OK - let's take them one by one. On Jul 26, 11:49 am, Casper Bang <casper.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > The article (citing Ubuntu's Shuttleworth and Debian's Murdoch) > specifically talks about nobody stepping up to work on Eclipse > packages, evidently because more applications revolve around the Mono > than the Java stack. This would appear to hold true, certainly you all > struggle with coming up with real world Java desktop applications - > while oddly enough having no trouble coming up with a greater list of > Mono applications.
The mono applications I know of are Tomboy, F-spot, Gnome do and Banshee. Seriously, that's it, although I am sure there are others. Citing what you read in the article as FUD from us is disingenuous. Fact is that Eclipse has code completion, refactoring and debugging support even in the older 3.0 versions mentioned in the original SD times article. In the discussion I did in fact call out that I am surprised that a couple of years on from Java being open sourced, there are not more Java desktop apps. The examples we gave show that Java can be used successfully for writing desktop applications, but in the episode I actually say that I am disappointed there are not more. That's a big part of the discussion. The lousy facts in the SD-times article about tooling notwithstanding, they do have a point about the adoption of Java on Linux and I said so explicitly. Perhaps you might listen again? > > You make ironic jokes about "Java is very slow" and "You have to write > the UI in C" in an effort to distract and avoiding searching for a > real answer to the question. Yet ironically, the few places where the > Java desktop DID succeed (i.e. Vuze) it was with SWT - a native/C UI > layer taking the same approach as they do in Mono. No Casper - this is *your take* on what we did. My own opinion is that we did nothing of the sort, and stating it as fact doesn't make it so - sorry buddy. I have no problem at all with the swing UIs I use every day, namely the IDEs I use, so clearly the UI technology is just fine and fast enough, however even I wouldn't call an IDE a general desktop app, hence we didn't talk about them. Someone pointed out since about limewire though which is a good example. Nice snappy UI, swing based, not something I use a lot which is why I didn't think of it, but I totally call BS on the "SWT is the only decent UI for Java desktop apps" argument. > > The article also concludes that MonoDevelop feature-wise is still > inferior to NetBeans and Eclipse, which we all know is the case. What > propels you into "don't know what they are smoking" and related > defense mechanisms? I did not get that from the article at all. What I got out of it was quite different and now I see why - gosh this is interesting and will be a part of the next podcast for sure. The original article published on July 8th in SD Times had nothing about mono playing catchup, and instead had the following blooper (taken from the Google cache - look it up for yourself with a query of: sdtimes mono outpaces java debugger if you don't believe me). The original states, among other things: "Eclipse 3.1 lacks features that MonoDevelop has, including code completion, integrated debugging, refactoring, and unit testing capabilities, Hargett claimed. “I’ve found in my consulting that people who install Eclipse 3.1 through the [Debian] package manager say, ‘This is terrible.’ ” He said that customers that have installed a version of Eclipse beyond 3.1 like it." It was also written by Stephen O'Grady and at no point did it conclude that MonoDevelop is still inferior to NetBeans or Eclipse in terms of features, I can assure you. The version currently up on SD Times has been completely re-written it seems, on July 15th by David Worthington! The old one has been completely replaced, and leaves us high and dry with our coverage on the podcast (thanks again for the professionalism SD Times). Fortunately the nature of the internet is such that the content never truly disappears. The information is already gone from Google's cache, but the Slashdot coverage plus a couple of the other blogs around clearly indicate that the original had none of the stuff you are talking about Casper, and instead had the information and inaccuracies that we reported: http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:61Y0HvuKwuoJ:tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/09/2131245/Mono-Outpaces-Java-In-Linux-Desktop-Development+mono+java+outpaces+debugger+eclipse&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a http://adterrasperaspera.com/blog/2009/07/09/java-development-outpaces-c-development-on-all-platforms http://www.dzone.com/links/rss/mono_outpaces_java_in_linux_desktop_development.html http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/09/2131245/Mono-Outpaces-Java-In-Linux-Desktop-Development?art_pos=1 So - clearly the original article was so bad SD times decided to cover up that it had ever even been written. Oh gosh you can bet we are going to dig into this on the next show. > > Moonlight is not at the Silverlight 1.0 point, it's officially at > 1.9.5 which is a superset of Silverlight 2.0. And it already comes > with codec's donated by Microsoft, the upcoming 2.0 beta will even > have H.264 support, something that seems like a long shot for JavaFX > but you never really covered. On a related note, Microsoft is > providing Mono with test suites which is more than what Harmony has > been able to get for over 2 years now from Sun. OK - granted all of these are true, but I still can't play Netflix on my linux machine, nor do I look likely to be able to do so any time soon while Microsoft holds those codecs hostage. It's great that Moonlight is making some way of running silverlight stuff even if Microsoft won't, but unless it runs the things I actually want to run then it's not much use to me and just serves to be one more way to keep Linux out of the running for being a complete windows replacement. At this time I keep a windows instance around just to be able to watch Netflix occasionally on trips. > > The attraction of Mono is that it's an easy-to-grok-yet-powerful > language that also excels at inter-operating with the rest of the > system. Linux applications typically make heavy use of other de-facto > libraries and tools, that's one major mismatch with Java, which > insists on doing everything but often ends up doing nothing really > well (loop back to the previous SWT point). While Mono will always > lack behind Microsoft's latest ISO/ECMA push, at the same time it will > always be ahead of Java so that's a rather mood point often invoked by > Java zealots. I think you mean moot point, and I would really dispute being "ahead" of Java. That's too general. In the cross platform metrics, Java is so far ahead of mono/.NET it's funny, come to that so is flash (I can actually watch you-tube and hulu on my linux machine). For my money, Scala is a long way ahead of C# in language design too (and ahead of F# as well). The JVM performs faster and efforts like NNIO are definitely lowering the barrier for more OS centric stuff, but above all if you tie into the OS too closely you lose the cross platform, and as a Linux user I find that unacceptable. > > Microsoft just as any other company has an agenda and stockholders to > cater to, hell I want to see my own pension blossom too. Can't we just > all get along and focus on the technology, we are engineers after all > and not priests right? And if you really do want to cover these > things, do it properly by inviting a guest who actually knows > something about it and who can explain why Java has a hard time > getting a foothold. The world is not black and white and who knows, > you might learn something by lowering the fence and actually talk to > the neighbor you have so much in common with. Likewise Casper. These points are useful because I can actually respond to them, and even better it pointed out the changed story on SD Times which I find to be close to a smoking gun on the original article. You talk like I don't use Mono (I use F-spot, Gnome-do and Banshee a lot) and also like I didn't question the fact that more Java desktop apps aren't available on Linux during episode 269 (which I did). I also get kinda pissed though when I am compared to a tabloid journalist based on someone changing an article out from under me, and more generally from the fact that you would compare us to that in the first place. I would remind you that we volunteer many hours per week to bring this podcast out, research the stories and produce the audio, and frankly in the last month or so I feel we have faced enough crap that I am seriously starting to question whether it is worth my continuing involvement in it. I have always said that the point at which it becomes a chore rather than fun is the inflexion point, and while we are not there yet, stuff like this does eventually wear you down. > > /Casper > > On 26 Jul., 18:38, CKoerner <chessm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > To avoid hi-jack of my thread, here is Dicks comments for replying > > > 1. Dick Wall : > > Incidentally, I was willing to give Microsoft the benefit of the > > doubt > > with regards to the code contribution and was pleasantly surprised. > > In > > the days since it appears that they contributed back to avoid a GPL > > violation though. Not wrong, but not the altruism we were led to > > believe initially. Microsoft has a long pattern of attacking linux > > (Linux is a cancer anyone) so is it any surprise I am not exactly > > their biggest fan. If they really want to make a good contribution, > > how about the video codecs Moonlight needs to be on an even footing? > > > 2. Dick Wall : > > Casper, can you elaborate on what you thought the FUD was? Sure - we > > ramble a lot and opinions are by their nature subjective, but what do > > you believe was FUD (which generally I take to mean lies?). Was it > > the > > ISO story? I think we had most of the broad facts right about that > > one > > even if we had to look up the details. Certainly there are enough > > irregularities around that whole thing to be suspicious. Was it > > something else? It's all well and good to wave the FUD flag around, > > but how can we have a discussion if you don't call anything out > > specifically? > > Dick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
