Link Details

I can't understand how people vote this up... This is one of the poorest interviews (or is it a debate?) that I've ever read. I stopped after the AS vs. JS section as it was just too dumb. "Open Up" ActionScript? It's a bloody ECMA spec. Google EcmaScript 4 draft. Adobe's the only one who ever implemented it.

And as for performance, the discussion was highly subjective, opinionated, had no facts and was full of cute little anecdotes and quotes... but no material or apparent expertise. The only argument at the end of the day was: "premature optimization is bad" ... in other words, yeah, ActionScript is faster, the language is better (it's not only strongly typed, it's dynamic as well -- types are optional) -- but we have no argument, so let's just fill space. It's like saying "it's okay that JavaScript is slow, it doesn't matter" ... but you can bet once it's faster, the benchmarks and Adobe bashing will be rampant.

Also, it's not just about JavaScript itself. You have to consider canvas and other elements of HTML5, as well as specific browser implementations or even operating systems! There's a HUGE difference in performance between Chrome on PC and Chrome on a Mac. There shouldn't be, but there is. Try Angry Birds HD for Chrome on your Mac... 5 fps... enjoy.

This is a waste of time.

I am afraid you did not get the point of the discussion. First it is about people with different opinions. If you want to have your opinion respected, you should respect the opinion of other people even when it is different than yours.

Second it was mentioned that most of the any performance differences of the JIT engines is not noticeable because either JavaScript or ActionScript code is just awaiting for the hardware to perform graphics operations or some other I/O activity. That is why most of the time it does not matter any performance differences when executing pure CPU tasks.

Other than that, in a later segment it was discussed the differences of smoothness between Impress.js animations (JavaScript) versus Prezi (Flash). But since you say you stopped listening you may have not realized that you are in agreement with some of the participant opinions.

The bottom line, relax, opinions are like faces, each one has their own. There is plenty of room for people with different opinions. This podcast provides that.

There is so much misinformation on this subject that it is very frustrating. I have customers and executives asking us for HTML5 versions of games and software, and the technology isn't even remotely comparable. It's not even close. This is just another example fueling the misinformation. Sorry, that's my opinion. You can't post articles without risking criticism. Nothing personal.

No problem with criticism at all. Actually I love criticism because that may help me to realize points I have not realized in the first place. The podcast even encourages people to express their agreement or disagreement.

However, what I am realizing is first, that you misunderstood 3 people that are not even really agreeing between themselves, and second you seem to have a need to post aggressive comments in public against other people just because you disagree.

Maybe if you try to listen with more calm, you get a different point of view you are getting now.

There was nothing personal in nature in my criticism. Yes, it was a strong opinion... but good lord. Really? You're defending your post by making me out to be a troll making personal attacks? Get off your high horse man. I thought this interview sucked. I wish all the best for you in making the next one better.

There still seems to be a misunderstanding but I am afraid it is not worth clarifying further because I would be repeating myself. I was not defending the post but rather clarifying that it is just a discussion between 3 people that do not exactly have the same opinion. You just generalized and criticized the whole post and whoever voted on it just because you disagreed with some of the participants.

Other than that, if is there anything that makes you "a troll making personal attacks" (just to use your own words) it is certainly not what I said, but rather the aggressive words that you used in first place to express your disagreement.

There are plenty of ways to express disagreement without being aggressive. Maybe your are not aggressive by nature, but that is the impression that you passed the way you expressed. If that was not the intention, maybe you can use different wording in the future. Just an intentionally constructive opinion, with which you do not have to agree of course.