 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / February 2007Steve Jobs Dismisses Java As "Heavyweight" in an Age of Lightweight Computing
"These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same month, Steve Jobs stands up, and declares – referring to language support on the new Apple iPhone – “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain.” And in the same month a company like Backbase, whose AJAX JSF Edition is aimed at “Java developers who want to leverage the JSF standard by creating a next generation rich component-based AJAX presentation tier,” wins a 'Technology of the Year Award 2007' in the category 'AJAX Toolkits.'" Full story: http://java.sys-con.com/read/331264.htm Sub: Steve Jobs Dismisses Java .. Well good for him. Go tell someone that cares* what Steve thinks. * e.g. comp.lang.java.advocacy Andrew T. >"These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same month, >Steve Jobs stands up, and declares, referring to language support on >the new Apple iPhone. "Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java >anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain." And he is not a fool, by ANY means. He knows what he is talking about. > And in the same >month a company like Backbase, whose AJAX JSF Edition is aimed at Java >developers who want to leverage the JSF standard by creating a next >generation rich component-based AJAX presentation tier, wins a >'Technology of the Year Award 2007' in the category 'AJAX Toolkits.'" Well... >Full story: >http://java.sys-con.com/read/331264.htm > "These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same month, > Steve Jobs stands up, and declares - referring to language support on > the new Apple iPhone - "Java's not worth building in. Nobody uses Java > anymore. It's this big heavyweight ball and chain." I can see where he is coming from.... who uses Java Applets in web pages anymore? It's mostly Flash and AJAX with the odd Java Applet to do the heavy stuff. > And in the same > month a company like Backbase, whose AJAX JSF Edition is aimed at "Java [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Full story: > http://java.sys-con.com/read/331264.htm > "These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same month, > Steve Jobs stands up, and declares – referring to language support on > the new Apple iPhone – “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java > anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain.” Java is not much used in desktop apps and web client side. But Java is heavily used in web server side *and* (which is the interesting part) in mobile phones ! Arne Arne Vajhøj schrieb: >> "These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same month, >> Steve Jobs stands up, and declares – referring to language support on >> the new Apple iPhone – “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java >> anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain.” > > Java is not much used in desktop apps and web client side. Hmm, obviously there are different opinions. Hans Muller [1] quotes a study of Evan Data Corporation: "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." Bye Michael [1] <http://weblogs.java.net/blog/hansmuller/archive/2005/10/official_swing.html> > Arne Vajhøj schrieb: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI > development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." More 'lies, damn lies, &' statistics. 19 of 20 jobs in a (OK - my) recent look over the Job site adds were weighted toward servlets and JSP, rather than Swing. So.. that leaves us with 47% of the 5% of app. development that is still targeted at the desktop? Andrew T. >> "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI >> development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > of app. development that is still targeted > at the desktop? Perhaps, but do you think that the rich client market is as less as 5 percent? To my recent look I use much more applications that target the desktop ;) Bye Michael > >> "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI > >> development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Perhaps, but do you think that the rich client market is as less as 5 > percent? Don't know. Note, amongst many other caveat's, that the quoted figures were for 'current development', and therefore ignored existing software that was rich client. > To my recent look I use much more > applications that target the desktop ;) I am not quite clear, does that mean you are? - deploying more to the desktop (for other users) - using more rich client/desktop based applications than web apps., for your own purposes - both In any case, I am in the 'both' category. I deploy using web start, and would probably offer a web start based rich client as a front end to web applications. If it was vital, I might also add a pure HTML web based front end, but only if 'every last client must be supported'. And as a user, with my bandwidth, web-apps (using Ajax and such) can be quite painful. I would far prefer to install a web start based app. once, assuming a download time of ten minutes or less, in preference to using a web-app. that requires 2-3 seconds to refresh each page. Andrew T. Andrew Thompson schrieb: >>>> "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI >>>> development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > ignored existing software that was rich > client. OK. Let me reformulate my position: I believe in the return of the rich client even though not much of the current development doesn't target the desktop. >> To my recent look I use much more >> applications that target the desktop ;) ... > I would far prefer to install a web > start based app. once, assuming a > download time of ten minutes or less, > in preference to using a web-app. > that requires 2-3 seconds to refresh > each page. That's what I mean. The web wasn't made for applications. Of course, there are some that are predestinated for being implemented as web-apps (Pet shops e.g. :)). And I can imagine some situations where I want a web-app. But what's (at least I) called a web-app today is a workaround. The AJAX approach for example is something that wouldn't be needed if there was a technology which overcomes the limitations of HTTP. As long as developers need to use three millions of different technologies to implement workaround-based applications, I'm in doubt that this kind of development will last for long. Web starting (Java) applications could be a solution... Bye Michael > Andrew Thompson schrieb: .. > >>>> "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI > >>>> development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > OK. Let me reformulate my position: I believe in the return of the rich > client OK. Yes, I both understand and agree with that. As browsers change, newer challenges (both with page formatting* and script compatibility) crop up. It is far easier to control the quality of the GUI in a desktop app. Ultimately, there is less overhead to objects transferred client<->server in a Swing app., than HTML, so it is quicker, and there are more options for tranpsorting the data, so compression of the data itself is much easier and more dependable. I think the concentration on browser based apps. will fade. * I say that as I look at GG's WITUN**, which as a combination of its HTML and JS, and my resizing the browser and a slow connection, has compacted the 'message tree' and messages area to a small rectangle on the upper left of the browser*** display area. ** WITUN - Web-interface to Usenet (It is not any sort of official acronym, but I get sick of typing that) *** OK - not so much 'browser' as 'OS component'. Oh, and note that I have reasons for using a WITUN, rather than a dedicated (rich client) news client - reasons not relevant to this thread. Andrew T. Michael Rauscher wrote: > But what's (at least I) called a web-app today is a workaround. > The AJAX approach for example is something that wouldn't be needed > if there was a technology which overcomes the limitations of HTTP. These are really not limitations of HTTP but of the problems HTTP solves, namely uncertain transmission latency or even pathways, and large values for transmission times. I would be interested in how you would do it differently from HTTP. - Lew > Michael Rauscher wrote: >> But what's (at least I) called a web-app today is a workaround. The [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > large values for transmission times. I would be interested in how you > would do it differently from HTTP. One very big limitation in the HTTP protocol is that it is always request from client and response from server. Client polling is a very poor substitute for notification by server. Arne It is defiantly weird times you just have to take a look on Google's GWT(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Google_Web_Toolkit#Google_Web_Toolkit) and Visual WebGui (http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_WebGui) to see the weirdness. I think the weirdness is not Java vs .NET but rather having to program applications using JavaScript,HTML and request/response. That is why frameworks like GWT and VWG are here. Historically applets did not provide a good solution because the were too heavy and lets face it enterprise desktop applications are almost extinct. I was looking for a job lately hoping to find a nice WinForms/ Swing position but nada... all web.. go figure... Ramanjit > It is defiantly weird times .. I suspect you mean 'definitely' weird times? (defiant/definite are separate words, meaning very different things) <http://www.google.com/search?q=definition+defiant> <http://www.google.com/search?q=definition+definite> Andrew T. > I was looking for a job lately hoping to find a nice WinForms/ > Swing position but nada... all web.. go figure... I thought one of the compelling arguments for .NET (against Java, for example) was that the WinForm and web API were drop in identical, so your code would work with either one via polymorphism. Is this not the case? - Oliver >> I was looking for a job lately hoping to find a nice WinForms/ >> Swing position but nada... all web.. go figure... > > I thought one of the compelling arguments for .NET (against Java, for > example) was that the WinForm and web API were drop in identical, so your > code would work with either one via polymorphism. Is this not the case? No. That is not the case. They have some conceptual similarities. But very far from polymorphic drop in. Arne > Arne Vajhøj schrieb: >>> "These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > "Java Swing with 47% use, has surpassed WinForms as the dominant GUI > development toolkit, an increase of 27% since fall 2004." Hm. I do not see many of all these Swing apps. Arne > "These are curious times just now for Java. In one and the same month, > Steve Jobs stands up, and declares – referring to language support on > the new Apple iPhone – “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java > anymore. Java has a heavy presence on the server side at least. I have no idea what Jobs is smoking. > It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain.” > And in the same [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Full story: > http://java.sys-con.com/read/331264.htm Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.