<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>











<rss version="2.0" xmlns:jf="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/jiveforums/rss">



<channel>
    <title>Support Forums: Message List - Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
    <link>http://www.theserverside.com</link>
    <description>Most recent forum messages</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
        <generator>Jive Forums Silver 5.5.30 (www.jivesoftware.com)</generator>
    
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 01:54:09 -0400</pubDate>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Thanks everyone!  I appreciate all your time and thoughts.
<br>
<br>Rick]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:46:27 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:46:27 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:46:27 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 11, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Rick Wagner</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Well I can speak on these answers for EAServer....]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 15:22:33 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 15:22:33 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 15:22:33 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 6, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Dave Wolf</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>1</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[Is there a firewall issue here for client-server communication over the internet without using HTTP protocol?   ...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:59:31 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:59:31 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:59:31 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 6, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Benedict Chng</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>2</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[There's no need to use servlets between your client server.  You should be able to call to the EJB's directly.  HTTP is a poor performing protocol for distributed applications.
<br>
<br>Dave Wolf
<br>Internet Applications Division
<br>Sybase
<br>]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:14:00 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:14:00 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:14:00 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 6, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Dave Wolf</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>3</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[The other approach is to retain your fat-client and reengineer it to communicate with your J2EE backend through servlets. This way, your user don't have to relearn the interface and you can keep a large part of your investment on the fat-client....]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:00:57 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:00:57 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 13:00:57 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 6, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Benedict Chng</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>4</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[In our application, we weighed this one pretty heavily. It mostly comes down to your customer base and maintainence. We went with Swing in the Java Plug-in (1.3) because we needed a complex UI that just wasn't possible or feasible with html. Our...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 09:06:38 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 09:06:38 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 09:06:38 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 6, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Robert McIntosh</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>0</jf:replyCount>
    </item>


    <item>

        <title>Swing vs. Browser client design decision</title>
        <link>http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=2484</link>

        

        
            <description><![CDATA[My workgroup is planning the migration of a successful three-tiered application from a fat-client (VB/ TP-with-c++ objects environment) to a J2EE environment.  Our customers are used to having the functionality a fat-client affords (F1 for help,...]]></description>
        

        <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 08:38:34 -0500</pubDate>

        

        <jf:creationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 08:38:34 -0500</jf:creationDate>
        <jf:modificationDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2000 08:38:34 -0500</jf:modificationDate>
        <jf:date>Dec 6, 2000</jf:date>
        <jf:author>Rick Wagner</jf:author>
        <jf:replyCount>6</jf:replyCount>
    </item>



</channel>
</rss>

