Discussions

News: JavaFX SDK Preview Now Available

  1. JavaFX SDK Preview Now Available (44 messages)

    Today Sun launched the JavaFX Preview SDK, a preview version of the JavaFX platform. At the JavaOne Conference in May, Sun showed JavaFX technology demonstrations and committed to delivering an SDK in July. This offering is intended to allow web scripters, designers and Java developers to become familiar with the JavaFX technology platform, JavaFX scripting language, and the advanced JavaFX plugins available with the NetBeans 6.1 IDE. JavaFX is the rich client platform for creating RIAs with media and content across all the screens of your life (PC, mobile, TV and other consumer devices). The JavaFX Preview SDK provides web scripters and Java developers with the foundation to quickly and easily build high-impact, immersive RIAs that combine 2D and 3D graphics, high fidelity audio and video and animation, all while leveraging the power and functionality of the existing Java Platform. The JavaFX Preview SDK is now available for download for free and includes: * The JavaFX compiler and runtime tools, 2D graphics and media libraries necessary to create highly interactive applications for the desktop and browser. * Helpful Tutorials, extensive API documentation and code samples * NetBeans 6.1 IDE with integrated JavaFX plugin that provides a sophisticated development environment to build, preview and debug JavaFX applications. * Project Nile, an easy-to-use plugin that allows exporting graphical assets from Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator to JavaFX applications * Java Runtime Environment (Java SE 6 Update 10 Beta), featuring a redesigned Java-based browser plugin that allows live, running applets to be dragged out of a web browser and dynamically transformed into a JavaFX application running on the desktop. Here are some relevant links: o http://www.javafx.com - JavaFX RIA site o http://java.sun.com/javafx--JavaFX - Developer page on SDN o http://blogs.sun.com/javafx - group blog o http://netbeans.org- NetBeans community site For more on using JavaFX, visit James Weaver's blog at http://learnjavafx.typepad.com/.

    Threaded Messages (44)

  2. It's nice that it has Netbeans integration, but our shop uses Eclipse ...
  3. It's nice that it has Netbeans integration, but our shop uses Eclipse ...
    So use Flex ;)
  4. SDK for Linux?[ Go to top ]

    Does anyone know if they intend to release JavaFX SDK for Linux?
  5. Re: SDK for Linux?[ Go to top ]

    Does anyone know if they intend to release JavaFX SDK for Linux?
    They do.
  6. Re: SDK for Linux?[ Go to top ]

    from another discussion board: "Now what's up with Linux? The JavaFX preview release will only be supported on Windows and Mac OS-X. These two platforms are widely used for the designer/scripter community JavaFX is attempting to reach and we wanted to get feedback from that audience as quickly as possible. We do plan on supporting Linux in future releases and as Jim points out, you are able to run with the technology preview branch, but Caveat Emptor."
  7. The JavaFX Preview SDK is now available for download for free
    +
    http://java.sun.com/javafx--JavaFX
    The fact that it is said to be free at this moment and that it is on a .com (not .org or .java.net or something) makes me wonder if there's any possibility in the future that JavaFX SDK is not free.
  8. http://java.sun.com/javafx--JavaFX
    The fact that it is said to be free at this moment and that it is on a .com (not .org or .java.net or something) makes me wonder if there's any possibility in the future that JavaFX SDK is not free.
    Found in FAQ: "The JavaFX Preview SDK is free for download. It is released under a 60 day evaluation license." "The JavaFX compiler, parts of the graphics libraries and tools are available now from the OpenJFX web site, under the GPL 2.0 open source license." Notice the word parts. It smells like Sun tries to sell the full Java FX stack with a price tag.
  9. Re: JavaFX SDK Preview Now Available[ Go to top ]

    Come on Tomi, do you really believe that? I wouldn't read such negativity into it. There may be IP issues that need resolving. I would give them the benefit of the doubt, especially where this is concerned. I wouldn't bet that they would do anything to detract adoption of JavaFX.
  10. Where is Linux version?[ Go to top ]

    I am very disappointed. There is not version for Linux.
  11. Flash/Flex/Air/Actionscript works really well, has now 98% browser penetration, great tool support, and Flex has become open source. With Actionscript 3 and latest IDEs (i.e. IntelliJ 8 early access) coding is really nice, 99% as good as Java for practical use. I kinda forgot, what exactly was the reason for JavaFX? /Henri Karapuu
  12. Flash/Flex/Air/Actionscript works really well, has now 98% browser penetration, great tool support, and Flex has become open source. With Actionscript 3 and latest IDEs (i.e. IntelliJ 8 early access) coding is really nice, 99% as good as Java for practical use.

    I kinda forgot, what exactly was the reason for JavaFX?

    /Henri Karapuu
    If you don't need access to all the Java APIs and don't know Java and don't need to easily communicate with Java on the server and have $700 for an IDE (plus more for other third party libraries) and you are getting paid by the hour and don't mind duplicating code and libraries - then I guess there is no reason.
    99% as good as Java for practical use
    If you said JavaFX, maybe. But not even close for as "Java for practical use". It is not practical on the server. It is not as practical as Eclipse RCP/Netbeans Platform. All that said, is there room for Flex/Actionscript in my toolbox? Yes. But within reason. There are some instances where Java on the client is better than Flex. Thus there is a reason and future for JavaFX.
  13. If you said JavaFX, maybe. But not even close for as "Java for practical use". It is not practical on the server. It is not as practical as Eclipse RCP/Netbeans Platform.


    All that said, is there room for Flex/Actionscript in my toolbox? Yes. But within reason. There are some instances where Java on the client is better than Flex. Thus there is a reason and future for JavaFX.
    First, Flex/AS3 is not for server side applications, I think Henri was talking about client side. Flex is great and pretty much covers 100% of what you can do in a RIA. AIR is another beast. The concept of AIR, being able to run the same app in browser and as a desktop app with more advanced features is great, but yes, Java is more powerful when it comes to desktop applications, no one is denying it. AIR is in it's first incarnation and will get more powerful/useful. The biggest benefit of AIR is the Adobe/Flash distribution model. You find an AIR app, click on it, it asks to install AIR runtime and within a few seconds you're done. More than one can say for JRE distributions. I think JavaFX is Sun's attempt to dethrone the king of all RIAs and get a piece of a market which is just at the tip of the iceberg. I doubt it will happen though. Ilya
  14. First, Flex/AS3 is not for server side applications, I think Henri was talking about client side
    Maybe he was. But he said Java and also said "why JavaFX". The main reasons: 1. It is NOT just about the client side. Most apps need to communicate with the server. 2. Existing libraries are important as is vendor choice.
    The concept of AIR, being able to run the same app in browser and as a desktop app with more advanced features is great
    Java can do this already.
    You find an AIR app, click on it, it asks to install AIR runtime and within a few seconds you're done. More than one can say for JRE distributions.
    Have you run a web start application lately with Java 1.6? And since 1.5, i believe, my JRE auto updates (if not, 1.6 for sure).
  15. Have you run a web start application lately with Java 1.6?
    No. But then again neither has 99.9% of other internet users. Sun has bit of a habit for releasing something that is pretty screwed, and when they finally manage to get it working properly everybody has already lost interest and moved on. /Henri Karapuu
  16. No.
    Then don't comment till you have tried and know. People need to stop basing their comments on years old experience.
    But then again neither has 99.9% of other internet users.
    You must have lots of time on your hands to go around and ask everyone if they have used a web started app or not. :)
    Sun has bit of a habit for releasing something that is pretty screwed,
    I guess. No one else does that. And if the do they never succeed at anything else. Sure.
  17. I haven't run webstart in 1.6, but I've developed and run webstart apps before and I think it's great, especially when developing intra-company apps. The problem with Java (has and still is) is the distribution. It's silly to compare installing a Flash plugin which takes less then 30 seconds even on dial up in one click to a bulky JVM install. I just think that java should stick to its niche, sever side enterprise application processing. It's does it better than any other tool out there. Ilya
  18. Cost[ Go to top ]

    ... and lets add $10,000 per server for better optimization between Flex and server-side Java, shall we? ;-)
  19. Re: Cost[ Go to top ]

    WTF are you talking about? One does not need any commercial components to develop Flex to ** ANY ** server side technology. Do you buy $10,000 worth of software when you integrate your ajax front end to the java backend? JSON and XML are sufficient enough and if you need any more efficiency, then you can use BlazeDS and a variety of other more efficient native RMI libs available for Flex. Don't comment if you have no clue as to WTF you're talking about.
  20. Re: Cost[ Go to top ]

    I meant Adobe LCDS. Yes, I know there is BlazeDS, but not all corporations will accept it (after all, if you are bundling it with your product, you want some sort of a support contract to go with it). The last I heard, Adobe LCDS was $10k per CPU. From what I see, there are 2 costs associated with Flex development: a) Required - the Flex SDK license (when we are talking about something like the FlexBuilder). b) Optional - a server-side remoting license (such as LCDS) The SDK license may not be a whole lot, but the server side one is. And that is what I meant by my earlier post. And lets be a bit more civil during communication, shall we? :-)
  21. Re: Cost[ Go to top ]

    Ok, now I'm lost. First you complain about paying $$$, then you complain about not having support/product bundling. Hmmm, and you get that with free open source JavaFX? You either use open source free software or commercial software. To say that using BlazeDS would not be excepted by a corporation one works for, but they would except an open source JavaFX product? They really need to get their #$%@ together, seems like too many politicians employed that have no clue. Sorry didn't mean to make last post not civil, I'm just tired of people saying that Flex is commercial, requires some license purchases, etc..., which is all not true. Also, those are the same people that then go and write a purchase order to Oracle for $100K. Ilya
  22. Re: Cost[ Go to top ]

    It's a little different. From what I've experience, as soon as you drop code inside the firewall and within the enterprise, it won't run without a support license, especially in bigger companies. This doesn't include things that are delivered to the client. If there is support for event the client side, typically, bigger companies will pay for it, like ExtJS, Jide, and yes, Flex, Flex Builder, whatever. Client code running outside the firewall has a different category in the eyes of those requiring licensed support. I'm sure that ESPN, Disney, etc are paying for support licenses to Adobe. Java running on the client, whether its an applet, webstart, JavaFX, whatever, doesn't usually fall into that category. And there's a lesson to be learned somewhere in here. Although I can empathize with the angst. Even with Oracle, there's a sense of security that goes with the pricetag. Even so, tides are changing. In any event, if this was a black and white issue, there would be no reason for companies like black duck floating around.
  23. Re: Cost[ Go to top ]

    ... and lets add $10,000 per server for better optimization between Flex and server-side Java, shall we? ;-)
    What 10k you are referring to, exactly? If you mean Flex server, that was back in 2005, now Flex is open source and compilation to SWF is done in the development environment. And besides the price back then was (iirc) 15k per CPU, not 10k per server. And companies were still paying, and doing kick ass profit with it, 'cos they pushed out better web apps than their cheap treehugger competitors, who continued to produce shit with Struts. /Henri Karapuu

  24. 99% as good as Java for practical use

    If you said JavaFX, maybe. But not even close for as "Java for practical use". It is not practical on the server. It is not as practical as Eclipse RCP/Netbeans Platform.
    You took that bit out of context, and i expressed my self bit unclearly. I was talking about 'coding', for which i meant just the language editing in IDE, not all the libraries, different uses and all that. My point was that nowadays modern Actionscript is quite okey language, and latest IDEs (like IntelliJ IDEA 8 early access) make Actionscript programming 99% as nice as Java, in terms of code completion, type safety, refactoring. /Henri Karapuu
  25. You took that bit out of context
    No, I didn't. See the last line your post (I quote it below)
    , and i expressed my self bit unclearly.
    Understood. That is why I said what I did in my last line of my reply.
    I was talking about 'coding', for which i meant just the language editing in IDE, not all the libraries, different uses and all that
    So for a niche it is more practical.
    My point was that nowadays modern Actionscript is quite okey language, and latest IDEs (like IntelliJ IDEA 8 early access) make Actionscript programming 99% as nice as Java, in terms of code completion, type safety, refactoring.
    Agreed. But that is a small part of the picture. You said
    I kinda forgot, what exactly was the reason for JavaFX?
    and I have you reasons.
  26. I mentioned about the Actionscript coding and it "being 99% as good Java" because for many the use of Actionscript instead of Java is a major show stopper, even though they have not tried Actionscript. But the reason why i think there is no reason for JavaFX is: 1. The main battle is about browser based RIAs, not desktop. 2. For browser based RIAs the adaption rate of the required plugins is absolutely crucial. 3. Flash/Flex leads in the point #2 by massive margin. 4. Therefore in the main development style (browser based) of these technologies, Flash/Flex is the strongest choice for vast majority of cases and will continue to be for at least half a decade. 5. For desktop development native environments like Visual Studio and XCode have continued to dominate and Java has captured only 1-2% market during 10 years. I don't see JavaFX changing that fundamentally. 6. If you must deploy Java apps and all the funky libs from web but don't need to count on near 100% ready-to-use browser penetration there are already solutions like Java WebStart. So, where does that leave JavaFX? Where it fits? Why it exists? /Henri Karapuu
  27. 1. The main battle is about browser based RIAs, not desktop.
    Most business/productivity apps need to access or act like desktop apps. Why AIR then?
    2. For browser based RIAs the adaption rate of the required plugins is absolutely crucial.
    And? Many pc's come with Java and thus the plugin. And if someone wants it, they will "install" it or just click yes JUST like the will for Flash.
    3. Flash/Flex leads in the point #2 by massive margin.
    Really tough prove that. My belief is that Flash is pretty pervasive. But I had to install it or reinstall because I installed Firefox - on multiple machines. So .... .
    4. Therefore in the main development style (browser based) of these technologies,
    your assumption
    Flash/Flex is the strongest choice for vast majority of cases and will continue to be for at least half a decade.
    Not for the apps i build and the ones I know about.
    5. For desktop development native environments like Visual Studio and XCode have continued to dominate and Java has captured only 1-2% market during 10 years.
    Proof? FYI - I code Java and C# (currently)
    I don't see JavaFX changing that fundamentally.
    That is not what is about.
    6. If you must deploy Java apps and all the funky libs from web but don't need to count on near 100% ready-to-use browser penetration there are already solutions like Java WebStart.
    JavaFX doesn't replace WebStart. From my experience, I have to install Flash to use it. So how is that different than Java?
    So, where does that leave JavaFX? Where it fits? Why it exists?
    Re read my posts. The browser is not an Island. Why does AIR exist? Why does BlazeDS exist?
  28. Re read my posts.
    Mark, you've given number of valid benefits of JavaFX, and i don't disagree with you. But those are single, isolated benefits/features. What i'm after is the higher level, bigger picture -- what is JavaFX's position in the toolbox. At the moment my opinion is that it has no place, for me and for majority of others. There are 4 main development styles, and JavaFX is not best choice for any of those: For desktop applications Visual Studio / XCode is far superior to Java (and Flex). For Intranet type development where bit of installation effort is acceptable Java Webstart is okey choice today. For browser based RIA Flex is really strong proposition, and GWT ain't bad either. For basic, RESTful prev gen PIA (Poor Internet Applications) there are dozens of frameworks. If Sun has clear vision how it is positioning JavaFX, then Sun has failed to communicate that vision to me. /Henri Karapuu
  29. Henri, I think you are missing something - JavaFX would be at the "webstart" and RIA layers. I think JavaFX is Sun's answer to you saying that VS and XCode are much better.
  30. Henri, I think you are missing something - JavaFX would be at the "webstart" and RIA layers. I think JavaFX is Sun's answer to you saying that VS and XCode are much better.
    Hi Joe, i'm aware where JavaFX is _supposed_ to fit in the toolbox. But toolboxes have space for only limited number of tools. To me it seems that JavaFX is a weaker hammer than my current hammer, and as a saw it's also weaker than my current, and so forth. Therefore i have no reason to add it to my toolbox. Perhaps the 'correct' answer to my question -- and indeed the way how Sun might need to market JavaFX -- is that JavaFX is neither going to a stronger hammer nor better saw than the current top tools, but it can replace multiple existing tools and do almost as good of a job? When hiking i use spork. It's half spoon and half fork. Saves space and weight in my hiking kit. Ps. I never had a change to say thanks when you moved to gigaspaces .. please accept my late thanks for the job well done in here, and best wishes for your new challenges. /Henri Karapuu
  31. After many years of developing desktop / rich client apps in C, C++ and Java, I've recently been involved with writing a couple of reasonably complex Flex "RIA" apps which required desktop-app-style functionality (ie navigation/explorer views, toolbars, menus, etc). From my experience I've found that Flex doesn't yet anywhere near live up to all the hype (perhaps it just seems like something new and amazing to those who've got used to struggling to hack together decent UIs with HTML/AJAX???). Firstly, it currently seems to be severely lacking in the area of decent frameworks: - The IOC frameworks that exist (such as Prana and Swiz) are severely limited compared to Spring and are not mature. - No Aspect Oriented framework. - No Eclipse RCP / Netbeans Platform / Spring Rich equivalent. (And please don't mention Cairngorm - it solves about five percent of the problem and requires you to add reams of boiler-plate code to achieve this...) Secondly, the currently available Flex IDE(s) are way behind those available for Java. Perhaps when IntelliJ 8 is finally released that situation will change but, for the moment, the main option is the underwhelming Flex Builder 3 IDE (which is relatively pricey). Thirdly, whilst the Adobe PR machine may try and convince you that for Java developers it is as easy as pie to start coding in Flex / ActionScript, the reality is that you are running in a whole new environment with a different VM, different language, different libraries, etc. No generics, no (explicit) threading, no high-precision numerics, no using all those existing Java libraries, and certainly no option to use other languages on the VM. Why would you want this situation if you are using Java and have developers who already know the Java world inside out? Lastly, there are also the "little" things like no proper support for right-mouse-clicks, or the little bugs such as that data binding works inconsistently if you disable the parent container. Add all this to the fact that Flex performance seems sluggish even compared to the old versions of Swing that people used to complain so much about and you start to wonder... Overall Flex seems like the new VB to me (both in good AND bad ways). It is great for knocking up prototypes or apps with relatively simple UIs that would otherwise have been developed with HTML/AJAX. It is also relatively easy for beginners to learn the basics. However, once things start getting a bit more involved and the complexity of your application increases then things start not to look so good. Therefore I think there are some pretty strong arguments for JavaFX and client-side Java (as long as Java 6 Update 10 elegantly and successfully resolves all the issues it aims to), although I have to confess that I would personally have liked to see Sun also develop a new and improved version of Swing to underpin it. Regards, Lawrie
  32. I would agree if we talked about Flex in the desktop application arena. I think you're missing the point. Flex is mostly used to replace the Javascript/Ajax front ends which are relatively difficult to build and are very inconsistent between browsers. Flex resolves this with the the ubiquity of the Flash plugin and a pretty decent framework/language to support the interface, at least when compared to equivalent javascript/ajax frameworks (GWT is pretty decent though). Ilya
  33. I think you're missing the point. Flex is mostly used to replace the Javascript/Ajax front end
    I don't think we are. The point is that Flex is a niche product. Java is not. So even if it is behind in a niche market, it is ahead in the rest. People need to look at the whole picture.
  34. I think you're missing the point. Flex is mostly used to replace the Javascript/Ajax front end
    I don't think we are. The point is that Flex is a niche product. Java is not. So even if it is behind in a niche market, it is ahead in the rest. People need to look at the whole picture.
    Everything is a niche product. The hopes for a general purpose, cover all possible things language is over. DSLs are finally coming to light and people are using the right tools for the job, not trying to write a web application in Pascal or a real time, multi-threaded app in ruby. Flex covers the web interface/RIA niche better than any other product out there, so why not use it?
  35. Lawrie, i think we are approaching Flex from two different sides: you are coming from desktop development background and i'm coming from the web side, while flex is in the between. So for you Flex appears as incomplete desktop technology, and i agree with you. But the real battle with these technologies is not about large desktop apps. It's about small to medium sized RIA apps that run (also) in the browser, and are easy to develop. Besides, regarding pure desktop development i have to say that Sun has so awful track record on the client side that no matter how promising JavaFX seems now, i would not bet much on them anyway :) /Henri Karapuu
  36. Henri, I think you are missing the point - I have never developed "desktop applications". I used to develop "client/server applications". I currently develop what used to be called "rich client applications" and are now, to use the currently in vogue Adobe marketing term, called "Rich Internet Applications (RIAs)". But I think this is just marketing. There is no fundamental difference between the type of applications I develop and the type of applications you describe as being Flex's target. I write RIAs by any reasonable definition (including Adobe's). The only difference is that my RIAs have user interfaces that are slightly more complicated than a basic web-site's UI. If what you're saying is that Flex currently only really delivers if you're developing fairly basic applications with simple UIs then we are in complete agreement. However, I'd much rather use just one technology that can meet all my development needs than one that is only good for a certain limited class of application. It is easy to knock Sun's track record on the client side. Sun decided to focus on other areas at the expense of the client-side. But they achieved an awful lot in the other areas that they focused their efforts on. So who can tell what the future holds for client-side Java? Past performance does not determine future performance. And as for Adobe's track record? They simply don't have much of one yet in this area. Only time will tell whether they will be anyway near as capable of developing their VM, language(s) and APIs long-term as Sun has been. Regards, Lawrie
  37. Please explain what is it that you can't do with Flex that you can do with any other (non-Desktop) application environment? Also, you mention developing only simple apps with Flex. That is complete non-sense. Flash is a powerful graphics engine and VM and the possibilities with it are not really limited. Again, desktop integration is limited, but that's the nature of web apps, not flash/flex. Again, we're discussing Flex and not AIR here. AIR is a fairly new technology and is definitely limited. Ilya
  38. Hi Ilya,
    Please explain what is it that you can't do with Flex that you can do with any other (non-Desktop) application environment?
    I can tell you are obviously a big fan of Flex! However, if you read my earlier post you can see some of the issues and limitations my team and I have run into while actually developing projects in Flex. Some things like supporting mouse right-button-click events for UI componente are not supported in Flex but are certainly available in Java applets, for example. Other things are certainly POSSIBLE to achieve in Flex/ActionScript, but what project team has the huge amount of time or skills required to replicate in Flex all the frameworks/libraries that they have found to be useful/essential for complex applications whilst developing in Java? Whilst it is true what you say that "Flash is a powerful graphics engine and VM and the possibilities with it are not really limited", the current reality is that Flex development is limited by the availability and quality of such frameworks and libraries. Also, there are Adobe guidelines for creating performant Flex applications and these state that you should avoid nesting UI containers deeply as this can be detrimental to performance. Therefore there are some limitations to the complexity of your UI if you want it to perform well. Don't get me wrong, much of my experience with Flex has been positive, and I think the Flex technology itself is pretty cool. However, this hasn't blinded me to what is currently missing in the Flex world in order to facilitate building more complex applications. Regards, Lawrie
  39. Yes, I'm a fan, but I think my fascination comes more from the fact that it replaces the current ajax/dhtml technologies very well. Besides the market penetration of flash to over 99% of browsers, which eliminates the complaints of supporting something that people might not have support for, it also adds a level of productivity and functionality on top of what today's ajax toolkits can accomplish. Again, I was never comparing flex to any desktop apps, simply as a great way of moving away from the world of inconsistent javascript support across browsers and the complexities of creating a responsive/interactive/usable application with ajax. I think flex wins that match hands down. Ilya
  40. flex looks promising let see[ Go to top ]

    yeah it is true that flex wind hands down in that case. I am only worried that performance and footprint of flex framework should improve further in next release. I mean file size of output file and framework itself. Also Flexbuilder should improve it compile speed and make express version for free or something like that...
  41. Henri,

    I think you are missing the point - I have never developed "desktop applications". I used to develop "client/server applications".
    Lawrie, i may have used the term 'desktop applications' too loosely -- i meant everything that does not run in the browser, let it be clients of client-server apps or pure non-connected desktop apps. Sorry about that.
    If what you're saying is that Flex currently only really delivers if you're developing fairly basic applications with simple UIs then we are in complete agreement.
    We are in compleete agreement. Although i might say Flex delivers for basic to moderately complex UIs, not only basic. But my view is that Flex is focused and what it tries to do, it does really well. It has a place in my toolbox. JavaFX then ... i don't even get where sun tries to position it, let alone if it is successful at that.
    However, I'd much rather use just one technology that can meet all my development needs
    Me too, unfortunately such technology does not exist as of today. /Henri Karapuu
  42. Henri, im sorry that you have a limited vision about the future and market... check this link http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html JavaFx will be better than Flex already is, and you dont need to wait until 2015 to see it. Cristobal Morales
  43. What does that link prove? Java's popularity? I don't think anyone's denying it, nor is anyone saying that Flex/AS3 will replace java. Flex/AS3 is a great solution for client side RIA and it doesn't and should try to play in the server side space. Ilya
  44. Henri, im sorry that you have a limited vision about the future and market...

    check this link http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
    Look kid, i'm very well aware of the overall programming language statistics. But that's not what we are talking about here, and your link proves absolutely nothing. Don't get me wrong, first and foremost i am a Java developer. For me it would be great if JavaFX would succeed. I just don't see it happening. /Henri Karapuu
  45. It would be interesting to hear people's experiences with Flex and complicated groups/grids with large datasets. I think in this area alone, the ecosystem hasn't caught up to the capabilities of an infragistics, componentone, xceed, etc. for wpf/silverlight, let alone Jide and Swing.