well put, Reinier. Oracle will take over the JVM. If they are smart, they'll work a deal with Apple to hire away some of their JVM engineers and get the code base.
I can't imagine that Apple will do the "app store only" mac that others are suggesting. They would largely kill their mac business. This would mean you couldn't do server side or web dev on a mac. This would also mean no more photoshop, Fusion, Parallels, Microsoft Office, Google Chrome, Firefox. So the rest of professional uses would be gone. Think about it. To lock it down the mac to an iOS only/app store only scenario - you couldn't even develop iOS apps on it. To do iOS you need the command line and XCode and the Unix stuff that goes along with it. Apple has to develop software and web sites and java code themselves. They going to use Linux for dev in house? PLUS: I'm no lawyer, but from what I see from the EU there would be anti-trust issues. The EU is way more active than the US on stuff like this. You can't just tell all the 1000s of mac developers out there to change their business model, kick 30% to Apple or to F off. My theory is EU antitrust issues are why apple backed off the retarded "only objective c" rule for the app store. They may come up with an alternate, additional laptop that only runs iOS, but there is no way they will kill the mac. On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > No, it overinflates *GUI* linux users. > > A linux server doesn't count. This is about a GUI, not just any > arbitrary JVM (You don't use JavaFX (the library, not the language) > unless you're going to paint widgets, obviously!) > > Possibly linux usage is overinflated a bit; I'm expecting virtually > every desktop linux user to know and frequent wikipedia and associated > sites, whereas no doubt a sizable amount of windows users either don't > know about it or use it rarely. > > Either way, though, a bit below 1%, or a smidge above 2%. I doubt that > changes the gist of my argument: Without the ~9% share that macs now > have, especially if you weight the market share to influence (which, > granted, also boosts posix numbers a bit), JavaFX as a multi-platform > technology is a joke. > > For desktop stuff, I'm basically assering that "Multiplatform" implies > "Runs on Macs and on Windows with a minimum of hassle", and the rest > is gravy. If you want to take your 'multi-platform' to a larger scope > you'd also have to toss android, iPhone, and possibly WebOS and > perhaps (time will tell) Win7 in there, but writing one app that has > good usability on all of that is basically impossible anyway, so its > not that important. For _developer_ share its important that linux > works too, but it can be a very arduous install procedure, and it > won't matter. > > On Oct 25, 12:41 am, Ben Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 25 Okt., 00:13, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > [...] a platform that has less than 1% market share (all non-mac posixes >> > combined). >> >> The figures that -- to me -- seem most reliable are those from >> wikimedia[1] which place Linux at 2.04%. If anything I'd say they >> favor Windows in that Linux users might be using their system for >> things other than wikimedia services, but whatever. >> >> With kind regards >> Ben >> >> [1]:http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSyste... > > -- > 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.
