I don't mind applications looking the same on different platforms that much, I believe native look is highly overrated. The native feel is a different story, but most of it can be managed. I have deployed applications with a Plastik look and feel across different platforms and that seemed widely acceptable. It's certainly not as bad as Apple's products on Windows.
The area where Swing fails is in advanced integration. The whole JDIC story: the HTML renderer, opening files via file manager, the integrated file dialogs (or at least a decent cross-platform one), the system tray messages, hooking yourself into a file listener API and so on. Some things seem to finally get some attention, but at the same time desktop environments add new features that Swing probably won't support for at least half a decade. Peter Michael Neale wrote: > it goes back to the write once run anywhere thing - it wasn't just run > anywhere it was run and look EXACTLY the same everywhere. Which makes > sense for about 10 minutes until you walk outside and go "wait... do > we really want that?" - that last thought never happened to a lot of > people. > > On Jul 21, 8:53 pm, Christian Catchpole <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I think the AWT/Swing approach was flawed from the start.. "lets avoid >> some problems by doing it all ourselves.. and inheriting a squillion >> more". As mentioned in the SWT interview, "if the native platform >> gets a feature, you just inherit it". I think it's one of the reasons >> Java on the Desktop never took off. >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
