The current Pivot samples does not provide good desktop application. Many example cannot execute without browser unless we write some extra code to provide Application class.
If you want to emphasize such Java desktop usage scenario, it is better to enhance these sample/source/tutorials. Also if desktop application is more focused, the full advantage of Java language, e.g, static type checking, generics, annotation, (some builder style declarative approach) to be employed in Pivot. Pivot lacks basic CRUD pattern which is supported in other frameworks. As I provided some sample CRUD code using generics, there are potential that Pivot can provide a easiest framework to develop rapid (yet reasonably sophisticated, and maintainable) GUI front-end. If these library are more provided(not just individual features which must be combined to develop actual application), Pivot will be more attractive. On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Greg Brown <gk_br...@verizon.net> wrote: > > IIA will likely mean nothing to anyone. > > That's exactly the point. RIA means too many different things to too many > different people, and more often than not has a negative connotation. > Macromedia invented the term "RIA" to describe what they were trying to do > with Flash - why shouldn't we invent a new acronym that better describes > what we are doing? > > > Why not go with RIA+ or just RIC for Rich Internet Client. > > Both are too similar to RIA. I want to get away from the term "rich". The > emphasis needs to be on the desktop, not the web, so something like > installable has to be in there. > > > RIA has an R in it meaning Rich. I'm reminded of the book "Filthy Rich > Clients". > > I have read it. It's full of good information, but is also several years > old and was named when RIAs were more strongly in favor. > > > I'm not sure why you feel RIA is going the way of the browser only > > That's my perception, based on various things I read and hear. I'm > interested in hearing what others think though. > > G > > -- Cheers, calathus
