[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Adobe Edge: What You Need to Know here

[regularwheathr95]

Corrections:

1. "situation" should be "situated"
2. "JSON is a form of Java" is a false statement.

Corrections:

1. "situation" should be "situated"
2. "JSON is a form of Java" is a false statement.

[AaronStaglm0oo]

"JSON is a form of Java that runs on modern desktop browsers and most mobile browsers, such as Safari." Wow. Just wow.

[Danueyi]

JSON is an object notation for JavaScript. It is not a programming language!

[Danueyi]

JSON is an object notation for JavaScript. It is not a programming language for Java!

[JonathanMcCarveraifk]

JSON is not a language. It is a storage formate like xml. Edge converts animations to html and javascript. Javascript is a language that all web browsers have had for a very long tome though it has made huge strides over the years. Java IS NOT javascript. There is no relation, similarity or connection between those languages except for the coincidence of names.

[JonathanMcCarveraifk]

"tome" ?? and I thought I was going to sound smart.

[RahulDesaiy1ox]

Seriously? JSON is a form of Java? Somebody's been messing with this pc world reporter....

Seriously? JSON is a form of Java? Somebody's been messing with this pc world reporter....

[Utopian]

I was just about to post the same comment as everyone else did about JSON, so instead I will just say PC World, you need writers and editors who actually understand the topics they write about.

[tetsuharu9kzw]

Mr. Daw, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Mr. Daw, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[gywsywd8s4]

JSON = JavaScript Object Notation i.e. JavaSript

[Daviddpcw]

Sorry for the mistake everyone, we moved a little too quick on this story. Thanks for the correction.

[TomMarinert15x]

OK, now we have heard from all of those who want to show what they know.

Can we get to what anyone thinks about the company that has the most to lose if their tools are not used to crank out HTML5 / CSS3, etc. sites? Is this the tipping point? Why is it going to take so long to go from animation to full site development?

[Carlo3nab]

Daviddpcw, on 01 August 2011 - 02:49 PM, said:

Sorry for the mistake everyone, we moved a little too quick on this story. Thanks for the correction.

Wow. People really jumped on you for that one. And clearly, only one person read the others comments and didn't sound like a complete moron from the department of redundancy department, like the rest. Honestly, your readers need to not take this crap so seriously.

[dwkmi]

Daviddpcw, on 01 August 2011 - 02:49 PM, said:

Sorry for the mistake everyone, we moved a little too quick on this story. Thanks for the correction.

LMAO. That's like me explaining quantum physics - and totally blowing it because I don't know a thing about it, and then saying I "moved a little too quick" on explaining it. Speed has/had nothing to do with it. Lack of knowledge is more like it. Unless of course anyone can write about anything even if they don't know the topic - and it's supposed to be corrected by an editor before publishing. Then I could see being too quick and missing a vital step.

[LordInsidious]

TomMarinert15x, on 01 August 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:

OK, now we have heard from all of those who want to show what they know.

Can we get to what anyone thinks about the company that has the most to lose if their tools are not used to crank out HTML5 / CSS3, etc. sites? Is this the tipping point? Why is it going to take so long to go from animation to full site development?

The fact is HTML5/CSS3 is not finished being formalized as a standard (let alone tested for bugs and security issues etc.), and until then we will not see a move away from Flash.

[artzy65]

edited

This post has been edited by artzy65: 02 August 2011 - 11:40 AM

[nonseq]

LordInsidious, on 02 August 2011 - 09:36 AM, said:

TomMarinert15x, on 01 August 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:

OK, now we have heard from all of those who want to show what they know.

Can we get to what anyone thinks about the company that has the most to lose if their tools are not used to crank out HTML5 / CSS3, etc. sites? Is this the tipping point? Why is it going to take so long to go from animation to full site development?

The fact is HTML5/CSS3 is not finished being formalized as a standard (let alone tested for bugs and security issues etc.), and until then we will not see a move away from Flash.

And yet the move away from flash is accelerating- except perhaps in gaming- but for everything else flash is toast. a flash in the pan if you will.

[LordInsidious]

nonseq, on 02 August 2011 - 11:38 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 02 August 2011 - 09:36 AM, said:

TomMarinert15x, on 01 August 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:

OK, now we have heard from all of those who want to show what they know.

Can we get to what anyone thinks about the company that has the most to lose if their tools are not used to crank out HTML5 / CSS3, etc. sites? Is this the tipping point? Why is it going to take so long to go from animation to full site development?

The fact is HTML5/CSS3 is not finished being formalized as a standard (let alone tested for bugs and security issues etc.), and until then we will not see a move away from Flash.

And yet the move away from flash is accelerating- except perhaps in gaming- but for everything else flash is toast. a flash in the pan if you will.

Nice pun but not even close to the truth, the market numbers on Flash are still very stable, around 95%, and there is very little out there that is going to change that in the short term.

[nonseq]

LordInsidious, on 02 August 2011 - 11:57 AM, said:

nonseq, on 02 August 2011 - 11:38 AM, said:

LordInsidious, on 02 August 2011 - 09:36 AM, said:

TomMarinert15x, on 01 August 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:

OK, now we have heard from all of those who want to show what they know.

Can we get to what anyone thinks about the company that has the most to lose if their tools are not used to crank out HTML5 / CSS3, etc. sites? Is this the tipping point? Why is it going to take so long to go from animation to full site development?

The fact is HTML5/CSS3 is not finished being formalized as a standard (let alone tested for bugs and security issues etc.), and until then we will not see a move away from Flash.

And yet the move away from flash is accelerating- except perhaps in gaming- but for everything else flash is toast. a flash in the pan if you will.

Nice pun but not even close to the truth, the market numbers on Flash are still very stable, around 95%, and there is very little out there that is going to change that in the short term.

The significant numbers are those sites that have provided HTML5 alternative capability (over 60%). Yes, Flash is on a bunch of machines... almost by default and sent as part of an OEM package. The 95% number may not accurately reflect usage. Perhaps most telling is Adobe's introduction of Edge and the move away from Flash client- which is notoriously buggy and insecure.

Flash is all about maintaining the status quo and Adobe milking as much as they can from a 16 year old technology. The successful developer will look to the future.

This post has been edited by nonseq: 02 August 2011 - 01:39 PM