phpMyAdmin in Flash

[Darren Gates]

hi PHP users,

Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

http://www.tufat.com/phpflashmyadmin.php

Special features include: drag-and-drop interface for InnoDB table
relationships, quick record editing, tree-menu display for databases
and tables, support for multiple hosts, and much more...

Thanks,
Darren

[Hayden Kirk]

"Darren Gates" <g8*@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5e**************************@posting.google.c om...

hi PHP users,

Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

http://www.tufat.com/phpflashmyadmin.php

Special features include: drag-and-drop interface for InnoDB table
relationships, quick record editing, tree-menu display for databases
and tables, support for multiple hosts, and much more...

Thanks,
Darren

Looks very good,

Keep up the good work, gave me a few ideas for other projects.

How hard is it to do Flash/Php sites? I've never tried using flash, but your
example gave me a good idea.

Thanks
- Hayden

[Darren Gates]

hi Hayden,

It's very simple, especially if you're familiar with OOP. Flash 7 is quite
easy to pick up since it's very object-oriented.

regards,
Darren

"Hayden Kirk" <sp**@spam.com> wrote in message
news:1r*******************@news02.tsnz.net...

"Darren Gates" <g8*@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5e**************************@posting.google.c om...

hi PHP users,

Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

http://www.tufat.com/phpflashmyadmin.php

Special features include: drag-and-drop interface for InnoDB table
relationships, quick record editing, tree-menu display for databases
and tables, support for multiple hosts, and much more...

Thanks,
Darren
Looks very good,

Keep up the good work, gave me a few ideas for other projects.

How hard is it to do Flash/Php sites? I've never tried using flash, but

your example gave me a good idea.

Thanks
- Hayden

[somaBoy MX]

"Darren Gates" <g8*@yahoo.com> wrote...

Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

http://www.tufat.com/phpflashmyadmin.php

Special features include: drag-and-drop interface for InnoDB table
relationships, quick record editing, tree-menu display for databases
and tables, support for multiple hosts, and much more...

Excellent working example of the flash "rich internet application" paradigm.
If you continue to fine tune it and add features it will become a very
welcome alternative to phpMyAdmin.

Did you use amfPHP on the backend?
..soma

[Brandon Blackmoor]

Darren Gates wrote:

hi PHP users,
Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

Good god, no. The last thing the world needs is another Flash
abomination. If Macromedia were to vanish along with every Flash plug-in
on the planet, the world would be better place. Flash, like HTML mail
and ActiveX, has no redeeming virtues.

bblackmoor
2004-04-02

[Darren Gates]

hi,

XML was used on the backend. Although there is some speed difference between
AMFPHP and XML, I feel that the gain in readability and editability makes
XML a more desirable communication protocol. Users on high-speed connections
will probably never notice any difference anyway.

regards,
Darren

"somaBoy MX" <no**@nonesuch.net> wrote in message
news:40**********************@news.skynet.be...

"Darren Gates" <g8*@yahoo.com> wrote...

Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

http://www.tufat.com/phpflashmyadmin.php

Special features include: drag-and-drop interface for InnoDB table
relationships, quick record editing, tree-menu display for databases
and tables, support for multiple hosts, and much more...
Excellent working example of the flash "rich internet application"

paradigm. If you continue to fine tune it and add features it will become a very
welcome alternative to phpMyAdmin.

Did you use amfPHP on the backend?
.soma

[Darren Gates]

Regardless of whether one feels that frames or Flash is evil or not... there
are many things that can be done in Flash that are simply *impossible* (or
at least, REALLY hard) to implement using HTML.

I present to you the "relationships building" tool in phpFlashMyAdmin... how
would this be done using phpMyAdmin (with InnoDB tables)? Well, you could
certainly could use "alter table" SQL syntax, but that's a pain to do over
and over for every change. Then, to delete or alter the relationship, you
must also use SQL... why not simply drag and drop the relationships visually
and instantaneously? By using Flash, creating and modifying foreign key
relationships among tables (and thus enforcing so-called "referential
integrity") is WAY easier than by executing SQL.

And then there are the page refreshes... After I've accessed the 15th page
of a recordset and edited some number of records using phpMyAdmin, I'm
nearly about to pull my hair out waiting for pages to refresh!
phpFlashMyAdmin elminates page refreshes completely.

"Brandon Blackmoor" <bb********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-97660.news.uni-berlin.de...

Darren Gates wrote:

>
hi PHP users,
Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

Good god, no. The last thing the world needs is another Flash
abomination. If Macromedia were to vanish along with every Flash plug-in
on the planet, the world would be better place. Flash, like HTML mail
and ActiveX, has no redeeming virtues.

bblackmoor
2004-04-02

[Joel Farris]

Brandon Blackmoor wrote:

Darren Gates wrote:
hi PHP users,
Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

Good god, no. The last thing the world needs is another Flash
abomination. If Macromedia were to vanish along with every Flash plug-in
on the planet, the world would be better place. Flash, like HTML mail
and ActiveX, has no redeeming virtues.

I'll bet you keep the window blinds in your apartment closed all day long
too, huh?
--
Joel Farris | Q: It reverses the logical flow of conversation.
twinkledust Designs | A: Why is top posting frowned upon?
http://twinkledust.com |
AIM chat: FarrisJoel |
| (this fifth line in my sig angers the net kops!)

[Ian.H]

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 11:10:48 -0500, Joel Farris wrote:
OK.. I'll play...

Brandon Blackmoor wrote:

Darren Gates wrote:
hi PHP users,
Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:

Good god, no. The last thing the world needs is another Flash
abomination. If Macromedia were to vanish along with every Flash plug-in
on the planet, the world would be better place. Flash, like HTML mail
and ActiveX, has no redeeming virtues.

I'll bet you keep the window blinds in your apartment closed all day long
too, huh?

The problem is IMO.. that Web sites should be (and I thought the purpose)
to display information and the likes (obviously administration for this is
assumed too for some situations). The need to make a Web site an "OS style
application" or a "glossy brochure" is? There's 2 much better alternatives
to this:
1:> An OS application
2:> A glossy brochure
So many sites these days are bloated with unneccessary graphics that just
hinder the loading of the page.. stupid background music and other
kid-like things. Unless the site is depicting an artists gallery or
similar... plaintext works just fine to read info does it not?
Illustrations / diagrams etc are often used to explain more complex
examples (or for general windoze users).. but these add to the
_information_.. they're not there to "look pretty".

HTML renders in "all" browsers.. frames in the majority (FWIW.. I _HATE_
frames in _sites_.. administration applications however.. it does have
benefits sometimes)... but flash requires external plugins.. more often
than not heavy loading times (initially) which is not good for many users
(bear in mind that the majority of 'net users are still on dialup
connections).

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Jan Pieter Kunst]

In article <pa***************************@bubbleboy.digiserv. net>,
"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote:

Web sites should be (and I thought the purpose)
to display information and the likes

Web sites 'should be' whatever people want them to be. If that includes
OS-style applications and glossy brochures, so be it.

I too dislike Flash in most cases (because in most cases it's used to
display annoying advertisements) but I can certainly see that it can be
useful if the goal is to mimic a desktop-like application. I have
nothing against that goal, as such. (But I would rather see open tools
and formats like (ECMA|Java)Script and SVG being used than something
proprietary like Flash, though.)

JP

--
Sorry, <de*****@cauce.org> is een "spam trap".
E-mail adres is <jpk"at"akamail.com>, waarbij "at" = @.

[Darren Gates]

But why limit ourselves to just displaying information on websites? Why
can't the web have OS-style apps and glossy brochures? To me, Flash enriches
the user's overall web experience. The Flash plugin is nearly ubiquitous at
this point, and it's easy to aquire for users who don't have it. Using Flash
with a server-side technology like PHP makes programming a rich, web-based
application 100x easier. The question is not 'why use flash' but 'why NOT
use flash!'
"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa***************************@bubbleboy.digis erv.net...

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 11:10:48 -0500, Joel Farris wrote:
OK.. I'll play...

Brandon Blackmoor wrote:

Darren Gates wrote:
hi PHP users,
Here's a Flash 7 version of phpMyAdmin:
Good god, no. The last thing the world needs is another Flash
abomination. If Macromedia were to vanish along with every Flash plug-in on the planet, the world would be better place. Flash, like HTML mail
and ActiveX, has no redeeming virtues.

I'll bet you keep the window blinds in your apartment closed all day long too, huh?

The problem is IMO.. that Web sites should be (and I thought the purpose)
to display information and the likes (obviously administration for this is
assumed too for some situations). The need to make a Web site an "OS style
application" or a "glossy brochure" is? There's 2 much better alternatives
to this:
1:> An OS application
2:> A glossy brochure
So many sites these days are bloated with unneccessary graphics that just
hinder the loading of the page.. stupid background music and other
kid-like things. Unless the site is depicting an artists gallery or
similar... plaintext works just fine to read info does it not?
Illustrations / diagrams etc are often used to explain more complex
examples (or for general windoze users).. but these add to the
_information_.. they're not there to "look pretty".

HTML renders in "all" browsers.. frames in the majority (FWIW.. I _HATE_
frames in _sites_.. administration applications however.. it does have
benefits sometimes)... but flash requires external plugins.. more often
than not heavy loading times (initially) which is not good for many users
(bear in mind that the majority of 'net users are still on dialup
connections).

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Brandon Blackmoor]

Darren Gates wrote:

The question is not 'why use flash' but 'why NOT
use flash!'

Because it's a buggy, nonstandard, proprietary plug-in that breaks
numerous web fundamentals and encourages (to put it mildly -- some would
say "mandates") user-hostile interface design. Flash is, in just about
every way, one of the worst things to happen to the web since frames.

Don't install it, don't use it, and don't tolerate people who do.

'Nuff said.

bblackmoor
2004-04-06

[Darren Gates]

Whether a user interface is user-friendly and well-designed depends on the
designer. There is no question that Flash can be abused, but so can HTML
(think animated gifs and websites that look like random notes).

While it's true that a lot of Flash sites have poor interfaces, that's not
inherent to the technology. Flash can be a tool to enhance interfaces if
used well.
"Brandon Blackmoor" <bb********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-97660.news.uni-berlin.de...

Darren Gates wrote:

>
The question is not 'why use flash' but 'why NOT
use flash!'

Because it's a buggy, nonstandard, proprietary plug-in that breaks
numerous web fundamentals and encourages (to put it mildly -- some would
say "mandates") user-hostile interface design. Flash is, in just about
every way, one of the worst things to happen to the web since frames.

Don't install it, don't use it, and don't tolerate people who do.

'Nuff said.

bblackmoor
2004-04-06

[John Dunlop]

Darren Gates wrote topsyturvily:

But why limit ourselves to just displaying information on websites? Why
can't the web have OS-style apps and glossy brochures?

I don't think the question is "Why can't ... ", but rather "Why
shouldn't ... ". My answer would be, as Ian has said, that that is
not what the web was intended for or is suited to. By presenting
"OS-style apps and glossy brochures" on the web, you're losing out on
the advantages the web has over other mediums.

Why not exploit the strengths of the WWW? Or has the puissance of
the web passed you by?

WWW != Internet

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/980920.html

--
Jock

[Ian.H]

[ Rearranged into correct Usenet (and common sense) order ]

"Brandon Blackmoor" <bb********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-97660.news.uni-berlin.de...

Darren Gates wrote:

>
> The question is not 'why use flash' but 'why NOT
> use flash!'
Because it's a buggy, nonstandard, proprietary plug-in that breaks
numerous web fundamentals and encourages (to put it mildly -- some would
say "mandates") user-hostile interface design. Flash is, in just about
every way, one of the worst things to happen to the web since frames.

Don't install it, don't use it, and don't tolerate people who do.

'Nuff said.

bblackmoor
2004-04-06

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 04:15:12 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:
Whether a user interface is user-friendly and well-designed depends on the
designer. There is no question that Flash can be abused, but so can HTML
(think animated gifs and websites that look like random notes).

While it's true that a lot of Flash sites have poor interfaces, that's not
inherent to the technology. Flash can be a tool to enhance interfaces if
used well.

I really suggest trying to stop thinking like micro$h!te.. look at the
problems it causes them.

You seem to be all for this "rich experience" and the likes... now here's
the blunt part... It's an A D M I N T O O L! No more.. no less.

This is the problem with a lot of windoze (l)users.. they seem to think
that "pretty point n drool" is the answer to everything... well I've got
news for you sunshine... it most certainly is _NOT_ the answer to
everything (just like cmdline > GUI for many many MANY things).

Regards,

Ian
PS: Please learn to post _properly_.

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Darren Gates]

consider this situation:

1) user wants a tool to credit/edit relationships among tables in MySQL
using an intuitive, visual interface, similar to that offered by most
desktop Databases, like FileMaker Pro and MS Access

2) user wants this tool to be available online so that multiple users of the
database can use the tool, the tool can be accessed easily from any
computer, and he doesn't have to pay loads of money in licensing fees

Would this be possible using:

1) HTML? NO... #1 would not be possible without extensive use of DHTML
layers, which would be quite challenging to implement.

2) A Desktop Application? NO... #2 would not be possible. The application
would need to be installed on one's computer to use it.

The point is that there are some good reasons to use Flash for such tools.
Specifically, such tasks are simply impossible (or at least *very*
difficult) using current web technologies. Java would also be a good
candidate for such an application, and in fact, I've considered creating a
Java version of this (phpJMyAdmin?), but choose Flash simply for ease of
development.

Thus, it's not simply a matter of being "pretty point n drool"... it's a
matter of "this simply CAN'T be done using traditional web technologies"
"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

I really suggest trying to stop thinking like micro$h!te.. look at the
problems it causes them.

You seem to be all for this "rich experience" and the likes... now here's
the blunt part... It's an A D M I N T O O L! No more.. no less.

This is the problem with a lot of windoze (l)users.. they seem to think
that "pretty point n drool" is the answer to everything... well I've got
news for you sunshine... it most certainly is _NOT_ the answer to
everything (just like cmdline > GUI for many many MANY things).

Regards,

Ian

[Darren Gates]

I definitely believe in exploiting the strengths of the web, and I think
that Flash and Java technologies are both strengths.

In the case of phpFlashMyAdmin (http://www.tufat.com/phpflashmyadmin.php)
there are some things can simply cannot be done using traditional web
technologies (assuming, of course, that one wishes to do it on the web).
Flash or Java is needed.

Chat rooms are another great example of something that should be done in
Flash or Java. See http://www.tufat.com/chat.php for an example of a chat
room, written in Flash, which would be hideous in HTML alone (think:
constant page refreshes).

I'm all for using traditional web technologies as much as possible, but I
think that there's a certain point at which it is simply not feasible unless
you want to get into the nightmare of moveable DHTML layers and tons of page
refreshes.
"John Dunlop" <us*********@john.dunlop.name> wrote in message
news:MP************************@News.Individual.NE T...

Darren Gates wrote topsyturvily:

But why limit ourselves to just displaying information on websites? Why
can't the web have OS-style apps and glossy brochures?

I don't think the question is "Why can't ... ", but rather "Why
shouldn't ... ". My answer would be, as Ian has said, that that is
not what the web was intended for or is suited to. By presenting
"OS-style apps and glossy brochures" on the web, you're losing out on
the advantages the web has over other mediums.

Why not exploit the strengths of the WWW? Or has the puissance of
the web passed you by?

WWW != Internet

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/980920.html

--
Jock

[Ian.H]

[ Rearranged once again into correct Usenet order ]

PLEASE LEARN TO POST!

Maybe your comments will hold more water if you at least _try_ to get that
right.

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

I really suggest trying to stop thinking like micro$h!te.. look at the
problems it causes them.

You seem to be all for this "rich experience" and the likes... now here's
the blunt part... It's an A D M I N T O O L! No more.. no less.

This is the problem with a lot of windoze (l)users.. they seem to think
that "pretty point n drool" is the answer to everything... well I've got
news for you sunshine... it most certainly is _NOT_ the answer to
everything (just like cmdline > GUI for many many MANY things).

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:23:10 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:
consider this situation:

1) user wants a tool to credit/edit relationships among tables in MySQL
using an intuitive, visual interface, similar to that offered by most
desktop Databases, like FileMaker Pro and MS Access

Well so far, all you seem to harp on about is table relationships.. is
this really the only addition you feel your "tool" helps with? if so, then
it's pointless unless that's all you do all day (DB relations).

Free clue #2: MySQL is NOT a "desktop database" (more m$ hype).

2) user wants this tool to be available online so that multiple users of the
database can use the tool, the tool can be accessed easily from any
computer, and he doesn't have to pay loads of money in licensing fees

But _MUST_ download more 3rd-party proprietry plugin BS.

Would this be possible using:

1) HTML? NO... #1 would not be possible without extensive use of DHTML
layers, which would be quite challenging to implement.

Maybe.. but it's still require no extra plugins like your "rich
experience" tool does.

2) A Desktop Application? NO... #2 would not be possible. The application
would need to be installed on one's computer to use it.

And a class A contradiction! Macromedia's junk does _NOT_ come as
standard.. thus, a 3rd-party plugin _MUST_ be installed.. why not just
install an OS application instead?

The point is that there are some good reasons to use Flash for such tools.

Still failing to see any so far...

Specifically, such tasks are simply impossible (or at least *very*
difficult) using current web technologies.

That would _heavily_ depend on the coder who was taking the project on.

Java would also be a good
candidate for such an application, and in fact, I've considered creating a
Java version of this (phpJMyAdmin?), but choose Flash simply for ease of
development.

Can't comment on Java.. never looked at it and have no desire to either..
but this is my choice. Whether it's good or not, I really can't say.

Thus, it's not simply a matter of being "pretty point n drool"... it's a
matter of "this simply CAN'T be done using traditional web technologies"

Well seeing as people have managed for ages... I don't see this as being a
major issue.

IMO.. you're trying to re-create a smoothly runnin wheel but with the
addition of pretty hubcaps.

Flash has it's place sure... my favourite place is JoeCartoon.. but
that's about it's fair use IMO.

You're not convincing me here at all.. and no, I'm not _completely_ 101%
against Flash.. but this idea just seems a pointless exercise to me anyway.

As per the norm.. my £0.02 worth.

Regards,

Ian

PS: If you do reply, reply properly.. rearranging posts into logical,
naturally easy to read order is tedious.. and yes, there is a fix for your
buggy news client for this (aka: QuoteFix).

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Ian.H]

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:34:39 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

[ snip more incorrectly posted stuff ]

Chat rooms are another great example of something that should be done in
Flash or Java. See http://www.tufat.com/chat.php for an example of a chat
room, written in Flash, which would be hideous in HTML alone (think:
constant page refreshes).

I was thinking this during my last response to you.

I actually use eIRC as a Java applet Webchat for my hobby IRC server..
you're right here, this works very well (not tried Flash, but I will go
with you on this one and say it'd probably benefit like Java has with
this).. however.. once again.. like "OS application and glossy brochure"
type sites, this wasn't what the HTTP protocol was intended for.. so yes,
it is hideous.

You seem to have a lack of understanding Darren.. that 'web sites' are
the be all and end all of the Internet... they _really_ aren't.

Personally, I'd love to see BBS' come back.. but that's just my retro
memories coming back to me =)

I'm all for using traditional web technologies as much as possible,

Obviously not...

but
I think that there's a certain point at which it is simply not feasible
unless you want to get into the nightmare of moveable DHTML layers and
tons of page refreshes.

But that's just it.. DHTML is part of the existing technologies that you
automagically think will fail. I browse most of the time with JS
disabled.. but it's there if I want it.. however, I went out of my way to
install a plugin for Firebird to prevent Flash _permanently_ form
displaying on my browser.. this doesn;t get changed.. this is a permanent
fixture for aslong as it works.

You're aiming at a very specific market here IMO.. and the wrong one too
(again, IMO).

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Ian.H]

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:48:23 +0000, Ian.H wrote:
[ snip ]

You're not convincing me here at all.. and no, I'm not _completely_ 101%
against Flash.. but this idea just seems a pointless exercise to me anyway.

Actually, to clarify on this statement.. I don't mean "pointless"
entirely.. you've obviously gained experience from coding your artwork..
which is always a good thing(tm). Pointless as in "not needed" IMO would
be a better way of putting it.

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Darren Gates]

ignoring the parts about incorrectly-posting to newsgroups.... (ps. I'm
using MS Outlook, and this is apparently the way that Outlook handles
newsgroup replies... i.e., blame Microsoft, not me, if this post doesn't
seem correctly threaded)... see below.
"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:34:39 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

[ snip more incorrectly posted stuff ]

Chat rooms are another great example of something that should be done in
Flash or Java. See http://www.tufat.com/chat.php for an example of a chat room, written in Flash, which would be hideous in HTML alone (think:
constant page refreshes).

I was thinking this during my last response to you.

I actually use eIRC as a Java applet Webchat for my hobby IRC server..
you're right here, this works very well (not tried Flash, but I will go
with you on this one and say it'd probably benefit like Java has with
this).. however.. once again.. like "OS application and glossy brochure"
type sites, this wasn't what the HTTP protocol was intended for.. so yes,
it is hideous.

You seem to have a lack of understanding Darren.. that 'web sites' are
the be all and end all of the Internet... they _really_ aren't.

Of course not, and I never implied this. I would never, for example, create
a Flash version of FTP or a Flash web browser or e-mail client... etc. I
would only use Flash for applications which for which (a) it is desirable
that they are web-based, and (b) for which traditional web technologies are
not suited. I think that there are plenty of such applications. The chat
room is one, and I think that the relationships tool in phpFlashMyAdmin is
another. The report layout-creation program for MySQL databases that you see
here: http://www.tufat.com/mypdf.php is another example which - although
possible in DHTML - would be very laborious.

But that's just it.. DHTML is part of the existing technologies that you
automagically think will fail. I browse most of the time with JS
disabled.. but it's there if I want it.. however, I went out of my way to
install a plugin for Firebird to prevent Flash _permanently_ form
displaying on my browser.. this doesn;t get changed.. this is a permanent
fixture for aslong as it works.

I think that anyone who has tried to get an advanced DHTML applications
working well across many different browsers would agree that DHTML is not
the right solution. This is largely the result of Microsoft's decision to go
its own way in the area of Javascript rather than following W3C standards.
DHTML is great for simple things, but it's a nightmare to get it working
well for advanced applications.

regards,
Darren

[Darren Gates]

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa***********************@bubbleboy.digiserv. net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:23:10 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

consider this situation:

1) user wants a tool to credit/edit relationships among tables in MySQL
using an intuitive, visual interface, similar to that offered by most
desktop Databases, like FileMaker Pro and MS Access

Well so far, all you seem to harp on about is table relationships.. is
this really the only addition you feel your "tool" helps with? if so, then
it's pointless unless that's all you do all day (DB relations).

No, I'm merely using this an example. There are dozens of such examples,
including chat rooms and the page layout program that comes with MyPDF
(http://www.tufat.com/mypdf.php). Many experienced MySQL programmers have
e-mailed me to say that the table relationship builder is a welcome and
long-awaited feature. Up to this point, programmers have had to resort to
fairly complex 'alter table...' statements.

Free clue #2: MySQL is NOT a "desktop database" (more m$ hype).
Yes, and that's the point of doing this in Flash! That's also the whole
point of phpMyAdmin... does anything like phpMyAdmin exist for FileMaker
Pro? If it does, I've never seen it. Why? Because FileMaker is a desktop
database. MySQL = web-based, thus a web-based solution is ideal. FileMaker
Pro = Desktop-based, thus an Desktop-based solution is ideal.

2) A Desktop Application? NO... #2 would not be possible. The application would need to be installed on one's computer to use it.

And a class A contradiction! Macromedia's junk does _NOT_ come as
standard.. thus, a 3rd-party plugin _MUST_ be installed.. why not just
install an OS application instead?

Because the point is the goal is to make this web-based, not OS-based. Sure,
OS apps exist for MySQL editing (for example, MySQL-Front), but that's not
the goal.

If you think about it, most OS applications (except for those in Java) also
require a great big plug-in called "Microsoft Windows". I love it when I can
do something with a web application and not fret over OS-compatibility
issues.

The point is that there are some good reasons to use Flash for such tools.

Still failing to see any so far...
Here are three examples:
1. chat rooms w/ no page refreshes
2. page layout & drawing applications (for example, a Flash greeting card
creator, or the layout builder in MyPDF)
3. visual relationship builder in phpFlashMyAdmin

Specifically, such tasks are simply impossible (or at least *very*
difficult) using current web technologies.

That would _heavily_ depend on the coder who was taking the project on.

Certainly, there is quite a bit of variation among skill in programmers, but
if you take something even as simple as a chatroom, it's obvious that page
refreshes are needed in any HTML-based chat situation. The *only* solution
is to use Flash or Java to avoid refreshes. For myself, I feel that I am
equally proficient in Flash and Javascript, and for most of the things that
I have done in Flash, I can't even begin to imagine how long it would have
taken me if implemented in Javascript/DHTML.

Java would also be a good
candidate for such an application, and in fact, I've considered creating

a Java version of this (phpJMyAdmin?), but choose Flash simply for ease of
development.

Can't comment on Java.. never looked at it and have no desire to either..
but this is my choice. Whether it's good or not, I really can't say.

Java is first-rate. Everything that I've ever done in Flash could have been
implemented in Java as an applet. Personally, I like Flash a bit more
because it's more design-friendly and faster, but I love Java, and would
welcome any RIAs written in Java.

Thus, it's not simply a matter of being "pretty point n drool"... it's a
matter of "this simply CAN'T be done using traditional web technologies"

Well seeing as people have managed for ages... I don't see this as being a
major issue.

The reason that they have managed is that they have not attempted to create
applications which require anything more sophisticated than HTML. Certainly,
if we limit ourselves to the basics, then everyone can get along just
fine... but as long as we do so, there will be a wide array of web
applications which will be beyond our reach (see above for 3 examples).

regards,
Darren

[Ian.H]

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:30:14 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

ignoring the parts about incorrectly-posting to newsgroups.... (ps. I'm
using MS Outlook, and this is apparently the way that Outlook handles
newsgroup replies... i.e., blame Microsoft, not me, if this post doesn't
seem correctly threaded)... see below.

Inline quoting like you have done this time around is perfectly acceptable
and highly encouraged.

Are you telling me though, that when OE starts, you can't click below all
previous text and start your reply from there? What I really think you
mean is that you couldn't be bothered.. just hit reply and type.

Have a look on google for 'OEQuotefix' (I don't have a URL myself else I'd
post it here).. but this will cure this issue for you anyway =)

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:34:39 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

[ snip more incorrectly posted stuff ]

> Chat rooms are another great example of something that should be done in
> Flash or Java. See http://www.tufat.com/chat.php for an example of a chat > room, written in Flash, which would be hideous in HTML alone (think:
> constant page refreshes).

I was thinking this during my last response to you.

I actually use eIRC as a Java applet Webchat for my hobby IRC server..
you're right here, this works very well (not tried Flash, but I will go
with you on this one and say it'd probably benefit like Java has with
this).. however.. once again.. like "OS application and glossy brochure"
type sites, this wasn't what the HTTP protocol was intended for.. so yes,
it is hideous.

You seem to have a lack of understanding Darren.. that 'web sites' are
the be all and end all of the Internet... they _really_ aren't.

Of course not, and I never implied this. I would never, for example, create
a Flash version of FTP or a Flash web browser or e-mail client... etc.

But why not? You may aswell =\
I
would only use Flash for applications which for which (a) it is desirable
that they are web-based,

My e-mail client is Web-based (Horde / IMP (using Firebird to access))...

and (b) for which traditional web technologies are
not suited.

But existing technologies _ARE_ suited. Once again, you miss the point.

I think that there are plenty of such applications. The chat
room is one, and I think that the relationships tool in phpFlashMyAdmin is
another.

And again.. this is _all_ you have gone on about with your Flash tool. If
that's your only "selling point".. I really fail to see any success in it.

The report layout-creation program for MySQL databases that you see
here: http://www.tufat.com/mypdf.php is another example which - although
possible in DHTML - would be very laborious.

Laborious.... so? Sometimes coding is that way.

After using ASM many years ago... you really wont convince me with this
argument (not that I'd use ASM for Web develpment however).. what you
consider laborious here is a walk in the park compared to some of the
things in ASM.

But that's just it.. DHTML is part of the existing technologies that you
automagically think will fail. I browse most of the time with JS
disabled.. but it's there if I want it.. however, I went out of my way to
install a plugin for Firebird to prevent Flash _permanently_ form
displaying on my browser.. this doesn;t get changed.. this is a permanent
fixture for aslong as it works.

I think that anyone who has tried to get an advanced DHTML applications
working well across many different browsers would agree that DHTML is not
the right solution.

It sounds like you may have tried, failed and given up... not _all_ coders
have the same problems (I'm most certainly no expert in DHTML.. but some
are).

This is largely the result of Microsoft's decision to go
its own way in the area of Javascript rather than following W3C standards.

Won't hear any complaints from me about how sloppy m$ are.

DHTML is great for simple things, but it's a nightmare to get it working
well for advanced applications.

I've seen some great apps out there.. and not in Flash.

I think this thread's run its course however.. there's noway in hell I'm
going to be convinced that Flash should be used for anything but cartoons
and the likes.. and noway on earth you're going to agree with me that
Flash isn't the answer to this issue.. so rather than drag this out going
back and forth and generating lots of friction, I think we should agree to
disagree on this =)

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Ian.H]

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:53:51 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa***********************@bubbleboy.digiserv. net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 17:23:10 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

[ snip ]

Free clue #2: MySQL is NOT a "desktop database" (more m$ hype).
Yes, and that's the point of doing this in Flash! That's also the whole
point of phpMyAdmin... does anything like phpMyAdmin exist for FileMaker
Pro? If it does, I've never seen it. Why? Because FileMaker is a desktop
database. MySQL = web-based, thus a web-based solution is ideal. FileMaker
Pro = Desktop-based, thus an Desktop-based solution is ideal.

No idea about Filemaker Pro.. but MySQL is _NOT_ "web-based" at all.. in
any shape or form!

I have many scripts (primarily in Perl) that I have coded over the years
that use MySQL... many of which wouldn't care if my box was connected to
the Inet or not. Again, this implies you're unsure of how the Inet is
structured.

> 2) A Desktop Application? NO... #2 would not be possible. The application > would need to be installed on one's computer to use it.

And a class A contradiction! Macromedia's junk does _NOT_ come as
standard.. thus, a 3rd-party plugin _MUST_ be installed.. why not just
install an OS application instead?

Because the point is the goal is to make this web-based, not OS-based. Sure,
OS apps exist for MySQL editing (for example, MySQL-Front), but that's not
the goal.

Why isn't that the goal? Surely the goal here is to administrate MySQL.
Now seeing as Flash is a client-side abomination.. it matters not. I can
easily write an application that will interact with the Inet.. but uses
nothing of Flash.

If you think about it, most OS applications (except for those in Java) also
require a great big plug-in called "Microsoft Windows".

Oh dear God.. you _seriously_ are dilusional. Until recently (few weeks) I
haven't had a windoze box running here for 18 months yet, I've continued
to develop some simple tools.. continued to develop for Web sites and a
whole variety of other things.. and guess what... none required that
plugin you mention from Redmond.

I love it when I can
do something with a web application and not fret over OS-compatibility
issues.

Your time.. your choice.. but x-platform coding rocks! ;)

> The point is that there are some good reasons to use Flash for such tools.

Still failing to see any so far...

Here are three examples:
1. chat rooms w/ no page refreshes

That is _NOT_ a tool!

2. page layout & drawing applications (for example, a Flash greeting card
creator, or the layout builder in MyPDF)

Oh please!

3. visual relationship builder in phpFlashMyAdmin

Bah!

> Specifically, such tasks are simply impossible (or at least *very*
> difficult) using current web technologies.

That would _heavily_ depend on the coder who was taking the project on.

Certainly, there is quite a bit of variation among skill in programmers, but
if you take something even as simple as a chatroom, it's obvious that page
refreshes are needed in any HTML-based chat situation.

Yes.. but.. (I'll try this easily):
THIS

IS

NOT

WHAT

HTTP

WAS

DESIGNED

FOR

But you seem to think it was.. just hard to accomplish nicely.

The *only* solution
is to use Flash or Java to avoid refreshes.

As stated already, I don't disagree that either would work well for a chat
room.. but please understand that this IS NOT what was intended when the
HTTP protocol was designed.

For myself, I feel that I am
equally proficient in Flash and Javascript, and for most of the things that
I have done in Flash, I can't even begin to imagine how long it would have
taken me if implemented in Javascript/DHTML.

That's your preference.

I've used both PHP and Perl over the last 6 years (although PHP moreso)..
but I normally use PHP for Web development and Perl for system scripting.
Why? I find PHP easier to integrate with what I need for Web development..
and that's the only reason... not that it's better or worse than Perl.
[ snip ]

> Thus, it's not simply a matter of being "pretty point n drool"... it's a
> matter of "this simply CAN'T be done using traditional web technologies"

Well seeing as people have managed for ages... I don't see this as being a
major issue.

The reason that they have managed is that they have not attempted to create
applications which require anything more sophisticated than HTML. Certainly,
if we limit ourselves to the basics, then everyone can get along just
fine... but as long as we do so, there will be a wide array of web
applications which will be beyond our reach (see above for 3 examples).

Who's limiting themselves to the basics? It works! Why change it?

_You're_ adding unneccessary limitations by requiring the user to have a
flash plugin presently installed. phpMA for example requires a browser
that handles frames.. and even that's not esential. Can you not
_seriously_ see which has the most scope for use?

You appear to be like many other Flash users... you seem to think that
it's the best thing since sliced bread (just in the same way Javascript
has been abused over the years)... "look at me and my new toy" kind of
thing. Flash has its place as I've stated (and agreed with you on one
instance of its use) but administration tools, are definitely _NOT_ one of
those places.. IMO.

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Darren Gates]

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

Oh dear God.. you _seriously_ are dilusional. Until recently (few weeks) I
haven't had a windoze box running here for 18 months yet, I've continued
to develop some simple tools.. continued to develop for Web sites and a
whole variety of other things.. and guess what... none required that
plugin you mention from Redmond.
I wish that were true of the vast majority of Inet users, but alas most of
us are indeed stuck with Windows.

That is _NOT_ a tool!
Tool, application, program... call it whatever you want to call it. This is
just semantics.

As stated already, I don't disagree that either would work well for a chat
room.. but please understand that this IS NOT what was intended when the
HTTP protocol was designed.
Do you think that the implementors of HTTP were thinking "Thou shalt use
this protocol for HTML and HTML only forever after!". No, of course not.
More likely, they had a view that plugins like Flash, Java, and VRML would
be created, and thus accomodations are made for various multimedia and
3rd-party mime-types and tags like <object> which allow embedding of such
things as Flash .swfs or Java applets.

You appear to be like many other Flash users... you seem to think that
it's the best thing since sliced bread (just in the same way Javascript
has been abused over the years)... "look at me and my new toy" kind of
thing. Flash has its place as I've stated (and agreed with you on one
instance of its use) but administration tools, are definitely _NOT_ one of
those places.. IMO.

No, I don't think that Flash is the best thing since sliced bread. But I
*do* feel that - if used properly - it can substantially enhance a user's
Internet experience, and enable web applications which would be nearly
impossible to create using just DHTML.

regards,
Darren

[Darren Gates]

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:30:14 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

I think this thread's run its course however.. there's noway in hell I'm
going to be convinced that Flash should be used for anything but cartoons
and the likes.. and noway on earth you're going to agree with me that
Flash isn't the answer to this issue.. so rather than drag this out going
back and forth and generating lots of friction, I think we should agree to
disagree on this =)

yes, I can certainly agree on that. Arguing a point like this is a bit like
arguing about religion or politics. This is taking up too much of my work
day anyway.

"Opinions are like a**holes... everyone has one and they all stink."
- anonymous

[Ian.H]

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:38:32 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

Oh dear God.. you _seriously_ are dilusional. Until recently (few weeks) I
haven't had a windoze box running here for 18 months yet, I've continued
to develop some simple tools.. continued to develop for Web sites and a
whole variety of other things.. and guess what... none required that
plugin you mention from Redmond.
I wish that were true of the vast majority of Inet users, but alas most of
us are indeed stuck with Windows.

I don't disagree with you there.. and I do "need" a windoze box also. I
DJ'd for about 10 years.. mainly as a hobby.. but also enjoy producing a
few tracks. Unfortunately, *nix isn't as developed in this area (or at
least applications for it) so I have to resort to windoze for this task at
least.. and before anyone brings up a *nix vs. windoze war.. this isn't my
aim here.. both windoze and *nix have their places.

That is _NOT_ a tool!

Tool, application, program... call it whatever you want to call it. This is
just semantics.

To an extent I agree... but a chatroom app is not what I'd consider a
"tool".

As stated already, I don't disagree that either would work well for a chat
room.. but please understand that this IS NOT what was intended when the
HTTP protocol was designed.

Do you think that the implementors of HTTP were thinking "Thou shalt use
this protocol for HTML and HTML only forever after!". No, of course not.

Quite possibly yes.. unless they were running crystalball 0.0.3.

More likely, they had a view that plugins like Flash, Java, and VRML would
be created, and thus accomodations are made for various multimedia and
3rd-party mime-types and tags like <object> which allow embedding of such
things as Flash .swfs or Java applets.

I don't doubt that either.. but I'm also pretty sure they didn't sit over
a few pints thinking "yes, Flash will be the future of tools!".

You appear to be like many other Flash users... you seem to think that
it's the best thing since sliced bread (just in the same way Javascript
has been abused over the years)... "look at me and my new toy" kind of
thing. Flash has its place as I've stated (and agreed with you on one
instance of its use) but administration tools, are definitely _NOT_ one of
those places.. IMO.

No, I don't think that Flash is the best thing since sliced bread. But I
*do* feel that - if used properly - it can substantially enhance a user's
Internet experience, and enable web applications which would be nearly
impossible to create using just DHTML.

Again.. 'Internet' is not 'WWW'.
As in the other part of the thread though, I don't think we're going to
resolve this discussion ending with the same results / opinions. Maybe I'm
just a retro kind of person.

Despite the disagreements we've had here throughout this discussion... I
do wish you success with the tool and I do appreciate the work that you
must have put into it (I'm not a Flash user.. but not a stranger to coding
and what goes into it) =)

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Ian.H]

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:46:12 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:30:14 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

I think this thread's run its course however.. there's noway in hell I'm
going to be convinced that Flash should be used for anything but cartoons
and the likes.. and noway on earth you're going to agree with me that
Flash isn't the answer to this issue.. so rather than drag this out going
back and forth and generating lots of friction, I think we should agree to
disagree on this =)

yes, I can certainly agree on that. Arguing a point like this is a bit like
arguing about religion or politics. This is taking up too much of my work
day anyway.

2 posts.. 2 agreements (I agree with your religion / politics comparison
also).. not everything is bad =)

"Opinions are like a**holes... everyone has one and they all stink."
- anonymous

LOL! =)

Regards,

Ian

--
Ian.H
digiServ Network
London, UK
http://digiserv.net/

[Darren Gates]

"Ian.H" <ia*@WINDOZEdigiserv.net> wrote in message
news:pa****************************@bubbleboy.digi serv.net...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:38:32 +0000, Darren Gates wrote:

Again.. 'Internet' is not 'WWW'.
Sure, but I think that when the term "Internet" is used, about 99% of
lay-people think WWW or E-mail. Few users think of things like FTP, Telnet,
and other applications. What actually defines "The Internet" is the topic of
another lengthy thread...
Despite the disagreements we've had here throughout this discussion... I
do wish you success with the tool and I do appreciate the work that you
must have put into it (I'm not a Flash user.. but not a stranger to coding
and what goes into it) =)

Thanks!
Darren

[Brandon Blackmoor]

Darren Gates wrote:

While it's true that a lot of Flash sites have poor
interfaces, that's not inherent to the technology.
Flash can be a tool to enhance interfaces if used
well.

In theory, yes. The difference between theory and practice is a rather
large one, in this case.

I will admit that Flash has tremendous value when it is *not* used for
web design, nor for anything *remotely* having to do with web
development. It's marvelous for short animated features, for example,
such as you'd see at Happy Tree Friends.

bblackmoor
2004-04-07

[Brandon Blackmoor]

Darren Gates wrote:

1) user wants a tool to credit/edit relationships among tables in MySQL
using an intuitive, visual interface,

phpMyAdmin. If that's too complicated for them, they shouldn't be
touching the database to begin with.

bblackmoor
2004-04-07