Pete Freitag Pete Freitag

Macromedia Flex Hosting?

Updated on December 06, 2023
By Pete Freitag

I was wondering why there aren't any hosting providers that offer Macromedia Flex hosting (or should I say Adobe Flex hosting). It turns out that it is against the Flex EULA:

The Macromedia Flex End User License Agreement (EULA) does not currently allow organizations to host licenses on behalf of a third party. Via the Flex FAQ.

Shared Flex hosting accounts would be a great way to get small shops into Flex. Are hosting companies not interested? Is Macromedia being too greedy with Flex?

macromedia flex ria hosting

Macromedia Flex Hosting? was first published on April 20, 2005.

If you like reading about macromedia, flex, ria, or hosting then you might also like:

Discuss / Follow me on Twitter ↯


Macromedia's site is inconsistent on this issue. Yes, there's the EULA, but see also:
by Mike Klepper on 04/20/2005 at 1:07:37 PM UTC
I heard they were working on it a couple of months ago, but I think they are having so much success with Flex that there isn't a need to make it accessible to such smaller companies & hosting providers yet.

Everyone bitched about Flashcom being so expensive, but I pay $10 a month, and Google Ads pays for that 10 times over. would rock, though. I can't charge for work via my NCL license.
by JesterXL on 04/20/2005 at 1:07:41 PM UTC
And you can forget about *anything* happening with Flex hosting until *after* the merger is completed. Ugh!
by Leif on 04/20/2005 at 1:55:57 PM UTC
Boy, that's strange. I'd love to know what MM's reasoning is for that policy.
by Steve Ray on 04/20/2005 at 4:07:49 PM UTC
I'm very interested in finding partners for ecommerce Flex hosting & development. Where there's a will...there's a way!
by speedyskis on 05/07/2005 at 8:19:45 AM UTC
I could not find a hosting client either so I set up a flex hosting service, email me if you need it jbranson(at)
by jamie branson on 10/25/2005 at 8:21:21 PM UTC
Flex hosting is sorely needed. We just cannot expect the client to purchase our web application for th 15,000 licensing fee
by marty on 03/06/2006 at 10:28:24 AM UTC
I'd like to assume that this is an issue only with 1.5. For most apps, obviously, you're not going to need the Enterprise Services for version 2, so you can just plop the resulting .swf file on the web server and be done with it. That can't possibly violate the EULA, and the IDE is going to be priced at under a thousand dollars.
by Steve Ray on 03/06/2006 at 3:35:33 PM UTC
Exactly how many times do we have to say that A SERVER IS NO LONGER REQUIRED? You don't even have to buy the IDE that'll cost under a grand. Code without it and compile it yourself. Read, get informed, and then make an informed decision. Yeesh.
by Steve Ray on 06/19/2006 at 1:42:22 PM UTC are a bit on the expensive side. I also tried their hosting out last week. Not bad at all, but their support is a bit scratchy - good one minute, bad the next 24 hours! That was enough for me to drop them.
I have now decided to go with I have checked them out quite thoroughly the past few days. They have all-round better options, and the cost is about 33% less. Their pre-sales support to-date has been quite good too. One thing to be aware of though. If you want Flex hosting for FDS (Flex Data Services) data-push. It is not available with either Fast Hit or CrystalTech. It seems you need a dedicated server for that. By the way, as a bonus, CrystalTech run their shared hosting with Flex on ColdFusion MX 7.0.2 Enterprise. Flex is also available on all their ColdFusion plans including the USD $16 something one - not that they mention it.
As a tip for anyone selling Flex hosting. They should mention the words; Flex and 7.2 and 7.0.2 and if running CF Enterprise, definitely the word 'Enterprise' too. We might all be able to find them then and they will get a lot more clients. It seems that Fast Hit are the only ones that totally realise this.
by Chris Bowyer on 04/21/2007 at 4:16:51 AM UTC