Interesting idea, but the issue is that Oracle is suing Google over its
use of Dalvik in Android - the basis of the case is that Dalvik breaks
the licensing terms of a JDK. Although I totally agree that this may
well spread FUD in the long term which will cost Oracle more that it
makes out of the suit, the fact is I suspect that the main reason is
still that GWT is moving to the maintenance part of its lifecycle
On 4/19/2012 11:17 AM, Blake McBride wrote:
Here is my own personal opinion about what is going on.
Initially Google was totally dedicated to GWT. It is a great platform
loved by Google and many others.
Oracle is suing Google over Java. Google doesn't know where this is
going to end and is, quite frankly, sick of the idea that Oracle could
possibly sue them over use of a largely public platform. Google
doesn't ever want to be in a position to have another company bully
them - especially given the very significant time and money Google put
in to, in effect, promoting Java.
Given the possibly crazy settlement amount, it is cheaper and less
hassle over the long haul if Google just invents in its own stuff and
doesn't depend on anything such as Java.
Given this, Google has roughly decided to drop GWT over the long haul
and move to some other solution such as Dart. However, there are two
issues. First, Google doesn't know how the suit will unfold, nor how
the public will react to both the suit and diminished support of GWT.
Secondly, Google doesn't know when Dart will be able to totally
replace GWT. These two issues cause Google to be silent. They don't
want to prematurely kill GWT, especially since they aren't totally
sure about its future anyway. They also can't give a roadmap since
that would largely be a lie. The only thing they can do is remain
silent. Look for an announcement about GWT when Dart is ready for
prime time. You can thank Oracle for all of this!
(On another note, IMO, Oracle suing over Java use may go a long way
towards killing Java over the long haul. Nobody wants to live with a
possible threat like this from one of the largest companies in the world.)
Blake McBride
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 7:12 AM, July <julyg...@gmail.com
<mailto:julyg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
+1
On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 4:48:52 AM UTC+8, emurmur wrote:
I'm one of the fence sitters.
I have been using Flex/Flash, which has been fantastic, but
has no
future on the mobile web. I think there are only two mature
tools
that would allow me to create similarly rich applications; GWT
and
Closure Tools. Google has decided that Javascript won't cut
it for
their own future products, even though they are heavily
invested in
Closure Tools. I agree completely. It is important to
understand
that they have also decided NOT to move everything to GWT.
This makes
some sense, given that the owner of Java is suing them. I
think this
is in no way a reflection on GWT as a tool and technology. So
Google
has decided to move forward with a third initiative designed,
in part,
to replace GWT and Closure Tools at Google. So, I look at
that and I
am worried about long-term support for GWT. I think that is a
reasonable concern. This concern is mitigated by the fact
that GWT is
a fully open-source project. Flex/Flash on mobile browsers _was_
fully supported and look how that turned out. So, corporate
support
is no guarantee; open source is actually a safer bet. However, I
would feel a lot better if I had an official roadmap for GWT.
That being said, Ray's comments on what is coming are
heartening. The
biggest worry I have for GWT, if Google stops directly
supporting it,
is the debug environment. The plugin seems to need a lot of
maintenance because the browsers are moving so fast. The
upcoming
support for source-maps mitigates this; I would feel better if
I did
not have to rely on a plugin.
I've been working with Dart quite a bit and it is really
promising.
However, integration with other Javascript environments is
problematic. For instance, Dart integration with PhoneGap
does not
exist and appears to be very challenging (some have tried and
decided
to pass on it). This is a non-starter for me. I want to use the
mobile web, but I also want the flexibility of providing an
app if my
customers want one. For now, Dart can't do that. This may
also be a
problem when trying to integrate a Dart app into Windows 8
Metro. GWT
is far superior in this regard; it has a nice architecture for
integrating with Javascript and many useful implementations,
including
a couple for PhoneGap. I'm hoping Javascript integration will be
addressed in the future, but Dart is still in alpha and the
team is
working on core features at least until the language gets to 1.0.
Also, because Dart is so young, the tooling cannot compare to
Java
tooling. This will improve, but Java has many years head
start. The
Dart team is amazing and I am sure they are creating something
very
important; I just wish they were 2 more years along.
My window for fence sitting is closing fast. I will have to
make a
decision. GWT and Dart are the only real contenders. As of
now, I
think GWT is the best choice, but I would sleep better at
night if I
had a roadmap under my pillow.
On Apr 13, 7:34 am, Blake McBride <blake1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I strongly disagree with this. First of all browser
technology and HTML
> are in constant flux. If GWT is not updated, it will very
soon become
> out-of-date (bugs in new browsers) and unusable (reliably
usable over a
> broad base of browsers and platforms). Secondly, building
apps with GWT is
> a full time job. Having to understand and maintain GWT
makes two full time
> jobs. Building GWT apps could easily be a multi-million
dollar effort -
> and so could maintaining GWT. This is a huge, huge risk!
>
> Another issue I've seen this many times before. When
Windows became
> popular, many developer tools appeared. Many were quite
good. IMO, the
> worst development environment by far was Microsoft's MFC.
Virtually all of
> the other tools either sold out or got dropped. Management
often chose MFC
> over other tool because they were non-technical and the old
IBM adage
> applied to Microsoft "no one ever lost their job by
selecting Microsoft"
> ruled. In the end, the industry largely settled on the
absolute lowest
> common denominator. Innovation in that area, for all
practical purposes,
> is dead.
>
> Now we have ASP, JSP, and other popular mashups out there.
I am utterly
> shocked how poor they are (although to their credit, they
are trying to
> solve practical problems given an environment that was
clearly not meant to
> support what they are attempting!). These environments are
among the worst
> I've ever seen. It's one kludgy work around after another
with three
> totally different environments attempting to interact. GWT
goes a very
> long way to solve this very significant problem. However,
GWT is a total
> waste of time if you risk your entire company on it and it
gets dropped.
> In terms of financial risk, very unfortunately, tool
popularity and
> support beats functionality, elegance, and productivity
every time.
>
> A statement of commitment from Google would make a huge
difference to me.
>
> Blake McBride
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Frank
<frank.wyna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > GWT will also not go away...
> > If you have downloaded GWT on your computer you just can
keep using it
> > even years after Google has dropped GWT...
> > Just like you still can program in QuickBasic or something.
>
> > GWT doesn't need anything from Google on the web to operate.
>
> > I will just keep using GWT if Google drops it, and see
keep an eye on Dart.
>
> > Op donderdag 12 april 2012 10:00:15 UTC+2 schreef dominikz
het volgende:
>
> >> I've been for years with technologies like SAP or AS/400.
Those are
> >> really annoying when you try to do something modern. But
the thing that is
> >> good about them is that they never go away. I understand
that Google needs
> >> to try new things (dart). But turning away from such a
big project like GWT
> >> is stabbing yourself in the back.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google Groups
> > "Google Web Toolkit" group.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>
>https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/TSws9XOf334J.
>
> > To post to this group, send email to
google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com
<mailto:google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com>.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:google-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/2hh07FVI2kcJ.
To post to this group, send email to
google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com
<mailto:google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:google-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google
Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
