Josh: I've had more than one AIR app fail to start because it was for an earlier version of the AIR runtime than I had, the EXT-JS online help was one of them, so versioning of AIR apps/runtimes has been an issue for me.
Joe D: There is an important difference between Silverlight/Air and JavaFX (but not Java). If a client computer has a Java 1.5 or greater installed and no JFX runtime, then the JFX runtime will be installed when the user starts a JavaFX based application. No seperate step for getting the runtime is needed, it occurs in the same stream of action as the loading of the app. No admin rights required, no installer to run, just a license agreement to accept (and personally, Sun should get it legal department in a dark room and beat them until they get rid of that too). Of course, users who've received u11/u12 will already have it installed, so no worries. So in essence the success of Runtime distribution lies in the hands of the ppl willing to get apps out there that help others by getting the runtime on ppl's computers. Something involving adult entertainment or cats with cheezburgers would probably be a good start :o) The question should probably not be 'Do desktops have JavaFX' but rather 'Do enough desktops have JavaSE 1.5 or higher' Secondly, whilst people are focusing on the penetration of Flash, its probably AIR we should be comparing with, as functionally (online/ offline, desktop integration, databases etc) its more comparable with JavaFX and JavaSE. I wonder what the penetration of AIR actually is (I haven't seen numbers from Adobe). On Mar 26, 6:32 am, Joe Data <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 25, 1:54 pm, Joshua Marinacci <[email protected]> wrote: > > > That's why caching is > > important and why JavaFX hitting 100m downloads of the runtime is > > important. It means that there are 100m desktops that can run your > > JavaFX app without having to download the runtime. (100m was in feb, > > i'm sure it's 200m+ by now). > > Downloads don't matter because of the "multiple download problem", > runtime penetration does. I believe that since JDK 6u11, JavaFX is > included in the JDK, so I already racked up two JavaFX downloads > because I got u11 and u12, and I will get one more with each new JDK > release. The same is true for JRE downloads, if the JRE includes > JavaFX. > > So the JavaFX team should publish the penetration rates, similar to > Flash (http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/ > version_penetration.html), as a better way to measure how widely > distributed JavaFX is. > > Also after a while, you will have exhausted all the computers that > JavaFX can get to easily (early adopters, JDK 1.6 auto-update), and > then it becomes a lot harder to gain more market share. Look at > Microsoft: They push Silverlight through their web page, through > Windows Update and through attractive content, and they don't even > publish their penetration rate, probably because it's too low (said to > be about 25% worldwide). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
