Yeah, that's a great extra for (X)Emacs. He's doing some great stuff to integrate Java and the shell, and I've got it installed on my box...
Sorry for forgetting to mention it...I highly recommend it for anyone that is interested in Java on UNIX. You'll also learn a ton about Emacs customization in the process (very useful).
Kudos to IBM for providing this environment (even if it expires after 90 days). Note: also thanks to the Blackdown team who have done an excellent job in less than excellent conditions to provide excellent tools that I rely on now.
A note on Java: This is actually a huge boon for Linux. Look at it this way...Linux provides an excellent (cheap and stable) platform on which to develop Java applications. I'm not talking about applets here...I'm talking about large / distributed software systems. I'm building one in a research setting right now using CORBA that's up to 40 KLOC.
I develop entirely on Linux using XEmacs, CVS, and make. For everyone who argues that there isn't a good Java development environment for Linux (article seen recently on ZDNet), that talk is for the birds. These are perfectly good tools that have been proven in the trenches writing code for the guts of the internet, UNIX, C/C++, and thousands of other packages / programs. If you want an environment that handles drag & drop JavaBeans, servlets, etc, go buy a fast box with 256 MB memory and JBuilder. The tool works just fine...just put the horsepower behind it. This isn't to say that XEmacs could be useful for the average Joe programmer (VB developers-come-Java programmers). It does take some tinkering, but there are good develoment environments out there. Anyway, what does a good environment provide you that you can't accomplish with a shell, some scripts, and syntax highlighting. Nothing as far as I've seen except bulk, sluggishness, and programmers who don't understand the fundamentals of development and rely on the tools to find their problems (a poor way to program).
Linux provides a great platform for this kind of development, though, and the gains realized are immense. I can run my object servers spread across the network and virtually guarantee that my clients can run on Mac, Solaris, Linux, and even Microsoft as long as the appropriate Java runtime is installed. Remember, this is an application not an applet! The Swing toolkit is slow and has a huge memory footprint, granted, but there are also some fabulous Swing tools out there (NoMagic MagicDraw UML comes to mind).
I'm not getting religious here; I use Perl, Tcl/Tk, and C/C++ when appropriate. All I'm saying is that Java has its place, and a great toolkit like this one from IBM goes a long way to advancing the Java development capabilities of software developers who won't pay for SPARCs or Windows and want a customizable, robust, and fast environment.
So, knock off the hatred of Java, find some good development tools, and use it for what it's good for (use Flash for providing animations in web browsers), as a full featured applications development language with thorough APIs. It's not perfect, but it has its place in a development toolkit.
Virginia might be high on itself for passing UCITA (they DID pass it and our illustrious governor Gilmore signed it with one hand while stuffing the soft money into his pocket with the other) and having AOL up in NoVA, but here in central VA (aka hell), they aren't showing it either. It's a marathon of antique roadshow and the Mystery! thing they are showing in St. Louis. And I get 2 PBSs.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not directing religious fervor at MS. They have on occasion made some reasonable products -- the original flight simulator was cool. I was just bringing up the lack of real innovation. Optical mice have been around years...they just added a new interface (which is nice, esp the USB). It was lack of innovation that I was trying to reinforce.
The people at MS Research are doing some cool work (smart sym links isn't it).
Just didn't want to come across as bashing MS. Though judging by posts today, it seems that is pretty hard to believe. I'd much rather have better products and organizations stand on their own legs than have zealots out screaming injustice.
This is NOT flamebait...just some comments. So, don't get all bent out of shape and don't kill my karma for wanting to have this clarified. First of all, the "open source" world did not start 4 years ago. It started over 20 years ago. Programs like vi and emacs have roots that are much older than Linux has been present in the popular press and trade rags. Making the assumption the model of giving away source and protocols is dangerous. Think TCP/IP, HTTP, SMTP, UNIX, and a thousand other tools, languages, applications, and OSes that were available on the pre-popular internet. Second, that I know of, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have never written bug-free code in any language, C++, assembler, or otherwise. And, what makes a marketer qualified to cast judgement about the complexit of a languge. C++ might have some baggage and is certainly not my choice for a development project, but Algol was arcane and needlessly complex. C++ was revolutionary in bringing some (albeit very small) order to the process of software engineering by allowing developers to code in the context of objects in a system rather than thinking in terms of procedures. To get to the meat of your article...I don't think anyone believes that joe sixpack sitting at home with a cable modem will download Linux and hack himself out some kernel patches. I believe that you will find distributions that do not install the source during an install by default if you do some looking. Linux does not have to be closed source to be successful with the average user who trashes their autoexec.bat file...though don't you think there is a problem with having an autoexec.bat file in the frist place...Linux only has to hide the complexity from the average user. Microsoft does not have its stock price and market cap as a result of its closed source model. It has simply been the most exploitive user of the marketplace. Next time, match "considerable marketing expertise" with equally considerable time doing background research.
This is like those "revolutionary optical mice" that they released late last year. They use a laser instead of a ball on the underside of the mouse. Only cool thing about it is that when you turn one over to look at the laser (!), it reduces its power output.
Funny, I remember having one of those as a kid (somewhere around the time of King's Quest and Zork so say 1985) when we had a 4 inch tall 20MB hard drive. The only difference is that now they don't use the grid for a mouse pad. And they cost $60 in the stores!
It's too bad the general public (and popular technolog press) are so easily duped into believing that this is all cutting edge and new.
1) how many shots does it take to blow up a tank where the girl was straddling the cannon? who was driving anyway? 2) that's one heck of a "cheat" to be able to destroy the whole game (including source!) with a ctrl-alt-del-esque keystroke. 3) and who ever heard of trashing the code because you killed the process? 4) my girlfriend kept asking me "what does mean?" 5) what? no rail or BFG? who cares about a silly machine gun. c'mon, get creative! these episodes cost $1M+ per. 6) Quake III has better graphics. in all, one of the worst episodes, though not as bad as doing it in COPS format from last week. and besides, who would play a game where you just stand behind a metal barrier and shoot at mitosis-ing stuff that doesn't move? oh, wait...what was I thinking... Fox has sunk to a new low. - Bart Simpson
Slashdot Mirror
Good call...I forgot about that (sorry Paul).
Yeah, that's a great extra for (X)Emacs. He's doing some great stuff to integrate Java and the shell, and I've got it installed on my box...
Sorry for forgetting to mention it...I highly recommend it for anyone that is interested in Java on UNIX. You'll also learn a ton about Emacs customization in the process (very useful).
Kudos to IBM for providing this environment (even if it expires after 90 days). Note: also thanks to the Blackdown team who have done an excellent job in less than excellent conditions to provide excellent tools that I rely on now.
A note on Java:
This is actually a huge boon for Linux. Look at it this way...Linux provides an excellent (cheap and stable) platform on which to develop Java applications. I'm not talking about applets here...I'm talking about large / distributed software systems. I'm building one in a research setting right now using CORBA that's up to 40 KLOC.
I develop entirely on Linux using XEmacs, CVS, and make. For everyone who argues that there isn't a good Java development environment for Linux (article seen recently on ZDNet), that talk is for the birds. These are perfectly good tools that have been proven in the trenches writing code for the guts of the internet, UNIX, C/C++, and thousands of other packages / programs. If you want an environment that handles drag & drop JavaBeans, servlets, etc, go buy a fast box with 256 MB memory and JBuilder. The tool works just fine...just put the horsepower behind it. This isn't to say that XEmacs could be useful for the average Joe programmer (VB developers-come-Java programmers). It does take some tinkering, but there are good develoment environments out there. Anyway, what does a good environment provide you that you can't accomplish with a shell, some scripts, and syntax highlighting. Nothing as far as I've seen except bulk, sluggishness, and programmers who don't understand the fundamentals of development and rely on the tools to find their problems (a poor way to program).
Linux provides a great platform for this kind of development, though, and the gains realized are immense. I can run my object servers spread across the network and virtually guarantee that my clients can run on Mac, Solaris, Linux, and even Microsoft as long as the appropriate Java runtime is installed. Remember, this is an application not an applet! The Swing toolkit is slow and has a huge memory footprint, granted, but there are also some fabulous Swing tools out there (NoMagic MagicDraw UML comes to mind).
I'm not getting religious here; I use Perl, Tcl/Tk, and C/C++ when appropriate. All I'm saying is that Java has its place, and a great toolkit like this one from IBM goes a long way to advancing the Java development capabilities of software developers who won't pay for SPARCs or Windows and want a customizable, robust, and fast environment.
So, knock off the hatred of Java, find some good development tools, and use it for what it's good for (use Flash for providing animations in web browsers), as a full featured applications development language with thorough APIs. It's not perfect, but it has its place in a development toolkit.
Kudos to IBM. Keep up the good support.
Virginia might be high on itself for passing UCITA (they DID pass it and our illustrious governor Gilmore signed it with one hand while stuffing the soft money into his pocket with the other) and having AOL up in NoVA, but here in central VA (aka hell), they aren't showing it either. It's a marathon of antique roadshow and the Mystery! thing they are showing in St. Louis. And I get 2 PBSs.
Anyone got a tape or webcast?
Yes, you're right. They are LEDs.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not directing religious fervor at MS. They have on occasion made some reasonable products -- the original flight simulator was cool. I was just bringing up the lack of real innovation. Optical mice have been around years...they just added a new interface (which is nice, esp the USB). It was lack of innovation that I was trying to reinforce.
The people at MS Research are doing some cool work (smart sym links isn't it).
Just didn't want to come across as bashing MS. Though judging by posts today, it seems that is pretty hard to believe. I'd much rather have better products and organizations stand on their own legs than have zealots out screaming injustice.
This is NOT flamebait...just some comments. So, don't get all bent out of shape and don't kill my karma for wanting to have this clarified. First of all, the "open source" world did not start 4 years ago. It started over 20 years ago. Programs like vi and emacs have roots that are much older than Linux has been present in the popular press and trade rags. Making the assumption the model of giving away source and protocols is dangerous. Think TCP/IP, HTTP, SMTP, UNIX, and a thousand other tools, languages, applications, and OSes that were available on the pre-popular internet. Second, that I know of, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have never written bug-free code in any language, C++, assembler, or otherwise. And, what makes a marketer qualified to cast judgement about the complexit of a languge. C++ might have some baggage and is certainly not my choice for a development project, but Algol was arcane and needlessly complex. C++ was revolutionary in bringing some (albeit very small) order to the process of software engineering by allowing developers to code in the context of objects in a system rather than thinking in terms of procedures. To get to the meat of your article...I don't think anyone believes that joe sixpack sitting at home with a cable modem will download Linux and hack himself out some kernel patches. I believe that you will find distributions that do not install the source during an install by default if you do some looking. Linux does not have to be closed source to be successful with the average user who trashes their autoexec.bat file...though don't you think there is a problem with having an autoexec.bat file in the frist place...Linux only has to hide the complexity from the average user. Microsoft does not have its stock price and market cap as a result of its closed source model. It has simply been the most exploitive user of the marketplace. Next time, match "considerable marketing expertise" with equally considerable time doing background research.
This is like those "revolutionary optical mice" that they released late last year. They use a laser instead of a ball on the underside of the mouse. Only cool thing about it is that when you turn one over to look at the laser (!), it reduces its power output.
Funny, I remember having one of those as a kid (somewhere around the time of King's Quest and Zork so say 1985) when we had a 4 inch tall 20MB hard drive. The only difference is that now they don't use the grid for a mouse pad. And they cost $60 in the stores!
It's too bad the general public (and popular technolog press) are so easily duped into believing that this is all cutting edge and new.
1) how many shots does it take to blow up a tank where the girl was straddling the cannon? who was driving anyway? 2) that's one heck of a "cheat" to be able to destroy the whole game (including source!) with a ctrl-alt-del-esque keystroke. 3) and who ever heard of trashing the code because you killed the process? 4) my girlfriend kept asking me "what does mean?" 5) what? no rail or BFG? who cares about a silly machine gun. c'mon, get creative! these episodes cost $1M+ per. 6) Quake III has better graphics. in all, one of the worst episodes, though not as bad as doing it in COPS format from last week. and besides, who would play a game where you just stand behind a metal barrier and shoot at mitosis-ing stuff that doesn't move? oh, wait...what was I thinking... Fox has sunk to a new low. - Bart Simpson