People complaining about the licensing of new AIR SDK

Well, I don’t think these are good news, start this negotiation in the middle of the most critical update imposed by Google. It seems that is just to force the payment model they are going to apply to all of the worried, desperate, hopeless developers that were surprised with this suddenly last minute announcement of the AIR acquisition. Andrew Frost @ajwfrost, do you really thing that AIR and Unity 3D can be compared?, do you really think Adobe AIR, that it is just an SDK, deserve a subscription payment model like Unity 3D?, Unity come fully loaded of tools of all kinds, plugins, assets, native access of almost the entire native platforms it supports, all of the mobile platforms, all of the desktop platforms, all of the game console platforms, all of the smart TV platforms, and web; it offers all of you need to build AAA Games and Apps without the need to pay for anything else, AIR and Unity are not comparable at all, so you can’t be thinking in a payment model like Unity for AIR, to develop with AIR you need to invest in a lot of additional tools, ANEs, SDKs, IDEs, you depend of the most expensive extensions ever to access the simplest native functionality, even to integrate simplest technologies like Facebook login, you must pay a lot of money, and only for 2 platforms and 1 architecture, while Unity offers almost every existing platform for the same price, if you want an almost complete development ecosystem you need to be subscribed to Adobe CC, these among another lot of reasons Adobe AIR can’t be charged. We are not going to pay anything for AIR, it’s going to be less expensive for a thousands of developers to port their AS3 games to Haxe, frameworks like Starling and Away3D are already ported, and start new ones with another technologies much more reasonable. We are already porting all of our games to Haxe, and starting new ones with another tools that deserve its costs, we are already completing our porting and we are really sure that we are going to publish updates before Harman releases any usable AIR. Adobe always kicked our asses, always abandoned the developers that generously supported their technologies, even controversial ones like Flash, this is going to finish with this fatal AIR new era.Well, I don’t think these are good news, start this negotiation in the middle of the most critical update imposed by Google. Just to force the payment model they are going to apply to all of the worried developers that ere surprised with announcement of AIR acquisition

1 Like

You don’t know how and where to use commas.

Blockquote
obviously we’ve been looking at Unity and other such products/frameworks to ensure that we’re being competitive and not putting too big a burden on anyone. Ultimately though, the fees that we can raise through distribution of AIR will be paying for the development team, so we’re really going to strive to make it a success.

For anyone using Adobe CC tools especially for Dev( Animate, Adobe Scout ) and already paying a subscription fee on this side, it would be totally unfair to start paying additionnal fee for the SDK now. That’s sounding like paying 2 times ( taking Unity as an instance, it’s finally less costy and you do not pay for IDE and then for SDK…).
Anyway IMHO, before to apply a rate, I hope we can see Air 33 run at least during a couple of month. Paying something in the very begins of such a surprising transition is like telling all of us Dev to go his way on Unity or other tool…
There is so much doubts for now on regarding this critical situation that it would be preferable to focus only on the release on that so waited Air 33 rather than starting to speak about additionnal fee. On behalf of all Dev still hoping something to continue with Air, it’s scary more than reassuring…

no they can’t
only if you do only game development, not the case of everyone
you would not pick Unity3D to build an app

please … if you really want to build a AAA game you pick Unreal Engine, not Unity 3D LOL
and you certainly do not pick Unity 3d to build apps

OK so why are you even here then?
you already got your solution, “port everything to Haxe” because what? it is cheaper?
lol :roll_eyes:

Here what you are underestimating

  • it is faster, easier to build your graphic assets in Animate CC
  • your Adobe CC subscription give you access to Flash Builder and Scout CC
  • the system of AS3 + ANE is much faster to deal with than anything else

don’t be an unfair asshole, Adobe generously provided the technology for free for a good decade
now that the tech is not EOL’ed and you have to pay a bit of licensing fee you go ape shit?

please let me ask you that:

  • how much money do you donate to AS3 or ANE open source projects ?
  • how much money do you spend for commercial ANE ?
  • how much money do you spend on books (related to AS3 stuff) ?
  • did you share at least one open source project?
  • do you contribute to open source projects reporting bugs or trying to improve the documentation?
  • you plan to move everything to Haxe, then how much do you plan to donate them ?

I’m pretty sure, if it is not game related or you can get away with it, you basically donate zero;
not only in money but also in time.

So yeah if you expect to have everything handed to you for free because you are so much special, even if the licensing cost was $1 it would be too much.

If you do that as a business, paying licensing fees is perfectly normal.

No it’s not.

Do you realise you can use Scout CC for free and they could perfectly sell the tool to you?

Do you go to a restaurant, have a nice meal, and come back few weeks later to pay your meal?

it doesn’t work like that, if you want/need the AIR 33 SDK then it is very clear, see the licensing fee.

If you can’t/won’t pay for it, then fine, use something else, nobody force you.

You are buying into the FUD of few toxic assholes on the Adobe forums.

Personally I prefer to trust professionals than to believe the bullshits spread by such assholes.

Harman, as they are, is a company that generate 7B revenues per year, so they must know one thing or two about doing business, and without knowing them personally I’m pretty sure they know their stuff.

I can guarantee you if the situation was different, for example Adobe open sourcing the sources of the AIR SDK, you would be in dire shit: “here you go, here some very complex C++ sources, go ahead compile it yourself”.

The same assholes that spread bullshits on Adobe forums would run for the hills because they would not even know where to start to compile it.

So believe me, you do want a company like Harman, to do the compilation for you,
and the upgrade, and the testing, and the maintenance, etc.

In fact, anyone should be happy to just pay a mere licensing fee for such service, because it is fucking very hard work.

Given the choice, while I have ton of experience compiling C++ cross-platform, I would pick “let me pay a licensing fee instead of compiling it myself”, because it is so much cheaper than to do it yourself.

1 Like

I’m not trying to push down the things here.( not like the Adobe forums bullshits we can see as you pointed out)
To have Harman taking the flag here is a great thing to avoid an open source solution which would probably drive to worst things at this step… I’m just noticing it’s a very weird way to introduce a company ( whatever should be ) to already talking about fees when we are in a such critical case at one month of a crash situation… This is something to deal between Harman and Adobe maybe… in a parternship deal.

I don’t want to be rough but Your restaurant example does not outstand exactly what the situation is. It’s not about saying that all should be free in the digital life…

The comparaison would be more like " You paid for a flight, and the company announce you in middle of the Pacific there is no more fuel in the engines… but you can avoid the crash if you pay now for a re-fill, and you have 3 minutes to take your decision" .
Then, the obvious answer is you will pay or it’s the crash 3 min later , right?

We are all in the same Ship here, and I believe in what Harman can do, but their is some obvious miscom’ since the begining of the year, and this is something to report them . not to ignore
Pricing is something to talk about certainly “After Adobe transition”.
I’m probably not the only one who hightlight this and competition is very appealing.
If the ambition is to try to attract new Devs , fresh new youngs , or older who left Flash/AIR and would come back later, then that’s probably not the best way to proceed.
If the ambition is solo to maintain a service meanwhile everybody can smoothly switch to other things… it appears to be the good way. But to me that’s a bit sad in this case.

You are assuming a lot on “what’s gonna be” and “what if”

Taking over a code base like AIR is not a simple and easy thing
so in short you doubt Harman before even they showed something

so far, the emergency is the Android 64-bit update and they focus on that,
but I see other people mocking them because they sell a licensing fee before having a web site in place, that’s childish at best

I already said it but the licensing fee is nothing, 0,5% to 1% of revenue is perfectly reasonable

I can see how it can cause issues if you’re not making some revenues and want to remove the splash screen, but then I would say maybe you have not figured out the business part of selling commercial apps or games.

It is a business, whether a web site, an app, a game, etc. you don’t end up earning money without spending money first

you spend money

  • on developer salary
  • on designer salary
  • on software to be able to do the job
  • on training and books etc.
  • on the time it takes to build the product
  • on promotion and advertising
  • on various licensing fees etc.
    art, image, sound, music and various assets

And here I will take a concrete example, I can do gfx/design but I’m particularly slow,
and worst while I’m doing that I got a very hard time to switch between my design-brain and my code-brain.

So if I build all the gfx assets myself, probably gonna take 3 months of work at no cost (my own time so $0 cost)

or I can buy already made assets that I can customise a little like Kenney game assets let’s say $100 cost

or I can pay a freelancer to build those assets, maybe $5000 cost

or I can hire a designer and pay him/her a salary, maybe $50000 x N years cost

But time is also valuable, so 3 months of my time, maybe I will be better off just paying for those assets

Apply the same logic to the AIR SDK.

Oh yeah sure you can build your own engine/framework C++ based and publish to anywhere you want, that would have a big cost in time.

I would argue that using AIR SDK, save a lot of time.

In either case, whether I decide to use AIR or use something else, if I need gfx assets I still have to produce those, nothing is free, either my time or the cost of having those assets produced.


My point is, unless you are producing something trivial, building software has a cost.
At the minimum your time.

If I needed to update an already made with AIR Android app, or if I needed to build from scratch an Android app, picking up AIR would save me time and money.

At this point you compare how much time and money you save using AIR,
vs paying a licensing fee for AIR 33.

Ok … It’s gonna be a business lessons so?.. I prefer not to argue any more on this topic. You have your point of view that’s great but let’s see the big picture:
Unity ask for fees from 100 K revenue… which let all students and other very little developper in confident with the fact they would grow and pay a bit later.

You explain we are in front of a 7 B revenues company with Harman, so why the hell can’t they wait before to" put a splash screen or pay…" .
A debate on their business model and what are the perspectives for them and the community in the current IDE ecosystem would be appreciated instead of this kind of business lesson for dummies .

Thanks

and you have a free tier for the AIR 33 SDK

you don’t want to talk about business, but I can tell you that
Harman is also free to do whatever they want when it come to business

they are the one who have paid the very expensive license to Adobe
to have the right to access, modify, update, redistribute, ec. the sources of the AIR SDK and publish it

so who are you to tell them how to do business?

what I understand is you don’t want any splash screen and not pay any licensing fee
so basically you are complaining because it’s not free anymore

You do Shortcuts…

I’m nothing more than a customer you are right… so “shut up and take my money”, isn’t it?

if you do business selling an app or a game
I really don’t see how the licensing fee is too much

Seems that you want to understand what you want so … fair enough

then explain better, what are you complaining about exactly ?

You are seeing this only as complains since the begining, reboot the mindset on it.
It 's not that painfull to question whether the Business model proposed is viable or not in short and long term. And visibilly your are not neutral on this problematic.

1st, if you want to continue this convo you do it in this thread
and you stop trying to hijack the other thread

2nd, whatever your opinion about the business model of the AIR 33 SDK
you should bring better arguments because so far I just see negativity and complaining

you don’t propose any alternative or other price range, you don’t explain why you’re not happy

and yeah off course I’m not neutral, I’m done sitting by the side of the road letting
some haters criticising a good tech and spreading bullshit

you can not have your cake and eat it

for a very long time Adobe catered for AIR and released for free
but for some that was not enough they had to constantly criticize them
constantly diminishing their work, emphasising way to much lack of communication etc.

OK, fine
now someone else (Harman) is taking over and will keep AIR updated and maintained,
and yeah, too bad, you will have to pay for it if you make some revenues with it

and now some people criticising that too
so my guess is that some people are just here to criticise and ruin the stuff for others

it does seem they enjoy trolling the place up, not interested in building software or talking about the tech itself

this forum exists to talk about building software with ActionScript
not to list the complaints and grievance of bitter people telling us we should all drop AS3 and move to something else like Unity3D or whatever

and all those people can go F… themselves

so yeah I’m not neutral, so what?

1 Like

yeah let’s talk about the tech itselft then.
It seems not appropriate to speak about viability of this pricing news , neither business model on this forum. That’s kind of biased. don’t take it bad. I understand you defend everything here.
Agreed