I agree with you on the point that desktops are here to stay, but my point was that if JavaFX is only ever going to viable on such desktops then it is not cross platform because by far the biggest focus for commercial software development companies currently is "post PC" devices like mobiles, tablets and IoT.
As someone who runs a software development business, I don't want to have to rewrite my applications on every platform, using perhaps completely different languages and tools. Such an approach may result in having the best quality of app on each platform but it also is dependent on your business having considerably more staff and capital than I have or indeed that most small businesses have. Forget about Xamarin or any other supposed alternative, unless you are willing to walk away from Java itself. I say lets wait and see what Johan and Gluon can deliver in the next 6 months or so, without any dependency on RoboVM. Perhaps one the new forks will be suitable but, regardless, I don't believe that someone like Johan who is working with some of the best Java, JavaFX and other technicians on the planet has not been planning and working on a viable way to enable JavaFX to run and run well on mobiles that is entirely independent of whatever happens to RoboVM. > On 19 Apr 2016, at 21:14, Scott Palmer <swpal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> On Apr 19, 2016, at 4:18 AM, Felix Bembrick <felix.bembr...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >> >> >> Let's face it, without highly optimised AOT, Java and/or JavaFX on mobiles >> is simply not viable which in turn implies that JavaFX itself is not even >> worth looking at... RIP. > > Let's not go crazy. JavaFX is still the best bet for desktop apps. Despite > all the hype desktop apps aren't going away. Browser-based apps and > JavaScript are still garbage in comparison to what JavaFX offers. > > > Scott
