To be fair, people who worked on the JavaFX compiler probably wouldn't be the same people who now work on the APIs. It's more likely that those people are working on the new language features for Java 7, or on other language projects like Fortress (is that one still going?).
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Kirk <[email protected]> wrote: > Yup, it still is only a small team and the dropping of JavaFX script was a > good thing IMHO. It was a poke at flash/silver light, was way behind the > curve, and took resources away from the core which (like it or not) Java > works reasonably well enough and everyone knows it.... so... no brainer to > kill that part and refocus err focus. > > Kirk > > On Jun 2, 2011, at 2:21 AM, Steven Herod wrote: > >> Well, the Oracle buy out put the whole thing in the air for a year and >> then there was the dropping of JavaFXScript, which was probably >> another year. >> >> But 2.0 is a 2.0 product, even the EA builds worked pretty well and >> were more functional than JavaFX 1.0 - 1.3. >> >> Its still only a small team to my understanding. >> >> On Jun 1, 7:07 pm, Moandji Ezana <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On the Java Spotlight Podcast >>> #32<http://blogs.oracle.com/javaspotlight/entry/java_spotlight_episode_32...> >>> , Nandini Ramani, the "Vice President of Development at Oracle in the Fusion >>> Middleware Group" in charge of Java FX has a slightly different take. >>> >>> She says (around 16:30) that coming out on Windows first was a "very >>> concious decision because time to market was so critical for us and testing >>> on all different platforms takes a lot of effort... It will be followed by a >>> Mac OS port". I found the time to market aspect amusing for a 3 or 4 year >>> old product that has never really gone anywhere. >>> >>> Moandji >>> >>> --www.moandjiezana.com >>> >>> Sent from my phone >>> On 31 May 2011 06:39, "Jonathan Giles" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> As Steven Herod linked to, here's Richard Bairs (Java Client >>>> Architect) response (see the last comment): >>> >>>> Cay, I have to agree! Which is why we have not developed a windows >>>> version in isolation of everything else — or even first!. I develop >>>> only on a Mac, and have done so for the past 3 years. As many >>>> developers here work on Mac as work on Windows, and a number are on >>>> Linux. Gerard Ziemski, who designed the initial version of Glass (our >>>> windowing layer replacing AWT) works only on a Mac and writes and >>>> maintains the Cocoa code. The first platform Glass came up on was a >>>> Mac, and was subsequently ported on Windows (and differences between >>>> Mac and Windows were at that time worked through). The guys working on >>>> the windows version are also the AWT maintainers who for years have >>>> wanted another go at it to fix the problems of AWT. We’re really very >>>> well versed in these problems :-) . >>> >>>> As for media, it sounds like there is some documentation which needs >>>> addressing. We are using gstreamer for the media framework, which as >>>> I’m sure you are aware is really quite widely adopted and works well >>>> on multiple platforms. >>> >>>> Now, I’m not prepared to make a statement on timetables or on why the >>>> windows 32-bit is the only one released at this first beta. But do >>>> bear in mind, we’re releasing a new beta build every 2 weeks. This >>>> isn’t a release candidate! It is a snapshot in time which represents a >>>> certain level of development and a certain level of testing. >>> >>>> -- Jonathan >>> >>>> On May 31, 1:36 pm, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Steven Herod <[email protected] >>>> wrote: >>> >>>>>> This may also help out on the cross platform question: >>>>>> http://fxexperience.com/2011/05/is-javafx-2-0-cross-platform/ >>> >>>>> Yes, in the sense that the answer is "Not at the moment and we can't tell >>>>> you when". >>> >>>>> Obviously, we can't know if Oracle is being truthful when they say that >>>>> JavaFX will be cross platform at some undetermined time in the future, >>> but >>>>> we can definitely draw some conclusions from the fact that they chose to >>>>> release a Windows-only version first: this is the clear sign that the >>>>> development process of JavaFX is not multi platform. >>> >>>>> Which should be a concern to everyone with an interest in that field and >>>>> quite reminiscent of the disaster that happened with AWT fifteen years >>> ago. >>> >>>>> Myself, I just can't understand why there's still even a tiny amount of >>>>> people who are interested in JavaFX after Sun proved for fifteen years >>> that >>>>> they just weren't very good at this UI framework stuff. >>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Cédric >>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >> > > -- > 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.
