As the AIR 2.0 is in beta now I have to edit this post, and add a link to the capabilities of the new version as it solves lot of limitations of the previous versions. Check it here.
I would do it much earlier because lot of projects had to be done using other programming languages. But it’s not me who lost money due to the limitations of AIR. They have to know the reasons why they make those limitations, and degraded AIR to be a widget creation tool.
The original post (hope it’s meaningless now):
I don’t know what Adobe thinks, but ignoring user (their customers) is a really dangerous thing to do.
I have a problem with launching external application from an AIR apllication. I don’t want it because I have nothing else to do, I need to do it. ( Actually the client needs to do it, so I have to be able to do it.) I think lots of people had/have this problem.
I don’t know what’s the point that even some music player software has bigger privileges than I could dream off with AIR? If we develop dekstop application, we have to have the same possibilities as other applications have. The installer could warn the users that this application is capable of doing that, and that’s it.
It’s not so funny to make some installers and try to bypass this stupid restriction! Adobe even doesn’t allow to distribute just the files and make what how I want things to work, I have to use their installer. (As I know useing shu-player is not as much legal, but I might end up useing it anyway)
So I could ask: How to solve it? I don’t know what are the plans in Adobe with AIR, but I cannot see bright future for it if Adobe will ignore what people need. If there will be other choice I will surely go that way. I don’t like to be in this kind of situation (be a hostage), when I am fully in a hands of some company (who doesnt really care).
Uff.
Ps: If you agree with me, don’t just pray for some change. Let them know what you want!
Monday, 5. January 2009
Actually I have the same problem, I really NEED to launch external applications from the AIR app I work on.
Shu-player won’t help me since my project have to run on linux, and I really don’t know what to do.
I read a lot of people complaining about that restriction on Flex/AIR blogs, and sadly, it seems that Adobe isn’t listening.
Monday, 5. January 2009
Hi,
I’m totally agree with you.
When we used to do application with asm, C, python, ruby, or whatever, we have full access to the OS and do what customers wants. Sure you can do bad coding and do bad things, but if you do so, I’m not sure your company/business will last very long.
Let developers write their code with full potential, and let users decide what to do when installing your application.
I think Air is mixing security from WEB point of view (where you can have attack from bad plug in/bug etc…) and not as a real application (where you are supposed to know what you are installing and where it comes from).
Monday, 5. January 2009
I am not sure what the big deal is anyway, with security I mean. If you download and install an application from the internet you assume its safe you don’t even think about it. You download it because you trust in the company you downloaded it from.
This is the same problem the web has combating publicity about shopping over the internet. Everyone worries about someone stealing your credit card numbers and what not.
So they post all these signs like hackersafe and some sites even take you off to some secure domain that looks different.
Imagine if you went into a local store to buy some shoes and you saw signs all over the store saying Robbersafe or “trustednottohavebadguyssafe”. Then when you got ready to pay they wisked you into some back room with several locks and body scanners, so you can pay for you shoes. You probably wouldn’t shop their much, nor would you feel safe.
I have a feeling that when the Microsoft machines started spewwing that AIR wasn’t safe Adobe backed down and the Adobe marketing department combined with legal got all bent out of shape….”if it isn’t safe then we can’t hurt out brand”.
Adobe….please ignore Microsoft or fire back as I am sure their are several windows based applications that are huge security holes…lets start with IE.
Monday, 5. January 2009
As an Adobe employee, let me state for the record that we are listening and are well aware of the demand to launch external applications, and other types of native integration.
To be fair however, AIR isn’t even one year old yet (AIR 1.0 was released in Feb 2008). There was a time when most everybody ridiculed Flex 1.0 for various shortcomings as well. Given that you now classify yourself as a Flex developer, I’m guessing those problems went away over time (not that it too couldn’t be better).
AIR 1.0 was a solid release with fantastic new capabilities for web developers. AIR 1.1 introduced internationalization. AIR 1.5 updated to include Flash Player 10 support. We’ve already talked about AIR on mobile devices in the future. That same future will bring new versions (both major and minor) with new features. What features will be determined largely by community feedback, so to your point, please do continue to let us know (though constructive criticism is appreciated).
For what it’s worth, there are plenty in the camp that would prefer *not* to have launching other applications (and other more low-level native support) as well. I should also note that you *can* build your own installer around ours, and with the appropriate license in place, there’s no legal problem with that at all.
http://www.adobe.com/products/air/runtime_distribution1.html
Regards,
Kevin Hoyt
Platform Evangelist
Adobe Systems, Inc.
Monday, 5. January 2009
We’ve lost multiple jobs due to the security limitations built into AIR and continue to do so.
Client ends up going with Sliverlight!
Monday, 5. January 2009
Hi,
You may try this : http://aperture.fluorinefx.com/, it could solve you’re pb.
(I don’t work for them)
Ak.
Monday, 5. January 2009
On Windows, there’s FlourineFX. It doesn’t get much simpler than this. The mere fact that you can easily do it with this .dll file is proof enough that Adobe /*could provide (edited, while not changing the meaning)*/ support for it.
http://aperture.fluorinefx.com/?page_id=4
Director had a plug-in architecture that let to the Buddy API Xtra, one of the most amazing and powerful Xtras ever created. If you wanted, you could completely destroy somebody’s operating system with Buddy API. Guess how many people did. I never heard of one.
Monday, 5. January 2009
I agree
Monday, 5. January 2009
As I understand it, the concern is that a malefactor could write a bad file to your disk, and then explicitly execute it. That’s instant exploit.
I haven’t doublechecked docs, but my memory is that we can request a file to be opened, with the user’s own choice of application to open it.
There is a constant tension between what a developer wishes to do on a consumer’s machine, and what consumers wish developers to do on their machines. The balance is ongoing.
jd/adobe
Monday, 5. January 2009
FluorineFx.Com sort of defeats the entire reason for using AIR — cross-platformness. FluorineFX only works in windows right now. Why even develop with AIR if you’re only releasing to windows? You’d be better off using .NET and WPF.
Tuesday, 6. January 2009
John Dowdell is absulutely right: running external apps would open the computer for attacks, exactly like all the other dekstop applications do. For the power you get, there is a price.
But I am sure the consumers absolutely don’t care about the safety of the programs (they would never install some smiley programs, and they would not use some well know operating system)
What I ask for is to decide in what direction AIR will go, so I will be able to decide if I can go with it. What I need is full power, not something between a web based application and the desktop.
Tuesday, 6. January 2009
If you need full power more than you need “something between a web based application and the desktop”, why are you using AIR in the first place? AIR is not intended as a replacement to native platform development. It IS a web based application mindset ported to the desktop. If you are only releasing for or targeting a specific OS, you are doing your client a great disservice by NOT developing with that OS’s core development tools. If that’s the case, and you are not a .NET, WPF, Carbon, Cocoa, etc. developer, then your client should be getting their work done elsewhere to begin with.
Wednesday, 7. January 2009
I’m sure you have a good reason for wanting to launch an external tool.
But are you going to ship PC, Linux and Mac versions of that external tool ? What about whatever-the-hell-it-is in a TV or mobile phone ?
Wednesday, 7. January 2009
My reason to wanting to launch an external application is simple speed. There are some areas where speed of the AIR is not enough. But I want some good looking application with nice animations - and develop it quickly. And as I know Flex it’s obvius to choose AIR as a user interface, with the help of some extra tools if needed. The external tool can be already developed as an open source project, what can save me time/money.
Mobile phones are different area, nobody will want run some application that has high requirements on hardware.
for Quentin:
As I (and the customer) wants cross platform application maybe Java would be the only solution later JavaFx maybe.
You say: “AIR is not intended as a replacement to native platform development.” This is exactly what I want to know, because they say something about bringing your web development experience to the desktop.
I need the cross platformness of AIR with more power. FluorineFx helps with windows but I need the other operating systems too.
And to make it clear, I could use different solution (Java) in other projects, but this is exactly what Adobe should care of. How many people/projects will have to choose different tools, because they will not be able to choose AIR. I can live without AIR, I don’t lost money if I use something else, only Adobe can lost in this. (Actually I will need some extra time to get better in other languages, that will cost money for me too.)
Thursday, 8. January 2009
From way back in June: http://www.flashmagazine.com/news/detail/air_roadmap/#When:11:12:00Z
“AIR 2.0 is up in the “air” and the team is currently doing developer interviews to find out what features to add. We talked to Mike Chambers and asked him what users are requesting and he revealed that among the current requests there’s better debugging support for javascript development, opening applications and USB support.”
That the first reference I could find quickly, but I’ve seen other mentions of AIR 2.0 having the ability to open up applications. Adobe won’t confirm it yet, as the features are still being worked out, but I imagine it’s likely going to happen. As Kevin Hoyt points out above AIR is only at version 1.5 and so there’s still a lot of features that both Adobe and developers would like to add to AIR, but it’s still a very new product and it these things take time. Especially when making sure that AIR works as seamlessly as possible on 3 different OS’s.
Meanwhile, Mike Chambers put together a quick proof of concept on how to use .Net code to launch an application from AIR:
http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2008/01/17/commandproxy-net-air-integration-proof-of-concept/
It’s a bit of a hack and got a lot of controversy from Microsoft employees who pointed out security flaws opens up. Not a great solution, but it’s a possible way to go until hopefully AIR 2.0 includes the functionality natively.
Friday, 9. January 2009
This feature is not absent from AIR due to any security restrictions. On the contrary, we just haven’t gotten to it yet. We can only develop new features so quickly, and since we *do* listen to our customers, we have to pick those from the many, many features that have been requested.
regards,
Oliver Goldman | Adobe AIR Engineering
Tuesday, 13. January 2009
I agree, the ability to launch an external application is much desired, especially since the security model of AIR seems too restrictive. If I can launch an external application I can by-pass these restrictions. My immediate requirements are to be able to load a swf from the local system without the user having to open a file dialog, and the swf does not live in the application or applicationStorage directories, rather it lives in on a file server with a mapped drive. Bottom-line, we need levels of security, and the user installing our AIR apps can choose to allow an application to have unfettered access. I say again, allow user’s to choose. There is nothing out of balance about giving users a choice.
Tuesday, 21. July 2009
I say kudos to Kevin Hoyt!
Adobe AIR is a completely free tool released by Adobe for the benefit of the developer community. It’s a young and developing technology, in no way guaranteed to be perfect or fully featured.
The sign of a good developer is that they are able to understand the benefits and shortfalls of the technologies available, and to choose the best technology to meet the needs of the task at hand. The complaints I see in this post show me that the majority of you have not done that. You’ve proceeded in development, invested time and resources without doing the necessary homework, and are now in a hole because you’ve hit a point where Adobe AIR doesn’t do what your project needs, and are now taking it out on Adobe.
I say thank you, Adobe, for putting desktop application development within easy reach of us web developers, and to those who would complain about the limitations of the technology, I’d recommend taking responsibility for the choices you’ve made in development, and do better homework next time.
Regards,
Tom McQuarrie | elTomTom.com
Wednesday, 7. October 2009
It looks like not only does Adobe listen to it’s customers, but it follows though as well.
Check out the first bullet in the AIR 2 feature list.
http://blogs.adobe.com/air/2009/10/previewing_adobe_air_2_at_adob.html