Comments on: Betting on JavaFX Is a Bad Bet Indeed

By: FONForum.org :: Pogledajte temu - Dobre knjige-jasno,primenjivo

FONForum.org :: Pogledajte temu - Dobre knjige-jasno,primenjivo — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 00:03:40 +0000

[...] i zato mi se svidela. Kako su primenjeni zakoni na konkretnom primeru moÅ¾ete proÄitati u tekstu: http://www.innovationontherun.com/betting-on-javafx-is-a-bad-bet-indeed/ Knjigu moÅ¾ete skinuti sa ed2k mreÅ¾e._________________RMS: If you teach students to use [...]

By: Rob Di Marco

Rob Di Marco — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:37:05 +0000

@Tim

OpenLazlo is an interesting toolkit and has been around for a much longer time but there is no way it will get the marketing, publicity, investment from 3rd party integrators that AIR, Silverlight, or JavaFX would.

The great disappointment to me is Sun’s continual failure to innovate and effectively market the Java language. All of the innovation in Java seems to come from third parties. For example, much of the EJB 3 push came from Hibernate and JBoss who saw a better way. I get irritated when I see other platforms doing more interesting things (e.g. Silverlight and LINQ from Microsoft) and feel that Java is stagnating.

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 06:10:14 +0000

Don’t forget OpenLaszlo. It’s mature, open-source, cross-platform, and pretty slick. I have to agree with you about JavaFX though. I’ll never forgive Sun for dropping the ball with Applets. Think what the web would look like today if they had been able to make Applets achieve critical mass 12 years ago (God has it been that long?)

By: Vijay

Vijay — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:21:10 +0000

The big difference between JavaFX and Adobe AIR is that you use web technologies (HTML, Javascript, AJAX, Flash) to write AIR application. If you are looking at similar solution to Adobe AIR on Java stack, Dekoh does it.

Vijay
Dekoh

By: Rob Di Marco

Rob Di Marco — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 11:01:31 +0000

@WARPEDJAVAGUY
My main point is that JavaFX is a nicer way of building Java applications, but does not by itself add functionality, as opposed to AIR and Silverlight which bring with them significantly new functionality.

I agree the race is just starting, but Sun seems to be three steps behind already. It is very hard to overcome being the third player in any market, especially a niche market like RIA.

By: WarpedJavaGuy

WarpedJavaGuy — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 01:01:37 +0000

> “JavaFX is basically a nicer way to write applets. There is no focus on offline applications, no focus on media..”

*Not true!* Applets only run in browsers. JavaFX can run on multiple devices and desktops and is a nicer way to develop rich content applications including online media.

I agree with some of the marketing points, but the race has only just started.

By: Rob Di Marco

Rob Di Marco — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 22:18:21 +0000

@SWASHBUCKLER
You are correct, I misspoke. As your reference indicates, Silverlight is the wrong technology for offline communication, Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is the correct technology for online/offline communication. WPF uses a superset of Silverlight functionality and I believe that Silverlight was originally a project under WPF until it was spun out on its own. So while not a part of Silverlight directly, it would seem that they have at least been considering this issue.

That being said, I do think offline/online communication will be a driving force behind developer adoption

By: Swashbuckler

Swashbuckler — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:14:23 +0000

Hmmm… you say “There are two motivators … and better online/offline experiences. Adobe and Microsoft get this …”

Yet, Microsoft’s Silverlight does NOT support offline. Are you aware of that?

“Silverlight is designed for Web page content that is connected to its host (it will not work offline)…”

Source: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb428859.aspx