No, your argument does not make sense. Java Desktop is no threat today. Right. But, this isn't just about today, it's about the future. Two options:
1. Java Desktop becomes a threat. It makes sense for apple to stop this in its tracks. 2. Java Desktop will never be a threat. It makes sense for apple to stop spending the resources on keeping it up to date. They are only alienating developers because certain oblivious developers have reacted to this news in blind panic, instead of thinking it through. Teaches Apple right for thinking developers aren't susceptible to mass hysteria. I'd be pissed if Apple is indeed shooting for option #1 here, but I'm guessing it's purely about the resources. Especially with the new app store stuff, they are taking on a very large role in quality assurance. If the app doesn't work as advertised, apple gets a significant chunk of the negative marketing. As well as the support call and the refund request. I'm not entirely sure this line of reasoning makes much sense (bugs happen, you can't stop them all), but a basic rule that all platforms you support are built to be as robust as you can is a good rule to have, and I'm guessing Apple does not see the java platform (for client side apps) worth maintaining at that level. On Oct 28, 8:42 pm, Rob Ross <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 28, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Cédric Beust ♔ wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:01 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > You're misrepresenting what apple is doing (or misunderstanding). > > Apple isn't trying to bash java > > > Steve Jobs in 2007: > > > “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It’s this big > > heavyweight ball and chain.” > > > Your other points still hold, though. Apple thinks that Java sucks *and* > > that it threatens their business model, hence the current decision to stop > > providing it. The decision makes business sense. > > > -- > > Cédric > > On further analysis, it really does *not* make sense. > > As has been clearly shouted from almost every rooftop in the land, Java > Desktop never became a successful toolkit for building & running consumer > desktop apps. Even I, who love Swing dearly and spend most of my time writing > Swing apps, will agree to this. > > If that's the case, exactly *what* threat does Java currently pose for the > consumer desktop, specifically Apple's desktop? > > 1. Are they worried Java desktop apps are competing with native Cocoa apps? > No, that can't be, as we've just agreed Java is not used to write desktop > apps. It's *no* threat in that space. > > 2. Are they worried that Java *will* become successful on the desktop? If so, > isn't that an implicit endorsement that Java is a formidable foe in that > space? > > Which one is it? > > If it's #1, then they have clearly made a strategic mistake by alienating > hundreds of thousands (millions?) of developers who enjoy using Apple > hardware for Java development, and were never going to compete with Apple by > writing Java desktop apps. > > If it's #2, then I say all the more reason for the community to create a > better native JDK for the Apple platform and kick their butt in the > marketplace! > > Rob -- 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.
