It's all about the lowest common denominator, which is what Google really gets. They don't care about Java in the same passionate/ religious way as i.e. Dick, to them it's just a tool and a marked to be harvested. That was one of the most interesting parts of the latest podcast, Dick putting Carl in the "hot chair". I've criticized the Java Posse in the past for seeking the path of least resistance and favouring other things over actual engineering/technology aspects, but this conversation I thought was superb!
I know there's no chance in he// that will happen, but another enlightening interview could be with Androids Dan Bornstein. Again, forgetting about religion and focusing on engineering, I would love to know how come Mono did not look interesting to them when it provides a lot of free machinery and performance: http://www.koushikdutta.com/2009/01/dalvik-vs-mono.html (And no, there's no patent patent issue here, just as Android isn't currently using Swing, a Mono version would not use WinForms so Microsoft couldn't do squad if they wanted to.) All of Google's fancy interactive stuff runs on the iPhone and Android devices - meanwhile Flash and JavaFX does not (well ok, Flash does but currently only released for the Hero). And giant hack or not, GWT makes the users as well as developers happy. The same argument goes for Android, App Engine etc. And at the end of the that day, isn't that all that really matters? /Casper On 28 Jun., 16:33, Jess Holle <je...@ptc.com> wrote: > tronda wrote: > > I think the main reason is what Carl said. With HTML 5 Google is able > > to drive the standard. With JavaFX/Applet/JavaPlugin this isn't the > > case. Flash the same. The web standards has served Google good in the > > past and I think this will be able to serve Google good in the future. > > I also think it is important to get momentum behind HTML 5 and Google > > is probably pushing it to avoid having developers turning to Flash/ > > JavaFX/Silverlight as a solution for their highly interactive content. > > I consider this a good thing. > > While I'd consider pushing developers away from Silverlight a good > thing, I can't consider architecting with any substantive piece of code > in JavaScript a good thing -- and interactive HTML == JavaScript in most > any real case. > > If you have a tiny client UI, fine, but as things grow JavaScript > becomes a really nasty technology. > > GWT is helpful in getting you around this -- until you hit the wall. > > Java and JavaFX are far more attractive in this regard. > > -- > Jess Holle --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
