 |
I have always had a lot of trouble describing the different aspects of Flash simply because there are so many facets to it. This becomes especially hard if you write or record tutorials for a living. Take for instance the idea of being a Flash or Flex developer. Every time I talked about something I had to throw them both in there although many times I simply chose one depending on the audience I was talking too. Luckily Adobe has finally started to sort things out to help make things less confusing. Below are a list of terms along with my new definitions for them. Bear in mind that these are not official Adobe definitions, but rather my own personal opinions. |
This is perhaps the hardest one to define. In the past the word Flash has been used to talk about the Flash authoring tool, the Flash player, and also as a more generic term for the whole set of Flash-related technologies. For this point forward, Flash is a technology platform with the Flash player being its central hub. So essentially the word Flash represents the Flash Platform.
Flex has always been used to describe both a framework and a developer IDE. This caused problems because often times someone would say “I built that in Flex.” But what do they mean? Did they use the Flex framework or did they do a traditional ActionScript project using Flex Builder. This was one of the most frustrating terms to deal with. From this point forward, the word Flex will be solely used to describe the framework itself, not the IDE. So the only time you would say that you built something in Flex is if you used the Flex framework in your project. I’m very happy about this change in particular.
This term has various definitions based on who you talk to. Going forward I will use the term Flash developer to describe anyone that is developing content for the Flash Platform. If you develop in Flash CS4 you are a Flash Developer. If you develop using the Flex framework you also are a Flash Developer. So this brings up the question of what to call those who only do Flex framework development. I see it as something similar to someone specializing in Java Swing development. Even though they specialize in Swing development, they still are a referred to as a Java developer. Of course people can continue to call themselves Flex developers or whatever else they want. But in my mind, you will be a Flash developer who specializes in the Flex framework.
There has to be a term for those people who use Flash and do little to no ActionScript coding. I will be calling these people Flash designers from this point forward. I was tempted to use Flash animator but design seemed a better fit. Of course the line between a Flash designer and developer is not a solid one and in the end these are all just arbitrary labels.
Ok so those are some of the words that will take on new definitions. There are also terms that will either change or go away completely. For instance, what should I say when I want to refer to the Flash authoring tool? Well stay tuned from Adobe on that one. For now I will specifically either say the version, as in Flash CS4, or just call it Flash authoring. As you may have heard from various sources, Flex Builder may soon be undergoing a name change. This makes total sense as the IDE is used for much more than just developing for the Flex framework. Stay tuned as we continue to roll out new pieces of the Flash Platform re-branding effort.
I’m sure many of you will have comments on the things that I have talked about here. Some of you may be vehemently disagree with me. Regardless, please leave your comments.
Lee
I think I agree with most of your definitions there Lee. Though I think a lot of people, like myself, will find it hard to put themselves in a category because we cover a few of them. E.g. I might create an RIA using the Flex framework, but it’ll contain some custom Flash components that were mainly developed in the Flash IDE. Plus the whole thing was designed in Flash (or maybe Photoshop…). But like you said, I guess it depends who you are talking too…
@jassa Well for that then were talking about the polymath concept. I don’t really like labels but they are a necessary evil. The developer community is the one who will be most affected by these changes as we will all be Flash developers now. Hopefully this help mend some of the divide between Flash and Flex.
I prefer the name action script developer since that helps make clear whether or not I a do flex mxml.
What I hate the most is when Google came out and said that they made a map API for “flash” when it was only for flex at the time. I felt like the flex community was trying to do a hustle take over, mater of fact just the other day I was talking to a flex developer who said he would rather not do any action script and make it all mxml. His quote was that it looks so much more nicer and cleaner compared to action script.
To be truthful I have a hard time trusting the flex community. Don’t get me wrong I like flex and I think it has it’s place it’s just that they types of people it got attention from seem to be a lot of the same people that use to hate flash, but now like it only because of flex.
If I had it my way the different between flash and flex would be that they are the same or as different as day and night. I think it’s time to bring them together or tare them apart for good.
Now I know that I have digressed but I feel that most of this confusion is due to the flex community not making it their but instead calling it the flash platform. Why not then just call it the Assembly platform. Yet we all know why they are doing this, they are trying to validate flex to the rest of the flash community saying that flex is just as good as flash because they are one in the same.
Well I’m gonna stay that it’s just not true, I like my timeline just as much as they like their markup. And until I can use mxml in the flash IDE I seen no reason to say the two are the same.
So I would think that even more clearer definitions would be best with greater detain.
PS: Sorry about the semi rant.
“Hopefully this help mend some of the divide between Flash and Flex.”
Haha, probably not. I struggle with writing unit-tests and they struggle with Flash linkage ID’s, they see a timeline and freak, I see a build server and get woozy…
holy flipping type-o’s batman, what the frick happen to my last post.
sorry lee.
@Josh rant away! I’m looking for uncensored feedback on this.
@JesterXL Yeah that makes sense. But I think it makes sense to say that you’re a Flash developer if you develop content for Flash player, regardless of the IDE or framework used. Again the Java analogy is a good one I think.
I think if you develop with the Flex Framework,you are a Flex developer,regardless of whether you are using MXML or Actionscript and whichever IDE you use.
Flash developers would include people who use the Flash authoring tool and other tools for developing Flash Player content without the Flex Framework.
@Pradeek Using the Java analogy, that would be like saying someone who did Swing development was not a Java developer. You need to start thinking of the word Flash as the player not the authoring tool. Were all developing for the Flash player although we may use different approaches to do it.
Oh yeah, the other thing is that I got the sensation the other day at a flex user group that most flex developers think Catalyst is gonna be the deal breaker when it comes to flex vs. flash.
It was that they really think it’s gonna be bigger then flash because it is gonna brings more designer into flex. Not saying that it’s not gonna help a little, it’s I just feel that for new people that get a taste of the flash world in Catalyst they will want the full package which you can only get in flash.
I feel like adobe is doing to flash with Catalyst as to windows did to xp with vista. It’s like the flash community is devolving so that it can accommodate the new comers.
So that brings up a whole new set of problems for your topic, whats gonna happen when people doing thermo start calling them self flash developers or designers???
@Josh I am not sure why someone would want to get rid of actionscript all together makes no sense…. really!!!
I agree that there is some tension between traditional flash designers and emerging flash development community but this problem goes way beyond flash. Developers seem to think that they own the web so everything should be done their way or it is wrong (flash was devil until javascript/ajax offered the some of flashs’ interactivty).
I like Lee’s take on it “Flash Developer” Flex or Flash it is the same thing Developers may not like it but thats how it should be done.
@lee I totally agree with you on the whole “I don’t really like labels but they are a necessary evil” thing. We can call ourselves whatever we want – at the end of the day, Flash users and Flex users alike are both using the Flash Player to deliver their mad skills.
@Josh Yeah Catalyst brings a new set of challenges with it. But you can’t go wrong with Flash being thought of as the final destination for us all. If you designed something and it runs in the Flash player, you did a Flash design whether or not it was done in Flash authoring or Catalyst. Same is true for developers. If you make your living writing code that runs in the Flash player, you’re a Flash developer.
Wow, really relevant post. I’ve just been talking to a potential employer who wants to know about my Flex experience. “Well,” says I, “I develop in AS3 and compile mostly in Flash – but I like to use the Flex IDE to write my ActionScript, and every one in a while I do an entire [Flash? AS3? MXML?] project in Flex.”
I agree with Josh in #3 – the most relevant point is that I know AS3. Yes there are differences between the IDEs, and depending on the scope of the project those differences can be enormous – but if someone is looking for an AS3 developer and they know the world Flash but don’t know the word Flex then that can disqualify all of those potential candidates who do stellar AS3 dev work in Flex, for instance.
I love what Adobe is doing, but your naming structures are getting incredibly tangled – and the fact that Thermo became “Flash Catalyst” and not just “Catalyst” worries me, because it looks like it’ll add even more confusion – unless you rename Flex to something like “Flash Developer” and then share the Flex framework between Flash CS4, Flash Catalyst and “Flash Developer.”
In short, you’ve put your finger on something that’s been giving me a headache all day and I’m eager to see how Adobe resolves the emerging branding quagmire.
Thanks for the post!
I guess that I’m just a little too critical on the mxml developers and the Catalyst new comers.
I guess I just have to wait and see if the quality stands as good as it does when you design in the Flash IDE. Because if new people start flooding the net with sub stander flash sites again it’s gonna be the whole “flash 99% bad” all over again.
My thing is that it’s hard enough to get top quality design with in the Flash IDE, how are they gonna do a better job with a simplified version?
I think that the titles should hold a level of class or skill set. As it should imply one is strong then the other or more technical. After all it can take years to master Action Script or design. Should some one gain the title just because they can drag and drop a component? What will that do to our industry and our wages? Now I’m not saying that developers are better designers. Matter of fact I think the whole developer/designer is more of a bigger problem then flash vs flex.
In that context I prefer what I have on my business cards. Rich Internet Applications Analyst. I feel that in the flash world you can not become a master designer for the flash player until you can develop and that goes like wise.
But I rarely get the title of analyst since most of the jobs I get want me to be a designer or developer, saying that I could not do both.
In the end, I just hope it truly helps and does not create more problems.
@Myk Well I can answer part of your question. The reason that Thermo got a Flash name is because, moving forward, all tools that create Flash content will have Flash in the name. So that implies that Flex Builder will see a name change. Now the “Catalyst” part of the name is what I’m not 100% in love with but that’s another story. But to sum up, if a tool’s primary purpose is to create Flash content, then expect to see Flash in the name moving forward. How long will all this take? No idea. Is it 100% definite? I have no idea. But this is what the thought process is behind these changes. We have to undo some confusing naming from earlier tools and technologies so it might take a while to get it just right.
Lee,
Thanks, that’s exactly what I was hoping to hear. I can take or leave “Catalyst,” and they can rename gumbo to “Flash Giraffe” for all I care – as long as the name of the IDE reflects the technology instead of creating artificial splinters.
Cool!
@Josh try not to think of Catalyst being a competitor to Flash. Catalyst is strictly for creating Flex framework projects. It will make it easier for designers and developers who are working with the Flex framework to create cool content. But if your project isn’t going to use the Flex framework then Flash will still be the only place to do animation and design. I know they seem like they will be competing with each other but they really won’t and that is definitely not the intention.
@lee
I just get that because of the Flex community trying to call it their trump card. So it’s not really creating a new flash vs. Catalyst, but instead it’s bringing up the old flash vs. flex fight.
Though I know what you mean by the limitations.
“all tools that create Flash content will have Flash in the name”
How far will that go? Just to tools within the Flash ecosystem? For example, you can export Flash content from Illustrator.
@Juan notice in the next sentence I said the tools whose “primary” purpose is creating Flash content. Don’t worry it won’t be Flash Illustrator
.
Lee, Thanks.
@josh and lee. I think the main problem is, that the Flash IDE always has been close related to the document file name (ie. saving the flash-document and compiling a flash-file). Back then, the should have taken the extension swf (ShockWave File) and called it by its real name (instead of a flash-file, swf-fil ["swiff"] aso. Back then Director was the big guy, and ShockWave was on their ground, so it wasn’t really feasible.
If the platform used it own name, ie. “Shockwave Platform” Flash could produce flash designers, -developers, -devigners and -deselopers. Flex could have Flex developers and -designers. Everyone would be happy, save files with their own names and deliver to a common platform. Well almost everybody, because Director will probably feel like we took the “bread out of their mouth” – but hey! They can be a part of it too
/ockley
i’m with kp, we should have ‘Flash Builder’
(and also ‘Flash IDE’, all for ‘Flash Developers’ and ‘Flash Designers’)
This is a really interesting discussion, I’ve been struggling to figure out exactly what I do for the past year. I started life as a designer and still think of myself as a designer but for the past 2 years about 70% of my work has been flash development. I now wear many hats. Somedays I’m designing a site, application or even ad, other days I’m creating animation on the timeline, sometimes even in After effects and then importing to flash but then the majority of the time I’m building flash sites, I’ve just started developing my own minimal tween engine and I’ve been working in AS3 building sites with little to no timeline work at all for the past year and am heavily in to the developing side of Flash.
I’ve steered clear of Flex because I fear if I start working in that I will be a true developer and I want to keep my designer title, but most of the time I’m not designing I’m developing… who am I?
I’ve started calling myself an interactive designer and developer because I design and develop interactive experiences using flash but that’s a mouthful and looks horrible on a business card. I don’t want to label myself as a Flash designer or developer because I like to think that I can do more than Flash work but perhaps that is the best title.
The problem I find is that I tell a developer I’m a designer they think I can’t code but if I tell them I’m a developer they think I can’t design or animate. I’m sure I’m not the only person stuck in Flash limbo? I wonder what other people call themselves? I just want to know what to tell people I do for a living?
I work as a Flash developer at an agency in Melbourne, we work in Flash and Flex depending on the project.
Congratulations (and good luck) on working out the descriptive language of what we do. I agree with the terms you came up with as they are the ones most people use. In terms of the Flash authoring tool, it’s always just going to be called Flash (or the Flash IDE if you’re programming in it), people are smart enough to know the context in which it is being used.
PS. I think it’s funny that there are so many Flash dev kids afraid of Flex kids in these comments.
isn’t it cleaner to call someone Actionscript Developer instead on Flash Developer?
Developing means programming and you do this in AS. Thats why noone is called Eclipse or Visualstudio Developer, but Java Developer.
Don’t forget the Flash Designer/Developer…. which is probably the most of us!!
Thanks for the definitions Lee….. I was really confused on who I was… maybe now I can get some sleep!
Keep up the great work!!!!
I am not totally agree with you Lee this time cause the flash developer must be called on the one who is using ActionScript for developing in flash only cause the difference between flex and flash is so big cause for my opinion using ActionScript project in flex is much not flexible like in flash I tried both for my developing work but I found that flash is the most times handy but in the otherwise coding in flex is flexible more that flash actionscript editor but as a flash user I prefer to say flash developer for using AS for developing in flash not flex.
@Luke Maybe call yourself a Interactive Creator? jk. After school, I knew it all (be it at a intermediate level). I knew Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign, After Effects, 3DMax, Flash & Actionscript, Director & Lingo, Dreamweaver, Audio Programs, Powerpoint, Quicktime Pro, Premier, Final Cut, Captivate…what the hell does that make me? I suppose it’s not what you know but what you do with that knowledge, so mainly I am coding my ass off for the last year with AS3 Class based development in Flash CS3. I must be a flash developer. Ultimately though I consider myself a Digital Media Expert.
On another note: Even though I think “Catalyst” is a really cool name for a program, I think it sounds too all-encompassing. Call it what it is. Flash…”Simple Action Creator”…”Noob Creator”…”Developer Helper”…”for Dummies”…”Builder for Mom’s”. I’m mostly kidding. I think Catalyst looks really really cool, but in the sort of way that I get excited for any program that looks well built and extremely well thought out. However, as an avid Flash CS3 user, I just can’t help but think I would feel limited if I were to personally use Catalyst, hence it is not a Catalyst.
NAme are good and the same as wot i have been parping on about for ages. I remember a discussion some time back with James Ward where i tried to convince him that just because Flex Builder has been used, it didn’t mean the project was a Flex project.
TBH I’d like to see the term Flex removed although i know it aint gonna happen, but I’d like to see.
Flex Builder – Flash Developer
Flash IDE – Flash Designer
Flash Catalyst – Flash Catalyst
Flex framework – Flash Application Framework
“I think it’s funny that there are so many Flash dev kids afraid of Flex kids in these comments.”
Another thing I’ve been parping on about for sometime, still not fully recognized but i believe it will be. FLEX IS FLASH. Why be afraid!
I understand the motivation for trying to make the product names more consistent, but I really don’t think that redefining, and further overloading, the term ‘Flash’ is going to help clear up the confusion. I think the term ‘Flash Platform’ is much clearer and less confusing than referring to the entire platform as ‘Flash’. Then again, I’m a developer not a marketer…
I am also strongly opposed to calling anyone that develops for the Flash Platform a Flash Developer. You made the comparison to a Java Developer vs. a Swing Developer. I think that Flash vs. Flex is more along the lines of Swing vs. SWT. They both target the same platform, but they use different approaches. I think you’d agree that calling an SWT Developer a Swing Developer is a little ridiculous. (For those that are not familiar with Swing or SWT, wikipedia has a good summary of their relationship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_(Java)#Relationship_to_SWT)
Aside from the disagreement over semantics, it is already difficult enough to find a skilled Flex Developer. It would only be more difficult if the Flex Developers were lumped in with the Flash Developers (oops, I need to be more specific… Flash IDE Developers).
@luke
I’m in the exact same boat as you. Just to get peoples reaction I have been calling myself a “Interactive Multimedia Specialist”. Then when they ask, I just explain I design and develop applications for Flash Player, using mainly Flash and Flex when the project calls for it.
Lee, you made a good effort in putting terms in order, your model is pretty good but I think it has one critical weak point, “Flash developer” term. You included here those who also use the Flex Framework. My personal experience shows, that each single Flex developer strives to avoid any “flash”-like sound near him. Flex developers will never agree to be called flash developers, and there’s real causes for it:
1. Flex isn’t only Flex builder and Flex SDK. Flex is also a solution (including its supporting back-end technologies like BlazeDS) and, which is more important, Flex is a state of mind. Flex implies big applications, regrets to work without robust architecture. Flex SDK implements design patterns and requires developer to be ready to use them effectively (with patterns understanding), or allows to use them with pain (no patterns understanding).
2. Flex [SDK] developer is pure programmer, 90% of cases.
3. A lot of Flex developers (and almost every Good Flex Developer) often come from other and older programmers ecosystems, like Java and .NET or become Flex’ers from the scratch, without any Flash IDE knowledge.
4. Flex as Solution has high learning curve, a much more high than Flash. Also, this curve sometimes has surprising ladders, like when someone really starts to understand how itemRenderer actually works and what makes it such a great concept.
5. Flex has a lot of great concepts which not available in pure AS3, like Bindings, metadata, mentioned itemRenderers and more.
6. Flex state of mind makes Flex developer know and use great Flex concepts.
7. Very, very rarely Flex Developers who are ex-Flash developers may agree to make FLA-based projects again. They often describe FLA-projects as Nightnare, Which Happily Is In The Past Now.
Myself, I love both worlds, Flash and Flex. But they are still two worlds, and developers of both in most cases disagree to be entangled.
I’m not happy with this situation, but this is what I see for two years of Flex
I’m holding out for Adobe Green Lantern Professional Pro….
this is definitely an interesting topic. my title is officially “interactive developer”, but i do NOT consider myself a developer. i have no programming background, but i know enough AS (mostly AS2) to be able to make Flash do what i need it to do, either by coding from scratch or finding bits of code and altering it to do my bidding. I am more of an Art Director or Designer who uses Flash.
in my mind a developer is somebody who thinks code first, whereas a designer thinks about looks first and would be happy to hand it off to a developer to make it work!
I work for an agency called Resource Interactive out of Columbus, Ohio. We have almost 200 employees, so sometimes titles can get a little granular. But I think agencies are confused on what labels their Flash employees should have too. By your definition, I would definitely be considered a Flash Developer. But by my company’s definition I am called an Interaction Designer, which is a design role. (I develop just as good as I design.) Since I program many of the user interactions and some unique visual effects, by some agency’s standards, I would either be called a Flash Developer, Flash Designer or a Motion Designer. Some agencies even see interaction designers as a purely strategic role… in which they plan the user’s experience, and don’t even TOUCH Flash! When I was at Adobe MAX, I had the opportunity to chat with the Thermo/Flash Catalyst team. Their definition of Interaction Designer was basically a person who designs in Flash but doesn’t do any development.
I could give a rat’s ass about the semantics. But describing Flash as the Flash Platform makes the most sense to me.
Actually, after some discussion with some other locals, I have a suggestion.
Rather than rebranding “Flash” to refer to the platform, use the brand “FP” (flash/flex platform). Then, your various FP products get rebranded to “FP Flash”, “FP Flex” and “FP Catalyst.”
My friend points out that “Flash Catalyst” makes the least sense, since it actually is completely divorced from the program currently known as “Flash” – as he points out, “Flex Catalyst” would have been more appropriate.
Under this system, a generalist could be an FP Developer while we could still have Flash Developers, Flex Developers and Catalyst Developers specializing in their chosen IDEs. Etc.
Thoughts?
I consider myself a Flash AS3 Developer. If someone uses MXML instead I would call them ” Flash MXML Developer “. Its really the only way one can distinctly determine that flash developers specialization.
What sucks tho, is that when searching for a job, a Flash Designer position might be available but if you say you are a Flash Developer, they immediately think you are a tech geek with no design skills.
This needs to change.
Hi there,
For the termn “flash designer” I think a web agency is a better flash designer than anyone alone. If I work with many people on a complex application, I will never say all the design of this application was thought buy me. It’s a team work, considering one and others have their own expertise with the flash plateform. All you need to do to speak about designing with the flash plateform is the capabilities of the flash plateform itself. And even if you don’t know a lot of things about it, you can have the best points of view when the application is being designed.
This is the same terminology I have been pushing within my workplace for some time now. I’ve also started running into confusion when talking about the Flex IDE versus the Flex framework.
I think Adobe should avoid following in Macromedia’s footsteps by using the same name for different parts of the platform. I have considered dropping the term “Flex IDE” altogether, internally and just say “Eclipse” instead.
So What Do You Consider Yourself to Be? That is the question. Based on what was mention on this page, what shall it be? I’ve begun a poll on the question above at Flash Speaks ActionScript. I am curious as to how everyone see themselves as.
Thanks Lee!
This post really helps a lot with our identity crisis at Philippine Flash Actionscripters (http://www.phlashers.com). We’re a Flash/Flex/AIR User Group/Community that essentially deals with all things Actionscript, and it’s a little weird to identify ourselves as a Flash User Group because we don’t cater to pure Flash designers at all.
Ah… the days of the term “devigner” (designer/developer)…
Cheers!
-Naz
I consider myself a Flash Platform Developer. Since I work with Flash and Flex, and create content for Flash Player, Flash Lite Player, and AIR, I went with an all inclusive description –> Flash Platform Developer.
iBrent
I remember a simpler time when whether you worked in oil, water, charcoal, or pastel you were called “ARTIST or DESIGNER”…
What is a -devigners or -deselopers
Why not KISS, (keep it simple s….) Flash Developer, Flash Designer ain’t the list of job title in applications forms already toooooo long.
ps: Sprinting to get to work on time does not make you a “USAIN BOLT”!
After getting used to all the Adobe evangelists standardizing on “Flash authoring tool”, I actually cringe when I see “Flash IDE” now. It’s still pretty common terminology among developers in the community, but I hope more people start using “Flash authoring tool” because its more encompassing of designing, animating, and all the other aspects of Flash content creation. Of course, if Adobe rebrands the product, that will probably be better. Still, though, if you say “Flash IDE”, consider switching to “Flash authoring tool”. Remember, it’s not just about development!
I prefer flasher, for it’s obvious probability of misinterpretation.
Thank you.
Officially, the Flash authoring tool is called Flash Professional. I suggest that.
My bosses don’t care how projects are done, as long as the final result looks and works great.
And I don’t give a rats what label I get, as long as I get paid!
I like the term Polymath, that’s me, but I don’t know how that would look on a CV!
The thing I find funny is that the product used to begin this whole rebranding is Flash Catalyst, which is the only product in the entire Adobe family is ONLY for Flex development.
Flex Builder is an ActionScript IDE. Yes, it produces Flash content, but you only use it for writing ActionScript (or MXML, but it’s all AS anyway). The “Flash platform” involves a lot more than ActionScript (just read the swf spec to realize how much more crap is in there). Timeline tweens, vector shapes, yadda yadda, none of which you can do in Flex Builder.
Flash Authoring is for doing everything that Flash Player supports other than writing ActionScript. It’s a horrible AS IDE.
Flash Catalyst is a Flex-only IDE. The only thing you can create in Catalyst is a Flex application.
So in my opinion, the terms that would make most sense are ActionScript Developer (for Flex Builder), Flash Animator (for Flash Authoring), and Flex Catalyst or Flex Designer (for Flash Catalyst). But I get the concept of rolling everything under the Flash platform name, I just think the fact that Catalyst is a Flex-specific product is hilarious.
And in terms of what we call ourselves… who cares? Just be a Cool Shit Maker and nobody will care what technology you use.
I like the idea of making the term “Flash Developer” mean someone who develops /for/ the Flash Platform, but the fact of the matter is that as Adobe-based designers and developers we need to consider what the industry as a whole has come to understand by these terms, right or wrong, or risk labelling ourselves in a speciality of the industry we’re not aiming for.
Fact of the matter is, when you say “Flash”, people think of the Flash IDE or the Flash Player. Though it seems to have improved in 2008, Flex developers are still plagued with the misconception that if you’re developing in Flex, you’re not developing for the Flash Player, and I still get the odd question of whether Flex has its own player. Though AIR helped improve that a lot actually, as clients realize that AIR /has/ a Flash Player in it.
I found when I was still calling myself a Flash Developer, even though I’d taught Flex, I was not getting any Flex gigs, and most of the projects were very branding-oriented, when I wanted to move into more programming-based RIA projects. So I switched my designation, as it were. After a while it swung the other way, and some clients were assuming that I knew Java and all kinds of backend tech, when I was primarily a client-side developer. Which is what prompted me to write a SWF developer designation whitepaper about a year ago, to help clear the confusion for recruiters, and avoid repeating myself in half-hour intervals several times a week.
So the terms to describe the technology are not just an academic exercise to “standardize” the nomenclature, but is affected by what is perceived in the industry, and how developers regard what they do.
I see “Flash Designer/Developer” as someone who works mainly in the Flash IDE, who is either designer or programming focused. The perception of other Flash ‘users’ and recruiters I’ve spoken to is that a “Flash Developer” is someone who works with the Flash IDE a lot, and maybe an external editor, but they’re more a “deseloper,” not a hard core programmer.
As the technology expands and the Flash-based runtime is a mature programming platform, I hear of more than a few “Flash Developers” who are having an identity crisis about what to call themselves with all these new technologies and terms. But don’t resent Flex Developers, any more than Java people learning Flex should resent Flash Designers. I mean c’mon: keep up and love it or find yourself in another line of work, but don’t waste time bitching about it — life’s too short. Most of the time a more apt term for them is…
I see “Flash Platform Developer” and “ActionScript Developer” as describing very well the “Flash Developer” who is a little more comfortable with code, still uses the Flash IDE a lot but spends most of their time in 3rd party code editors such as FlashDevelop or FlexBuilder. Which is why, in my view, it’s important not to confuse or merge the terms “Flash” and “Flash Platform.”
I entirely agree with your definition of the “Flex Developer”: the term in this case, contrary to the Flash Developer, should concentrate on the technology, not the tool, since even a “deseloper” may use Flex Builder.
Only thing is, even the term “Flex Developer” is getting to be a little too vague to describe ActionScript or Flash Platform Developers who use the Flex Framework as the main part of their jobs. Which is why I prefer the terms “Flex Developer” and “Enterprise Flex Developer,” mostly to distinguish between the Flex people who have knowledge of Flash Player-based client-side/UI development, and those (formerly) .Net/Java people who are coming at Flex from a whole different angle.
I’ve personally given a lot of thought to the topic of labels, of what to call myself as a professional to get certain work. First I was a “Flash Designer” in 2000, then as my skills improved a “Flash Deseloper” in 2003 — quickly changed to “Interactive Designer” when I realized that no one knew what the hell that meant. Then in 2004 with AS2 I became a “Flash Developer”, and finally in 2007 a “Flex Developer.” Now I call myself a “Flex and Flash Platform Developer” which strikes the perfect balance for me.
So I would use the following terms in today’s market:
- Flash Designer
- Flash Developer
- ActionScript Developer, Flash Platform Developer
- Flex Developer
- Enterprise Flex Developer
As far as the terminology:
- Flash: the IDE
- Flash Platform: the entire Flash/Flex/AIR ecosystem
- Flex: the framework (whether deployed for FP or AIR)
Sorry this post is so long. Just my 2c.
@Doug:
Cool Shit Maker… I love it!
To hell with my last post, heh. I’m gonna git me some new business cards with “Cool Shit Maker” printed on it. Rock on dude!
@luke: I had the same problem as you and after some thought adopted a title of “New Media Developer & Designer”
I think in my infinite wisdom, we shall call each as following:
Flex -> Future (because coding is futuristic)
Flash -> Splash (referring to the classic use of splash screens)
While searching the job scene, I rarely see a requirement for ‘Flex’. I see most employers that want ‘Flash’ work requiring AS3. And this is from someone who is outside the normal Flash community. I haven’t really used Flash in a couple years.
@Josh Tynjala:
Although I have seen Adobe (actually Macromedia) in its own course literature a few years ago refer to the “Flash Integrated Design Environment” or Flash IDE. So I think IDE can apply to both designers and developers, even though traditionally the acronym ‘IDE ‘ is from the programming world. Matter of preference really.
I’ve also heard the commonly used term term “Flash Authoring,” which to me is a little more succinct than the clunky term “Flash authoring tool”, more specific than the vague word “Flash” and more accessible than “Flash IDE”.
Thanks everyone for all these great comments. Be sure that many people with in Adobe are watching this thread to get the community’s reactions to all of this.
Some people confused when they saw my flex apps and murmered that its Flash and where is the Flex. But for the past few months, the name Flex is rocking even it might arise confusion in some aspects.
Thanks
I think a lot of the confusion steps form the direction Macromedia and Adobe took with these products. 6-7 years ago we use to do a lot of training for both Flash Designers and Flash Developers/ActionScripters. Then Macromedia seemed to move Flash into a Design direction – when Flex was first released, only to later refocus the ActionScript side of the program. These days the only ActionScript we teach is to Designers looking to move away from the timeline – but you can hardly call them Flash Developers.
My predictions for the re-naming of Flex Builder…
Flash Studio 2009
The IDE formerly known as Flex
Flash -> more than just pop-up ads
=)
iBrent
oh, and don’t forget:
Flash-ditty
Snoop-Flex
Flash-izzle
=)
I see the main problem of all this is the splintering of the Flash platform by Adobe. When the Flex framework was developed it should have been implemented in the existing Flash development application. The IDE of Flash could have been beefed up with the features that went into FlexBuilder, which most people want anyway. In fact, people were hoping for it in Flash CS4 and it didn’t happen.
Features being implemented in Catalyst could have been done for the design side of Flash. That way one just chooses a Flex Project as one of the options in the start menu for Flash. Right now I can pick Flash AS3, Flash AS2, AIR, Mobile, AS file and Flash Project. Why couldn’t there be a Flex Project choice?
This splintering of the platform has caused our issues today. What do you call people who work with the platform? Once it was easy, you were either a Flash Designer/Animator or a Flash Developer. There were some crossing of lines but it wasn’t difficult to determine how you fit into the scheme of things. But today it’s hard, you can be a Flash Designer, Flash Animator, Flash Developer, Flex Developer and now, with Catalyst, a Flex Designer. Plus what’s one side effect we’ve gotten out of this separation of Flex and Flash? Two distinct communities that do not always work together. Often times I see a Flex vs Flash situation that, in the end, is just silly. But it works out that way because Adobe has created two development platforms for the same end result.
Never mind the fact that Flash competitors get to use this splintering to their advantage. “Flash is only good for cartoons.” “Flex is not design friendly.” We all know this is silly but the market may not. Adobe is providing a divide and conquer plan to its competition right out of the box.
As for labels, I feel that labeling everyone who creates content for the Flash platform as a Flash Developer is a serious mistake. It doesn’t always fit since there are several totally different ways to create content for the platform. It would be the same as calling myself a JPEG designer and being able to ignore whether I use Photoshop, Illustrator or Fireworks to create the JPEGs. How your content is created for a platform has a huge influence on how you are identified in that community. I can output my Flash content as a Projector which happens to be an exe file. Since Windows applications also typically end up as an exe file could I call myself a Windows Developer? I can output my Flash content created in Windows as a Macintosh Projector, can I call myself a Mac Developer? Somehow I doubt either of those would go over well in the jobs market.
And thinking of the jobs market, employer puts out a call for a “Flash Developer”. He’ll get hundreds of applicants that do not qualify because what he really wants is someone who uses the Flex framework. He would have to remember to put in “Flash Developer, Flex experience” which defeats the purpose of labeling everyone as Flash Developer. With the splintering we have he might as well just put “Flex Developer” in the first place. Everyone will know what he’s talking about and the proper people will apply.
My somewhat dream solution for the Flash platform? Adobe should stop creating different applications for every little thing in the Flash platform and start consolidating features into one core program with possibly three versions. One version for designers that has all the authoring tools plus the Catalyst features, this version can show code but doesn’t provide the fancy IDE tools. One version for developers that has all the IDE features plus the FlexBuilder features, this version can show content but doesn’t provide the fancy authoring tools. A third version that has all the features of the other two for the people who do both. The Flex framework is implemented into this core program properly as a framework and not as a separate development platform. The three versions can easily trade files/projects with little concern over how the other side creates their part of the project. Then give this program a name other than Flash as that is the platform. Something like FlashDesigner, FlashDeveloper and FlashBuilder. Or whatever is deemed necessary, anything other than just Flash.
But at this point it’s probably too late to do that. The Flash and Flex communities (and mindsets) are already out there and unlikely to change. In fact many people would probably be highly resistant to it. Flex people might be annoyed to be called Flash Developers since they may not feel that is what they do. Flash people would be annoyed to be turned down for “Flash Developer” jobs because they didn’t know Flex.
I don’t see how any of this can be resolved until the Flex framework is fully implemented into Flash CS4 (or CS5, whatever) with the Catalyst/FlexBuilder features. Until then, they will always be two distinct communities just as Adobe created them to be, whether it was intended or not.
Add one more to the list
Flash Developer, for those of us that like AS3, but don’t like flex’s bulk,
Oh, wait there is a Flash Develop ( http://www.flashdevelop.org/wikidocs/index.php?title=Features )
I just wish it was cross platform. I personally use ( jedit )
iBrent
Good call – Flash Studio containing Flash, Flash Catalyst and Flex is definitely in the making. And a rename of Flex to Flash something or other will make commercial sense. Everyone has heard of Flash and very few have heard of Flex.
@Travis Almand:
I see what you’re saying about integration, but look what happened historically when Macromedia decided to base Flex Builder 1.0 on the Dreamweaver engine? It was horrible. It ran slow, was difficult to debug, and a real pain to use. Of course part of it was that Flex 1.0 was a server-based technology in its infancy and not ready for the mass market IMO.
I agree that one of the chief disappointments in the evolution of Flash, which despite being a fan I still have a hard time forgiving Macromedia/Adobe for, is not improving the code editing capabilities of Flash significantly since Flash 5. (Which is like what, nearly 8 years ago? I mean C’mon!) But the fact of the matter is, Flash Authoring and Flex Builder run on completely different technologies: Flash is a standalone application built in C (AFAIK), and Flex Builder is an Eclipse plugin. Flash has way too many capabilities to be re-created as an Eclipse plugin. And Flash’s code support is dismal, so retooling it for Flex would be a job and a half. And although Flash Catalyst is built on top of the Eclipse engine, it is not an Eclipse plugin (as of yet). So merging these applications would be a total disaster.
What I’d like to see is greater integration. And I’m not talking about a souped up Flex Integration Kit, or another Wizard. Or yet another “bridge application” like Catalyst (I think three is enough already). I mean true integration. Here are my suggestions:
* For one, get rid of the Flash compiler. If it has not already been done, tweak the Flex compiler, and make it form the basis of compiling in Flash. That way the compilers are the same, which would enable even greater integration.
* This would enable you to build Flex projects in Flash if you’re masochistically inclined to use the pathetic Flash code editor. And it would enable you to write MXML code in Flash if you want. Or at the very least enable you to use Flex framework elements in your Flash projects without developing an ulcer.
* Having the Flex compiler (which could be renamed as the Flash Compiler) in Flash could open up the platform for greater integration with Flex Builder. Lots of people use Flex Builder for code editing in the Flash projects, but it’s a hack at best. You still have to go back into Flash and press Ctrl-Enter/Test Movie. This is a pain. You should be able to check a setting in Flash that says (“Use Flex Builder as Code Editor”), and Flash would launch Flex Builder to display ActionScript. Flex Builder would also be able to compile Flash projects using the Compiler in the Flash Authoring installation using the regular Run/Build button.
* And features that cannot be used in Flex Builder while Flash is “assigned” as the compiler would be disabled to clarify which features can be set by Flex Builder, so you would not get confused as to which settings affect which compiler.
* And even further than that, you could integrate the superior debugging abilities from Flex Builder for Flash projects, complete with better error syntax. Sweet!!
* Make the Flash component set into an SDK like the Flex SDK, so you can use it in Flex Builder. That way you can sell the merits of that component framework as a lightweight alternative to Flex, which it is — only you can have the option of using Flash Authoring or Flex Builder to code with it, unlike today.
And ditto goes for Flash Catalyst: the tool looks great, superb, cool idea. But the last thing that we need is a Flash clone for Flex, further fragmenting the toolset. Make the word “Catalyst” in Flash Catalyst live up to its name: create some integration between Flash, Flash Catalyst and Flex so that the tools can be truly be used together.
And while you’re at it, rebrand Flash Authoring and Flex Builder, so that you have a seamless continuity in the toolset. So the existing applications,
- Flash CSX
- Flex Builder X
- Flash Catalyst X
…becomes:
- Flash Designer CSX
- Flash Developer Studio X (using the Flex Builder v. numbering)
- Flash Catalyst X
The tools remain the same (with the above integration changes). And the Flex SDK becomes just another toolkit used by Flash Developer Studio, not to be confused with the technology platform like it is today.
That solves your divide and conquer problem mentioned by Travis, and it solves the naming problem.
And so the name “Flash Developer” would be king again, and refer to “people who develop code for the Flash Platform”, instead of the hackneyed, confusing division of job titles that exist today.
I want a t-shirt that says:
“I’m not a smart man, but I know what Flash is”
=)
Having spent the last two years working solely with Flex (IDE and SDK) building RIA Applications etc I don’t think grouping “Flex Developers” and “Flash Developers” is a wise idea. Does that mean kids who can draw shapes in Flash are now classified as Flex Devs as well? The two need to be kept separated in my opinion.
Hey Lee,
that’s about the same I’ve found myself most comfortable with when I explain to students and clients what is which and which is what.
It all evolved in the direction of “Flash Platform” especially when AIR entered the scene. To me, since then there hasn’t been a better way (or any other way at all, to be precise) of referring to Flex, Flash, Flash Player, and AIR than with the term “Flash Platform”.
Maybe there should be a Suite sold by Adobe called something like Developer Premium. It would be Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, Flex, Catalyst, Dreamweaver and maybe even Centaur/Bolt (ColdFusion 9 and it’s IDE) since it will be a server-side ActionScript interpreter. That sounds awfully lofty though, I just think a lot of shaking things up would help, but to actually get marketing people behind selling the Platform as a whole might help too. Stop singling out ColdFusion and make it part of the Flash Platform.
Might as well chime in here: My take was that Flex was intentionally branded as something other than Flash as a way to disassociate from whatever baggage Flash had. In some ways it made sense–after all, it was a success. Now all the Flex people are here and I know some of them “get” the fact that it’s all rendered down to .swf that runs in the Flash player (and in fact, the framework/sdk is nothing more than AS code–plus a compiler). However, others have a history of arriving almost to spite Flash. Maybe it’s a dirty trick to tell them it’s all Flash anyway. However, the reason that Adobe is making the right decision to ensure “anything that renders Flash has Flash in its name” is that it helps reduce confusion. Plus, Flash no longer has the “bad” reputation of banner adds or “skip intro”. (Perhaps we can even thank Flex folks for that?)
Personally, if I have to try to explain all the pieces of the Flash platform one more time I’ll hurl.
I can only guess why the Flex folks appear to be getting all bent about this:
–they never liked Flash in the first place, now they have to admit it’s what they’re based on?
–they don’t want to be associated with whatever history Flash has?
–they totally don’t get it and think their skills are being threatened?
With all due respect, the Flex folks I know who really understand what’s going on are perfectly fine with this change.
Really, what is it?
From a marketing standpoint, “Flash” is the brand with the highest awareness, so it makes perfect sense to call everything related to it “flash-something”.
I dont think there is a need to have any other explanation for the new naming strategy. We are all grownups ..
Great post, thanks for clearing all this up. Now we just need to get it into the hands of people outside of our community!