基于 HTML 的 AIR 应用程序是否与 Flex AIR 一样快速/强大，或者只是“较小”？兄弟？
我有一个 HTML/JS（YUI 框架）照片管理器，需要访问本地 FS。我应该将 HTML/JS 移至 AIR，还是硬着头皮将其“移植”至 Flex AIR？
我知道营销所说的是什么，但我想要真正的答案——我通过使用 HTML/JS AIR“放弃”了什么？我希望从在构建基于 HTML 的 AIR 应用程序方面拥有丰富经验的人们那里获得一些反馈。
I've got a HTML/JS (YUI framework) photo-organizer that needs access to the local FS. Should I move HTML/JS to AIR, or bite the bullet and "port" it to Flex AIR?
I know what the marketing says, but I want the real answer -- what an I "giving up" by going HTML/JS AIR? I'd like to get some feedback from people with deep experience building HTML-based AIR apps.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
我认为您在使用 HTML AIR 模式时不会遇到很多问题，AIR 在幕后使用 Webkit 引擎 iirc，它可以很好地工作，并且具有与 Flash/Flex 构建的应用程序大部分相同的本机功能。您还将看到 Safari 中的大部分 HTML5 功能。我想说，如果您需要动画，那么 Flash 通常会比 Canvas 运行得更好...有很多 ExtJS 和其他框架在 AIR 上运行的示例。
至于你要放弃什么，我认为从 HTML 到 HTML/AIR 的角度来看你不会失去任何东西。通过使用基于 Flash 的应用程序（而不是直接使用 HTML），您可以获得很多好处。在 Flex 中，特定控件和其他功能比标准 HTML 控件更容易调整。 Flash 中的动画工具要好得多。 ActionScript 与 JS 并不一一对应，因此代码可能存在问题。恕我直言，在 AS 中处理远程内容/数据实际上比 XHR 更好一些，尽管只是在处理 XML 时。
从管理的角度来看，从已编写的应用程序转到带有 HTML 的 AIR 可能是最短的路径。如果您真的需要，您可以稍后进行转换，并且许多底层逻辑都会被解决。无论是最接近您已经经常使用的产品，上市时间都会更短。
I don't think you'll see many issues in using the HTML AIR mode, AIR uses the Webkit engine under the covers iirc, which can work well enough, and has most of the same native features of the Flash/Flex built applications. You'll also see most of the HTML5 features you'd find in Safari. I would say if you need animations that Flash will generally run better than Canvas at this point... There's plenty of examples of ExtJS and other frameworks running on AIR.
As to what you are giving up, I don't think you'd lose anything from an HTML to HTML/AIR standpoint. You could gain a lot of what you gain in having an application in general based in Flash over straight HTML. In flex specifically controls and other features can be more readily tweaked than standard HTML controls. The animation tools in Flash are much nicer. ActionScript doesn't line up to JS on a one to one basis, so there may be issues with code. Dealing with remote content/data is actually a little nicer imho in AS over XHR, though only when dealing with XML.
From an administrative standpoint, going to AIR with HTML from an already written application is probably the shortest path. If you REALLY needed to, you could convert later, and a lot of the underlying logic would be worked out. Time to market would be shorter with whatever is closest to what you are already using more often than not.
事实并非如此，因为 FS 访问可在 HTML/JS 版本中使用。然而，另一条路线确实为应用程序开发提供了一些更多的本机支持——例如动画、更丰富的控件等，否则您将不得不生活。当您转向复杂的应用程序时，您将非常怀念调试器和分析器以及设计视图。另请注意，如果您担心共享源代码，您可能不应该使用 HTML/JS 方式。
Not really, since FS access is available with the HTML/JS version. However, the other route does open up some more native support for application development -- Animation for example, richer controls etc which you will have to live without otherwise. You will greatly miss the debugger and the profiler as also the design view when you move to complex applications. Also, note that if you are worried about sharing your source you probably shouldn't use the HTML/JS way.