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."Without Adobe Flash player, I wouldn't be able to do my day-to-day functions."
"I am impressed with the tool’s documentation."
"With the alliance with Microsoft, the product is perfectly integrated."
"The UI is really good."
"Adobe Flash is simple and easy-to-use software. It is very familiar and compatible with other Adobe software, making it easier to use."
"ASP.NET is stable. I did not have to do any maintenance on it."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to use."
"The solution has good scalability."
"It is seamless compared to Java or any other technology stack."
"This framework is very easy to use and tweak for our business needs."
"We use ASP.NET to develop web applications and web API. I'm working at a government financial institution in Mexico that helps citizens buy a house"
"One of the most valuable features in ASP.NET is thread management with asynchronous processing. I've been implementing this for a few years and it has proven to be extremely helpful, especially when using a tool that wouldn't have worked without it. It's definitely a fundamental aspect of the platform."
"The solution is easy to integrate and understand. It has a very good user interface and a lot of prebuilt tools, which require a lot less coding if we compare it to other solutions."
"At times it can be slow, but other than that it is a great and helpful product."
"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 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."
"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."
"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."
"Scripted languages like AngularJS and Node.js are much faster than using ASP on the client side."
"The solution's initial setup is intermediate, and it could be improved."
"In addition to the visual aspect, there is a need for ASP.NET to provide a robust visual front end like there was in the past."
"An area for improvement is the structure template."
"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."
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.