I apologize that I implied anything about your (or anyone elses) character, definitely my bad and no excuse for it.
mocks away... Lloyd On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Christian Edward Gruber < christianedwardgru...@gmail.com> wrote: > Herr Meinholz, > > Holy argumentum ad-hominem, dude! Wow. I'm not an Apple apologist. Heck, > I work for Google and have more than enough reasons to be annoyed by Apple, > as a firm, from an industry perspective and developer ecosystem perspective. > I'm just saying that the kinds of issues that were raised did not affect > the bulk of my last five years, four of which were pre-Google, and involved > mostly Java development on Mac developer stations/laptops with deployment to > a heterogenous back-end usually on J2EE servers. Also, I happen, > personally, to like the Mac dev tools because I grew up on NeXTSTEP. That's > a style preference - it doesn't blind me to what I see as unhelpful business > practices (unhelpful to the customer and the developer). > > In your argument you make a case for uncertainty... except that Mac apps > don't require an app-store intermediary, and they would lose about 50-80% of > their Mac laptop business if you couldn't install whatever app you wanted on > such. So it's only a very theoretical uncertainty. The Mac itself is > fairly non-walled-garden. the iPhone and iPad and iPod - sure. Total walled > garden. I disagree with Apple on this. I'd like a walled garden approach > with a nice ladder to hop over the wall. > > But why am I even discussing this when you call my intellectual integrity > in question and you don't even know me. And your ad-hominem is largely > based on such an accusation based on my anecdotal disagreement with your > sweeping conclusions? All I did was provide myself as a counter-example. > Not saying "it ain't so" ... saying, rather, "it ain't necessarily so." > Were I not immediately dismissive of such an assault on my character, I > would be offended sir. As it is, I shall just mock you to my friends. ;-) > > cheers, love and light. (and hopefully a good sense of humour) > Christian. > > > > On May 5, 2010, at 1:20 AM, Lloyd Meinholz wrote: > > This is not FUD. There is uncertainty (the U part) in how fully Apple will > support Java in the future. Apple has badly neglected Java in the past and > has not commited to not doing the same in the future. What gives you any > confidence that Apple will ever release a Java update past what you have > now? What happens when Apple decides that Objective-C is the only language > that should be used on MacOSX just like they recently decided it was the > only appropriate language for the iPutz platform? > > I purchased a Mac mini 2 years ago to give MacOSX a whirl. I recently made > a major upgrade/purchase of my home desktop system. I really wanted an iMac > but with the uncertainty I perceived and felt (whether you recognize it as > legitimate or not) I went with an Intel box instead. The decision was not > purely monetary even though I think I got a better value with my Intel box. > The experience I had with my mini was a few months before Apple released the > big Java updates (1.5 and 1.6) and the experience was not stellar for me. > Eclipse in particular was sub-par and has only recently gotten better (Cocoa > port?). I have no confidence that if I had bought an iMac that a similar > situation would not re-occur in the future. > > What is the difference between Apple saying that non Objective-C > applications on the iPutz is not ok from Sun saying non Java applications on > the JVM is not ok? What kind of hell would people raise if Sun/Oracle said > that only Java could run on the JVM (no groovy/scala/clojure/jruby for you) > since other languages would give a sub-optimal user/developer experience? > What is Tor (sorry to pick on you, but you did mock Linux :) going to say > when Apple decides that JavaFX shouldn't run on MacOSX since it doesn't give > the native LOF experience? > > In the end, we can develop good Java code on any of the major platforms and > maybe it's mostly a personal preference, but I prefer the one that doesn't > limit my options. I also prefer colleagues that are intellectually honest > enough to accept the good and bad of their dealer without becoming an > apologist. > > Lloyd > > > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Christian Edward Gruber < > christianedwardgru...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> And yet, almost all of my development in the last 10 years has been in >> Java, and about 5 years ago I gave up and got a Mac (once they were on Intel >> for a rev or two.). I've never looked back. I had some minor annoyance >> about JDK6 which quickly was addressed with developers access downloads >> which were generally of high quality, and it's been a stellar - stellar - >> experience. >> >> I'm not saying they're awesome as a company towards devs who don't play >> their way - I"m just saying I haven't been hit very hard by it, and I"m not >> an atypical developer, in the java world. It is FUD. The not-best-place >> for me has been linux where I hate the UI all the time (gnome or kde - I >> have resorted to WMaker, but it's a hack), and on Windows where I bluescreen >> all the time. Again, that's me, that's my preferences, but the Java part >> hasn't been an issue, so the above mentioned once took priority. >> >> Christian. >> >> On May 4, 2010, at 7:47 PM, Lloyd Meinholz wrote: >> >> I honestly don't understand why you think questioning that the Mac >> universe is maybe not the best place for Java develoers. is fud. In the >> recent past, Apple took a long time to update the JDK to 1.6 and patch 1.5. >> How far behind in their releases were they? 1, 2 years? They said nothing of >> the reasoning, they gave no roadmap for next releases. There is no reason to >> think that they might not do something similar again. OpenJDK is not the >> same thing. There are disadvantages to having to start up an X11.app to use >> Java on the Mac. Things may be ok now, but it wasn't in the recent past and >> there is no guarantee that it will be in the future. Back in the day, there >> was a huge difference is using blackdown Java on Linux vs. using the Sun >> JDK. >> >> You guys can all love you Macs and MacOSX and iWhatever and they are great >> machines, but you should really be more honest with yourself about Apple's >> intentions. I'm buying hardware and software to develop for and use in the >> way that I think is best, not the way Apple thinks is best. >> >> Lloyd >> >> >> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot >> <reini...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Replies inline. >>> >>> > >>> > 1) Would you agree that given actions and words, Apple also considers >>> > Java an inferior and irrelevant platform? >>> >>> Yes. Especially for desktop apps. Just like ruby, python, mono, the >>> entirety of the terminal (including bash, find, grep and friends), >>> lua, scala, java, PHP and any other language you care to name. For NON- >>> desktop apps though, apple still sells a server OS. They don't sell an >>> Objective C based web framework. So, what the heck are you on about? >>> >>> This might be of some concern to JavaFX users. Minor concern, of >>> course - you can claim the OpenJDK is unstable but that's rather >>> offensive to the OpenJDK crew, and X11.app works perfectly well if >>> that's what it ends up taking, though with the recent popularity >>> especially amongst developers neither Apple nor Oracle can afford to >>> let such a situation stand. Apple sells servers. Servers run server >>> software. Like web servers with webapps on them. Apple themselves use >>> WebObjects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects) which they >>> themselves wrote. In Java. >>> >>> Stop fudding. >>> >>> > >>> > 2) While Steve's cross-air might be aimed at Adobe, his flak shooting >>> > has broad implications across the board. Do you think he has moral >>> > issues with the collateral damage it's creating beyond his own iWorld? >>> > (i.e. Novell's MonoTouch customers) >>> >>> Moral issues? I'm quite sure he's so focussed and passionate on giving >>> the world his personal vision of the future that he's so far >>> entrenched in "the end justifies the means" it would take a direct >>> moral conflict for him to consider anything he steers apple into as >>> immoral. That's problematic for us and all the more reason to pressure >>> Apple into caring more about such issues. >>> >>> Stop fudding. You claimed Java support on OS X is unreliable. What >>> does Steve's flak shooting and his moral compass have to do with java >>> support on Os X? If you were holding on to your hat about somehow >>> using java to write for the iPhone or iPad, and / or if you weren't >>> but you feel the current situation is very bad news, I'll join you on >>> the picket line. iPhone / iPad and macbooks aren't the same thing >>> though. So stop fudding. >>> >>> > >>> > 3) Do you see any monopolistic behavioral pattern that suggests Apple >>> > is the new Microsoft, except that Apple has the benefit of good taste >>> > and is still not big enough as a target for anti-trust litigation? >>> >>> Yes. If you'd read my other posts you'd know that. >>> >>> Stop fudding. You claimed Java support on OS X is unreliable. What >>> does Apple's stellar rise to power have to do with java support on Os >>> X? If anything, OS X being more entrenched than ever DECREASES the >>> odds that there won't be a decent java available on OS X. If not >>> apple, then sunoracle will step up. They can't not. >>> >>> Unless you're going to claim that we'll see an app store model in the >>> near future of OS X, where you simply cannot run any apps on an OS X >>> machine at all unless personally signed and verified by apple. Which >>> is completely ludicrous. If that's truly what you think and why you're >>> FUDing java on OS X, you should say so, so the folks reading your >>> advice can make their own judgement on the likelyhood of this extreme >>> scenario. >>> >>> > >>> > /Casper >>> > >>> > “We’ve been there before, >>> > and intermediate layers between the platform and the developer >>> > ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the >>> > platform.” >>> > >>> > On May 4, 2:20 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <reini...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > Given that OpenJDK7 already builds on Mac OS X today, I'm guessing >>> > > we'll have to wait about a minute after OpenJDK 7 final is released, >>> > > depending on how fast your computer can build the OpenJDK. Duh. >>> > >>> > > Stop fudding. >>> > >>> > > On May 4, 10:42 am, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com> >>> > > wrote: >>> > >>> > > > 1. The recent letter to Adobe shows that Apple clearly believe >>> Cocoa to the >>> > > > the "One True Way". Anything else is going through a "private >>> library" or >>> > > > "intermediate framework", and we KNOW what happens to those. >>> > >>> > > > 2. Java access to Cocoa has been deprecated. This is not just lack >>> of a >>> > > > timely release, it's now permanently locked out of the pearly gates >>> (unless >>> > > > it goes via JNI, which will mean someone else's framework...) >>> > >>> > > > 3. As for timely updates of Java? The painfully slow wait for Java >>> 6, >>> > > > accompanied by no information whatsoever, is now infamous in the >>> eyes of >>> > > > many developers. Given that Apple now seem to consider Java less >>> important >>> > > > that it was back then, how long will we have to wait for Java 7 >>> once it's >>> > > > out? >>> > >>> > > > On 4 May 2010 02:16, Reinier Zwitserloot <reini...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > Of course it's 100% FUD - the fact that apple no longer >>> considered >>> > > > > cocoa libraries for java important is completely irrelevant >>> compared >>> > > > > to releasing timely java updates. I don't see the availability or >>> > > > > timeless of updates of MFC bindings in windows java, or KDE >>> bindings >>> > > > > for linux java raise anyone's concern. Why should cocoa be any >>> > > > > different? >>> > >>> > > > > On May 3, 5:03 pm, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > > It's not 100% FUD >>> > >>> > > > > > Java as a user of the Cocoa API got relegated to a 2nd class >>> citizen with >>> > > > > > the release of OSX Tiger: >>> > > > >http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/qa/qa2001/qa1342.html >>> > >>> > > > > > On 3 May 2010 15:17, Reinier Zwitserloot <reini...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > > > Casper, for the fiftheenth bloody time, STOP FUDDING about >>> java on >>> > > > > > > macs. >>> > >>> > > > > > >http://landonf.bikemonkey.org/static/soylatte/ >>> > >>> > > > > > > OpenJDK for the win. >>> > >>> > > > > > > Pro-Apple bias amongst geeks is rooted due to the fact that >>> as far as >>> > > > > > > notebooks are concerned, apple's hardware is fit for a >>> programmer >>> > > > > > > whereas your average notebook / desktop PC that doesn't host >>> a shiny >>> > > > > > > apple logo on it is a piece of crap. It's hard to take a >>> standpoint >>> > > > > > > against a supplier of something no one else supplies. If it >>> had been >>> > > > > > > related to 'alternative to microsoft', we'd have seen similar >>> bias >>> > > > > > > towards linux and solaris but that's not really panning out, >>> hence >>> > > > > > > your theory does not seem to hold water. >>> > >>> > > > > > > On May 3, 11:29 am, Casper Bang <casper.b...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > > > > In this particular context, I think the bias is rooted in >>> your foe's >>> > > > > > > > enemy being your friend. For the longest time Apple was the >>> escape >>> > > > > pod >>> > > > > > > > that hardcore Java developers took from the evil empire's >>> mother >>> > > > > ship. >>> > > > > > > > However, these recent events are really just a predictable >>> further >>> > > > > > > > escalation, considering Java on a Mac is typically 1½-2 >>> years behind >>> > > > > > > > other platform releases. It should come as no surprise >>> then, when >>> > > > > > > > Apple undoubtedly drops all support for client Java within >>> the >>> > > > > not-too- >>> > > > > > > > distant future invoking all too familiar arguments. I do >>> feel that >>> > > > > > > > several of the posse members took a far more healthy and >>> critical >>> > > > > > > > outlook on Apple over the past year though, lead by our >>> posse editor >>> > > > > > > > in chief. >>> > >>> > > > > > > > /Casper >>> > >>> > > > > > > > On May 3, 10:45 am, Liam Knox <liamjk...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > Should I just say Apple is purely after a monopoly i.e. >>> the cash, >>> > > > > > > > > unlike Joe's stated reasons ? >>> > > > > > > > > Does that make it clearer >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > On May 3, 5:06 pm, Kerry Sainsbury <ke...@fidelma.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:25 PM, phil.swen...@gmail.com< >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > phil.swen...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > > > > > > > > > To describe Apples doctorine on Flash or Java on >>> their mobile >>> > > > > > > devices >>> > > > > > > > > > > > as purely due to a want of consistent user >>> experience is just >>> > > > > > > nonsense >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > The clear reason.... >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Not convincing! Calling something "nonsense" or >>> "clear" >>> > > > > doesn't >>> > > > > > > make >>> > > > > > > > > > > it so. Try forming a cogent argument next time. >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Well, Liam's next sentence was "You could equally >>> diverge from >>> > > > > their >>> > > > > > > > > > perceived athletics using objective C of any of their >>> mandated >>> > > > > > > > > > technologies", which sounded reasonable to me -- apart >>> from some >>> > > > > > > issues >>> > > > > > > > > > with English. >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > I believe he meant: >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > "You could equally diverge from their perceived >>> aesthetics using >>> > > > > > > Objective C >>> > > > > > > > > > or any of their mandated technologies". >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Does that make it clearer? >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Why would the UI I create using Objective C be any >>> better than >>> > > > > the UI >>> > > > > > > I >>> > > > > > > > > > would create using any other framework or language, if >>> that >>> > > > > framework >>> > > > > > > or >>> > > > > > > > > > language calls the same UI layer that Objective C does? >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > In fact I'm sure that some frameworks could actually >>> enhance the >>> > > > > UI >>> > > > > > > that I >>> > > > > > > > > > would create, because I make AWFUL user interfaces. >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > (sorry for jumping in Liam!) >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > Cheers >>> > > > > > > > > > Kerry >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to >>> the >>> > > > > Google >>> > > > > > > Groups "The Java Posse" group. >>> > > > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to >>> javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > > > > > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > > > . >>> > > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// >>> > > > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to >>> the Google >>> > > > > > > Groups "The Java Posse" group. >>> > > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to >>> javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > > > > > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > > > . >>> > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// >>> > > > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> > >>> > > > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>> Google >>> > > > > Groups >>> > > > > > > "The Java Posse" group. >>> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to >>> javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > > > > > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > > > . >>> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// >>> > > > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> > >>> > > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>> Google >>> > > > > Groups >>> > > > > > > "The Java Posse" group. >>> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to >>> javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > > > > > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > > > . >>> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at >>> > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> > >>> > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > Kevin Wright >>> > >>> > > > > > mail/google talk: kev.lee.wri...@googlemail.com >>> > > > > > wave: kev.lee.wri...@googlewave.com >>> > > > > > skype: kev.lee.wright >>> > > > > > twitter: @thecoda >>> > >>> > > > > > -- >>> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>> Google Groups >>> > > > > "The Java Posse" group. >>> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to >>> javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > > > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > . >>> > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// >>> > > > > groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> > >>> > > > > -- >>> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>> Google Groups >>> > > > > "The Java Posse" group. >>> > > > > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > > > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> <javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com> >>> > > > > . >>> > > > > For more options, visit this >>> > >>> > ... >>> > >>> > read more » >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "The Java Posse" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "The Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to javapo...@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. >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "The Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@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. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@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.
