I’ve announced here last year Jaspal was talking the improvements on their existing platform to create a well-formatted platform after 18 months of research according their blog.
I downloaded the Zinc 3.0 for Windows platform and take a test, read the entire “what’s new in Zinc 3.0″ to see what big features Zinc has that compete againt AIR 1.0 release.
Here’s my notes.
Cross-operating system
Zinc 3.0 – Windows (xp, Vista),Mac OS X, Linux
AIR Beta 3 – Windows and Mac OS X
Zinc 3.0 is targeting a universal desktop market work, with that Zinc 3 can deploy for linux witch AIR Beta 3 still doesn’t have the support, in my view is a great advantages that AIR 2.0 could bring to developers.
PDF support
Now Zinc 3.0 brings into their platform and entire API for read PDF, as you can see in their on-line documentation.
AIR Beta 3 still doesn’t bring to developers the original idea of aggregating the two world of PDF and SWF player inside a one desktop runtime. Maybe the team lead the gaps on first release or keep in secret until they reveal features hidden.
Universal Client vs. Deployable OS Version
Zinc 3.0 have the ability to create deployed versions for (windows, mac and linux), witch is cool, you can create both on windows or mac and exchange deployed version for both or even linux.
This architecture leverage against many perspectives, multi-access OS system not only directories but serial-ports, disk access, memory usage, network devices, available also in a mac shell for example.
AIR is great, deployed very stick light weight applications universal and distributes own application on a runtime of 10mb (still light weight), supports Windows and Mac, and a good view on that, is because Adobe folks is growing in efforts to stabilizes in a solid platform. The architecture in well, is very organized but some folks still trolls out the AIR and say that AIR is afraid of certain circumstances of system access. Despite this isolate event, AIR still rocks because of simplicity I don’t need to create a deployed version of each OS system I will use, in my view the Zinc maybe 4.0 could get the jump into this or so.
HTML engine
Zinc 3.0 still uses IE engine, that’s completly stack overflow of memory usage or blows up if the users has sniffers on engine to pop-up’s nudes girls on it. That’s I was in hope to get into the version 3.0 a gecko of mozilla but no lucky yet.
AIR with Webkit impress me with the same resolution of Safari and Opera rendering, the HTML component is still thin with not much implementation, but I believe they will get more deep on next versions.
SWF compatibilities
Zinc 3.0 aims to bring 100% full support on Swf9 in Windows and Mac I supposed to be right, because in their documentation they says:
Adobe Flash 9 Compatible
Zinc™ 3.0 is 100% compatible with Flash 9 on Windows, Mac OSX and Linux! This means you can start working with the latest release of Flash without the worry of compatibility.
In real scenario Flash Player 9 for linux is still in Beta and has some incompatibilities with some linux distributions. Maybe they fix soon this unknown expression.
AIR has 100% for Windows and MAC ability to access full API even with some non-finish for Linux Support player that delayed according to their FAQ for linux users.
API and Technologies
Zinc 3.0 has only one option to create desktop alike 2.0 applications, Flex/Flash (Actionscript1,2,3) support. Even they have plug-in based micro architecture to create extensions in C++/Cococa and Delphi, but a Web developer who want to make advantages of Web and Desktop together will need to learn those in short time.
AIR has the following support for create desktop alike 2.0 applications (Flash/Flex, HTML and Ajax), which in this aspect gives to the developer the ability to create from scratch applications using combined technology or isolated usage.
IDE
Zinc 3.0 releases together a new improved IDE, with many features, you only see those features if you direct download the Zinc 3.0 to see yourself.
AIR Beta 3 – has Flash IDE ability, Dreamweaver ability, Aptana IDE and Flex Builder to create applications, giving again to the developer a choice of its. But still get strong because of the technologies able to deploy applications. Zinc 3.0 IDE rocks comparing their previously IDE.
Transparency
Zinc 3.0 – Has full access for transparency like full UI Change.
AIR – have the same ability, with more options to skin like Degrafa framework.
[Updated]
Prices
Zinc 3.0 you have to pay $349.00 to get access their technology. It’s a good deal comparing certain other tools that makes the same thing.
AIR – the engine and business model is free, but to develop any application you have to pay, Flex Builder is a little in desavantage in price comparing with Zinc 3.0 IDE, but remember that I still need Flex Builder to deploy a version in my binary .swf9 to create what clients needs.
Multidmedia did a great work and put a tremendous efforts in Zinc 3.0, for sure they have 270.000 world wide developers that will love.
AIR still aims and involves people and companies all over the world, but until they release the 1.0 they gain more space on market. Do you still remember the guy behind scene?
Twitter Updates
8 Comments
witch is a woman who is mean and casts spells…
You may want to change witch to which.
Nice review. Might have wanted to add in that Zinc costs over 800 dollars to do what they say. Air is free.
no doubts Zinc is great piece of software, and no doubts AIR will develop in fast pace
there is also a slight (or big) difference – MDM Zinc is not free and AIR is free
I like Zinc, but I have much greater expectations and beliefs in AIR
I think everyone is also forgetting that you CAN’T make standalone apps with AIR that work on CD or DVD. Thats VERY important to freelancers like myself who develop cd-roms for clients. I like air, but I love Zinc!
“AIR – the engine and business model is free, but to develop any application you have to pay”
Not true. The Java-based SDK will be free, and run on all three major platforms.
Sure, Zinc 3.0 looks great when you check out the “What’s new” page; but honestly, how many of those features are bug-free and tested to the point that Adobe has tested AIR?
I used Zinc 2.x extensively for two plus years and got incredibly sick and tired of making hacks and workarounds for when said “features” didn’t work the way they were supposed to or lead to memory leaks or other problems.
Honestly, I’m a little scared to drop the money for Zinc 3.0, especially if it’s as buggy as 2.0 was.
to Cahlan: so why not just download the trial version and evaluate it first? If you had to Pay for Air, would you just go ahead and buy it, or would you evaluate it first?…
Now that air has gone out of beta, I will be using it more for my “smaller” projects, but Zinc 3 is really leaps and bounds ahead of where zinc 2.5 ever was, and has air beat for building CD apps.
Peace.
AIR is free… for now. I’m guessing the next versions will come out with a “Basic” and a “Pro” release, with certain limitations around the basic and a heftier pricetag on the “Pro”. I’m a bit skeptical that Adobe is going to maintain a free SDK forever, but it’s clever getting early adoption with a nice free carrot initially. Honestly, if they had wanted to keep it free, they would have made it open source. Come on guys, Adobe is the Microsoft of the media industry. You can’t tell me that their products are priced affordably or that they don’t try cornering the industry by creating proprietary standards. Welcome to business in the real world.
My main gripe with AIR is the runtime download. It’s fine in countries with super fast cheap internet, but in the developing world, it’s a grudge download. Also, future updates to the runtime will add yet another app to the list of updates asking for more bandwidth.
But it’s early days still, let’s wait and see what happens…
AIR 1.5
fully free , you need to pay for the IDE but otherwise you may wish to go for Eclipse /Aptana Plugin which is also free . AIR Apps run smoothly on WIN/MAC OSX/All Linux flavours . With the time the number of AIR apps as well as Developers are growing day by day and support for AJAX/JavaScript makes ti far more better than others…
Thanx!
Amar shukla
One Trackback
[...] Igor has posted a nice initial comparison of these applications that allow creating web-enabled desktop applications using Flash and Flex. [...]