Swing is really not all that stable on platforms other than Window and Solaris. Now Mac OSX is pretty good to. On Linux, I was using JDK 1.4.1_01 from the Sun site. I couldn't believe how many of the Swing classes still created the error "Not Yet Implimented". I finally went back to JDK 1.3.1_06 but that has problems with Fonts... In the end, I tried the IBM version JDK 1.4 and it worked very well! Also, I could not get the gtk 2.0 version of Eclipse to work but the Motif version did. In the end, I guess that is good enough, isn't it? I just with IBM and SUN would quit fighting and make SWT a standard. It is already available for most OS's. If it is a standard then maybe we would feel more comfortable coding to it. Right now, it is like the extentions that Microsoft has put into IE. Sure, they work and might actually be defacto standard but that still doesn't make them right.
IBM does not actually work like most US companies. It works more like the Japanese or European model. One clear way to see this is that IBM has the least "No invented here". That is a major change from the IBM of the 80's. Don't get me wrong, it does have a lot of American tendencies.
I am not an expert but it appears that most Japanese companies tend to work in groups rather than alone. That is the partnership model that IBM is following. Compare that to Microsoft which follows the "One Microsoft Way" model.
Slashdot Mirror
Swing is really not all that stable on platforms other than Window and Solaris. Now Mac OSX is pretty good to. On Linux, I was using JDK 1.4.1_01 from the Sun site. I couldn't believe how many of the Swing classes still created the error "Not Yet Implimented". I finally went back to JDK 1.3.1_06 but that has problems with Fonts... In the end, I tried the IBM version JDK 1.4 and it worked very well! Also, I could not get the gtk 2.0 version of Eclipse to work but the Motif version did. In the end, I guess that is good enough, isn't it? I just with IBM and SUN would quit fighting and make SWT a standard. It is already available for most OS's. If it is a standard then maybe we would feel more comfortable coding to it. Right now, it is like the extentions that Microsoft has put into IE. Sure, they work and might actually be defacto standard but that still doesn't make them right.
IBM does not actually work like most US companies. It works more like the Japanese or European model. One clear way to see this is that IBM has the least "No invented here". That is a major change from the IBM of the 80's. Don't get me wrong, it does have a lot of American tendencies.
I am not an expert but it appears that most Japanese companies tend to work in groups rather than alone. That is the partnership model that IBM is following. Compare that to Microsoft which follows the "One Microsoft Way" model.