We performed a comparison between Adobe Flash and ASP.NET based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two .NET Development Services solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With the alliance with Microsoft, the product is perfectly integrated."
"The UI is really good."
"Without Adobe Flash player, I wouldn't be able to do my day-to-day functions."
"I am impressed with the tool’s documentation."
"Adobe Flash is simple and easy-to-use software. It is very familiar and compatible with other Adobe software, making it easier to use."
"It's a pretty stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of ASP.NET is the support of multiple platforms with ASP.NET Core. Additionally, Azure integrates well with ASP.NET and Visual Studio."
"The most valuable features are ease of use, scalability, and flexibility."
"I have found the entity framework to be a valuable feature. The authentication layer is amazing as well. ASP.NET has a vibrant community, and as a result, we haven't had the need to contact technical support."
"The most valuable feature of ASP.NET is its visual side, which makes building Windows forms applications visually efficient."
"The solution is very easy to maintain because UI management is simple and many libraries are available."
"The solution has good scalability."
"ASP.NET's best features are its application structure and API testing."
"At times it can be slow, but other than that it is a great and helpful product."
"It would be nice to see Adobe Flash as a separate application instead of embedding it with other apps. I want the product to be a simple app. The product’s scalability is also one of its weak points."
"Adobe can focus on the gaming side mode."
"It would be ideal if there was more research on the product available."
"It would be nice to have more integration and faster integration."
"It could use better reporting and documentation."
"It would be beneficial if Microsoft provided more support for certain technologies, such as Blazor, in the form of basic components. As it stands, some reliance on third-party tools may be necessary. Having more support from Microsoft for these technologies would make it easier for users to build and maintain applications. For example, the grids, date pickers, and dropdown lists would be components to add."
"In the future, I would like to see more AI and machine learning technologies made available in libraries."
"ASP.NET is a very slow tool, and it should be faster."
"I'd like to be able to run any application from a specific point instead of compiling all the code. For example, if I want to test function A, I should be able to test it even if my other functions aren't working. Like in SQL, you provide parameters to the function, and it executes. I'd like to see something similar in ASP.NET."
"ASP.NET is not the best solution for all companies looking to implement a solution like it."
"The capability related to Python needs to be improved."
"Sometimes it can be really difficult to debug using ASP.NET. When there's an issue, trying to find out the cause is not always easy, so debugging is the top area for improvement, in my opinion."
Adobe Flash is ranked 4th in .NET Development Services with 5 reviews while ASP.NET is ranked 3rd in .NET Development Services with 30 reviews. Adobe Flash is rated 9.0, while ASP.NET is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Adobe Flash writes "Easy to set up with good functionality and adaptability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ASP.NET writes "Beneficial thread management, and asynchronous processing, and template-driven setup". Adobe Flash is most compared with Microsoft Silverlight and Adobe AIR, whereas ASP.NET is most compared with SharePoint Designer and Microsoft Silverlight. See our ASP.NET vs. Adobe Flash report.
See our list of best .NET Development Services vendors.
We monitor all .NET Development Services reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.