 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / March 2008C# versus Java for Interactive Images
I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for interactivion with images. I would like any views from Java developers why Java is used over C# as that will help me decide what language to use. I code normally in C# but I know some Java. C# allows Mouse events and the (x,y) positions can be used, so it seems easy enough to use C# for image interaction, or even just events for a TextBox which is placed on the screen after the Text is created by the program. My preference in using C# is simply the VC# environment is good for debugging and quick coding. Do you have any views? > I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for > interactivion with images. Do you mean as in 'Java applets embedded in a web page?'. > I would like any views from Java developers why Java is used over C# > as that will help me decide what language to use. Is there such as a thing as a c# 'applet' that can be embedded in a web page? Is your client base 'Windows' or 'PCs in general'? -- Andrew T. PhySci.org > > I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > > results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for > > interactivion with images. > > Do you mean as in 'Java applets embedded > in a web page?'. I mean either an applet or a servlet, but via the WWW. > > I would like any views from Java developers why Java is used over C# > > as that will help me decide what language to use. > > Is there such as a thing as a c# 'applet' that > can be embedded in a web page? No, you can run .aspx pages which are completely dynamic. The whole thing runs server side. > Is your client base 'Windows' or 'PCs in general'? The work is all WWW based. If you see http://www.muckety.com/ you can see the idea of the interactive map I am trying to follow. I like the idea of a natural linking process via an image. I think this is easy to implement in C# but everyone seems to use Java for this type work. So I was wondering if Java offered some benefits over C# for interaction with images. > -- > Andrew T. > PhySci.org >>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I mean either an applet or a servlet, but via the WWW. Servlets are server side - applets are client side - for all practical purposes they can not replace each other. Arne > >>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > >>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Arne This is a fine distinction (applet and servlet). My question is only - Do so many people use Java for interactive images because it has features not available in C#? >>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Do so many people use Java for interactive images because it has > features not available in C#? My impression is that Flash would be most used for this with Java applets at a second place. And C# is not an option because .NET is not installed on all systems and not available at all for some systems. Arne >>>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > And C# is not an option because .NET is not installed on all systems > and not available at all for some systems. Java is at least as rich as C# for server-side implementations of such functionality. JSP are like .aspx, sort of. Java server-side also integrates well with scripting languages like Javascript. Libraries based on AJAX, JSF (Java Server Faces) and other frameworks provide a rich set of graphical and quasi-graphical interactions, dynamically and statically. The trend is toward greater cooperation of client-side and server-side actions to make for a rich experience. One needn't rely on a browser having plugins for Flash, Java or anything else beyond HTML and Javascript. Arne's assessment seems accurate for strictly client-side graphical interaction. Flex seems to be getting some attention also.  SignatureLew > >>>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > >>>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > experience. One needn't rely on a browser having plugins for Flash, Java or > anything else beyond HTML and Javascript. Javascript is disabled on several browsers especially on computers running at large companies (a security measure). > Arne's assessment seems accurate for strictly client-side graphical > interaction. Flex seems to be getting some attention also. I was under the impression that Java has some classes which made it more suited to graphical work, since everyone talks of Java in reference to 3D, 360 images, and interactive imnages. > -- > Lew- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>>>>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Javascript is disabled on several browsers especially on computers > running at large companies (a security measure). In todays AJAX world browsers with JavaScript disabled would be useless for so many things, that I would not worry about that. Arne > Javascript is disabled on several browsers especially on computers > running at large companies (a security measure). I run with Javascript disabled, and I can't load most Flash images as well as many types of media (YouTube, etc.) JavaScript is used to start up the process. If you had a C# based solution, I imagine it would have the same problem -- it wouldn't run because the JavaScript starter would not execute. >> Javascript is disabled on several browsers especially on computers >> running at large companies (a security measure). [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If you had a C# based solution, I imagine it would have the same problem > -- it wouldn't run because the JavaScript starter would not execute. Client side .NET can be put in using a pure object tag. Arne PS: I find it difficult to understand why people would allow Java, .NET and Flash but not JavaScript. ... > PS: I find it difficult to understand why people would allow Java, .NET > and Flash but not JavaScript. I suspect it is a hangover from IE's earlier incarnations that would allows JS to invoke powerful and potentially dangerous OS level tools. I agree with the general comments that suggest. a) This could be done in HTML, with an imagemap (and perhaps a little JS thrown in) b) If the *average* user does not have JS enabled, they will not have Java, Flex.. whatever. -- Andrew T. PhySci.org > PS: I find it difficult to understand why people would allow Java, .NET > and Flash but not JavaScript. Just to be clear, I think the web page needs to execute some JavaScript before it launches Flash, etc. Probably it's checking for browser versions and compatibility. So many people use libraries for client side scripting these days, that I'm sure all the libraries must do a lot of compatibility checks before running anything. Disable JavaScript, and you stop everything else from running too. ... > ...Disable JavaScript, and > you stop everything else from running too. Not necessarily*. Well designed JS might do versioning if enabled, but also specify a 'noscript' element to simply dump the applet (or whatever) into the page if JS is disabled. * Though yes, commonly. -- Andrew T. PhySci.org >> My impression is that Flash would be most used for this with Java >> applets at a second place. > Arne's assessment seems accurate for strictly client-side graphical > interaction. Flex seems to be getting some attention also. I am not an expert in Adobe technology. But my impression was that Flex build on top of Flash. Arne > >>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > >>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > - Show quoted text - My understanding is that .NET only needs to be installed on the server, so where is the issue with not all systems having .NET? I am not seeking to sell the software, so other server systems have no value to me. >>>>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>>>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > My understanding is that .NET only needs to be installed on the > server, so where is the issue with not all systems having .NET? Not true if you are you are looking for client side technology as Java applets. (but oviously HTML generated by ASP.NET does not require .NET client side) Arne > My understanding is that .NET only needs to be installed on the > server, so where is the issue with not all systems having .NET? I am > not seeking to sell the software, so other server systems have no > value to me. You missed the point. You users may be running Macs or Linux machines without any .Net at all. I think .Net is available, but I can't see it being a common install for those system. If you are just sending HTML to the client, then nothing needs to be installed on the client -- no Java for applets, no .Net, no JavaScript. > I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > interaction, or even just events for a TextBox which is placed on the > screen after the Text is created by the program. For code running client side it does matter that Java is more cross platform. > My preference in using C# is simply the VC# environment is good for > debugging and quick coding. There are plenty of good IDE's for Java that can more or less the same. Arne > > I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > > results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > For code running client side it does matter that Java is > more cross platform. What are you saying exactly, that .aspx will not work if the client has non-Windows software such as UNIX? > > My preference in using C# is simply the VC# environment is good for > > debugging and quick coding. > > There are plenty of good IDE's for Java that can more or less the same. > Arne >>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > What are you saying exactly, that .aspx will not work if the client > has non-Windows software such as UNIX? No. .aspx runs server side. Arne > >>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search > >>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > - Show quoted text - That was my point, so I did not understand the selling point of Java as being more cross platform, since .NET will run on the server and render a page. I see VC# as much easier and more powerful in terms of actual coding as the IDE is really powerful. So for me the only real issue is one of graphics classes and if Java has more powerful graphics classes and therefore the image interaction I envisage is more able to be done. I will develop this in Java is I think Java is more suitable, but people seem to be saying that the selling point of Java is its cross platform applicability. >>>>> I am trying to write an interactive image which presents search >>>>> results in a tree structure. I see at many sites Java is used for [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > as being more cross platform, since .NET will run on the server and > render a page. The cross platform is a point for applet, because applet run client side. (cross platform can also be a point for server side because you can freely choose production platform) > I see VC# as much easier and more powerful in terms of actual coding > as the IDE is really powerful. Hm. The Java IDE's has been leading in relation to features like refactoring for 5+ years. Arne 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.