Creative Suite 5 is nearly upon us – so close I am already nudging our resident sys admin to buy us the shiny new apps. Obviously, there are many new features / changes to encourage people to upgrade.
One such that certainly sounds interesting, is a tool providing the ability to export flash as HTML5 Canvas. With IE9 on the horizon too, this will mean all of the major browsers will support HTML5, a step towards making this a viable alternative to the Flash plug-in. More on this here and again with a performance comparison between Flash and HTML5 here.
As you may or may not have heard by now, another eagerly anticipated feature was the ability to export flash apps as iPhone code. Apple have very recently announced that they have changed the way their SDK works – only code written in C, C++ or Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs. Cross-compilers, such as that advertised to be in the new CS release, are apparently banned. This will potentially affect a number of other technologies (e.g. Unity3D), but the Adobe link is the most publicised given the public deterioration in their relationship with Apple.
Given this bad blood between Apple and Adobe, the cynical might wonder if the announcement was deliberately timed to dampen the build up to the CS5 launch. It is definitely a blow to the product, and prompted an Adobe employee to post a frustrated response to the move (more here, including links). Steve Jobs has since responded to this (more here) with a customarily curt reply, not giving any hope to those hoping for Apple to change their mind.
Nevertheless, I am still looking forward to trying the new Creative Suite, even without the opportunity to try my hand at iPhone development. More on CS5 here.
Nick Nawrattel
Lead Multimedia Developer
Showing posts with label Nick. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nick. Show all posts
Tuesday, 13 April 2010
Thursday, 26 June 2008
Open Source vs Library vs Ad Hoc
Depending on your requirements, there are different approaches that may be taken in creating a website. What are they (lets pretend you haven’t already read the title)? What advantages do they bring? What do we at Bluhalo advocate?
The first one we will consider is open source software. Although there are a number of different licence flavours, at its most basic open source software can be thought of as free code. What this code does depends entirely on the type of software. For example, there are entire ecommerce solutions available that can be installed and simply require customisation to use. At the other end of the open source spectrum (that we are interested in) would be simple components, intended to achieve a very specific purpose. Somewhere in the middle is the concept of frameworks – varying quantities of code designed to facilitate ad hoc development (more on that later).
So why would you go the open source route? Assuming you can find something that meets your needs, speed of development is greatly increased. Also, if the community for the project is active, it has likely been well tested, meaning there should be very few bugs. The flip side of this is that if there is little community interest or input, projects can stagnate and die - what may initially appear to be a great solution ends up requiring far more time to correct than anticipated, and since it requires working on existing code it potentially forces the developer to work in a way that might not best match their work flow.
To get over the last point, you come to the possibility of building and maintaining a library of your own code. While it can take time to accumulate a meaningful library, it will be code that you know intimately so should be fully aware of what it is capable of. Rigorous testing would also allow you to overcome the lack of a community in ensuring that it is stable and reliable. Precisely what you maintain is very much down to personal preference – some prefer it to be a number of often used functions, while others may prefer to create extensive frameworks for different types of project that can easily be rolled out at need.
The problem with the latter (and with the larger open source solutions) is that they don’t always precisely match requirements – there may be redundant code or features, or they simply may not provide functionality required by the client. Here we come to ad hoc development – crafting a web application precisely according to the needs of the client. While this is more time consuming, it does mean that the final solution will more exactly match what was requested.
As with everything in life, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. If only we could pick and choose! So how is it done at Bluhalo? Here we can give a knowing and reassuring smile. :) We aren’t locked into any one practise.
For example, a smaller business in need of an ecommerce solution with a limited budget will be pointed toward our Dreams division. In this case, they will carefully customise an open source solution with which they are intimately familiar (i.e. tried and tested!) to give the client the best possible balance for their needs.
We also use an open source framework, Symfony, that is gaining a large following around the world. As I mentioned earlier, a framework is designed to aid development – it prevents the programmers from having to re-invent the wheel on every site and instead allows them to concentrate on the nuts and bolts of what makes the clients’ site unique. This has a hugely positive affect on the time it takes to develop a proprietary site.
We also maintain a code library - if a client wanted a simple mp3 player (yay, finally a multimedia example!), we would start with our library player. This is an existing basic player that I wrote previously, and then adjust it functionally and visually to precisely meet the clients requirements. Why waste their valuable studio time unnecessarily?
Basically then, we don’t fall into the trap of relying on a single practice and forcing it around the requirements we are given. The needs for each site will be unique, so we adjust our methodology according to what will give you the best result.
Nick
The first one we will consider is open source software. Although there are a number of different licence flavours, at its most basic open source software can be thought of as free code. What this code does depends entirely on the type of software. For example, there are entire ecommerce solutions available that can be installed and simply require customisation to use. At the other end of the open source spectrum (that we are interested in) would be simple components, intended to achieve a very specific purpose. Somewhere in the middle is the concept of frameworks – varying quantities of code designed to facilitate ad hoc development (more on that later).
So why would you go the open source route? Assuming you can find something that meets your needs, speed of development is greatly increased. Also, if the community for the project is active, it has likely been well tested, meaning there should be very few bugs. The flip side of this is that if there is little community interest or input, projects can stagnate and die - what may initially appear to be a great solution ends up requiring far more time to correct than anticipated, and since it requires working on existing code it potentially forces the developer to work in a way that might not best match their work flow.
To get over the last point, you come to the possibility of building and maintaining a library of your own code. While it can take time to accumulate a meaningful library, it will be code that you know intimately so should be fully aware of what it is capable of. Rigorous testing would also allow you to overcome the lack of a community in ensuring that it is stable and reliable. Precisely what you maintain is very much down to personal preference – some prefer it to be a number of often used functions, while others may prefer to create extensive frameworks for different types of project that can easily be rolled out at need.
The problem with the latter (and with the larger open source solutions) is that they don’t always precisely match requirements – there may be redundant code or features, or they simply may not provide functionality required by the client. Here we come to ad hoc development – crafting a web application precisely according to the needs of the client. While this is more time consuming, it does mean that the final solution will more exactly match what was requested.
As with everything in life, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. If only we could pick and choose! So how is it done at Bluhalo? Here we can give a knowing and reassuring smile. :) We aren’t locked into any one practise.
For example, a smaller business in need of an ecommerce solution with a limited budget will be pointed toward our Dreams division. In this case, they will carefully customise an open source solution with which they are intimately familiar (i.e. tried and tested!) to give the client the best possible balance for their needs.
We also use an open source framework, Symfony, that is gaining a large following around the world. As I mentioned earlier, a framework is designed to aid development – it prevents the programmers from having to re-invent the wheel on every site and instead allows them to concentrate on the nuts and bolts of what makes the clients’ site unique. This has a hugely positive affect on the time it takes to develop a proprietary site.
We also maintain a code library - if a client wanted a simple mp3 player (yay, finally a multimedia example!), we would start with our library player. This is an existing basic player that I wrote previously, and then adjust it functionally and visually to precisely meet the clients requirements. Why waste their valuable studio time unnecessarily?
Basically then, we don’t fall into the trap of relying on a single practice and forcing it around the requirements we are given. The needs for each site will be unique, so we adjust our methodology according to what will give you the best result.
Nick
Wednesday, 7 May 2008
Multimedia Trends
Whether or not it is indicative of a larger marketwide trend, we are definitely noticing a pattern in terms of what we are producing in the office.
Although not common, we used to be asked to produce entire sites in flash. This no longer happens (or at least, it no longer happens for externally facing ones – there are exceptions for intranets and applications, but more on the latter in a bit). Instead, it is becoming the domain of the microsite. In fact, we have been working on a couple of these microsites recently (one of which recently went live for Hi-Tec, complete with wooshy effects and sounds!). This is great for having a bit of life on your site, without the risks to rankings etc that are normally associated with flash only sites.
Another thing I have noticed a steady increase in is 3d. I have mentioned this before, and not as an attempt to encourage everyone to start requesting 3d online flash apps, but rather to point to a definite upwards trend. This has in part been sparked by the papervision library for flash, but in a broader sense seems to have been sparked by general demand. This is indicated by Adobe's announcement of support for simple 3d in the next version of flash.
On the subject of Adobe and announcements, they have recently made announcements (http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/05/01/adobe_open_access_protocols/) that should help in the development of multimedia apps for mobile phones. As the article mentions, there are also technologies such as JavaFX and Microsoft's Silverlight with an eye to mobile content. While most people don’t tend to associate the mobile with multimedia content, phones are becoming ever more capable of displaying it; any help in the propagation of multimedia content across the mobile format is welcome in my opinion. Another help would be cheaper mobile data bills, buts that’s another blog entirely!
Also covered in the above announcement is Air; and so we find ourselves back at what I touched on before - applications (It’s like I planned this or something!). Basically, Air can be considered as a flash player for the desktop (as opposed to a browser). This allows people to write applications using technology they are comfortable with for what is effectively a different target platform. Potentially it means that you can provide consumers with a desktop, offline hook-up to an online service. Now, this isn’t quite what I had touched on before – Air wasn’t ready when we were required to start the project in question. In our case, we are writing a C# application that acts a wrapper to a Flash / Flex application (by communicating with a database). However, the announcement does touch on the opening up of the player to better allow this kind of development.
This isn’t to say there is not more traditional multimedia being built – people still request video players / audio players. It does however suggest that the focus is always changing and evolving as people try to find the best way to deliver their message to the public.
Ps. – request more 3d…
Nick
Although not common, we used to be asked to produce entire sites in flash. This no longer happens (or at least, it no longer happens for externally facing ones – there are exceptions for intranets and applications, but more on the latter in a bit). Instead, it is becoming the domain of the microsite. In fact, we have been working on a couple of these microsites recently (one of which recently went live for Hi-Tec, complete with wooshy effects and sounds!). This is great for having a bit of life on your site, without the risks to rankings etc that are normally associated with flash only sites.
Another thing I have noticed a steady increase in is 3d. I have mentioned this before, and not as an attempt to encourage everyone to start requesting 3d online flash apps, but rather to point to a definite upwards trend. This has in part been sparked by the papervision library for flash, but in a broader sense seems to have been sparked by general demand. This is indicated by Adobe's announcement of support for simple 3d in the next version of flash.
On the subject of Adobe and announcements, they have recently made announcements (http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/05/01/adobe_open_access_protocols/) that should help in the development of multimedia apps for mobile phones. As the article mentions, there are also technologies such as JavaFX and Microsoft's Silverlight with an eye to mobile content. While most people don’t tend to associate the mobile with multimedia content, phones are becoming ever more capable of displaying it; any help in the propagation of multimedia content across the mobile format is welcome in my opinion. Another help would be cheaper mobile data bills, buts that’s another blog entirely!
Also covered in the above announcement is Air; and so we find ourselves back at what I touched on before - applications (It’s like I planned this or something!). Basically, Air can be considered as a flash player for the desktop (as opposed to a browser). This allows people to write applications using technology they are comfortable with for what is effectively a different target platform. Potentially it means that you can provide consumers with a desktop, offline hook-up to an online service. Now, this isn’t quite what I had touched on before – Air wasn’t ready when we were required to start the project in question. In our case, we are writing a C# application that acts a wrapper to a Flash / Flex application (by communicating with a database). However, the announcement does touch on the opening up of the player to better allow this kind of development.
This isn’t to say there is not more traditional multimedia being built – people still request video players / audio players. It does however suggest that the focus is always changing and evolving as people try to find the best way to deliver their message to the public.
Ps. – request more 3d…
Nick
Monday, 7 April 2008
Adding some polish - video and multimedia
Since the introduction of Flash 8 and its video capabilities the internet has seen a sudden boom of video content, with the most obvious site being youtube. With these new capabilities the more coded minded developers were intrigued by such techniques as streaming, whereas the more creative individuals were excited about the potential of introducing video graphics into flash projects. I fall into the latter category and feel that my role complements the qualities and methods of the lead multimedia developer producing content managed and visually striking applications.
Combining Flash and After Effects (a video motion graphic package) can produce high quality results. By using this method, more advanced features of After Effects can be imported into Flash. For example, here at Bluhalo this technique was used for a Littlewoods multimedia CD and subtly in both www.hi-tec.com/ion-mask and http://www.avenir-telecom.co.uk/. See if you can tell the difference?
However, with anything that is “good for you” there is usually also a downside. By creating refreshing motion graphics in this manner, it can increase the download time for websites. However, if developed with this in mind, a combination of both the ‘wow factor’ and realistic download speeds can be achieved.
Actually producing the final article can be problematic with unexplainable peculiarities with both importing and exporting. A bit of creative thinking and these can be easily overcome.
Overall, as the popularity of broadband continues to increase, the demand for rich media content will grow, as will the boundaries for video integration.
Combining Flash and After Effects (a video motion graphic package) can produce high quality results. By using this method, more advanced features of After Effects can be imported into Flash. For example, here at Bluhalo this technique was used for a Littlewoods multimedia CD and subtly in both www.hi-tec.com/ion-mask and http://www.avenir-telecom.co.uk/. See if you can tell the difference?
However, with anything that is “good for you” there is usually also a downside. By creating refreshing motion graphics in this manner, it can increase the download time for websites. However, if developed with this in mind, a combination of both the ‘wow factor’ and realistic download speeds can be achieved.
Actually producing the final article can be problematic with unexplainable peculiarities with both importing and exporting. A bit of creative thinking and these can be easily overcome.
Overall, as the popularity of broadband continues to increase, the demand for rich media content will grow, as will the boundaries for video integration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
