To be honest, Oracle is going to customize this framework and use it for competing with MS. Plain and simple.
You will see some new App Server or a compiled package coming up with Java a part of it or java being tuned up to suite Oracle suite of products..Nothing new in its strategy. Regards, jd On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:12 PM, opinali <opin...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've signed the petition too, although I don't think this will have > any immediate impact. I just hope Oracle is listening - virtually 100% > of the prominent outsider JavaFX enthusiasts have signed it. But even > if Oracle is already planning to open FX, they will most certainly > wait to announce that at J1'10 when they can make a huge PR splash > about it. > > I agree that this JavaOne will be decisive for JavaFX. The already- > sure thing is that JavaFX TV will ship soon - v1.3.1 is expected to > bring a production-quality port for the Intel CE 3100/4100 platform. I > guess we'll be able to buy some HDTV sets with FX next Christmas. But > oddly enough, the roadmap is much less clear for the JavaFX Mobile > profile, that should have hit the market much sooner. It seems Oracle > had to rethink their strategy when MS announced that WinMob7 won't be > very friendly to native apps - although frankly, this may not be very > relevant, because any user-installable FXMob runtime (even OTA) will > not cut it; the only chance for FXMob is shipping OEM, which requires > some buy-in from device makers. (I don't know if WinMob7's licensing > rules will allow OEMs to integrate third-party platforms like FX, but > I suppose that would be possible.) > > The FX team seems to have used this opportunity to make some important > improvements in FX's multi-platform approach. The original concept of > profile was substantially improved, with a capabilities API to > dynamically query the runtime for optional features, and stubs that > allow unsupported classes (like the Effects) to exist, but degrade > gracefully, in lower profiles. Add to that the fact that the TV > profile is virtually identical to Desktop (and Prism-only), and > JavaFX's multiplatform story seems like something designed in heaven, > especially compared to its competition. I suppose also that they've > been working ahead on performance and other issues, ever since the 1.2 > release. But time's up; endless implementation improvements won't do > much good if FXMob doesn't start shipping soon. The window of > opportunity still exists but it's closing quickly, as more mobile-RIA > competitors like Flash 10.1 and Silverlight start shipping. > > The Java Store is another important piece of the limbo where FXMob has > entered this year. The beta Store is apparently dead, and I think > Oracle must be reevaluating it from a broader strategic perspective. > Maybe they will kill the store (or keep it only for other profiles), > if this makes easier e.g. to arrange deals so Android handsets will > have the FXMob runtime and the Android app store will allow users to > buy and install FXMob apps; same for Nokia handsets with Ovi, etc. > This is just a wild guess, but the app stores issue is certainly part > of the problem, and part of whatever new roadmap that Oracle has been > working on lately (and hopefully, we will get to know in Sept 19...). > > A+ > Osvaldo > > On 16 jul, 08:24, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it> > wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 7/16/10 12:14 , Carl Jokl wrote:> I have signed. > > > > Me too. After reading Kirill's post I knew that a post from Stephen > > was in progress :-) > > > > > > > > > While we are on the subject of JavaFX, is there any indication of > > > when the first real JavaFX phones will be available? It has > > > implications for an open source JavaME project I am working on. The > > > application is fairly complex and it may be difficult to keep the > > > mobile jar size within the permitted constraints for modern mobile > > > phones. For this reason I would be loathed to have to add the > > > JavaFX runtime to the distribution as there is a danger it would > > > bloat the app to much and push it over the limit. > > > > > I really worry that with all the attention that Android is getting > > > from Handset manufacturers it may discourage them from embracing > > > JavaFX Mobile. When JavaFX Mobile launched though there were > > > several companies listed as being committed to doing something with > > > it. > > > > For Mobile JavaFX, I'm very pessimistic. I used it the past year for > > implementing an idea I had in mind, thinking that many enabled phones > > would have been made available. In the end, I waited for several > > months for users' feedback, that didn't come (almost nobody has got a > > JavaFX enabled phone, and furthermore the process of installing the > > runtime isn't user oriented). I moved to Android a few months ago and > > now my app has experienced a successful start, including some user > > feedback. BTW, while my project is not commercial, nor is meant to > > make money, I've realized that had I started with Android one year > > ago, I'd have enjoyed one year without any kind of competition > > (similar commercial applications for Android started to come out just > > when I published my first releases). You figure out what this means. > > > > So, if your app is related to some business, or in any case it will > > experience some competition, I think you'd better to move to Android > > (I mean, adding an Android port) rather than waiting further for > > JavaFX. After the JavaOne I'll consider JavaFX Mobile definitely dead, > > but even though some announcement is made (unless it's very big e.g. > > Nokia says it will integrate it on all of its phones) it will be in > > such a delay that it won't be able to compete with Android. In any > > case, Android on mobile phones will be for sure in our future, and I > > consider it an investment, in addition to supporting for the currently > > huge base of JME phones. > > > > - -- > > Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager > > Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." > > java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici -www.tidalwave.it/people > > fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) > > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > > > iEYEARECAAYFAkxAQWkACgkQeDweFqgUGxcXewCfY/NZGfI8z0SfIxHS4wov6lhZ > > HbUAn3fiDejY6U6XkLDSj9/ELHQeorFr > > =BuKq > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- > 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.
