Interestingly javafx seems to be 70% faster than WebGL:
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/opinali/archive/2011/11/25/java...
Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
21–30 of 84 posts
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#22The Java way has always been: To run this, click on the .bat file or type java -jar myapp.jar. And some people wonder why Java has been such a failure on the desktop. This should have been in Java from the beginning, instead of outsourcing this functionality to third parties (Mainly Windows only installer applications that sucks, and also isnt used that much). That said, I think it is misguided to include a JRE in th…
At least on Mac OS X, you can double-click .jar files and they will get launched as the user expects, complete with Dock presence.
Most Java applications are not built to work that way. They usually need the full CLASSPATH formed before they can launch. One .jar would not suffice.
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#23One of the biggest problems Java faces for real adoption amongst tech people is still the perception (and I am not sure it is entirely flawed either) that it is insecure. Yes Flash is just as bad if not worse, but we are stuck with them because they are so ingrained within the Internet. Java never caught on, and I know that when I see a Java application I let out a huge sigh and go download and install Java again.
I've gone so far, and so have many of my friends, to remove Java completely and it is not like I am missing out on anything important! I just don't trust Java. I don't trust Flash either, but that is nicely sandboxed in Chrome, sure exploits may exist there, but at least it will be a lot less likely, and Click to Flash helps as well!
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#24The Java way has always been: To run this, click on the .bat file or type java -jar myapp.jar. And some people wonder why Java has been such a failure on the desktop. This should have been in Java from the beginning, instead of outsourcing this functionality to third parties (Mainly Windows only installer applications that sucks, and also isnt used that much). That said, I think it is misguided to include a JRE in th…
> That said, I think it is misguided to include a JRE in the bundle. The correct way would be something like OS X Lion has, promt the user if Java is not installed. and then do a more or less automatic install of Java, in the system.
Apple is recommending that as of Mountain Lion, Java apps should bundle the JRE from Oracle's OpenJDK and use that. Apple's unofficial Java spokesperson Mike Swingler is adamant that this new approach (for Apple) is better.
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#25Interestingly javafx seems to be 70% faster than WebGL: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/opinali/archive/2011/11/25/java...
That's dreadful for Java.
OpenGL support has been in Java for 6 or 7 years. WebGL has been in browsers less than 12 months and Java isn't even twice as fast?
(I'm a long time Java programmer, but I think JavaFX is the most stupid thing I've ever seen)
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO the correct way is to include subset of JRE that's actually required for given application. This can lead to relatively small total application size and deployments that do not require any knowledge of java and java world from end user. Having one JRE for all apps on the system is nice but it's usually not needed.
Yes, but still parts of the JVM would be duplicated between apps and updated on app developer X's own schedule.
Part of what this seems to be there to solve is the situation where the user doesn't have access rights to install a JRE.
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#27Interestingly javafx seems to be 70% faster than WebGL: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/opinali/archive/2011/11/25/java...
That's dreadful for Java. OpenGL support has been in Java for 6 or 7 years. WebGL has been in browsers less than 12 months and Java isn't even twice as fast? (I'm a long time Java programmer, but I think JavaFX is the most stupid thing I've ever seen)
From the blog:
"JavaFX (Hotspot Client) is 70% faster than WebGL, a great performance, considering the competition is a dedicated game engine built on top of a low-level 3D API."
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#28One of the biggest problems Java faces for real adoption amongst tech people is still the perception (and I am not sure it is entirely flawed either) that it is insecure. Yes Flash is just as bad if not worse, but we are stuck with them because they are so ingrained within the Internet. Java never caught on, and I know that when I see a Java application I let out a huge sigh and go download and install Java again. I'…
Apart from the risks inherent from running random programs via a web browser (drive by download etc). I don't see how Java is less secure than (say) a C++ or Python application?
On the client side, Java will check certificates of Applications before executing and even then will ask permission. It also has sandboxing and security policies built into the VM which should be harder to break out of than those imposed on Native code (all else being equal).
On the server side, the libraries are fairly mature (hibernate etc) and are generally designed to avoid classic traps like CSRF and SQLi etc.
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's dreadful for Java. OpenGL support has been in Java for 6 or 7 years. WebGL has been in browsers less than 12 months and Java isn't even twice as fast? (I'm a long time Java programmer, but I think JavaFX is the most stupid thing I've ever seen)
From the blog: "JavaFX (Hotspot Client) is 70% faster than WebGL, a great performance, considering the competition is a dedicated game engine built on top of a low-level 3D API."
[deleted]
Re: Java is preparing to co-bundling and native binaries
#30I write internal corporate IT systems using Java. This announcement is good news because it should be easier to deploy to servers and a I can guarantee that I know what JRE I'm working with in production. I can now move to Java 7 without having to worry about breaking other systems or adding an extra deployment step for my apps.