I honestly don't understand why you think questioning that the Mac
universe is maybe not the best place for Java develoers. is fud. In
the recent past, Apple took a long time to update the JDK to 1.6 and
patch 1.5. How far behind in their releases were they? 1, 2 years?
They said nothing of the reasoning, they gave no roadmap for next
releases. There is no reason to think that they might not do
something similar again. OpenJDK is not the same thing. There are
disadvantages to having to start up an X11.app to use Java on the
Mac. Things may be ok now, but it wasn't in the recent past and
there is no guarantee that it will be in the future. Back in the
day, there was a huge difference is using blackdown Java on Linux
vs. using the Sun JDK.
You guys can all love you Macs and MacOSX and iWhatever and they are
great machines, but you should really be more honest with yourself
about Apple's intentions. I'm buying hardware and software to
develop for and use in the way that I think is best, not the way
Apple thinks is best.
Lloyd
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]
> wrote:
Replies inline.
>
> 1) Would you agree that given actions and words, Apple also
considers
> Java an inferior and irrelevant platform?
Yes. Especially for desktop apps. Just like ruby, python, mono, the
entirety of the terminal (including bash, find, grep and friends),
lua, scala, java, PHP and any other language you care to name. For
NON-
desktop apps though, apple still sells a server OS. They don't sell an
Objective C based web framework. So, what the heck are you on about?
This might be of some concern to JavaFX users. Minor concern, of
course - you can claim the OpenJDK is unstable but that's rather
offensive to the OpenJDK crew, and X11.app works perfectly well if
that's what it ends up taking, though with the recent popularity
especially amongst developers neither Apple nor Oracle can afford to
let such a situation stand. Apple sells servers. Servers run server
software. Like web servers with webapps on them. Apple themselves use
WebObjects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects) which they
themselves wrote. In Java.
Stop fudding.
>
> 2) While Steve's cross-air might be aimed at Adobe, his flak
shooting
> has broad implications across the board. Do you think he has moral
> issues with the collateral damage it's creating beyond his own
iWorld?
> (i.e. Novell's MonoTouch customers)
Moral issues? I'm quite sure he's so focussed and passionate on giving
the world his personal vision of the future that he's so far
entrenched in "the end justifies the means" it would take a direct
moral conflict for him to consider anything he steers apple into as
immoral. That's problematic for us and all the more reason to pressure
Apple into caring more about such issues.
Stop fudding. You claimed Java support on OS X is unreliable. What
does Steve's flak shooting and his moral compass have to do with java
support on Os X? If you were holding on to your hat about somehow
using java to write for the iPhone or iPad, and / or if you weren't
but you feel the current situation is very bad news, I'll join you on
the picket line. iPhone / iPad and macbooks aren't the same thing
though. So stop fudding.
>
> 3) Do you see any monopolistic behavioral pattern that suggests
Apple
> is the new Microsoft, except that Apple has the benefit of good
taste
> and is still not big enough as a target for anti-trust litigation?
Yes. If you'd read my other posts you'd know that.
Stop fudding. You claimed Java support on OS X is unreliable. What
does Apple's stellar rise to power have to do with java support on Os
X? If anything, OS X being more entrenched than ever DECREASES the
odds that there won't be a decent java available on OS X. If not
apple, then sunoracle will step up. They can't not.
Unless you're going to claim that we'll see an app store model in the
near future of OS X, where you simply cannot run any apps on an OS X
machine at all unless personally signed and verified by apple. Which
is completely ludicrous. If that's truly what you think and why you're
FUDing java on OS X, you should say so, so the folks reading your
advice can make their own judgement on the likelyhood of this extreme
scenario.
>
> /Casper
>
> “We’ve been there before,
> and intermediate layers between the platform and the developer
> ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of
the
> platform.”
>
> On May 4, 2:20 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Given that OpenJDK7 already builds on Mac OS X today, I'm guessing
> > we'll have to wait about a minute after OpenJDK 7 final is
released,
> > depending on how fast your computer can build the OpenJDK. Duh.
>
> > Stop fudding.
>
> > On May 4, 10:42 am, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > 1. The recent letter to Adobe shows that Apple clearly believe
Cocoa to the
> > > the "One True Way". Anything else is going through a "private
library" or
> > > "intermediate framework", and we KNOW what happens to those.
>
> > > 2. Java access to Cocoa has been deprecated. This is not just
lack of a
> > > timely release, it's now permanently locked out of the pearly
gates (unless
> > > it goes via JNI, which will mean someone else's framework...)
>
> > > 3. As for timely updates of Java? The painfully slow wait for
Java 6,
> > > accompanied by no information whatsoever, is now infamous in
the eyes of
> > > many developers. Given that Apple now seem to consider Java
less important
> > > that it was back then, how long will we have to wait for Java
7 once it's
> > > out?
>
> > > On 4 May 2010 02:16, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> > > > Of course it's 100% FUD - the fact that apple no longer
considered
> > > > cocoa libraries for java important is completely irrelevant
compared
> > > > to releasing timely java updates. I don't see the
availability or
> > > > timeless of updates of MFC bindings in windows java, or KDE
bindings
> > > > for linux java raise anyone's concern. Why should cocoa be any
> > > > different?
>
> > > > On May 3, 5:03 pm, Kevin Wright
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > It's not 100% FUD
>
> > > > > Java as a user of the Cocoa API got relegated to a 2nd
class citizen with
> > > > > the release of OSX Tiger:
> > > >http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/qa/qa2001/qa1342.html
>
> > > > > On 3 May 2010 15:17, Reinier Zwitserloot
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Casper, for the fiftheenth bloody time, STOP FUDDING
about java on
> > > > > > macs.
>
> > > > > >http://landonf.bikemonkey.org/static/soylatte/
>
> > > > > > OpenJDK for the win.
>
> > > > > > Pro-Apple bias amongst geeks is rooted due to the fact
that as far as
> > > > > > notebooks are concerned, apple's hardware is fit for a
programmer
> > > > > > whereas your average notebook / desktop PC that doesn't
host a shiny
> > > > > > apple logo on it is a piece of crap. It's hard to take a
standpoint
> > > > > > against a supplier of something no one else supplies. If
it had been
> > > > > > related to 'alternative to microsoft', we'd have seen
similar bias
> > > > > > towards linux and solaris but that's not really panning
out, hence
> > > > > > your theory does not seem to hold water.
>
> > > > > > On May 3, 11:29 am, Casper Bang <[email protected]>
wrote:
> > > > > > > In this particular context, I think the bias is rooted
in your foe's
> > > > > > > enemy being your friend. For the longest time Apple
was the escape
> > > > pod
> > > > > > > that hardcore Java developers took from the evil
empire's mother
> > > > ship.
> > > > > > > However, these recent events are really just a
predictable further
> > > > > > > escalation, considering Java on a Mac is typically
1½-2 years behind
> > > > > > > other platform releases. It should come as no surprise
then, when
> > > > > > > Apple undoubtedly drops all support for client Java
within the
> > > > not-too-
> > > > > > > distant future invoking all too familiar arguments. I
do feel that
> > > > > > > several of the posse members took a far more healthy
and critical
> > > > > > > outlook on Apple over the past year though, lead by
our posse editor
> > > > > > > in chief.
>
> > > > > > > /Casper
>
> > > > > > > On May 3, 10:45 am, Liam Knox <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Should I just say Apple is purely after a monopoly
i.e. the cash,
> > > > > > > > unlike Joe's stated reasons ?
> > > > > > > > Does that make it clearer
>
> > > > > > > > On May 3, 5:06 pm, Kerry Sainsbury
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:25 PM,
[email protected] <
>
> > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > To describe Apples doctorine on Flash or Java
on their mobile
> > > > > > devices
> > > > > > > > > > > as purely due to a want of consistent user
experience is just
> > > > > > nonsense
>
> > > > > > > > > > > The clear reason....
>
> > > > > > > > > > Not convincing! Calling something "nonsense" or
"clear"
> > > > doesn't
> > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > > > it so. Try forming a cogent argument next time.
>
> > > > > > > > > Well, Liam's next sentence was "You could equally
diverge from
> > > > their
> > > > > > > > > perceived athletics using objective C of any of
their mandated
> > > > > > > > > technologies", which sounded reasonable to me --
apart from some
> > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > with English.
>
> > > > > > > > > I believe he meant:
>
> > > > > > > > > "You could equally diverge from their perceived
aesthetics using
> > > > > > Objective C
> > > > > > > > > or any of their mandated technologies".
>
> > > > > > > > > Does that make it clearer?
>
> > > > > > > > > Why would the UI I create using Objective C be any
better than
> > > > the UI
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > would create using any other framework or
language, if that
> > > > framework
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > language calls the same UI layer that Objective C
does?
>
> > > > > > > > > In fact I'm sure that some frameworks could
actually enhance the
> > > > UI
> > > > > > that I
> > > > > > > > > would create, because I make AWFUL user interfaces.
>
> > > > > > > > > (sorry for jumping in Liam!)
>
> > > > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > > > Kerry
>
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > 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]<javaposse
%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 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]<javaposse
%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > 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]<javaposse
%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 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]<javaposse
%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kevin Wright
>
> > > > > mail/google talk: [email protected]
> > > > > wave: [email protected]
> > > > > skype: kev.lee.wright
> > > > > twitter: @thecoda
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > 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]<javaposse
%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > .
> > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> > > > --
> > > > 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]<javaposse
%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
> > > > .
> > > > For more options, visit this
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
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
.
--
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
.
