The idea of a JFX Sightings page (in the tradition of the Swing Sightings page) has been raised before and I think is a good one.
It deserves it's own page though, that technet section isn't up to it in my opinion. Personally I think this would be great under the fxexperience site as it partners nicely with the links of the week? On 28/07/2013, at 4:17 AM, Pedro Duque Vieira <pedro.duquevie...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have an Swing/JavaFX app, the site is: http://modellus.co > > How can I get it to be on that real world usecases section? Or does it not > have the necessary requirements to be in it? > > Thanks, best regards, > > @John: On the JavaFx community site they have a section with references to >> real world usecases. >> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javafx/community/index.html >> >> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 1:40 AM, John C. Turnbull <ozem...@ozemail.com.au >>> wrote: >>> Like Daniel said, none of what we say is in any way a criticism of the >>> JavaFX development team who, in my view and that of the entire community, >>> are doing an awesome job. >>> >>> >>> >>> For mine, all the shortcomings of JavaFX (perceived or actual) can be >> blown >>> away if I could just demonstrate what JavaFX is really capable of. >>> >>> >>> >>> We have Ensemble from Oracle and also Ensemble from JFXtras (whose demo >>> incidentally doesn't run since Java 7 Update 21). With Oracle Ensemble >> we >>> can see that JavaFX has quite a nice set of basic controls and that it at >>> least supports very simple animations. With JFXtras Ensemble we can see >>> that very nice controls are possible but unfortunately many of these are >> of >>> a rather "whimsical" nature and not the kind of control you would use in >>> everyday business apps. >>> >>> >>> >>> What else is there? >>> >>> >>> >>> Of course we have rock stars like Gerrit Grunwald who frequently post >>> awesome controls and code snippets but we really need something that >> brings >>> it altogether in a kick-arse showcase. Preferably a whole suite of >> killer >>> apps that highlights everything JavaFX is capable of. >>> >>> >>> >>> Yes, that would require a lot of effort but IMHO it is absolutely worth >> it. >>> Without it, people like me really struggle to sell JavaFX or even get a >>> handle on its true potential. I can promise people that more advanced >>> things are "possible" but given that they write the cheques, they need to >>> see it for themselves. >>> >>> >>> >>> And how about a website of JavaFX reference sites? There must be big >>> companies out there using it right? >>> >>> >>> >>> In the end it doesn't matter if I personally see enormous potential for >>> JavaFX if I cannot convince others to see what I see. >>> >>> >>> >>> -jct >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Daniel Zwolenski [mailto:zon...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Saturday, 27 July 2013 09:12 >>> To: John C. Turnbull >>> Cc: Richard Bair; openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net >>> Subject: Re: Can JavaFX do CAD? >>> >>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> >>> I've failed to convince multiple clients that they should use JFX because >>> of >>> >>> >>> a) lack of examples of what it can really do, and how to make it do that >>> (e.g. in enterprise space we have >>> http://static.springsource.org/docs/petclinic.html) >>> >>> b) lack of any big or notable players out there actually using it, or at >>> least publicly saying they are using it >>> >>> c) the deployment hassles vs the ease of html app deployment and the true >>> cross-platform-ness of html >>> >>> >>> >>> After actually getting one client to trust me on it and use it on a real, >>> commercial app (startup), I hit problems with performance (broad >>> interpretation of the term, not 'framerate'), crippling deployment and >> auto >>> updating issues, missing basic features (e.g. maximise button, coming in >>> 2014 I believe?), unpredictability of CSS styling, and a lack of best >>> practices for things like how to do CAD-like diagrams (not so much render >>> performance but zooming, panning, mouse input, layering, dragging, etc). >>> >>> >>> >>> Like John, I've been guilty of letting my frustration show in these >> forums. >>> Like John, it's because I want so badly for JavaFX to be the platform I >>> develop on, it has the potential to be awesome, but things (that seem >>> obvious and small to me) completely stop it from being usable in a real >>> world situation for me. >>> >>> >>> >>> It's not that we think the JFX team aren't slogging their guts out, >> clearly >>> you are. It's just that in some key areas, there are small-ish blocks >> that >>> stop the whole rocket from launching. To then see a whole lot of effort >> be >>> poured into things like binary CSS/FXML compilation, Pi platform support >>> (that's more important than iOS/Android, really?), web deployment >> patches, >>> or even 3D (as cool as that is), just knocks me about. Obviously your >>> priorities are coming from somewhere different to ours, but the way you >>> prioritise is unfathomable to me and that definitely adds to the >>> frustration. >>> >>> >>> >>> At this stage, I am not suggesting my clients use JFX (I actively >>> discourage >>> them from it, in their interest). Mobile is the area that has the >> potential >>> to bring JFX back into usable for me as it can compete easier with the >>> current technologies (which are all crap). Maybe if that ends up working >> (a >>> long, long road to go on that and very much an 'if') then it will seep >> back >>> into the desktop for me, but at a minimum the desktop deployment options >>> will need to be improved before that's even a possibility. >>> >>> >>> I've come to accept that I am not in the primary target audience for >>> JavaFX, >>> maybe a secondary target. I don't understand who the primary target is >>> though, and knowing/accepting doesn't make it any less frustrating. I >> keep >>> involved in the hope that I might get a usable platform somewhere along >> the >>> way but it's more of a hope than a belief. >>> >>> >>> >>> So nothing really new above, but just adding my voice to John's. JavaFX >> is >>> definitely not production ready for me, my clients and the types of apps >> I >>> build (e.g. consumer facing online systems, enterprise/backoffice >> systems, >>> form/data systems, diagramming systems). One day I hope it will be, but >>> it's >>> moving extremely slowly or not at all in the areas that would make it so >>> for >>> me. Meanwhile the competitors (primarily JavaScript based solutions) are >>> improving rapidly in the areas where they have traditionally been weak. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 8:30 AM, John C. Turnbull < >> ozem...@ozemail.com.au >>> <mailto:ozem...@ozemail.com.au> > wrote: >>> >>> Hi Richard, >>> >>> I have to stop posting late at night, that one came across as really >> ANGRY! >>> >>> It's not anger, it's passion... and frustration. >>> >>> I am frustrated because I spend much of my day trying to convince my >>> employer that we should be using JavaFX. They ask me questions like: >>> >>> "What happens if Oracle abandons JavaFX just like Sun did with JMF, >> Java3D, >>> JOGL etc. ?" >>> >>> I say: >>> >>> "This is Oracle, not Sun." >>> >>> They say: >>> >>> "Can you show me what JavaFX can do? There must be examples out there >>> right?" >>> >>> And I say: >>> >>> "Sure, here's Ensemble." >>> >>> They say: >>> >>> "OK, so it has a nice set of basic controls and can do simple animations >>> but >>> what about more complex things like Flash?" >>> >>> ...hence the dancing cat reference. >>> >>> It's not that my employer *needs* dancing cats, it's just that they need >> to >>> see that there is more to JavaFX than red circle transitions. I can't >> even >>> prove to them that JavaFX is capable of dancing cats. They don't have >> the >>> resources to fund me to develop something more sophisticated but they >> tell >>> me that if JavaFX truly was a "mature" technology (like I tell them) then >>> where are all the examples? >>> >>> I am finding it difficult to convince them that JavaFX is production >> ready >>> and is not still in "experimental" mode because I am unable to >> demonstrate >>> its true capabilities or refer them to many examples of people (and I >> mean >>> big companies) actually using it. >>> >>> The main concerns of my employer and I think many companies in a similar >>> situation is that JavaFX won't survive long term and that it is only >> really >>> suitable for form based applications. Then of course there is the whole >>> "HTML5 runs on all platforms" argument but that's another story... >>> >>> So this is why I think it's imperative that Oracle invests in developing >> a >>> true showcase application for JavaFX. Something that non-technical >> people >>> (like managers who make decisions about where the money goes) can look at >>> it >>> and go "wow!". >>> >>> I am just not getting my managers to go "wow" at what I can show them >> with >>> JavaFX at the moment. >>> >>> Every comment or apparent criticism I post about JavaFX is from the >>> perspective that I am trying to deal with real-world problems and people >>> who >>> require proof (such as demos, reference sites etc.) and not because I >>> myself >>> think JavaFX is not up to scratch. >>> >>> It's quite the opposite actually. >>> >>> I am a very, very strong believer and supporter of JavaFX and have many >>> reasons both personal and professional as to why I want it to be a >> massive >>> success. As I have said before, there are plenty of people who praise >>> JavaFX and tend to avoid the very real issues that are restricting its >>> adoption. I just think we have to face these issues head on if we are to >>> compete in what is a very cut-throat industry. >>> >>> -jct >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Richard Bair [mailto:richard.b...@oracle.com >>> <mailto:richard.b...@oracle.com> ] >>> Sent: Saturday, 27 July 2013 01:40 >>> To: John C. Turnbull >>> Cc: 'Daniel Zwolenski'; openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net >>> <mailto:openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net> >>> Subject: Re: Can JavaFX do CAD? >>> >>>> For Flash, there are literally millions of examples of >>>> fancy/complex/impressive graphics and animations out there that can be >>>> really impressive at times. I have not seen ONE such example in >> JavaFX! >>> >>> Point to one? >>> >>> Have you seen any of the JavaOne examples? The movie wall or movies on a >>> stack of 3D cubes was pretty good. But I guess you're not interested in >> the >>> 3D aspect? What is it you are looking for exactly? Different people (on >>> this >>> list) have had different perceptions on both (a) what's important and (b) >>> what kind of graphics they're interested in. Most people would deride the >>> dancing cat as being totally irrelevant to the types of applications >>> they're >>> trying to build (the basis for much of flash animations is shape >> morphing, >>> you can find some code here https://gist.github.com/gontard/5029764). >>> >>> On the other hand, JavaFX is not a replacement for OpenGL. Drawing 25 >>> million lines is just not something we can do right now, especially in a >>> resource constrained environment. I've already commented on the memory >>> overhead (which would continue to be an issue even if the drawing part of >>> the problem were solved). >>> >>> I've pushed to graphics repo the StretchyGrid, which is about 300k line >>> nodes (the actual amount is variable, see the javadoc comments). At 300k >>> nodes the scene graph overhead is negligible on the FX side, dirty opts >> is >>> taking a long time to run, and painting is really slow. >>> >>> PULSE: 347 [122ms:222ms] >>> T12 (8 +0ms): CSS Pass >>> T12 (8 +0ms): Layout Pass >>> T12 (47 +53ms): Waiting for previous rendering >>> T12 (100 +1ms): Copy state to render graph >>> T10 (101 +16ms): Dirty Opts Computed >>> T10 (117 +105ms): Painted >>> Counters: >>> Nodes rendered: 306565 >>> Nodes visited during render: 306565 >>> >>> If I were doing this by hand in open GL, I think the drawing would be >>> essentially free, if I used LINES with GL anti-aliasing, I could send 'em >>> all down to the card in a single shot (and if I had a modern GL I could >> do >>> LINES + FXAA or one of the other per-pixel AA algorithms available and it >>> would turn out pretty nice). Because our shapes don't implement the >> non-AA >>> path, and our AA involves software rasterization and uploading of >> pixels, I >>> expect that to be the main source of the 105ms time being spent here. >>> >>> Also I noticed (by turning on prism.showdirty=true) that the entire grid >> is >>> being painted every time, even though visually it looks like only a small >>> subset actually needs to be changed. But that's really a minor thing, as >> I >>> said, drawing this many lines should basically be free if I configure >>> "smooth" to false in the app. Except that right now it is totally not >>> implemented (in NGShape): >>> >>> public void setAntialiased(boolean aa) { >>> // We don't support aliased shapes at this time >>> } >>> >>> The point of stretchy grid is not to say "wow look at this amazing demo". >>> The point is to say "what happens if I put in 300K nodes. Where does the >>> system start to fall over?". >>> >>> Richard= >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > -- > Pedro Duque Vieira
