Is it really true that *all* of JavaFX is open source? Even if it is, if I wanted to say take some aspects of the product in a radical new direction, wouldn't someone from Oracle have to approve the changes?
If yes, then only Oracle can bring the big enhancements that are necessary which we know will never happen. As I said, the biggest impediment to the growth in features, performance and adoption of JavaFX is Oracle themselves. > On 1 Dec 2015, at 20:45, Peter Pilgrim <peter.pilg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi All > > I find it remarkable to see that this debate about > innovation-versus-maintenance is similar to the one going on in the > Java EE space. See > https://java.net/projects/javaee-spec/lists/users/archive/2015-01/message/48 > - Many Java EE experts, including myself, are now looking at the > application servers and the ability to modularise the EE > specification, so that we can just launch an application with `java > -jar acme.jar'. Of course, we are already wrong about that command > line option, because the JDK 9 will be a game changer. > > Anyway, Shai, has some valid interesting assertions in his blog entry. > I don't think it is all FUD in the way that Microsoft used to secretly > push in their strategic vision to conquer the desktop world. I do > believe that his evidence shows how weak OTHER developers view Java > client side technologies. JavaFX has not set the world on fire and has > been the vision that I saw at the first presentation in JavaOne 2007. > > But that was yesterday, 8 years ago in fact. I lot of mistakes were > made, and the vision could have better. We all had to follow the > education and the learning path. Hindsight is a beautiful thing, a lot > of us though scripting languages were exciting back then. We should > have started with an all Java API solution in the first place, but > there you go... > > Donald said the JavaFX is 100% open source, so what is the real > issue. We have the code, go and build. > > Alexander, I downloaded your JavaOne presentation, I went through it > last night. It is good stuff with all of those 11 business enterprise > applications. Why are these applications not good enough to show > adoption? > > Last year, 2014, I watch a JavaFX talk at JavaOne on a financial > trading system written in JavaFX (CelerFX or something). What gives > here? > > I am definitely a Java EE guy these days ever since I wrote two books, > but you fellows need to step up, I think, promote FX more strongly > yourselves. I know that Nandini (who is now at Twitter) pushed a FX > show case a couple times in the past, first for JavaFX 1.0 and then > 1.2. Jim did with blog and is still going at Pivotal. Guys you need to > do more videos, screen captures and more talks. If the popular Java > conferences don't take you on, then f*** e* and host your own video > shows like Adam Bien. Build some excitement about what your have done > with FX in your applications. Grow some con****** and come down with > the attitude. > > The good news is that JDK 9 will bring a better deployment story for > Java on the whole. You can have launchers and modules that only your > application require. Perhaps, were the value is. > > >> On 1 December 2015 at 08:21, Felix Bembrick <felix.bembr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Well, it is the official Swing replacement but look at Java 9 and you won't >> see many if any enhancements to JavaFX. The point is Oracle has no interest >> in desktop software other than maintaining any existing support contracts. >> >> I don't even think Oracle wants JavaFX so it would be better for everyone to >> take ownership of it and build a company purely around JavaFX that's >> actually profitable and keeps enhancing the product at a much faster pace. >> >>> On 1 Dec 2015, at 19:12, i...@cuhka.com wrote: >>> >>> If it is not a part of OpenJDK/Oracle JDK it will not work. Whether Oracle >>> itself maintains the code doesn't really matter I think, but they have to >>> put support and development in it. >>> >>> To me another downside if Oracle would suspend further development is that >>> any statements made by Oracle seem to carry not so much value. If I'm >>> correct JavaFX was presented by Oracle as the Swing replacement. If after a >>> short time they revert from that position, what would that mean for any >>> other statement? >>> >>> >>> Citeren Felix Bembrick <felix.bembr...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> If JavaFX stays under Oracle control, it will be the same it is today in 5 >>>> years. I really doubt they will put another dollar into its expansion and >>>> new features. >>>> >>>> How can that be good? >>>> >>>> Plus the company that does take over could provide commercial support as >>>> well as training (which Oracle doesn't). > > > > -- > Best wishes > > Peter Pilgrim, > Java Champion / Director P.E.A.T. LTD > > ++++ Scala and Java EE Software Development / Design / Architect > for `BlueChip' enterprises, London, UK ++++ > > I am currently writing ``Digital Java EE 7 Development'' Packt Pub > (September 2015) > > ++++ Digital ++ Finance ++ Adaptation ++ Transformation ++ Software ++++ > > :: http://www.xenonique.co.uk/blog/ :: > :: http://twitter.com/peter_pilgrim :: > :: http://java-champions.java.net/ ::
