Comments on: JavaFX, why? http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/ Things I like to talk about programming Sat, 29 Aug 2009 10:42:21 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: rogerpadilla http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/#comment-30 rogerpadilla Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:12:28 +0000 http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/?p=101#comment-30 I resume it: JavaFX (TheLanguage) = Ideal combination of agility and naturalness. Sure, you can can obtain with others languages the same result which you get with JavaFX. The question is, would you obtain it with the same levels of agility and naturalness? I resume it: JavaFX (TheLanguage) = Ideal combination of agility and naturalness.

Sure, you can can obtain with others languages the same result which you get with JavaFX. The question is, would you obtain it with the same levels of agility and naturalness?

]]> By: rogerpadilla http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/#comment-29 rogerpadilla Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:06:02 +0000 http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/?p=101#comment-29 Unfortunately, the things always happens step by step. I think any language (even C#), has left the ring with a full IDE support. Sun has started correctly bet by providing support from NetBeans, which as its time, is beginning to leave behind it to Eclipse in almost all areas. The main strength of JavaFX is the speed and the naturalness (in an ideal combination) with it lets you create and maintain the projects you created with, whether GUIs, animations, graphics, and so on, even a mixture of all. So, its main strength is the speed you get by use it. Unfortunately, the things always happens step by step. I think any language (even C#), has left the ring with a full IDE support. Sun has started correctly bet by providing support from NetBeans, which as its time, is beginning to leave behind it to Eclipse in almost all areas.

The main strength of JavaFX is the speed and the naturalness (in an ideal combination) with it lets you create and maintain the projects you created with, whether GUIs, animations, graphics, and so on, even a mixture of all. So, its main strength is the speed you get by use it.

]]> By: Jacek http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/#comment-28 Jacek Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:50:23 +0000 http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/?p=101#comment-28 http://javabuilders.org I am busy working on an all-Java alternative :-) http://javabuilders.org

I am busy working on an all-Java alternative :-)

]]> By: Oziel Jose http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/#comment-27 Oziel Jose Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:46:16 +0000 http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/?p=101#comment-27 I disagree, from time to time something new have to come along, and although the future of javafx is uncertain, the initiative of sun is correct, fix java eventually would be too problematic, do you think that c# is the right path to take in the innovations filed? give it a couple of years and you'll see... I disagree, from time to time something new have to come along, and although the future of javafx is uncertain, the initiative of sun is correct, fix java eventually would be too problematic, do you think that c# is the right path to take in the innovations filed? give it a couple of years and you’ll see…

]]> By: Olivier Allouch http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/#comment-26 Olivier Allouch Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:45:15 +0000 http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/?p=101#comment-26 Jacek, you're so right. The messages are clear: "Don't complain, you've got Painters in Swing. Now go and maintain it yourself." The real fight is for saving UI in Java. Not putting closures can be understood, even if there's time to fix (in BGGA) the issues that Joshua Bloch pointed, even if he doesn't want it fixed, he prefers his solution. But...no properties ! It's clearly to attract developers to JavaFX, which is elegant and all, but some don't want/need it ! Now, I don't think that JavaFX will be a failure. My last hope is JDK 8 (or a "temporary" fork). The next episode will be when they release their new UI components for JavaFX. We'll see if it's usable in Java, even if it will be less nice, less cool, less... I wouldn't mind seeing a line counting comparison. All I want is keep coding in Java. Olivier Allouch Jacek, you’re so right. The messages are clear: “Don’t complain, you’ve got Painters in Swing. Now go and maintain it yourself.”

The real fight is for saving UI in Java. Not putting closures can be understood, even if there’s time to fix (in BGGA) the issues that Joshua Bloch pointed, even if he doesn’t want it fixed, he prefers his solution.
But…no properties ! It’s clearly to attract developers to JavaFX, which is elegant and all, but some don’t want/need it !

Now, I don’t think that JavaFX will be a failure. My last hope is JDK 8 (or a “temporary” fork).

The next episode will be when they release their new UI components for JavaFX. We’ll see if it’s usable in Java, even if it will be less nice, less cool, less…
I wouldn’t mind seeing a line counting comparison. All I want is keep coding in Java.

Olivier Allouch

]]> By: Jacek http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/javafx-why/#comment-25 Jacek Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:17:42 +0000 http://rogerpadilla.wordpress.com/?p=101#comment-25 Sorry, I strongly disagree. Most of the good stuff in JavaFX is the media and scenegraph API, not the language itself. A few months of hardcore enhancements to Java instead (e.g. proper properties / databinding / closures) and we could have done the same in Java instead of forcing a new language down everybody's throat. JavaFX (the language, not the API) is a colossal waste of critically needed resources that should have been put into enhancing Java itself and keeping it up to date vs. its competitors. Sun really blew it on this one. And the lack of enthusiasm for JavaFX is proof that most folks would have preferred core Java to be enhanced instead. Sorry, I strongly disagree. Most of the good stuff in JavaFX is the media and scenegraph API, not the language itself. A few months of hardcore enhancements to Java instead (e.g. proper properties / databinding / closures) and we could have done the same in Java instead of forcing a new language down everybody’s throat.

JavaFX (the language, not the API) is a colossal waste of critically needed resources that should have been put into enhancing Java itself and keeping it up to date vs. its competitors.

Sun really blew it on this one. And the lack of enthusiasm for JavaFX is proof that most folks would have preferred core Java to be enhanced instead.

]]>