Slashdot Mirror


Sun Releases JavaFX

ink writes "Sun released JavaFX 1.0 today, in a bid to take on Adobe's Flash and Microsoft's Silverlight technologies. It is Sun's first Java release to include standardized, cross-platform audio and video playback code (in the form of On2 licensed codecs). The lack of a Linux or Solaris release is a notable absence. The development kit currently consists of the base run-time, a NetBeans/Eclipse plug-in and a set of artifact exporters for Adobe CS 3&4." An anonymous reader adds a link to several tutorials accompanying the new release.

185 comments

  1. Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... in a bid to take on Adobe's Flash and Microsoft's Silverlight technologies

    Well, I will throw out there a heads up to folks about OpenLaszlo which is the "run-anywhere, no-lock-in rich Internet platform. Period."

    Unfortunately it still has a massive adoption curve ahead of it so maybe there's no reason to list it as a contender. While there are neat demos, a few companies have employed it: Wal-Mart, Pandora even MSN's music service.

    *sigh* I wonder if this means Sun is going to pull out of Orbit and come up with some J2ME version of JavaFX?

    Like always, I welcome the competition, diversity and options this brings while I cringe at the thought of yet another schism in the open source community.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by ink · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, I will throw out there a heads up to folks about OpenLaszlo which is the "run-anywhere, no-lock-in rich Internet platform. Period."

      That's not entirely true. OpenLaszlo relies on Flash to display video, and Flash is not a no-lock-in platform. You cannot redistribute Flash, or use it in a whole host of applications without licensing it from Adobe.

      --
      The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
    2. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, pay attention please... come up with some J2ME version of JavaFX? ... if you download the windows version (okay this is slashdot so windows is probably a dirty word) you'll find a JavaME version of JavaFX is there as a beta. One of the supposedly key points is that JavaFX "runs on all the screens of your life" which includes your cell phone but probably does not include your digital camera.

    3. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      i am excited about XML UI programming languages, so i've been doing my part by porting (and supporting) the OpenLaszlo concepts, which are really fun and easy to learn, by the way) to other languages. Although OpenLaszlo is still the first thing i reach for when doing web apps, I'd love to see a Laszlo-Inspired layer over every interface system out there, JavaFX, certainly included in that

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    4. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 4, Informative

      OpenLaszlo compiles to either flash or DHTML. Its not a Flash lock-in.

    5. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but the DHTML can not play audio or video

    6. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet the DHTML portion doesn't support rich media (video, etc) as well as the Flash portion, or there would be no need for a Flash portion. Really this is the only new thing - if you wanted a library for animations and controls in DHTML, there are tons of JavaScript libraries already out there to pick from. So no, it's either Flash, Silverlight or Java applets if you want rich media in the browser.

    7. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again, one of the critical failings of OSS: Naming.

      The name "OpenLaszlo" sounds just ridiculous. It's about as bad as "OpenJerrold", or "OpenLeonard".

    8. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by rholtzjr · · Score: 1


      I am open to all technologies that are for "Open platform".
      Any that are not, then I want NOTHING to do with.
      I am tired as a developer to "change" platform specification!!!!!
      Enough is enough

    9. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I'm glad to see people working on better web-oriented GUI systems. However, OpenLaszlo appears to be lacking edit-able data grids and tree widgets (like Windows Explorer type trees). These are staples of desktop GUI's. Some of the OL documentation links are also broken.

    10. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 3, Informative

      You cannot redistribute Flash, or use it in a whole host of applications without licensing it from Adobe.

      Huh? You can't redistribute any application without a license unless it's public domain. That's copyright. GPL is a distribution license.

      As far as Adobe's Flash, they have an easy website form to obtain a standard redistribution license:
      http://www.adobe.com/products/players/fpsh_distribution1.html

      It's suitable for distributing the player on installation media, for distributing the player on a whole network, or for distributing with other software through a website you manage. It pretty much covers the bases for intended uses of Flash Player for an end-user.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    11. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Air-conditioned+cowh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OpenLaszlo compiles to either flash or DHTML. Its not a Flash lock-in.

      I'd be surprised if it were possible to display streaming video in just DHTML.

    12. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by genik76 · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would be one hell of a JavaScript program.

    13. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by fredrik70 · · Score: 5, Funny

      well, with html 5 we all will have the video tag so there's a solution in sight - hopefully!

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    14. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by master_p · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can DHTML display video? the GP poster talked about video specifically.

    15. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      >> That's not entirely true. OpenLaszlo relies on Flash to display video, and Flash is not a no-lock-in platform.

      > OpenLaszlo compiles to either flash or DHTML. Its not a Flash lock-in.

      How is that DHTML video working out for you?

    16. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by 2starr · · Score: 1

      JavaFX is already built to run on J2ME. There's a good interview on The Java Posse this week where they mention that.

      --

      "Let your heart soar as high as it will. Refuse to be average." - A. W. Tozer

    17. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      We don't need the video tag, there is already <object>

    18. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by ink · · Score: 1

      From the link you provided:

      "Royalty-free Flash Player distribution is limited to specific desktop and laptop operating systems. Distribution restrictions are specified in the license agreement. Distribution on devices is subject to a licensing fee and different licensing terms. Please contact an Adobe Mobile & Devices representative if you are interested in licensing Flash Player for distribution on devices."

      So one cannot redistribute Flash, or use it in a whole host of applications without licensing it from Adobe. It's a closed platform.

      --
      The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
    19. Re:Probably Also Contending with OpenLaszlo by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      For distribution on devices. And it only runs on x86 platforms.

      In any case, you're still missing the point. All software is either licensed, public domain, owned by the user, or pirated. Want to put gnash on your device? You must agree to the GPL.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
  2. SO confusing.. by TheDarkener · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No shockwave for Linux, Flash 64 gets released JUST for Linux, Sun open-sources Java, but now no JavaFX for Linux...

    Can't we all just get along? My head is spinning at all the end-user requests for their intarwebs to work correctly. I guess it's just too much to ask for a real, open standard that just works (like...umm...html?)

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:SO confusing.. by vivin · · Score: 1

      I haven't tried this yet, but it was the same problem with the preview SDK. There was no linux version, but you could get the Mac version running on Linux:

      http://www.weiqigao.com/blog/2008/08/05/watch_javafx_sdk_run_on_linux.html

      I'm assuming the same method can be used to run the SDK on Linux. I'm going to try this out now.

      --
      Vivin Suresh Paliath
      http://vivin.net

      I like
    2. Re:SO confusing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read more on their site. They plan on supporting Linux and Solaris in January.

    3. Re:SO confusing.. by vivin · · Score: 1

      No dice. Windows comes as exe, and Mac as dmg. Nice job, Sun. I'm going to see if I can get to run somehow, though.

      --
      Vivin Suresh Paliath
      http://vivin.net

      I like
    4. Re:SO confusing.. by HRbnjR · · Score: 1

      Any time new features are implemented across all major browsers (yay CSS 2.1 in IE8) it makes me quite happy, as I'm just waiting to see how much functionality we can eek out of the web before the entire effort splinters apart into such closed non-standard vendor-specific solutions like Flash, Silverlight, JavaFX, etc.

      Now that CSS support is maturing, if we could just get SVG and a standard audio/video tag with Free codecs, I think we would be OK for the most common use cases.

    5. Re:SO confusing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wow...you can't even be bothered to type "Linux dmg" into Google...how lazy are you?

      (In case you really are that lazy, the answer is mount -t hfs -o loop file.dmg /path/to/mount)

    6. Re:SO confusing.. by BrianRoach · · Score: 1

      I guess it's too much to ask that you click on the link in the story that takes you to Sun's blog where they explain that Linux and Solaris versions are being released?

    7. Re:SO confusing.. by pallmall1 · · Score: 1

      I guess it's too much to ask that you click on the link in the story that takes you to Sun's blog where they explain that Linux and Solaris versions are being released?

      I wonder if those versions will be released before Duke Nukem Forever. I heard that was going to be released, too.

      --
      3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
    8. Re:SO confusing.. by pallmall1 · · Score: 1

      They plan on supporting Linux and Solaris in January.

      Could you post a link to the page that gives January as a planned date for a Linux release of javafx? I haven't been able to find any reference to that date yet, but it's hard to find all the javafx related pages they have.

      --
      3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
    9. Re:SO confusing.. by synthespian · · Score: 1

      My guess is that Sun is the only game in town for really "getting along" in all platforms (Sun, Windows, Linux, Macs and BSDs).

      --
      Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
    10. Re:SO confusing.. by powerspike · · Score: 1

      last time i checked, html didn't work the same in firefox msie or sarfi.......

    11. Re:SO confusing.. by hotfireball · · Score: 1

      Sun open-sources Java, but now no JavaFX for Linux...

      It will be. Just hurry to release it and spin it out. So a widespread desktop systems has a primary priority in this case, I think.

    12. Re:SO confusing.. by Kooty-Sentinel · · Score: 1

      # ./rtfm --group=slashdot -t now
      segfault (core dumped)

      --
      Your evaluation period for Productivity 1.0 has ended. Please purchase more coffee to continue using this product.
    13. Re:SO confusing.. by not+already+in+use · · Score: 1

      (like...umm...html?)

      Exactly -- HTML, javascript, the video tag and the canvas tag is really where it's at, once they are generally supported.

      --
      Similes are like metaphors
  3. sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not really into technology but am making an effort to learn. Can someone please explain what the original post means. (I half get it, if the counts for anything) My main problem is..."include standardized, cross-platform audio and video playback code (in the form of On2 licensed codecs)" And..."The development kit currently consists of the base run-time, a NetBeans/Eclipse plug-in and a set of artifact exporters for Adobe CS 3&4." Thanks, sorry i am so uninformed.

    1. Re:sorry by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      My main problem is..."include standardized, cross-platform audio and video playback code (in the form of On2 licensed codecs)"

      On2 is the company that provides the video/audio codecs for video in the Flash plugin. (i.e. The technology used by sites like Youtube.) The inclusion of these codecs in JavaFX means that JavaFX will be able to play movies intended for a Flash player.

      And..."The development kit currently consists of the base run-time, a NetBeans/Eclipse plug-in and a set of artifact exporters for Adobe CS 3&4."

      In other words, JavaFX is a scripting language for graphics. Similar in principle to Flash. The download gives developers the necessary libraries and viewers to develop JavaFX code. (Including plugins for your favorite IDE.) Not sure what the Adobe CS stuff is about.

    2. Re:sorry by wuwoowu · · Score: 1

      Thanks that really helped!

    3. Re:sorry by Fireflymantis · · Score: 1, Informative

      Sun released JavaFX 1.0 today, in a bid to take on Adobe's Flash and Microsoft's Silverlight technologies.

      JavaFX, a technology by sun which will let developers write "rich internet applications" using a Java-esq language which has been in development for quite some time now has finally been released, joining rather late to the game. Also it requires it's own plugin which will be a hefty barrier to entry.

      It is Sun's first Java release to include standardized, cross-platform audio and video playback code (in the form of On2 licensed codecs).

      So, it will include Audio/Video support, and it is using codecs from On2. I don't think that this means the codecs are free in any sense of the term, just that Sun is paying the cost of licensing these codecs for the developers using JavaFX. Nevertheless, good codec support is always a good thing.

      The lack of a Linux or Solaris release is a notable absence.

      Kind of deflates the "standardized, cross-platform" claim...

      The development kit currently consists of the base run-time, a NetBeans/Eclipse plug-in and a set of artifact exporters for Adobe CS 3&4."

      So, the download they offer you includes the software to run the software you write, a plugin for eclipse and netbeans which are the two leading Java development environments, and some plugins for a few Adobe products to move stuff from them into the JavaFX world.

    4. Re:sorry by Moochman · · Score: 1

      The Adobe CS stuff is about being able to import Photoshop and Illustrator projects complete with layers and make applications out of them.

    5. Re:sorry by trawg · · Score: 1

      On2 [wikipedia.org] is the company that provides the video/audio codecs for video in the Flash plugin. (i.e. The technology used by sites like Youtube.) The inclusion of these codecs in JavaFX means that JavaFX will be able to play movies intended for a Flash player.

      It's sort of cool, but I wish we could get away from the On2 codecs.

      Their licensing fees for high-end stuff are ridiculous. We were pretty stoked once h264 support made its way into Flash because it meant we could ditch our reliance on the expensive On2 stuff and stick with the open source encoders (I'd happily buy a commercial h264 encoder but I can't find a decent one that works as well and is as flexible as the open source alternatives).

      I would have much preferred to see Sun go with h264 as their video codec of choice here - for selfish reasons, mostly (so we don't have to re-encode all our h264 content to get it working on Java devices!).

      All these things to me though just highlight the need for a true, open, competitive video codec. I'm holding out hopes for Dirac and Theora but from what I've read they still need a bit of work on the quality - plus I think some of the encoding tools are a bit lacking (? could be wrong, haven't looked for a while).

    6. Re:sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Adobe CS plugins are to export graphics to into a JavaFX-specific file format. This is to improve integration with application code, something like accessing individual photoshop layers from within the Java code. There's probably more to it, though.

    7. Re:sorry by psetzer · · Score: 1

      If the new codecs work the same way image formats do, you just put the new set of codecs in a jar, stick them in the extension directory, and then every single Java app can use them with no further configuration.

      --
      "Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is living in a state of sin." -- John von Neumann
  4. Existing plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is this not running on top of the existing java plugin. Or at least add the functionality to the next release of java.

    1. Re:Existing plugin by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why is this not running on top of the existing java plugin.

      It is. This is really a set of libraries on top of the existing Java runtime that support the JavaFX scripting framework.

      Or at least add the functionality to the next release of java.

      I'm sure they will once the technology has been shaken out a bit. Sun tends to be cautious about making changes to the core APIs.

    2. Re:Existing plugin by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      According to the JavaFX website this is already the way it works:
      "JavaSE 6 update 10 gives developers the ability to create draggable applets which the user can then save on their desktop to use later."

      --
      She made the willows dance
    3. Re:Existing plugin by mrcleaver · · Score: 1

      How the hell did you get modded troll?

    4. Re:Existing plugin by Samah · · Score: 1

      What the hell... who modded parent troll? Someone fix that please.

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
    5. Re:Existing plugin by DaleCooper82 · · Score: 1

      Client side part is in JRE6u11. JavaFX developers must download SDK/IDE plugins.

      --
      :: There is no light at the end of a tunnel. There is a tunnel after a tunnel : Thom Y. ::
    6. Re:Existing plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The key bits are the scenegraph code ("scenario", available, but currently only as GPL) and the media playback (Java Media Components?) JMC replacing the hideous JMF. The JMC are based on GSTreamer on Linux (and solaris? not sure) so there is the possibility of playing anything ffmpeg does. God knows how the licensing is going to work out, especially since the H264 library is GPL.

  5. So what does cross-platform mean in this context? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No linux, no Solaris. I guess Windows and Mac are "cross platform" if you're feeling generous. Hopefully a Linux release will at least come on the heels of this soon.

  6. Another flash copy? by nvivo · · Score: 1

    So, what is the difference between this and silverlight? Both are a copy of flash that won't get any wide usage anytime soon and none of them run on linux...

    1. Re:Another flash copy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The linux version of silverlight is called moonlight. And there are a number of places that are currently using it, like netflix and the BBC.

    2. Re:Another flash copy? by Shados · · Score: 1

      These things are targeted at developer a lot more than they are at end user. So the difference? You can use your java background and existing java code (to some extent). More or less the same use case as Silverlight (except silverlight is a subset-like version of the already relatively used WPF framework...not sure if JavaFX has its root in something thats already adopted)

    3. Re:Another flash copy? by DrXym · · Score: 1
      So, what is the difference between this and silverlight? Both are a copy of flash that won't get any wide usage anytime soon and none of them run on linux...

      I suppose the answer is JavaFX will eventually appear and be reasonably supported on Linux, whereas Silverlight never will. A half-assed Mono implementation doesn't count as supported either.

      Still, Sun could help themselves here by stating specifically which platforms are supported. It's understandable if they go for the largest user base first, but other platforms are important too.

  7. JavaFX on Android by vivin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What I'd really like to see is JavaFX running on Android. I saw a presentation from Java One where it showed a JavaFX app running on Android. Has anyone been able to duplicate this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYy4j9x2Mi4

    I've played around with JavaFX and it seems pretty nice. I've been able to write small widgets with it. Whether it can take on Silverlight and Flash still remains to be seem. What's awesome is that JavaFX has the support of Java's rich API and 3rd-party libraries (you can easily import them into a JavaFX program).

    Also if JavaFX apps can run properly on Android or the iPhone, I think that would also help it be more successful.

    --
    Vivin Suresh Paliath
    http://vivin.net

    I like
    1. Re:JavaFX on Android by recharged95 · · Score: 1
      If JavaFx's footprint is smaller than Flash, I'd see a version on the G1 sooner than you think.

      .

      I found the G1's paltry 70MB of usable space for apps crippling, especially when I'm uploading IMAP mail that's in the multiple MB range. Webapps is the future on the G1 unless they allow on-card loading of apps.

    2. Re:JavaFX on Android by glop · · Score: 1

      Can't you just log in as root and create a couple symlinks to go around that.
      Of course, after that you have to leave the card in at all times to avoid weird errors. But that seems a nice trade off.

  8. Just what the web needs by mtarnovan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... another RIA platform. Only this one doesn't have a userbase yet and I don't think it'll have one to speak of in the near future; it is Windows and Mac OS only (though Sun promises that Linux and Solaris support is underway http://blogs.sun.com/javafx/entry/a_word_on_linux_and). Microsoft has been pushing Silverlight hard and still has only about 30% market penetration in the US (they claim 50% mp in 'some countries' - I'm very curious which countries are these: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/oct08/10-13Silverlight2PR.mspx). With Flash+Flex having a comfortable user base of some 90+%, let's not even begin to compare Microsoft's vs Sun's power to push stuff to the desktops of the masses, it's not even funny.

    1. Re:Just what the web needs by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      ... another RIA platform. Only this one doesn't have a userbase yet and I don't think it'll have one to speak of in the near future; it is Windows and Mac OS only

      so it's got a potential user-base of approximately 98.8% of web clients?

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    2. Re:Just what the web needs by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Apologies, better link at the source -

      Windows 89.62%
      Mac 8.87%
      Linux 0.83%
      iPhone 0.37%
      Playstation 0.04%
      SunOS 0.01%

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    3. Re:Just what the web needs by mtarnovan · · Score: 1

      Semicolon doesn't imply causality between those clauses.

  9. Cross platform? by tsotha · · Score: 1

    It is Sun's first Java release to include standardized, cross-platform audio and video playback code (in the form of On2 licensed codecs). The lack of a Linux or Solaris release is a notable absence.

    So... cross-platform means PC and Mac? Or just PC?

    1. Re:Cross platform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out this article:

      For now, JavaFX is limited to Mac OS and Windows. Linux and Solaris support will roll out early next year, Tanase said, adding that the video codecs still have to be made compatible with those environments.

    2. Re:Cross platform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any Mac made in the past several years *is* a PC, jerk-face! Besides There's OSes other than Windows and Mac OS X that run on PCs.

  10. Linux support is 'coming' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the link:

    "We are going to support Linux and Solaris. We love both operating systems....we are actively working on it right now. We have it in our continuous build system."

    and

    "So why didn't we ship for Linux and Solaris in 1.0 along with Mac & Windows?

    Simple. It's not ready yet. Certain features are there but other features are broken or not performing well enough. In particular video and graphics hardware acceleration have historically been tricky to implement properly on Linux and Solaris, as users of native apps for those operating systems know all too well. But we are working on it and will ship it."

    1. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1

      They shouldn't have shipped it at all then.

      I've been developing in mostly java for over a decade and tend to agree with most of Sun's decisions, but this is weak.

      If the product wasn't ready for all the target platforms than the product wasn't ready.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    2. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by jasonmanley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that it comes down to a business decision. Creating brand awareness, gaining market penetration etc. In these markets it seems that "days count". Get the "acronym", or prduct name or whatever out there - create a buzz - get some interest and momentum behind the idea and add features as you go. I for one applaud Sun's open source efforts and don't hold this against them. They are inventing / tweaking a very difficult business model by releasing free software and getting support / client / business / developer buy in. It is not easy and they have had to take a few hits while sorting it out. So I understand and considering everything that we are getting for free from them (and top quality I might add) I will allow them this decision.

      --
      http://projectleader.wordpress.com
    3. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by A12m0v · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Linux and Solaris count towards less than 5% of the market. Sun did the smart thing by bringing it to the mass OS market, instead of delaying it. If they delayed it, they'd have lost their window of entry, and maybe lost the market entirely to Adobe AIR.

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    4. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by SilverJets · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but as every year passes I get more and more sure that Sun is trying to backtrack on passing off Solaris and OpenSolaris as a desktop alternatives.

    5. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what?

    6. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by hotfireball · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Linux and Solaris count towards less than 5% of the market.

      Right. A *desktop* market. Actually much less than 5%. It is about less than 3% for both.

    7. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Which market? The market *that counts* at the moment is the pre-existing Java developer market. Including mac users, a figure I'm plucking out of the air, the Unix user base of java developers is possibly 40%, or perhaps more.

      Development shops aren't going to ramp up development using a 1.0 product if their coders are in mixed environments and have to run FX in a VM, under wine or dual boot. e.g. "this sounds dandy but does it run in Ubuntu?" (Assuming, of course, the decision makers aren't hanging out on theserverside.com arguing for the 847th time why 'flavour of the month web framework' is better than Gavin's Seam - It's a website like Slashdot but for self-proclaimed Java EE demigods)

    8. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by einer · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Linux (and BSD) users are the early adopters and the ones who encourage their Windows using friends to use better alternatives like Firefox. Also, Linux users tend to be the first ones to develop on new languages and platforms. Less apps, less JVM's in the browser, less exposure, fewer early adopters excited about the product.

      As a Java developer and Linux user, I won't be using this and I can garauntee that not a single one of my Windows using co-workers has any desire to install another browser plug-in on every browser they use. If I had the desire to implement our next app with JavaFX they would.

    9. Re:Linux support is 'coming' by ebuck · · Score: 1

      You seem to think that doing things in parallel guarantees delay of the product that hits the majority of the masses.

  11. Way to go Sun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this is a good move

  12. Only no JavaFX for developers by Lobais · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Even though it is still a shame,
    you CAN view JavaFX used on webpages. It seams to work just like java-applets, only nicer to look at. (Sadly it also has the same slow loading as applets)

    Example: http://javafx.com/samples/StopWatch/index.html

    1. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by sssssss27 · · Score: 1

      That page actually crashed Firefox for me. Wasn't the slow loading applets the whole reason people went to Flash in the first place?

    2. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by Nicopa · · Score: 1

      Applets slow starting was supposedly fixed in Java 6u10, if you have an older Java install the latest (http://www.java.com) and try again.

    3. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by stuntpope · · Score: 1

      Wow.... I gave up after a full minute, using Safari 3 on OS X Tiger. Never did load anything. I think the stopwatch was me counting time go by, waiting for this demo to load.

    4. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by decavolt · · Score: 1

      I really like the disappear-while-scrolling "feature". Brilliant.

    5. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

      Yea, I tried a few samples, first it prompted me to trust a unverified certificate and give unknown code...how did it put it...full access to my computer.

      Then it was so slow safari asked me if I wanted to kill it.

      Oh yea, this is a flash killer.

    6. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      I had no problem on a G4 PPC running webkit and Leopard. Performance was rather good for my computer slow by today's standards.

    7. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by karstux · · Score: 1

      Loaded forever and didn't show anything, even though I specifically installed the newest Java update 11 for this.

      If that "experience" and the sibling responses to your post are anything to go by, this won't have much of a future...

      --
      Don't whistle while you're pissing.
    8. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Slow to load, but load it did on a PS3 with Yellow Dog Linux using IBM Java.

    9. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by hansamurai · · Score: 1

      Worked for me almost instantly, JDK 6u11.

    10. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by alexj33 · · Score: 1

      It's only a matter of time before FX splinters into a dizzying array of obscure versions and frameworks, thus defeating its purpose.

      Sun says that FX was built to work around this problem, but developers work very, very hard to find a way to make that problem resurface again.

    11. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I noticed them adding a "Java Quick Start" service on my Windows laptop. Nice, it really made Java faster. Now I have only some 40 of these "Quick Start" applications starting up with the computer, taking some gigabyte of memory. Gee.

    12. Re:Only no JavaFX for developers by Nicopa · · Score: 1

      Even without that "quick start" applets will start faster and won't block the whole Firefox process while loading.

  13. It does work on linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    what is this linux support all you frothing nerds are screaming about? I just ran the "web start" examples in linux just fine, in fact FX runs on the standard JRE. Ok, there's no sdk for linux yet, FINE, just cut them some slack, for christ sake.

    1. Re:It does work on linux by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm watching that rabbit movie thing right now. It's not terribly quick, but it does appear to work. It seems not to require anything other than Java installed, no plug-ins or anything. I can live with that...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:It does work on linux by Moochman · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the video quality is good... can't say I'm in love with the bundled player component though... The play/pause button is a wierd target to hit (only works when you get it in the middle) and the jog bar doesn't let you click anywhere in it to skip ahead. I know I'm being picky, but something that will be used this much deserves to be gotten right!

    3. Re:It does work on linux by radarsat1 · · Score: 1

      Just played a game of brick breaker on Ubuntu. It's Java folks, it runs fine. Nice to see a simple game not eating my CPU like Flash does, too.

    4. Re:It does work on linux by alexj33 · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... let's see...

      1. Honkin' long load time? Check.

      2. A UI that doesn't do what you want? (slider can't move thru content but goes back to the beginning every time you click on slider) Check.

      3. Finicky volume bar? (You have to hit the volume ticks right in the middle) Check.

      4. Slow, jerky video on my brand new computer? Check.

      5. Everything we have come to expect from applets so far for the last 13 years? Check.

      6. Sense of foreboding that I will get burned if I adopt this technology, just like applets? Check.

      Report card: FAIL.

    5. Re:It does work on linux by alexj33 · · Score: 1

      Tried to run the "Flying Saucer" demo, got a message: "This sample needs Java SE 6 Update 10." The dang app in the page should "just run" and download what is needed.

      FAIL, FAIL, FAIL, FAIL, FAIL, FAIL.

  14. Come back forwards on that reversal again...? by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 5, Funny

    The lack of a Linux or Solaris release is a notable absence.

    So if we have an absence of a lack, does that mean there is a Linux and/or Solaris release? :-P

    And yes, I don't think I'm not being overly pedantic in noting the presence of an absence of a lack of internal bouyancy in the summary, since that's a term whose inapplicability wouldn't be not out of place in this sentence.

    --
    A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
    1. Re:Come back forwards on that reversal again...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So.. you're saying it floats, right?

    2. Re:Come back forwards on that reversal again...? by MadHakish · · Score: 1

      Thanks, my brain hurts now...

      --
      Wisest is he who knows he does not know.
    3. Re:Come back forwards on that reversal again...? by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 1

      So.. you're saying it floats, right?

      Only if it doesn't weigh the same as a duck wouldn't. (And that obviously can't be not untrue, given that my earlier post clearly lacks the requisite 'which'. ;-)

      --
      A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
    4. Re:Come back forwards on that reversal again...? by Jonboy+X · · Score: 1


      The lack of a Linux or Solaris release is a notable absence.

      So if we have an absence of a lack, does that mean there is a Linux and/or Solaris release? :-P

      And yes, I don't think I'm not being overly pedantic in noting the presence of an absence of a lack of internal bouyancy in the summary, since that's a term whose inapplicability wouldn't be not out of place in this sentence.

      The lack of a release is also a notable absence.

      Also, you misspelled "buoyancy".

      Please don't think me pedantic. I was worried that your poor spelling would keep people from understanding whatever the hell it was that you were trying to say.

      --

      "In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
    5. Re:Come back forwards on that reversal again...? by mgiuca · · Score: 1

      Sorry, have to trip you up here.

      While it is poorly worded, to say "the lack is an absence" is valid. That is, the lack itself is the absence, as opposed to the lack being absent.

  15. JavaFX Mobile by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    *sigh* I wonder if this means Sun is going to pull out of Orbit [slashdot.org] and come up with some J2ME version of JavaFX?

    I don't know about Orbit, but a JavaME version of JavaFX is definitely in the works. And to clarify, JavaFX Mobile will be provided to handset manufacturers as a binary distribution, for which Sun will charge a per-unit royalty.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  16. Bout fucking time...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For for shit's sake. It's 2009. Don't you think its about time I should be able to make a fucking API call and determine the volume of the input audio is instead of getting and NotImplemented exception?

  17. JavaFX already does Java ME by Osvaldo+Doederlein · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this means Sun is going to pull out of Orbit and come up with some J2ME version of JavaFX?

    Java FX Mobile was also released (but still in beta stage; FCS planned for next spring). Check Terrence Barr's blog. In fact, the mobile version is a big part of JavaFX's grand scheme. Deploy the exact same code on desktop, web and mobile devices - it's revolutionary and unique, for anything as rich as JavaFX.

  18. Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Flash and Silverlight? Yeah, right. Sun knows that Yet Another Web Development Framework isn't going to take over the desktop. This is a blatant attempt to stop Android taking over the mobile phone space. Android added native media playback classes and a bunch of other stuff to the J2ME mix, the HTC G1 was a surprise hit, and a whole bunch of cell phone manufacturers have now announced Android phones - not J2ME phones. Sun is seeing its lock on the mobile phone application market disappearing overnight, and Google side-stepped whatever patent claims it might have exerted by running "Dalvik" byte-code instead of Java byte-code.

    "We're making our binaries available" to mobile-phone makers "so we can unify the Java platform implementations," said Schwartz, who expects rapid adoption. "We're starting with a couple billion handsets in the marketplace and swimming downstream."

    The business case
    Sun also will charge those handset makers a per-unit royalty for JavaFX

    So, it's closed source, and phone manufacturers have to pay a royalty to Sun for every handset shipped? In the meantime, Android is getting the press, HTC has shipped half a million G1 handsets in the past couple of months, Android is open source and free to implement, and there are numerous Android phones from multiple manufacturers on the horizon. Why would any of these manufacturers choose JavaFX instead?

    1. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by ToasterMonkey · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm sorry, what the fuck do Flash, Silverlight and Java FX have to do with Android?

      Mods, mods, mods.. please guys, wake up.

      This is a blatant attempt to stop Android taking over the mobile phone space.

      Unwrap some of that tinfoil so you can talk, and tell us WHY.

    2. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative

      Android - Mobile phone stack, making heavy use of Java technology. While Sun's not directly involved, Jonathan Schwartz has spoken highly of it.

      JavaFX - Web multimedia/interactivity stack, similar to Flash and Silverlight.

      The two are not competitors. Sun is not pushing JavaFX to compete with Android any more than Microsoft is pushing Silverlight to destroy Windows CE.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 1

      Android includes its own "JVM" - except it isn't really a JVM, but a "Dalvik" VM that interprets Dalvik bytecode translated directly from Java bytecode - the end result is the same. The Dalvik VM, and its new classes (which incidentally include media playback codecs, one of the big JavaFX announcements) are a direct competitor to J2ME. If Google succeeds in having every phone manufacturer shipping Dalvik+Google classes, and takes the developer mindshare with its App Store, then J2ME is effectively dead.

      If JavaFX has nothing to do with mobile phones, then why does the article say that it is being targetted to mobile phones, and offered to mobile phone manufacturers, and why did Schwartz say "We're making our binaries available to mobile-phone makers so we can unify the Java platform implementations"?

    4. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by recharged95 · · Score: 1
      See my post somewhere above. Unless Android has a slick way to show multimedia, or their own version of JavaFX, JavaFX is the way to go unless they add more on-board memory to devices like the G1. I'm already at 10MB left of onboard memory on my G1 due to local mail and apps!

      But I do agree this a bandaid to save J2ME--Android did it the right way such that J2ME should evolve to something similar to Android (won't happen due to the JCP).

    5. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by bjourne · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sorry, you are misinformed. The Andorid platform was announced 20071105. JavaFX framework was announced at Java One in May 2007 six months earlier. Calling JavaFX a response to Android is plain incorrect and an apples to oranges comparison to boot.

    6. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Android includes its own "JVM" - except it isn't really a JVM, but a "Dalvik" VM that...

      Yeah yeah yeah, whatever. When you have something to challenge Sun's public support of Android, let me know. Oh, and Android is an operating system, just so you know. J2ME is a bolt-on Java stack for third party operating systems.

      If JavaFX has nothing to do with mobile phones, then why does the article say that it is being targetted to mobile phones, and offered to mobile phone manufacturers, and why did Schwartz say "We're making our binaries available to mobile-phone makers so we can unify the Java platform implementations"?

      Because it is still has nothing to do with mobile phones. When you wake up from your coma, find out about this thing called the "iPhone". It's a very popular phone that Apple (yeah, Apple) started making about two years ago, and one of the few criticisms virtually everyone has about it is that it doesn't support Flash. This is considered an issue because the iPhone has a real web browser in it, but it cannot browse sites that require Flash (whether badly designed "corporate website" crap, or sites where Flash is appropriate like Hulu.com.)

      As a result, it's pretty much inevitable that anyone trying to put together a Flash competitor is going to make a big fuss about their stuff being workable on cellphones.

      JavaFX doesn't do what Android does. Android doesn't do what JavaFX does. The two are not competitors, any more than Silverlight is a Windows ME competitor. You can't get around that. They're not the same. They don't do the same thing. Their areas of overlap are small. Indeed, Sun or Google or both are likely to port JavaFX to Android in the long term, and I suspect it'll be on Android that you'll see the best JavaFX support on mobile devices, simply because Android is the most open, Java friendly, platform out there.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    7. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 1

      It was known publically in March 2007 that Google had already been working on a major mobile phone project for months (eg see one report here). The fact that this project wasn't officially unveiled until November is irrelevant; everyone in the industry knew what was going on, and Sun would certainly have been aware of their plans.

    8. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 1

      Yes, Android has native class support for multimedia, including H.264.

      "The SDK specifies the Media API along with its MediaPlayer and MediaRecorder APIs. According to the AudioEncoder class, audio can be encoded to AMR-NB. The VideoEncoder class specifies H.263, H.264, and MPEG-4 SP." source

    9. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why is it so difficult to understand that Google's Dalvik - an implementation of Java being used for free by mobile phone manufacturers - is a direct threat to Sun's J2ME? This is not some secret conspiracy theory - professional business analysts, who actually make a living from watching these kinds of things, have noticed the same thing.

      "However, Google's move threatens Sun's business strategy, Mazzocchi said. He believes that Sun sees a bright future in the mobile market and hopes to earn revenue off the use of the Java virtual machine by phone makers. Google's plan diminishes that opportunity for Sun." source

      "But with this you'll need to develop a separate application that's not standard. Unless Android becomes main stream and kills J2ME ..." source

      This blog post from over a year ago proposes that JavaFX Mobile is just the next stage for J2ME to compete with Android.

    10. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 1

      what the fuck do Flash, Silverlight and Java FX have to do with Android?

      In very simple terms, from the Wikipedia page on JavaFX: "The other component is JavaFX Mobile, a Java operating system for mobile devices, including PDAs, smartphones and feature phones. It features a Java SE and Java ME implementation running on top of a Linux kernel."

      If you can't see "what the fuck" a Java implementation running on top of a Linux kernel has to do with Android, then there is no hope for you.

    11. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 1

      Android is more than just an operating system - it is a complete software stack designed to run Java applications. The Linux kernel is only one component. You don't seem to realise that running Java applications is one of the major features of Android. And JavaFX is more than just a JVM - JavaFX mobile is a complete software stack (including a Linux kernel) for running Java applications on mobile devices.

      JavaFX doesn't do what Android does. Android doesn't do what JavaFX does. The two are not competitors

      Two different Java implementations, with different classes, both including and running on a Linux kernel, both on mobile phones, are not competitors?

    12. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      And the Wikipedia page on JavaFX Mobile indicates "JavaFX Mobile" is actually a third party developed product that Sun already had. It has little or nothing to do with JavaFX, just a rebranding of a SavaJe Technologies operating system.

      This article is about JavaFX, not JavaFX Mobile. You're being (deliberately?) misleading by suggesting today's announcement is about competitors to Android, which AGAIN is a product Sun has endorsed enthusiastically.

      Who to believe. You, or Jonathan Schwartz?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    13. Re:Flash and Silverlight the target? by chrb · · Score: 1

      So, JavaFX Mobile has nothing to do with Sun, because they just bought it from another company and rebranded it as their own? And yet JavaFX Mobile is just JavaFX running on a Linux JVM optimised for mobile devices... functionally, it is the same as the desktop JavaFX, just running on mobile devices... and yet somehow that makes it totally different, and nothing to do with Sun or this article? Here's a novel idea: if Sun didn't want JavaFX Mobile to be associated with JavaFX, then they shouldn't have branded it as "JavaFX Mobile", and they shouldn't have promoted it to mobile developers as JavaFX!

      This article is about JavaFX, not JavaFX Mobile.

      You still don't get it?! JavaFX Mobile is a part of JavaFX. Your comment is like saying that an article about GCC is about the Fortran compiler and not the C compiler... it's the same damn thing.

      And Jonathan Schwartz loves Android, despite the fact that that it totally undermines Sun's own mobile Java product? Have you actually read the comments on the Schwartz blog you linked to?: "How come the stock tanked with such a good news? After hours trading JAVA down 2.8% or 12 cents to $5.56" "Funny.... I didn't see any mention on either the OHA site or any of the tech blogs of Java being part of the phone stack. That coupled with the fact that no one from Sun was at the presentation, makes one wonder if Java is even part of the google phone stack.""Confusing... Is this a spin or a loss for JAVA ??" "Can you explain in simplistic bullet points how JAVA benefits from Google employing JAVA? You appear almost giddy at the announcement but I am hard pressed to see how JAVA is going to make money from this." "Today NAS is up about 1% ; Sun is down 10%. As a long time stockholder I'm sick of this."

      Look, Android is great, Sun is great, but let's not pretend for a moment that Android is good news for Sun. As Schwartz himself said, Java is Sun's number 1 product, they even changed the SUNW ticker to JAVA. A non-Java VM with Java source compatible compiler being offered for free to mobile vendors by a company with the brand power of Google is an absolute disaster for Sun.

  19. Solaris by Enderandrew · · Score: 0

    Sun is a big-name company, and they no better than to support a dying ship in Solaris.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  20. JavaFX 1.0 SDK running on Linux by vivin · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was able to get the SDK to run on Linux. Full details here. Please don't kill my box :)

    --
    Vivin Suresh Paliath
    http://vivin.net

    I like
    1. Re:JavaFX 1.0 SDK running on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was able to get the SDK to run on Linux. Full details here. Please don't kill my box :)

      Network Timeout
      The server at vivin.net is taking too long to respond.

      Hi, welcome to Slashdot. You must be new here.
      Might I suggest reviewing the colorful history of the: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot_effect

      At the bottom you will find a reference to http://coralcdn.org so that you can use http://vivin.net.nyud.net/journal/12/4/2008/

  21. Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by Qbertino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They've done it! They have *finally* done it. Beyond all hype, potential vaporware and marketing bullcrap they have - for once - actually pulled through with RIAs. People this is the first time in history that Sun has actually pulled through with implementing a piece of Java in a form that Java was initially meant for: A cross plattform rich & powerfull client enviroment. Finally Java and its VM have stepped up and entered the ring with Flash!

    Only intially releasing for OS X and Windows is a large downside, as it will get negative votes from opinion leaders in the field, but the simple fact that they pulled through and didn't stop at 20% with some half-assed crappy Java Media Framework or some other piece of sh*t they've released ever since Flash took the helm at rich clients 10 years ago is a very big supprising plus!!! And the release-website (why the f*ck isn't this, the most important prime sorce even linked in the GP metaarticle???) doesn't even look like total crap.

    If they actually manage to pull through with a broad parallel release policy for this in the near future, manage to reduce JFX deployment to zero-fuss Flash-style and release the java-based FOSS tools and IDEs for JFX as announced a year ago, we will - for the first time in the history of the web - see a true competitor to Flash rise. This is good news in so many ways I can't even describe. If Sun plays its cards right and continues applying common sense and not screwing around this time and Adobe isn't on its toes, we will have a fully free open source rich client platform in just a few years and Flash will be history. Yay! Go, Sun, go!

    I can't tell you how much I and many other professional Flash developers have waited for this moment for the last 8 years.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by icepick72 · · Score: 1

      Agree with your post except I doubt the predcition "in just a few years and Flash will be history" because not only is Flash heavily entrenched but that would require Flash devs to change their skill sets for this to happen. Something different is going to happen however I don't doubt Sun will have a piece of the pie this time. BTW, weren't some of the codecs or media pieces used proprietary ... I have to go back and re-read but meh .. having too much fun running JavaFX "applets?" right now ...

    2. Re:Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by srijon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah! Java finally made it in the form is was meant to be. We love you Sun.

      Oh. Wait a moment. override? bind? def? public-init? WTF.

    3. Re:Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by cecom · · Score: 1

      Oh my, please hold my head up while I vomit! Are you people f*ing deluded??? How has JavaFX magically solved the problem of ridiculous loading times? I really do love Java. I do! But this is ridiculous. Hello!!! Pretending that the problem doesn't exist is not going to solve it.

    4. Re:Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Too little, too late. Today, it's not JavaFX vs Flash. It's JavaFX competing with Silverlight on who can take over the bigger part of the present Flash marketshare. And Silverlight is being marketed and pushed much more heavily than JavaFX, at least at the moment (not to mention that Microsoft has the benefit of (ab)using Windows Update to distribute Silverlight, and they may well switch it to "recommended update" in the future).

      Of course, this JavaFX thing still builds in the usual desktop JRE and applets, so it has all the disadvantages historically associated with them - the requirement to download and install the relatively large JRE, and the slowness with which applets themselves load.

      By the way, it's not open source, either - the JavaFX runtime is closed source, only the compiler and other SDK bits are open.

      On the whole, I simply don't see this thing as viable. I expect to see Flash still reigning for the next few years at least, and Silverlight also grabbing a large slice, but alongside Flash, rather than displacing it. JavaFX will probably go the same way applets went - it's too late to the show, it doesn't look nearly as polished as all other contenders, it doesn't really offer anything above its competitors, but most of all - unlike Java as a whole, which is backed by IBM and Google, JavaFX is solely a Sun project, and Sun is not exactly in a good shape right now, so if you'd rather prefer a corporate-backed project, it's not a safe bet.

    5. Re:Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by alexj33 · · Score: 1

      >>I expect to see Flash still reigning indefinitely..

      There, fixed that for you.

    6. Re:Holy Halleluja! Unbelievable! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the release-website [javafx.com] doesn't even look like total crap.

      Strange -- it does here. Are you colorblind, perhaps? Or using a monochrome monitor?

  22. JavaFX.com is down... by thistle · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...and has been for at least 20-30 minutes. I guess they didn't expect anyone to actually check out the site.

    1. Re:JavaFX.com is down... by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      not for me - just tried it

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    2. Re:JavaFX.com is down... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Are you on Sprint and have they been depeering people again?

      The site was working fine for me.

      Slow Down Cowboy!

      Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

      It's been 4 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

      Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.

      Hey Taco: YOU'RE A MORON

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  23. Not really, no. by Qbertino · · Score: 3, Informative

    Laszlo is a Generator for a few things - which also include Flash, nonetheless. Much like the old Macromedia Flash Generator, the Ming Libraries or the Macromedia Laszlo Rippoff 'Flex'.

    JavaFX on the other hand is an all-out leveraging of the Java VM for RIAs, something Laszlo can't offer. It's its own VM (naturally) plus a toolkit for building content and applications. While there are overlaps between the two, JavaFX is clearly aimed at Flash - the biggest advancement being a much more streamlines deployment of the Java VM (I just installed it with a sinlge click of a mouse, supported by some nifty Ajax widget that streamlined the process even more).

    And, contrary to Silverlight, Java actually has a chance to dethrone Flash, as it is the most mature cross plattform available, despite Flash being the most widespread plattform in general. I'm really interested in how this will play out. ... And am downloading the free JavaFX IDE as I'm typing this. If it doesn't get in my way building RIAs, I will probably never purchase a Flash IDE licence again.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Not really, no. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      The big problem with JavaFX is that, apparently, it requires a full Java VM on the client to work. This is about 15Mb to download. For comparison, Silverlight 2.0 is ~4Mb, and Flash is less than 1Mb. And yes, it is a big deal. Today, for anything other than Flash, you have to assume that the client won't have the plugin/runtime installed by default, so the download has to be as small as possible.

    2. Re:Not really, no. by synthesizerpatel · · Score: 1

      Uh so, you download the client, it installs, and you can then view plugin content with it?

      15 megs vs. 4 megs vs. 1meg? Thats your argument?

      Stupid people will click 'Sure, install this random plugin I never heard of' just as they click 'yes' on every other pop-up that they see, their connection will be sluggish for 5-30 minutes depending on how far away they live from the ocean and after that they'll be activated for content.

      I'm pumped on this, not because I'm a Java fan, but Flash is the worst pile of crap ever. Silverlight makes me feel icky. Java? Well, it's got terrible marketing, terrible branding, but if it can play embedded videos for me and make slick presentation content in a mature cross-platform development environment.. I'm in.

      Also, I bet the processing guys are thinking 'Damn, they took our thing and made it a product.'

      Also, openlaslo.. looool.

    3. Re:Not really, no. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Uh so, you download the client, it installs, and you can then view plugin content with it?

      15 megs vs. 4 megs vs. 1meg? Thats your argument?

      Stupid people will click 'Sure, install this random plugin I never heard of' just as they click 'yes' on every other pop-up that they see, their connection will be sluggish for 5-30 minutes depending on how far away they live from the ocean and after that they'll be activated for content.

      Yes, this is precisely my argument. You describe the scenario quite accurately, but there are two important bits: first of all, the majority of people on the Net are "stupid", and they will click the "Install this plugin" button. Second, most of them will wait for it to load most 1-2 minutes, then leave the site.

      Installation experience is also an important part of it. Silverlight installer, when run, just displays a single window with a huge "Install Silverlight" logo - once clicked, it does everything automatically. Flash installer doesn't even bother with the button - it's literally a one-click installation, as soon as installer is run, it does everything that's needed without further prompts. In contrast, JRE installer is your traditional kind, with a several-page wizard. A guy who just wants to view a page (and consider what kind of pages might actually be using Flash/Silverlight/JavaFX - not kernel.org, for sure!) is very likely to just close the installer immediately as soon as he finds out that he's supposed to think about such important questions as "where do you want to install this".

      Double fun: the current Sun's JRE installer for Windows has a checkbox to download and install OpenOffice.org. That checkbox is turned on by default. If a user decides that he cares enough to install the JRE to be able to access some JavaFX-using web site, but can't be bothered enough to carefully read everything in the installer wizard, and just clicks Next-Next-Next-Finish (and c'mon, this is what most people do!), he'll also have to wait for OO.org to download (which is definitely not small) and install, too.

      Flash is the worst pile of crap ever. Silverlight makes me feel icky.

      Why? Both work. I understand how someone may be opposed to the concept of proprietary browser plugins over HTML in general, but I see no reason to prefer something out of Flash/Silverlight/JavaFX over others from a user perspective. For a user, the best is whatever he has already (which is usually Flash), or whatever he can install most quickly (which is also Flash, though Silverlight is almost there as well). Developer's perspective is a different thing, but there I'd say that Silverlight is clearly ahead of all of them with respect to features, performance and development convenience. For designers, I hear that Flash tools are still vastly superior than anything else. So, briefly, JavaFX has nothing to show for users, nothing to show for designers, and nothing to show for developers. Why bother?

    4. Re:Not really, no. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 4, Informative

      The download for Java *is* as small as possible. If you go to Sun's download page and select the "Windows Kernel Installation", the installer is 0.20 MB

      It then dynamically downloads components from the network as required.

      More information about this here.

      Don't ask me why (I guess it's an experimental feature they're prepping for the Java 7 release) but for the time being you have to access it via Sun's developer site rather than the consumer java.com one. Hmmm.

    5. Re:Not really, no. by synthesizerpatel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      eh. I leave the site when Silverlight comes up. When Flash came out originally people were all grumpy about it not being HTML compliant.. Now it's the standard? How times change.

      And from a technology perspective, Flash isn't better simply because it's more pervasive -- it's just more pervasive. It's advantagous to use it, but not better.

      I don't think the strategy here is that Sun expects all the flash developers to download NetBeans and start writing Java -- Sun's got a lot of people programming Java already, this just collateralizes on their existing skillsets and allows them to compete in a market that wasn't as viable for them without this feature.

      I think Processing nailed the concept better though.

    6. Re:Not really, no. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      eh. I leave the site when Silverlight comes up. When Flash came out originally people were all grumpy about it not being HTML compliant.. Now it's the standard? How times change.

      The people who grumbled about Flash being non-standard-compliant were always just a few geeks, a tiny minority on the whole. The annoyance for most was that it required something else apart from your browser to install in order to be viewed. These days, stats for Flash coverage is >90% of all desktops with web browsers - in part because most Windows computers come with at least some version of Flash preinstalled - so it's no longer an issue.

      And from a technology perspective, Flash isn't better simply because it's more pervasive -- it's just more pervasive.

      Yes, of course it's not a tech advantage. It is a marketing advantage though (reach the broadest audience).

    7. Re:Not really, no. by szundi · · Score: 1

      Yes, and Java coverage is 90%+ too.

    8. Re:Not really, no. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      On the home desktop? Hardly believable, though I'd appreciate if you give a link to your sources if you have any.

    9. Re:Not really, no. by szundi · · Score: 1

      My website has google analytics installed. I have a lot of visitors brought by google adwords, it's in hungary. Google analytics told me that it's 91.43% (now checked) who has java installed.

      I have to admit that only 1.84% did not have some flash versions installed

      I think it's pretty awesome for java, as it's not the everyone's tool to make cool (and idiot) web page designs but a serious programming platform, so not really competitors. You can read about Jonathan's blog about it too (ceo of sun)

    10. Re:Not really, no. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I think it's pretty awesome for java

      I do not deny that. The market is pretty hard these days, and you've got to keep up. With Microsoft bringing Silverlight in, Sun had to reply - and it's good that they did bring their project to release. If anything, competition is good for all of us end users.

      as it's not the everyone's tool to make cool (and idiot) web page designs but a serious programming platform, so not really competitors.

      They may be trying to position it that way, but in practice, what actual features does it have compared to Flash and Silverlight that would make it different in that respect?

    11. Re:Not really, no. by szundi · · Score: 1

      Not competitors i meant for Java. JavaFX is the competitor now based on Java

      My personal opinion is that maybe the graphics and other 'cool' tools embedded in the JavaFX may not be better than Flash etc, but you have the power of Java with you! That is the difference that i always dreamt of: having a cool framework to make cool websites and in parallel have the power to make these web sites not just cool animated but do something after some relatively easy programming (compared to a business application in flash... hah!)

    12. Re:Not really, no. by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but the newest .NET runtime is something like 200-300 MB.

      So, its Silverlight + .NET at hundreds of MB vs JavaFX + JRE at less than 20 MB.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    13. Re:Not really, no. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      My personal opinion is that maybe the graphics and other 'cool' tools embedded in the JavaFX may not be better than Flash etc, but you have the power of Java with you! That is the difference that i always dreamt of: having a cool framework to make cool websites and in parallel have the power to make these web sites not just cool animated but do something after some relatively easy programming (compared to a business application in flash... hah!)

      This is precisely what Silverlight offers, s/Java/.NET/

      And yes, I think that, in the long term, it's what will kill Flash. Unless Adobe develops their own framework.

    14. Re:Not really, no. by szundi · · Score: 1

      I don't know .NET, i think you are right.

      JavaFX has other advantages for Java developers. I clearly know and accept that a .NET developer never will be a Java developer and vica versa, because they have projects to support. How could they? JavaFX allows you to use your preexisting classes, write real programs, etc. such as silverlight.

      I'm sorry, but i was just talking about JavaFX vs. Flash, not Silverlight. Maybe Silverlight will win overall, because it has a better GUI IDE and fancy stuffs, and these are important for existing Flash developers. Sun has a weak(er) spot here, for example i would pay a lot for an Expression Blend for Java :)

  24. Who needs Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just created a clone of asteroids on it in a couple hours without ever using it before. I've programmed in Flash for years and, even though JavaFX has a long rode to adoption ahead of it, it's *way* better than flash/flex in terms of ease of use and power. Comparing Flash to JavaFX is like comparing the old TI-82 programming language to MatLab. Seriously, JavaFX blows it out of the water. It may never win on adoption given the ingrained nature of Flash (would have probably had a good chance before AS3 though) but it definitely wins for (admittedly less important) technical merits. It'll be absolutely killer for web-based games.

    I don't regard Silverlight as a viable RIA language since I haven't met anyone yet who wouldn't rather spend their day french kissing a rabid bear than code in Silverlight.

    1. Re:Who needs Flash? by karstux · · Score: 1

      Can it use accelerated OpenGL in the browser? If so, that would put it ahead of Flash by a large margin.

      --
      Don't whistle while you're pissing.
    2. Re:Who needs Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would assume so. OpenGL in applets has been possible for quite some time with JOGL (jnlp can use native libs). See here.

  25. Java is DEAD!! by MadClown69 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't really understand why Sun bothers. They had there chance with Java and blow it. .NET will be the platform that you can write once and run anywhere. JavaFX is just said compared to Flash and Silverlight.

    1. Re:Java is DEAD!! by Moochman · · Score: 1

      Oh, there said and blow there chance! Your rite!

    2. Re:Java is DEAD!! by Vexorian · · Score: 1
      Your comment would make sense if it wasn't for a little thing... It is bullshit. Try checking out marketshare, Java is still beating .NET's ass. My cell phone? Running Java games already. Oh, you think it would run a .NET app? oh snap, it does not run windows, so screw it.

      .NET will be the platform that you can write once and run anywhere.

      hahahahahaha

      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    3. Re:Java is DEAD!! by zoid.com · · Score: 1

      I don't really understand why Sun bothers.
      They had there chance with Java and blow it. .NET will be the platform that you can write once and run anywhere. JavaFX is just said compared to Flash and Silverlight.

      I really don't understand why you bother. You had a chance but you blow it.

    4. Re:Java is DEAD!! by Adam+Jorgensen · · Score: 1

      Really? As much as I dislike Java as a language, I am still forced to admit that it has a huge share of the market when it comes to a lot of development, espcially large-scale corporate development. .NET is cute, but is does not have that level of penetration.

    5. Re:Java is DEAD!! by MadClown69 · · Score: 0

      You guys really can't see whats coming for Java. Let me lay it out for you what the next 5 years is going to be. 1. Java finally dies on the desktop and .NET has 98% plus of the market on desktop. 2. Android and the iPhone are the dominant platforms for mobile and java stays in the low single digit percentage. 3. 95 plus percent of Businesses use .NET on the server or Mono when using Linux, Unix, Mac or Solaris. The last 5% are the big guys like Amazon & Google who will use Java only because its legacy. 4. Single digit percentage use JavaFX. Sun gives up on it.

    6. Re:Java is DEAD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I don't really understand why Sun bothers. They had there chance with Java and blow it. .NET will be the platform that you can write once and run anywhere. JavaFX is just said compared to Flash and Silverlight.

      On what platform does silverlight run on again?
      http://www.crn.com/software/212100582

      Let us all know when .net runs anywhere from embedded to mainframes.

      I dub thee super-troll.

  26. "and silverlight" by Vexorian · · Score: 1

    "Sun released JavaFX 1.0 today, in a bid to take on Adobe's Flash and Microsoft's Silverlight technologies

    Why exactly would Sun want to take on Silverlight? It is not like silverlight is even relevant right now... ...Ok, it may already have an amazing marketshare of 0.01 percent the pages that abuse annoying multimedia...

    --

    Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
  27. bleh by Vexorian · · Score: 0, Redundant

    We are going to support Linux and Solaris

    One day, just like chrome is going to run on Linux, one day...

    Really, it annoys Linux users to be treated like the later guy, it should be feel even worse for Solaris people, even Sun treats you like something that is ok not to support from the first day. It was possible to just delay the whole freaking release, but even for Sun it is perfectly ok to just screw these operating systems and only care about OS/X and windows, that's great.

    --

    Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
  28. No solaris version...hahaha by FictionPimp · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Sun: Our OS is so insignificant even we won't develop for it.

  29. H.264 or GTFO by benjin · · Score: 1

    Seriously, what is with the @#$% non standards? On2? Huh? I thought this was Java? Just give me any easy way to post videos that anyone can see. At least Flash can use an H.264. I hate having to re-encode things over and over again for different mediums. It would be nice to have a link that would work on everything from a Wii/PS3 to an iPhone without having to have licensing deals bootstrapped to the tech all the time. Youtube on the iPhone is the biggest one in my mind that is just about worthless.

  30. Sun are so...enterprise by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Seriously, look at the "Start" page on the JavaFX website. It gives you a choice of *three* radio buttons, and confusingly presents three different JavaFX-related packages. Nowhere does it say, "download all of these and get started," or even "which one do I want? Click our little expanding

    button to find out."

    Combine that with the 2nd-tier graphic design and interactivity going on all over the place, and it feels sort of like something that a) isn't going to win over the designer crowd and b) WHY on earth would Linux fans look at this as anything other than a snub? Sigh. (Anyway, I've downloaded all three packages, and I'll give it a go...)

    1. Re:Sun are so...enterprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I clicked the "Windws" link

    2. Re:Sun are so...enterprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On top of that it runs like shit. I find it funny that flash has always been a powerful medium in this arena but too many arrogant power users and programmer types over looked it as some adware thing. Foolish. Flash is very powerful and now its flexing its muscle. Its brillaint for streaming vids, smooth and powerful fir interactive UI and animation and it can handle XML, dynamic data the works. So now we have MS with their Silverlight which isnt too bad, and ugh javafx.

  31. Fail! by AdamInParadise · · Score: 2, Informative

    I tried the demo over at javafx.com and I got two security warnings (they use self-signed certificates) and one popup with a EULA. And the demo have some serious usability and display issues.

    I love Java and it pays my bills but Sun really have a long way to go to reach the acceptance level of Flash.

    --
    Nobox: Only simple products.
  32. Openness is the difference! by icknay · · Score: 1

    The big difference between Java FX, Flash, and Silverlight is that Sun suggests that the stack will be open source, and Sun's track record of open-sourcing things is excellent. That would be a really significant improvement for the open internet .. vs. the ridiculous situation now with the de-facto dominance of totally proprietary Flash. Java FX may have an uphill fight, but it's clearly the one to root for if you don't want the internet locked up by Adobe or Microsoft. See here: http://java.sun.com/javafx/faqs.jsp#2

  33. Your take? by Gazzonyx · · Score: 1

    I know we've spoke a few times on Java and you're fairly knowledgeable on quite a few aspects of it; what's your take on JavaFX? I looked at some of the code and it looked like refactored XML. While I both love and hate Java, I try to avoid 'enterprise' Java like the plague... it's becoming an ugly monster. The concepts are solid, but the implementation leaves you feeling like Sun is in dire straights for some guys with beards.

    Care to go out on a limb about the future of JavaFX?

    --

    If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

    1. Re:Your take? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      what's your take on JavaFX?

      I have sort of a 'meh' reaction to it. It's not that the technology isn't cool, but it's a solution looking for a problem. Much like Silverlight, but without the antitrust practices to force it into use. In particular, its intended use as a platform on top of applets bothers me. Applets died out for a lot of good reasons. There's no good argument to be made for their revival. Especially with Flash and/or DHTML providing nearly all the advantages of Applets. Just let sleeping dogs lie and focus on using the technology elsewhere.

      There is a possibility that JavaFX could be useful on cell phones. However, I don't see it happening. Sun is good at creating abstract technologies that provide options to the market. They're not so good at creating firm solutions that can hold their own in a competitive environment. The competition may be technologically inferior, but at least their end to end solution is practical.

      Which is what I'm seeing with cell phones. Android may be only pseudo-Java based, but it provides the necessary phone technology top to bottom. The amount of customization necessary is pretty minimal. Meanwhile, Sun is pushing this JavaFX technology which is only a small piece of the puzzle. (Arguably the least important piece!) Handset manufacturers would have to adapt their phone software to meet the technology rather than having a pre-rolled solution available. Thus there's not much incentive to ship JavaFX.

      In effect, JavaFX is DOA. You can throw it on the pile with PalmOS Cobalt, Shockwave, VRML, and other interesting technologies that failed to properly position themselves in the marketplace.

      FWIW, I'm flattered you consider my opinion important enough to ask. :-)

  34. Well yes.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    But they are alienating their main clients: Solaris users.

    For somebody that has made a living from Solaris for several years, the message could not be more ominous: don't use Solaris, not even ourselves can be arsed to support it.

    Nice one Sun, nice one.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  35. "notable absence" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The lack of a GNU/Linux release is not a "notable absence" at all, it's an entirely predictable absence. And does anybody actually use Solaris as a desktop OS any more (if so, you have my sympathy)?

  36. Not a flash contender by samael · · Score: 1

    With Flash I arrive at a page and there's some content staring at me, waiting to be played with.

    With this I arrive at a page, click on a "Jave Webstart" link, wait for it to download, wait while it says "Downloading Application" and then, if I'm lucky, get to play with something.

    Not only that, but while Flash happily picks up my proxy settings, Java simply times out and gives an exception after a minute or so.

    This is hardly the user experience that I want...

  37. Pushing to the desktop by Osvaldo+Doederlein · · Score: 1

    Let's not even begin to compare Microsoft's vs Sun's power to push stuff to the desktops of the masses, it's not even funny.

    For a reality check, see in Jonathan Schwartz's blog how Microsoft bought, for an undisclosed but certainly huge pile of cash, the privilege of bundling some of their stuff (e.g. Windows Live toolbar) with Sun's Java updates.

  38. Talk about delusions of grandeur by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not supporting linux and solaris, which have less than 5% of the desktop market, is not notable and is, in fact, good business sense.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    1. Re:Talk about delusions of grandeur by TwinkieStix · · Score: 1

      Not when you are talking SDKs - and especially Java SDKs. I haven't seen a study to prove it, but I am absolutely sure that the Linux adoption rate among JAVA DEVELOPERS is much higher than 5%. At my company (an all Java shop), Linux adoption among developers is about 80%. As far as I know, the output of stuff created with the SDK work fine under Linux.

    2. Re:Talk about delusions of grandeur by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 0, Troll

      What part of "desktop" did you not understand?

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  39. Regarding Linux/Solaris support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AFAIK, JavaFX works on both platforms, except for the video and the hardware acceleration parts.
    Even a lot of Linux distros don't support both video and hardware acceleration out of the box and you have to go through installing from restricted repos to do that. I am a bit miffed that I cannot *develop* JavaFX apps day one, but I sure can run them if I have Java 6 installed.
    I think the runtime issue might be resolved by next year as more and more computers are shipped with Java 6 by default.
    JFX does hardware accelerated 3d which in itself is a big win over Flash. I would love it if I can develop small widgets on my site without having to purchase an Adobe license for it. I don't plan to write a photo manager or something like that, just nifty little gadgets.
    On the whole, Sun has some things to sort out esp. in the runtime delivery department, but to me, this seems like a great start.

  40. Alpha quality by metamatic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1. It needs to be an order of magnitude faster to load. I don't have to wait 20 seconds for Flash movies to start playing.

    2. It needs to not require a new runtime, with two nuisance security/license agreement dialogs.

    3. It needs to not crash Firefox.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    1. Re:Alpha quality by rossjudson · · Score: 1

      1. Try using some hardware purchased after 1999.
      2. It's a library, more or less. It's shared, the theory being that you download the jfx runtime once, and from then on you have it.
      3. I couldn't agree more. Particularly when you drag applets out of the browser. Or maybe there's just some weird compatibility thing going on with one of my browser plugins.

    2. Re:Alpha quality by metamatic · · Score: 1

      1. MacBook Pro from last year. Try not being patronizing. Java startup still has major performance issues.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  41. How is this cross-platform? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    > The lack of a Linux or Solaris release is a notable absence.

    Aaaaand this is cross-platform how? Does "cross-platform" now mean it'll run on Vista Home and Vista Ultimate?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:How is this cross-platform? by cowwoc2001 · · Score: 1

      It runs on all platforms so yes it is cross-platform. The development kit isn't out for Linux yet but that's coming very soon. Also please note that the development kit is out for non-Windows platforms and that Linux is hardly the target audience for desktop users ;)

  42. javafx language by rossjudson · · Score: 1

    The runtime library in jfx has been a long time coming, and raises the bar in JavaLand to an acceptable starting point for creating visuals with sophisticated hardware-accelerated effects.

    The principle flaw of the graphics runtime is its pervasive single-threading model, which means it will never be able to achieve smooth animation of sophisticated displays. The technical excellence of the JVM goes to waste under this display model. The good news is that the jfx team is certainly aware of this, and may be able to address it. Apple splits the scene graph from the rendering graph, and it's the right way to do it.

    The most interesting part of jfx is the language itself. It combines three key features:

    1. Self-adjusting computation through the compile-time construction of a dynamic dataflow graph, with a goal of minimal recomputation. The dataflow can easily and extensively reconfigure itself at runtime.

    2. Strong declarative sequence manipulation, fully integrated with 1, fully supporting the goal of minimal recomputation and propagation of minimal change.

    3. Simple and sensible class/object literal notation. Almost-complete compatibility with existing Java code (with a few irritating limitations, such as an inability to call non-default constructors).

    The language feels a bit incomplete to me, but I can see where they're going, and it's a pretty nice place. Coming from a Java/Scala perspective, the type system of jfx is pretty weak generally, but it does a fine job for its core cases.

    Relative to Java, I see about a 10 to 1 reduction in code for most UI tasks...but to get there, you have to think about declarative sequence manipulation. Things like this:

    public class Nest extends Operation {
            override var items = bind
                    [operands[0].boundLeaves(
                            function(leaf: Dimension) {
                                    Dimension {
                                            name: bind leaf.name
                                            items: bind for (o in operands[1..]) o.items };
                            }).items];
    }

    This folds together two tree-like structures, copying the second under each _leaf_ node of the first. The cool thing about this is the bind statements, which make this entire function _incremental_. After executing it, I can insert items anywhere I want in the first or second trees, and the jfx runtime will do the minimal recomputation necessary to build the new folded tree. This pervasive support for the effortless, listener-free handling of incremental modifications is pretty impressive in practice.

    That being said, there's a lot being shifted under the covers, in the name of being declarative. Whatever the flaws may be in the current runtime, there are some pretty smart people working on it, and it's only going to get better.

    I look forward to a tighter type system with generics, Scala-like abstract members, a concurrency model, and better tools. If you do Java programming (UI or not), it's worth your time to investigate it.

  43. Seriously? by denmarkw00t · · Score: 1
    I mean, good luck. Really. They need it. Flash has such a hold on the market that competitors are going to have a hard time unless:
    1. They can offer the plug-in for free
    2. Offer the plug-in cross-platform/browser
    3. Offer authoring software cheaper (or free, would be better - maybe in-IDE ads?)
    4. Create an easy convert-from-SWF tool

    Without ALL of those, no one else stands a chance. I mean, look at Silverlight - its a bomb. A crude bomb.

  44. Has anyone got this to work on a Mac? by robosmurf · · Score: 1

    I downloaded one of the sample apps (BrickBreaker), and it seemed to automatically install the JavaFX code.

    However, I then end up with an entirely black window for the app. This is on a G4 Mac.

    Not good for a first impression.