Replace me

var movie = new Gordon.Movie(“Chatbot.swf”, {id: “your_stage”, width: 480, height: 320});

but it is not working though on my ipad.

Please help me regarding this issue.

this post explain my point of view about Flash vs. Web Standards: Sympathy for the Devil. I think that every Flash hater should read it.

PS: just because your site is made with HTML+JS doesn’t mean that it is more accessible than a Flash website…

That’s because people get excited about proofs of concept because… they prove concepts. It’s an example of what can be done, and a lens on what more can be built upon it.

I do (and also like) more HTML/CSS/JavaScript development than Flash but for really complex projects with many developers using a language that has AS3/Haxe/Java/C# features is way better than using JavaScript just think about GWT and try to understand why they choose Java over JavaScript…

It’s really more a matter of preference than “better”. GWT is really the worst example you could have chosen, as it demonstrates perfectly that it’s a matter of preference, not functionality unavailable to Javascript: GWT produces Javascript code, as jhiswin said. If you prefer the Java “way of doing things” over Javascript, go ahead and use GWT. But unless you’re sending applets over the wire, we’ll both be producing Javascript one way or another.

I personally prefer the Javascript language. I like its simplicity and power. I like its syntax. I like it’s OO model. I like that it’s the “native” language of the web. And I can do just as much with it as anyone can do in GWT.

The same argument holds for Haxe.

C# and AS3 are a little different in that you can deploy them in Silverlight and Flash runtimes, respectively. Otherwise the argument above applies to C# and AS3 as well: they’re all capable, it’s a matter of what you prefer to write. But ultimately the time is coming where those runtime environments’ advantages are going to be pretty minimal. The only real advantages they have are performance—where Javascript is rapidly gaining, thanks to the efforts of Apple, Google and Mozilla—and API—where Javascript is also rapidly gaining, thanks to the efforts of the HTML5 standards process.

And those runtime environments have some pretty serious drawbacks too. Microsoft is sort of new in this space, but Adobe (and Macromedia) have had years to fix the accessibility, stability and resource overuse problems with Flash. The HTML/CSS/Javascript world is far ahead on this point, and getting better.

There are only really a handful of good reasons to use Flash (or, to a much lesser extent, Silverlight) in a new web app today:

1. Improved API access in Javascript is inconsistent across platforms.
2. Performance for an increasingly narrowing set of functionality.
3. Flexible audio/video playback without much fuss.

#1 is being mostly resolved as we speak, and may be a non-issue within a year or two. #2 is being resolved as we speak, and will be a non-issue within a year or two. #3 is the albatross around the open web’s neck. (Apple needs to get over themselves and support OGG.)

For better or worse, IE 9 is coming down the line with a Javascript engine that performs well, some CSS 3 support, and probably canvas. This will almost definitely be the nail in the coffin of IE 6-7, driving a deluge of “killer apps” that will promote all but the corporate sector to upgrade to modern browsers.

In short, a time where client-side language choice is only a matter of preference is basically visible on the horizon.

So write Java if you like. But don’t fool yourself into thinking you’re getting a leg up on Javascript.

I guess I’ll try using it with http://code.google.com/p/freemovie-js/ which is a SWF compiler that I ported to JS a bit ago.

@cosmincimpoi:
Optimization seems to not have been considered in the creation of the code. For example, the tiger example uses CPU even when idling. If more people with reasonable skills got interested and helped improve the code, this will be usable, even if it’s only for very simple use cases.

@millermedeiros:
The problem isn’t due to lack of feature support. Try it yourself: create a very simple flash movie (just a shape).
Strangely, it will work if you inject the shape directly into one of the original flash files.
When I get the time, I’m going to investigate the code to see if I can find out why this is. Some other people should also do so.
Your argument for language makes no sense. AS3 is based on ECMAScript. GWT compiles to Javascript.

Some people are complaining that it doesn’t run their SWF files.. That’s because Gordon only supports the basic drawing commands: SWF tag support. Try exporting the swf as the oldest version possible and make sure that no AS is required.

If you want to do some simple vector animations (and don’t want to use Flash) why don’t you just use SVG animation? Using the canvas is almost the same as using an animated GIF…

I do (and also like) more HTML/CSS/JavaScript development than Flash but for really complex projects with many developers using a language that has AS3/Haxe/Java/C# features is way better than using JavaScript, just think about GWT and try to understand why they choose Java over JavaScript…

Things can coexist, it’s a good thing that Flash, Silverlight, Unity3D, exists.. It’s always pushing the web further and it’s a good thing that JavaScript is trying to catch up.

Which makes me wonder… has anyone seen any work being done on an IDE similar to Adobe Flash but in a Web App and for Canvas?

@rdza: if you’re going to rely on plugins to get IE to behave, you might as well use chrome frame.

The planned canvas implementation will probably be faster than this.