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: https://www.bit-101.com/2003/929. 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.