it is still THEIR software. It is an ugly baby, but it is their baby.
Punting the SDK to Apache means that this is a dead end. Kind of like voluntarily handing over their baby to child protective services.
Imagine if Microsoft removed Design View from Visual Studio.
AIR and Flex are dead for the enterprise, what little they had is going to evaporate.
Press releases to the contrary, there is no future for AIR/flex/adobe in my development shop
Someone at Adobe has their head so far up their own @$$ that they will never see the light of day again.
Agree about the feeling that now all the focus/hype from Adobe is being put on developing games for Air/Flash and enterprise app development looks like being ignored.
However I think that passing the SDK and framework development to Apache is a great thing. Now many can participate in the development and decide the framework future.
Maybe that should have been done on day 0. Also FlashPlayer should be opensource as the Java VM is, making it opensource might have given the FlashPlayer an even wider audience/acceptance and support for 3rd parties.
Design view always sucks in all ides, except maybe the ones used to design workflows or things alike.
I still think it really depends on the content being coded.
To your point, if Microsoft removed Design View from Visual Studio, then for the most part I wouldn't care. The majority of my development in VS is on web solutions that I always directly edit the aspx/html anyway. Where I would care is on winforms apps that generate designer code that is not easily read/edited.
The mxml code used to create the UI of Flex apps is clean and easily read/edited.
Europe, Middle East and Africa