I consider a Java plugin as pretty much a non-starter these days. I'm not a big fan of Java the language (the tools are great), but I think the biggest problem has to do with Sun's historical handling of many issues regarding non-intrusive deployment (Flash excels at this), and applets being somewhat clunky back in the 90s. I can only see the Java plugin base going down and not up. Flash has some amazing market penetration numbers. Some 98% of all browser users have Flash 6 and above installed.
I'm interested in #2 because I want to do apps. And no matter how much you dress up a pig, it's still a pig. But it's all about the deployment these days. If we only had Ruby and proper widgets in the browser....hell I'd take Microsoft throwing us an SVG bone. Oh well, one can dream. Until then, web app development still languishes in the dark ages.
As a.NET developer I'd like to thank the slashdot community for their constant bashing of.NET. I think the lack of respect and interest in.NET has really helped drive down the supply of decent.NET developers thus contractor rates have been increasing nicely (since business really doesn't give a crap what the most techies prefer, they have are creating a massive demand for this work -> big demand/low supply = big $). Bob
Haha, nice one Bob. While the open source jihadists whine about Microsoft, you're out getting rich.
I used to do a lot of low-level network programming and logfiles were the way to go. Debuggers are worthless for getting the whole picture of your system.
Since MS couldn't succeed in screwing over Java into their own image - they reinvented it as C# - nothing more than a pale immitation. Sorry.NET guys - your guiding light in Anders failed.
Bahah, are Java guys the most bitter developers in the world? Sun is busy copying features from C# for Java 5 left and right, and Joe Bitter here calls C# a pale imitation. Hilarious.
First off, take a look at what's coming for C# 3.0 http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1253. Next, realize Java's failures on the client (Swing). After that ponder why even the open source or nothing crowd has nothing to do with Java and why Ruby and Python are big in that sphere.
Face it, Sun crippled Java to such an extent that it'll never be anything more than the next COBOL. If Sun had any clue (and they usually don't), they would call the Java 6 language feature-complete, and in the Dolphin time frame develop a new language to leverage the new VM and all the existing libraries..
Obviously Vim is completely worthless for Java development, but the vi plugins for Eclipse and IDEA aren't.
Emacs and Vim are dying tools. For all this nonsense "Dude, I'm hardcore I only use command line tools", they spend half their time trying to bring the same functionality of modern IDEs to these hopelessly cripped console editors (bolted on guis don't count).
I love Vim for editing config files and quick edits, but it and Emacs (except maybe for Lisp) are completely worthless for heavy duty development.
It's true. But what is "turning it over" (it's already open source) to random group of people going to acomplish. It's not going to change the fact the codebase is a clusterfsck that nobody wants to touch.
"In an ideal world open source should not be dependent on the capriciousness of any one corporation," OpenOffice.org project leader Louis Suarez-Potts told vnunet.com.
It's already not dependant. It's open source. Do with it as you please. IBM already has.
IBM used the OpenOffice source code last year to create a separate version of the suite as part of its Workplace offering, which is allowed under the application's licence.
Oops, IBM already forked it, so what is Louis talking about again?
A fork is considered inappropriate for open source projects, as it forces the developer community to spread its attention over multiple, yet similar, projects.
*cough*, bullshit.
"If OpenOffice did become independent we would be interested in talking to Sun about it, but it's not holding us back in any way," he wrote.
So IBM officially doesn't care one way or the other, so what are Louis' real motives. That's easy. It's all about corporate hatred and biting the hand that feeds you.
As for the embedding of Gecko, I said to hell with it. I took a page from Apple, and used KHTML instead. The loss in portability by not going with Gecko was well worth the far quicker development time, the lower memory consumption, the increased responsiveness, and the higher degree of stability of KHTML.
What exactly is the portability problem with KHTML? I would be interested in a KHTML browser for windows and it's been said that with Qt4 and the work of various developers you'll be able to get an almost complete KDE 4 environment in windows.
Thank God for C#? Oh please, the B-sharps have more of an influence on Java than that pretender of a programming language. Micrsoft couldn't even invent it's own DOS for heaven's sake.
Haha, watching you people in denial is always hilarious. In your fantasy world C# had nothing to do with the new features in Java 5...right? Hilarious
I was being too giving when I said it approached the functionality of win 3.1. Obviously, HTML/Javascript hacks is a complete joke as a "toolkit" and you're extremely limited to what you can do in a sandboxed browser environment. You can't even open up a persistent socket without Flash. Do you really think that AJAX is anything besides a clunky, hack that is used because of the deployment opportunities? I guess you java server-side guys are so limited in your options, that you have to put the best face forward on what is utter crap for rich client functionality.
Client OS is becoming largely irrelevant these days anyway - the browser is where it's at, and Microsoft is losing their share there pretty quickly.
Which is why they were originally so desperate to "win" the browser war. Unfortunately (for Microsoft), killing netscape just ended up spawning Mozilla/Firefox...
Sorry to burst your bubble, but hardcore DHTML/AJAX barely gets you to the functionality of Windows 3.1. Vista with Avalon/XAML will just drive the point home even more. Mozilla as a platform has always been more talk than action, and Firefox has already settled into its niche. But, heh, Java developers have been relegated to the server so I understand your point of view.
And the more I think about it, the more I think he is confusing Mustang with some features in Dolphin (7). He's a little over-optimistic about the native fidelity and font quality of Mustang. It'll be better, but it won't be native. I contend that one of the biggest mistakes Sun ever made was not to use native fonts in Swing.
That solution is not cross platform, which is one of the main benefits of using Java, and is completely restricted to Windows. If you want to be tied to the horribly buggy piece of crap that is Windows that's great but forgive the rest of us for having a brain.
Any developer that's worth anything has already moved away from Windows.
And that's why there isn't any competition for windows on the client, because losers like you believe (maybe) in that crap.
Java7 will have swt like widgets that will integrate and look native to each platform its running on. A windows app will look like windows in java. And a linux app will appear like a normal gnome app on Linux.
You have any links on these widget plans for Java 7? Better late than never I guess.
That was a good explanation of all the clamor over Matisse. Java and Swing will never be a VB killer, but at least it gives Swing developers a nice layout manager.
Re:Looks like they've got subpixel in there
on
NetBeans 5.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
...that is if you're running a later Mustang build
Looks like they've got subpixel in there
on
NetBeans 5.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I saw some screenshots of it, and it looks like the editor finally got the subpixel rendering in there. It's still no cleartype, but at least the editor is now somewhat readable on a LCD.
Sat down at the local Borders and read it in about an hour after it caused a big stink over at javalobby.org and theserverside.com a couple months ago. Ruby's a real nice language and I'd personally choose it over Java for many projects, but it's just falling into it's niche with the Ruby on Rails hype, just like PHP, Perl, and Python fell into their niches a while back.
The thing is that a pure dynamically typed language is never going to be the language "Beyond Java". But it doesn't have to be an either/or situation, as is already the case with languages like Boo and Dylan. Look at languages that do type inference with type declarations for method arguments and return types as "the future". Take a look at http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1253 for what Microsoft is doing with the next version of C#. That seems to be a more reasonable approach to the whole dynamic vs static typing debate. In fact, I would recommend searching http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/ to see what some of the "deep thinkers" about these issues say about the whole debate.
Ruby is nice, but Beyond Java seems more of a book to shake up the Java community and promote consulting services than any real insight onto what's "Beyond Java". I think Guido is even going to be pure some sort of type declarations in Python 3000 - whenever that comes out.
Sitting in front of your 'puter talking about "us the community" and apostilating about how source code equals freedom will make any slashdork obese and laughed at
Yes, and you develop in VS.NET and deploy on Mono. Rational people don't use that utterly, craptastic MonoDevelop shit for development - unless you're some deranged open source jihadist.
Since a lot of people using Mono might be coming from a traditional.NET environment, the author expects those people to be used to certain development tools. To that effect, the second chapter in the book is dedicated to introducing the reader to development tools that can be used with Mono, especially Mono Develop.
Bahaha. Mono is a deployment option for windows developers. Nobody in their right mind uses MonoDevelop when they can use VS.NET
Re:obvious but often denied
on
Mitnick on OSS
·
· Score: 1
The Capt. Obvious comments you've seen here are really "yeah, we can't really deny it since Mitnick is saying it, but we don't like talking about it anyway because it messes with the religion"
Slashdot Mirror
I consider a Java plugin as pretty much a non-starter these days. I'm not a big fan of Java the language (the tools are great), but I think the biggest problem has to do with Sun's historical handling of many issues regarding non-intrusive deployment (Flash excels at this), and applets being somewhat clunky back in the 90s. I can only see the Java plugin base going down and not up. Flash has some amazing market penetration numbers. Some 98% of all browser users have Flash 6 and above installed.
I'm interested in #2 because I want to do apps. And no matter how much you dress up a pig, it's still a pig. But it's all about the deployment these days. If we only had Ruby and proper widgets in the browser....hell I'd take Microsoft throwing us an SVG bone. Oh well, one can dream. Until then, web app development still languishes in the dark ages.
As a .NET developer I'd like to thank the slashdot community for their constant bashing of .NET. I think the lack of respect and interest in .NET has really helped drive down the supply of decent .NET developers thus contractor rates have been increasing nicely (since business really doesn't give a crap what the most techies prefer, they have are creating a massive demand for this work -> big demand/low supply = big $). Bob
Haha, nice one Bob. While the open source jihadists whine about Microsoft, you're out getting rich.
I used to do a lot of low-level network programming and logfiles were the way to go. Debuggers are worthless for getting the whole picture of your system.
Since MS couldn't succeed in screwing over Java into their own image - they reinvented it as C# - nothing more than a pale immitation. Sorry .NET guys - your guiding light in Anders failed.
Bahah, are Java guys the most bitter developers in the world? Sun is busy copying features from C# for Java 5 left and right, and Joe Bitter here calls C# a pale imitation. Hilarious.
First off, take a look at what's coming for C# 3.0 http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1253. Next, realize Java's failures on the client (Swing). After that ponder why even the open source or nothing crowd has nothing to do with Java and why Ruby and Python are big in that sphere.
Face it, Sun crippled Java to such an extent that it'll never be anything more than the next COBOL. If Sun had any clue (and they usually don't), they would call the Java 6 language feature-complete, and in the Dolphin time frame develop a new language to leverage the new VM and all the existing libraries..
Obviously Vim is completely worthless for Java development, but the vi plugins for Eclipse and IDEA aren't.
Emacs and Vim are dying tools. For all this nonsense "Dude, I'm hardcore I only use command line tools", they spend half their time trying to bring the same functionality of modern IDEs to these hopelessly cripped console editors (bolted on guis don't count).
I love Vim for editing config files and quick edits, but it and Emacs (except maybe for Lisp) are completely worthless for heavy duty development.
It's true. But what is "turning it over" (it's already open source) to random group of people going to acomplish. It's not going to change the fact the codebase is a clusterfsck that nobody wants to touch.
Hehe, humor is always the best comeback.
"In an ideal world open source should not be dependent on the capriciousness of any one corporation," OpenOffice.org project leader Louis Suarez-Potts told vnunet.com.
It's already not dependant. It's open source. Do with it as you please. IBM already has.
IBM used the OpenOffice source code last year to create a separate version of the suite as part of its Workplace offering, which is allowed under the application's licence.
Oops, IBM already forked it, so what is Louis talking about again?
A fork is considered inappropriate for open source projects, as it forces the developer community to spread its attention over multiple, yet similar, projects.
*cough*, bullshit.
"If OpenOffice did become independent we would be interested in talking to Sun about it, but it's not holding us back in any way," he wrote.
So IBM officially doesn't care one way or the other, so what are Louis' real motives. That's easy. It's all about corporate hatred and biting the hand that feeds you.
As for the embedding of Gecko, I said to hell with it. I took a page from Apple, and used KHTML instead. The loss in portability by not going with Gecko was well worth the far quicker development time, the lower memory consumption, the increased responsiveness, and the higher degree of stability of KHTML.
What exactly is the portability problem with KHTML? I would be interested in a KHTML browser for windows and it's been said that with Qt4 and the work of various developers you'll be able to get an almost complete KDE 4 environment in windows.
Thank God for C#? Oh please, the B-sharps have more of an influence on Java than that pretender of a programming language. Micrsoft couldn't even invent it's own DOS for heaven's sake.
Haha, watching you people in denial is always hilarious. In your fantasy world C# had nothing to do with the new features in Java 5...right? Hilarious
I was being too giving when I said it approached the functionality of win 3.1. Obviously, HTML/Javascript hacks is a complete joke as a "toolkit" and you're extremely limited to what you can do in a sandboxed browser environment. You can't even open up a persistent socket without Flash. Do you really think that AJAX is anything besides a clunky, hack that is used because of the deployment opportunities? I guess you java server-side guys are so limited in your options, that you have to put the best face forward on what is utter crap for rich client functionality.
Client OS is becoming largely irrelevant these days anyway - the browser is where it's at, and Microsoft is losing their share there pretty quickly.
Which is why they were originally so desperate to "win" the browser war. Unfortunately (for Microsoft), killing netscape just ended up spawning Mozilla/Firefox...
Sorry to burst your bubble, but hardcore DHTML/AJAX barely gets you to the functionality of Windows 3.1. Vista with Avalon/XAML will just drive the point home even more. Mozilla as a platform has always been more talk than action, and Firefox has already settled into its niche. But, heh, Java developers have been relegated to the server so I understand your point of view.
And the more I think about it, the more I think he is confusing Mustang with some features in Dolphin (7). He's a little over-optimistic about the native fidelity and font quality of Mustang. It'll be better, but it won't be native. I contend that one of the biggest mistakes Sun ever made was not to use native fonts in Swing.
That solution is not cross platform, which is one of the main benefits of using Java, and is completely restricted to Windows. If you want to be tied to the horribly buggy piece of crap that is Windows that's great but forgive the rest of us for having a brain.
Any developer that's worth anything has already moved away from Windows.
And that's why there isn't any competition for windows on the client, because losers like you believe (maybe) in that crap.
No, he's talking about Java 7 - which I'm assuming he's not confusing with Java 6 (Mustang). I already have a recent Mustang build.
Java7 will have swt like widgets that will integrate and look native to each platform its running on. A windows app will look like windows in java. And a linux app will appear like a normal gnome app on Linux.
You have any links on these widget plans for Java 7? Better late than never I guess.
That was a good explanation of all the clamor over Matisse. Java and Swing will never be a VB killer, but at least it gives Swing developers a nice layout manager.
...that is if you're running a later Mustang build
I saw some screenshots of it, and it looks like the editor finally got the subpixel rendering in there. It's still no cleartype, but at least the editor is now somewhat readable on a LCD.
Sat down at the local Borders and read it in about an hour after it caused a big stink over at javalobby.org and theserverside.com a couple months ago. Ruby's a real nice language and I'd personally choose it over Java for many projects, but it's just falling into it's niche with the Ruby on Rails hype, just like PHP, Perl, and Python fell into their niches a while back.
The thing is that a pure dynamically typed language is never going to be the language "Beyond Java". But it doesn't have to be an either/or situation, as is already the case with languages like Boo and Dylan. Look at languages that do type inference with type declarations for method arguments and return types as "the future". Take a look at http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1253 for what Microsoft is doing with the next version of C#. That seems to be a more reasonable approach to the whole dynamic vs static typing debate. In fact, I would recommend searching http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/ to see what some of the "deep thinkers" about these issues say about the whole debate.
Ruby is nice, but Beyond Java seems more of a book to shake up the Java community and promote consulting services than any real insight onto what's "Beyond Java". I think Guido is even going to be pure some sort of type declarations in Python 3000 - whenever that comes out.
Sitting in front of your 'puter talking about "us the community" and apostilating about how source code equals freedom will make any slashdork obese and laughed at
Yes, and you develop in VS.NET and deploy on Mono. Rational people don't use that utterly, craptastic MonoDevelop shit for development - unless you're some deranged open source jihadist.
Since a lot of people using Mono might be coming from a traditional .NET environment, the author expects those people to be used to certain development tools. To that effect, the second chapter in the book is dedicated to introducing the reader to development tools that can be used with Mono, especially Mono Develop.
Bahaha. Mono is a deployment option for windows developers. Nobody in their right mind uses MonoDevelop when they can use VS.NET
The Capt. Obvious comments you've seen here are really "yeah, we can't really deny it since Mitnick is saying it, but we don't like talking about it anyway because it messes with the religion"