Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

Well I did ask Johan what AOT they are going to use instead of RoboVM but there 
has not be a response yet.

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.

But I take Johan on his word that the demise of RoboVM will not negatively 
affect Gluon or its products and he has done absolutely amazing things 
throughout his career. So I am assuming he as a plan B.

I really wish Gluon somehow took complete ownership of the entire OpenJFX 
project as JavaFX could not be in safer hands.

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 17:43, Tobi  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> in my opinion the abandonment of RoboVM is a very big step back for Java on 
> Mobile because there is NO real alternative to RoboVM. So it has definitely a 
> big impact on Gluon and JavaFX on Mobile. Gluon uses RoboVM 1.8 - and old 
> version of RoboVM which will be not developed anymore. So no serious company 
> will decide to use a technology which is winding down! 
> 
> So ok, what could Gluon do now? Using OpenJDK9 for iOS and Android? Currently 
> definitely not! OpenJDK9 for Mobile is in an experimental state and uses the 
> Zero interpreter! So the performance will be not acceptable until the OpenJDK 
> 9 provides the same level of AOT like RoboVM - or even better! 
> 
> What can we do now to reach the goal to develop modern mobile applications 
> with Java - instead of with Xamarian…?
> 
> We need as soon as possible one or more companies to continue the development 
> of one of the RoboVM 1.8 forks (like BugVM) or merge the know how of RoboVM 
> with the current OpenJDK9 efforts… We need commitments of big companies to 
> Java like Oracle, Intel, IBM, SAP! We need the RoboVM team which breaks out 
> of Microsofts Xamarian world! In my dreams Niklas, Henric and their team take 
> the money of Xamarian and Microsoft and revive their baby „RoboVM“ in the 
> context of a fork based on open sourced RoboVM 1.8… Maybe with in a join 
> venture with Intel (concerning Intel’s Multi-OS engine)
> 
> What do you think about it guys? What are your plans Niklas…?
> 
> Best regards,
> Tobi
> 
> //
> follow me on twitter: https://twitter.com/tobibley 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Am 18.04.2016 um 19:15 schrieb Johan Vos :
>> 
>> Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX.
>> The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the last
>> open-source version.
>> 
>> RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a
>> system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create
>> Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole
>> "Studio" allowing developers to create applications.
>> 
>> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to
>> have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the
>> studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse.
>> 
>> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices.
>> RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS
>> specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and
>> an Android specific UI.
>> 
>> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a
>> platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great
>> developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue
>> working on their product.
>> 
>> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.
>> 
>> - Johan
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah  wrote:
>>> 
>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
 "shutting down".
 
 https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
 
 Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
 JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
 goal?
 
 Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or
 is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross
 platform technology?
 
 Thanks,
 
 Felix
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Steve Hannah
>>> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Tobi]

Hi,

in my opinion the abandonment of RoboVM is a very big step back for Java on 
Mobile because there is NO real alternative to RoboVM. So it has definitely a 
big impact on Gluon and JavaFX on Mobile. Gluon uses RoboVM 1.8 - and old 
version of RoboVM which will be not developed anymore. So no serious company 
will decide to use a technology which is winding down! 

So ok, what could Gluon do now? Using OpenJDK9 for iOS and Android? Currently 
definitely not! OpenJDK9 for Mobile is in an experimental state and uses the 
Zero interpreter! So the performance will be not acceptable until the OpenJDK 9 
provides the same level of AOT like RoboVM - or even better! 

What can we do now to reach the goal to develop modern mobile applications with 
Java - instead of with Xamarian…?

We need as soon as possible one or more companies to continue the development 
of one of the RoboVM 1.8 forks (like BugVM) or merge the know how of RoboVM 
with the current OpenJDK9 efforts… We need commitments of big companies to Java 
like Oracle, Intel, IBM, SAP! We need the RoboVM team which breaks out of 
Microsofts Xamarian world! In my dreams Niklas, Henric and their team take the 
money of Xamarian and Microsoft and revive their baby „RoboVM“ in the context 
of a fork based on open sourced RoboVM 1.8… Maybe with in a join venture with 
Intel (concerning Intel’s Multi-OS engine)

What do you think about it guys? What are your plans Niklas…?

Best regards,
Tobi

//
follow me on twitter: https://twitter.com/tobibley 





> Am 18.04.2016 um 19:15 schrieb Johan Vos :
> 
> Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX.
> The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the last
> open-source version.
> 
> RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a
> system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create
> Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole
> "Studio" allowing developers to create applications.
> 
> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to
> have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the
> studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse.
> 
> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices.
> RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS
> specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and
> an Android specific UI.
> 
> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a
> platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great
> developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue
> working on their product.
> 
> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.
> 
> - Johan
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah  wrote:
> 
>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
>>> "shutting down".
>>> 
>>> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
>>> 
>>> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
>>> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
>>> goal?
>>> 
>>> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or
>>> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross
>>> platform technology?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Felix
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Steve Hannah
>> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
>> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Sven Reimers]

Seems there are more forks out there..

https://github.com/bugvm/bugvm

Sven

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Felix Bembrick 
wrote:

> Good luck to you Erik. I totally agree with you and hope you succeed. If
> there's any way I can help, I will do just that.
>
> Felix
>
> > On 19 Apr 2016, at 04:39, Erik De Rijcke 
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm currently looking if I can get some robovm fork kickstarted. (
> > https://github.com/FlexoVM/flexovm/issues/4 ).
> >
> > It's really a shame that for this one time Java has a real nice aot
> > llvm compiler, MS kills it. Being able to compile Java (or any
> > bytecode language) to a native, fast and small executable (especially
> > for arm/embedded use which does not require an Oracle license) would
> > be *really* cool. Let's see if we can continue to make this happen in
> > one way or another.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Felix Bembrick
> >  wrote:
> >> So what AOT will you be using now? The last RoboVM AOT or something
> else?
> >>
> >>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:15, Johan Vos  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX.
> >>> The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the
> last open-source version.
> >>>
> >>> RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a
> system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create
> Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole
> "Studio" allowing developers to create applications.
> >>>
> >>> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we
> happen to have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't
> need the studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and
> Eclipse.
> >>>
> >>> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices.
> RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS
> specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and
> an Android specific UI.
> >>>
> >>> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a
> platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great
> developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue
> working on their product.
> >>>
> >>> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.
> >>>
> >>> - Johan
> >>>
> >>>
>  On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah 
> wrote:
>  According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>  https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
> 
> 
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick <
> felix.bembr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
> "shutting down".
> >
> > https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> >
> > Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is
> making JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for
> that goal?
> >
> > Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this
> void? Or is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly
> viable cross platform technology?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Felix
> 
> 
> 
>  --
>  Steve Hannah
>  Web Lite Solutions Corp.
> >>>
>



-- 
Sven Reimers

* Senior Expert Software Architect
* Java Champion
* NetBeans Dream Team Member: http://dreamteam.netbeans.org
* Community Leader  NetBeans: http://community.java.net/netbeans
  Desktop Java:
http://community.java.net/javadesktop
* JUG Leader JUG Bodensee: http://www.jug-bodensee.de
* Duke's Choice Award Winner 2009
* Blog: https://www.java.net//blog/sven

* XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Sven_Reimers8
* LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/svenreimers

Join the NetBeans Groups:
* XING: http://www.xing.com/group-20148.82db20
* NUGM: http://haug-server.dyndns.org/display/NUGM/Home
* LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1860468
   http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=107402
   http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1684717
* Oracle: https://mix.oracle.com/groups/18497

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

Good luck to you Erik. I totally agree with you and hope you succeed. If 
there's any way I can help, I will do just that.

Felix

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 04:39, Erik De Rijcke  wrote:
> 
> I'm currently looking if I can get some robovm fork kickstarted. (
> https://github.com/FlexoVM/flexovm/issues/4 ).
> 
> It's really a shame that for this one time Java has a real nice aot
> llvm compiler, MS kills it. Being able to compile Java (or any
> bytecode language) to a native, fast and small executable (especially
> for arm/embedded use which does not require an Oracle license) would
> be *really* cool. Let's see if we can continue to make this happen in
> one way or another.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Felix Bembrick
>  wrote:
>> So what AOT will you be using now? The last RoboVM AOT or something else?
>> 
>>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:15, Johan Vos  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX.
>>> The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the last 
>>> open-source version.
>>> 
>>> RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a 
>>> system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create 
>>> Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole 
>>> "Studio" allowing developers to create applications.
>>> 
>>> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to 
>>> have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the 
>>> studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse.
>>> 
>>> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices. 
>>> RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS 
>>> specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and 
>>> an Android specific UI.
>>> 
>>> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a 
>>> platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great 
>>> developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue 
>>> working on their product.
>>> 
>>> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.
>>> 
>>> - Johan
>>> 
>>> 
 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah  wrote:
 According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
 https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
 
 
 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick 
>  wrote:
> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively 
> "shutting down".
> 
> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> 
> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making 
> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that 
> goal?
> 
> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or 
> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable 
> cross platform technology?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Felix
 
 
 
 --
 Steve Hannah
 Web Lite Solutions Corp.
>>> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Erik De Rijcke]

I'm currently looking if I can get some robovm fork kickstarted. (
https://github.com/FlexoVM/flexovm/issues/4 ).

It's really a shame that for this one time Java has a real nice aot
llvm compiler, MS kills it. Being able to compile Java (or any
bytecode language) to a native, fast and small executable (especially
for arm/embedded use which does not require an Oracle license) would
be *really* cool. Let's see if we can continue to make this happen in
one way or another.

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Felix Bembrick
 wrote:
> So what AOT will you be using now? The last RoboVM AOT or something else?
>
>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:15, Johan Vos  wrote:
>>
>> Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX.
>> The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the last 
>> open-source version.
>>
>> RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a 
>> system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create 
>> Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole 
>> "Studio" allowing developers to create applications.
>>
>> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to 
>> have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the 
>> studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse.
>>
>> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices. RoboVM 
>> took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS specific 
>> UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and an Android 
>> specific UI.
>>
>> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a 
>> platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great 
>> developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue 
>> working on their product.
>>
>> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.
>>
>> - Johan
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah  wrote:
>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>>>
>>>
>>>
 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick  
 wrote:
 I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting 
 down".

 https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/

 Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making 
 JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that 
 goal?

 Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or 
 is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross 
 platform technology?

 Thanks,

 Felix
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve Hannah
>>> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
>>

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

I wonder what the performance of alternatives to RoboVM is like...

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:09, Steve Hannah  wrote:
> 
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784242565357568
> 
> The Gluon blog post from a few months ago (when @robovm was acquired by
>> @xamarin) is still almost entirely relevant
>> http://gluonhq.com/gluon-supports-multiple-jvms/
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Felix Bembrick 
> wrote:
> 
>> So what do they use instead?
>> 
>>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  wrote:
>>> 
>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick <
>> felix.bembr...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
>> "shutting
 down".
 
 https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
 
 Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
 JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
 goal?
 
 Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void?
>> Or
 is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable
>> cross
 platform technology?
 
 Thanks,
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784242565357568
> 
> The Gluon blog post from a few months ago (when @robovm was acquired by
>> @xamarin) is still almost entirely relevant
>> http://gluonhq.com/gluon-supports-multiple-jvms/
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Felix Bembrick 
> wrote:
> 
>> So what do they use instead?
>> 
>>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  wrote:
>>> 
>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick <
>> felix.bembr...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
>> "shutting
 down".
 
 https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
 
 Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
 JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
 goal?
 
 Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void?
>> Or
 is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable
>> cross
 platform technology?
 
 Thanks,
 
 Felix
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Steve Hannah
>>> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
>>> 
>>> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
>>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>> 
>>> According to Gluon, theyre not impacted by
>> this.=
>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041;>
>> https://t=
>>> witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Johan Vos]

Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX.
The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the last
open-source version.

RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a
system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create
Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole
"Studio" allowing developers to create applications.

Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to
have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the
studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse.

The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices.
RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS
specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and
an Android specific UI.

We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a
platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great
developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue
working on their product.

But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.

- Johan


On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah  wrote:

> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick 
> wrote:
>
>> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
>> "shutting down".
>>
>> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
>>
>> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
>> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
>> goal?
>>
>> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or
>> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross
>> platform technology?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Felix
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Hannah
> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
>

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Steve Hannah]

https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784242565357568

The Gluon blog post from a few months ago (when @robovm was acquired by
> @xamarin) is still almost entirely relevant
> http://gluonhq.com/gluon-supports-multiple-jvms/


On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Felix Bembrick 
wrote:

> So what do they use instead?
>
> > On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  wrote:
> >
> > According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
> > https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick <
> felix.bembr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively
> "shutting
> >> down".
> >>
> >> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> >>
> >> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
> >> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
> >> goal?
> >>
> >> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void?
> Or
> >> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable
> cross
> >> platform technology?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Felix
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Steve Hannah
> > Web Lite Solutions Corp.
> >
> > --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> > Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >
> > According to Gluon, theyre not impacted by
> this.=
> > https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041;>
> https://t=
> > witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

So what do they use instead?

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  wrote:
> 
> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick 
> wrote:
> 
>> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting
>> down".
>> 
>> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
>> 
>> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
>> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
>> goal?
>> 
>> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or
>> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross
>> platform technology?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Felix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Steve Hannah
> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
> 
> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> According to Gluon, theyre not impacted by this.=
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041;>https://t=
> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Steve Hannah]

According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041



On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick 
wrote:

> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting
> down".
>
> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
>
> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that
> goal?
>
> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or
> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross
> platform technology?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Felix




-- 
Steve Hannah
Web Lite Solutions Corp.