Comments on: Metaliq Components (finally getting the love they need)

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 18:55:29 +0000

Hey Timbo,

Actually Grant Skinner did all of the original code for the component set (originally called GLIC) and used Metaliq to handle marketing and support. So that is EXACTLY what they were there for originally.

Quote from Grant:
“I did not want to turn gskinner.com into a full-time marketing/support engine for glic, so I had to identify and establish a deal with a partner I felt would do justice to the component set, and I think we have one in Metaliq.”

By: timbo

timbo — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 08:04:33 +0000

Whatever you think of their business plan, the Metaliq folks do some very good development. I don’t think there is any need for concern regarding Flash 9 components. Metaliq is there to code, not head up customer service.

By: Colin

Colin — Sat, 09 Dec 2006 21:28:27 +0000

if you have any questions or comments about the metaliq components you can contact me directly.

colin [at] metaliq [dot] com

We are providing the source now upon purchase of the mCOM components or if you have already bought the components we will give you the source etc. Should you have any concerns please let me know directly.

Thanks,
Colin
Metaliq

By: Derek Vadneau

Derek Vadneau — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 22:39:13 +0000

And it’s great that you’ve done that. It’s one of the reasons I like the Flash/Flex community so much: people give.

I’m sure there are quite a few mCom users that are thanking you right now.

mCom should be thanking you as well

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:03:19 +0000

Hey Derek,

I definitely don’t think that Metaliq’s sudden interest is a coincidence… I’m just letting people know about this interest. It doesn’t seem like they are going out of their way to notify their current user base.

By: Derek Vadneau

Derek Vadneau — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 18:29:05 +0000

I never purchased mCom because of the problems people described with Metaliq. The component set looks decent, although without source code I’d rather use the V2 components. Why? I can make modifications when I need to. No component set is going to be perfect for all of your projects. Plus I’d rather not get involved with a company that treats their customers the way they have.

When I heard Metaliq was going to be responsible for the components going into Flash 9 I nearly cried. I’m all for Grant and his team taking it on, but involving Metaliq seems like such a dumb move. Why would Adobe involve themselves with a company that neglects their user base? Luckily for Metaliq they won’t be the ones supporting Flash 9 or we’d all be in trouble.

You think Metaliq’s sudden interest in their customers is a coincidence?

I’m still a little baffled by Adobe’s choice here. But I’m not running a multi-million(billion?) dollar company either.

By: Abdul Qabiz

Abdul Qabiz — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 16:34:38 +0000

We bought it this year and we had bad experience for the reasons mentioned in your post.

Even though Metaliq is light weight I would not call it more than bunch of components. To me it’s not really a good framework where you can write other components on top of it…Specially, it was impossible without source-code. Since we bought it and were serious to use it I was forced to learn it’s architecture using ASV (www.buraks.com/asv/ is a great tool and worth mentioning here).

Anyways, we dropped it just after evaluating it. That means, Metaliq components missed a chance to be used in one of the complex application we have been building. We came up with our own framework and all of our components are (would be) based on our own home grown framework…

It’s good to know that Metaliq learnt from their mistake and now shipping source-code and good documentation. Had they done it earlier, they would have larger customer base…

Thanks for your post, it’s indeed useful review. Otherwise I would have not known about this

Regards,

-abdul