On Aug 1, 7:01 am, Weiqi Gao <[email protected]> wrote: You make some excellent points. Let me first just say I don't intend to diminish or suggest that Java vs Mono is inferior in any way, just trying to make sense of Java's role and ability to succeed in a very complex open source desktop environment in contrast to Mono.
> 1. By definition, all (true to the philosophy) Java applications run on > Linux (WORA). So there are tons of Java applications that run on Linux. > Every Posse Applet of the Week and GUI Application of the Week, etc., > run on Linux. Some Java applications that I ran on Linux includes: > MindMap, Spark, Limewire, the Java based video player applet whose name > escapes me at the moment, the Java based word processor applet thingy > whose name escapes me at the moment. If we count development tools, the > list will be a lot longer. I got a free license of IntelliJ RubyMinds, > a Java based Ruby IDE through the JUG I participate in, and it runs on > Linux. Absolutely. There are tons of good Java applications that run on Linux. What I'm trying to understand and failing miserably at is why these awsome Java applications don't get promoted more as great solutions for the Linux desktop in contrast to other projects built on other languages. Why doesn't Java app XYZ get promoted by Ubuntu or included in their repository for users to search for? Maybe it's just a packaging problem? If it's not packaged as a .deb but as a webstart instead, then it's not a real, usable application? Maybe it's an ownership thing? If it's not built by the Linux community for the Linux community, then it's no good? Or maybe it's bias by association? This was developed on another operating system therefore it can't be used as a Linux solution. I don't believe any of that of course, just wondering if the Linux community just an ideological disconnect that Java can't win in comparison to Mono. > 2. ... (Not that they should stop working on it. I want one badly, for > amd64. I'm just asking a rhetorical question.) > Oh my gosh. I want this so bad I can't even tell you. If the Linux community got this the same way they got the 64 bit flash player, I think JavaFX would get some nice press there and it might raise some excitement from current or would-be developers. > 3. When people gripe about there are no Java applications for Linux, > they usually mean a special kind of application---the kind that's > indistinguishable from other quote-and-quote Linux applications [...] > Yet not very many Java-GNOME applications are written. For a > KDE based Linux distribution it would be the Java bindings of the Qt > and KDE APIs, which I understand have existed in the form of Jambi, and > now abandoned. > > 4. From a technical point of view, the Java application for Linux > situation is not that different from the Java application for Mac OS X >[...]Why isn't anyone yelling "There > are no Mac OS X applications written in Java?" > > 5. For that matter, Microsoft has released Java bindings for the .NET > framework, which has not picked up steam in the Java community. Why > isn't anyone yelling "There are no .NET applications written in Java?" > > 6. The answers, for all three questions, are the same: "Why?" The three > stars---those who would pay for them (those who volunteer their spare > time to work on Open Source pays with their time, etc.), those who can > write them, and those who would use them---are never aligned. And for > any successful project, those three must be aligned. As a Java > developer, would you rather be writing a Java-GNOME application rather > than a Swing application? How about a Java-Cocoa application? A .NET > application using Java.NET (not to be confused withhttp://java.net)? Yeah, definitely good points there. I'm not really crazy about the idea of native bindings. I like Swing. I wish Nimbus could just be the default Java LAF on all platforms. I am entertaining the idea that native binding could help move Java closer to some desktop projects and give them a better feeling of ownership and that Java is there to help not replace. It would be cool if KDE developer Joe could blog "we wrote K3B in Java using QtJambi and it's awsome..." But as you pointed out above these binding are not really used, so probably a bad idea as far as improving the perception that Java could be a good solution for KDE or Gnome or Xfce, or OS X, etc. > 7. BTW, as mentioned in the show and earlier on the thread, Microsoft is > paying for all the Linux/Mono stuff. > One has to wonder why Microsoft would bother establishing a relationship to Novell to pay for developers to work on Mono and to fly them out to their campus for training. Some in the Linux community wearing especially shiny tin foil hats think it's part of some grand plot by Microsoft to somehow obliterate Linux and the open source community. I, on the other hand, believe that Microsoft sees a business opportunity for making money by paying for and supporting Mono development specifically for Linux in the enterprise. Perhaps there would be potential for Sun as well if they put a little more effort into matching Mono's moves in terms of how it's being promoted and it's perception in the open source community. If the average Ubuntu user can't see the awsome "Java based video player" in their repository, they probably don't know it's there. Perhaps that's just a failing of Ubuntu. I don't know, but in the meantime, those Mono apps are there in Ubuntu's repository and they're being used and there are Linux users saying "that's cool, I want to learn C#!" :/ > -- > Weiqi Gao > [email protected]http://www.weiqigao.com/blog/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
