On 25 November 2014 at 17:24, Tom Eugelink wrote:
> the question is, should it be working good in one area or only half in two?
That's an age-old problem I guess Tom. Personally I feel that traditional
forms/dialogs based applications have enough support in Scene Builder as it
is with version
You are completely right, except in the "now that this part has been done".
SceneBuilder is no where near to being done yet, that is, assuming SB should work on the
level of XCode or the Flash editor. And then the question is, should it be working good
in one area or only half in two?
Tom
On
Of course Oracle needs/needed to prioritise features in JavaFX and I think
they have done a very good job in that respect given that the most common
use case would be for forms or dialogs with the odd decorative effect.
But, now that this part has been done, I would love to see a lot more work
put
FWIW I've found Scene Builder to work pretty well and haven't missed
animation support. Doing it at the code level was good enough. And yes I
have built things in Flash, a long time ago. Perhaps my standards are
lower, as mostly in the last few years when doing UI work I've been stuck
with HTML :-)
In light of the reflection performance hit, the approach dagger 2 has taken
with DI may be pretty interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK_XtfXPkqw
On 24-11-2014 16:19, Manfred Karrer wrote:
I have a longtime backgroud in Flash and Flex development and a bit if iOS, so
I would like to
I have a longtime backgroud in Flash and Flex development and a bit if iOS, so
I would like to add here my 5 cents.
My first impression and experience with Scene Builder was kind of: Is this
meant serious? It cannot be that Oracle release such a product in year 2014
when other platform had shi
I actually have a bit of this in SnapCode - you can draw and configure
arbitrary shapes with fills and effects, bring up the animation inspector and
set the time slider to a new time and reconfigure attributes for that new
key-frame (such as size, location, rotation, scale, skew, color), then sa
Oh, you are right, if the JavaFX team does not need to make choices on where to invest their
precious time, then all possible usages could be implemented immediately. Unfortunately they too
have to place priorities and then the most likely usage will get implemented first (since most
usages alr
JavaFX should not be seen as a "replacement" for anything or an
"alternative". It has characteristics of both Flash and Flex along with
Silverlight and especially Qt, (not to mention even HTML5/CSS/JS), but is a
separate and distinct product in its own class.
Just because the Flash visual editor
I have no problems using JavaFX's animations for my purposes, which are
decorative effects. I do not need an editor for that, forced me to use it and
it probably will even get in my way. Which BTW was the case with the Flash
coding that I have done; I hated that Flash EDI, it was way too much f
Actually Felix Everybody is waiting for you to write such a tool. I don't
think anybody has scene your Disney Animation Movie Credits but me.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Felix Bembrick
wrote:
> Really? My point is, why have such good built-on classes to support the
> building of everything
thats funny -Scene! boy I can't spell
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Mike wrote:
> Actually Felix Everybody is waiting for you to write such a tool. I don't
> think anybody has scene your Disney Animation Movie Credits but me.
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Felix Bembrick
> wrote:
>
>>
Really? My point is, why have such good built-on classes to support the
building of everything from simple animations to complex visualisations if
it is practically impossible to do so?
On 24 November 2014 at 21:02, Tom Eugelink wrote:
> I do not think that JavaFX is aiming at replacing flash,
I do not think that JavaFX is aiming at replacing flash, HTML and javascript
are doing a great job there, hence animations are not equally important as they
were for flash.
Tom
On 24-11-2014 10:46, Felix Bembrick wrote:
I am surprised more people have not expressed an opinion on this. To me
I am surprised more people have not expressed an opinion on this. To me,
it seems absolutely *vital* to the long term (or any term) success of
JavaFX.
Haven't any of you ever programmed in Flash? Can you imagine trying to
create any of those complex (or even the simple) animations and
visualisat
I’m afraid at this time there are no plans for adding an animation/transition
effect editor to Scene Builder, certainly not in the short-term.
Thanks
Richard
> On Nov 13, 2014, at 7:34 PM, Felix Bembrick wrote:
>
> Java applets were the first "programs" to run inside a web browser and for
> a
://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/oracle_jdk_on_64_bit
From: Jeff Martin
To: Felix Bembrick ,
Cc: "openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net List"
Date: 11/14/2014 09:25 AM
Subject: Re: What Scene Builder needs YESTERDAY!
Sent by:"openjfx-dev"
I think this was
I think this was true back when Java was a contender for browser graphics. It’s
clear now that Java in the browser, and even Flash, are going away. Now I think
the best opportunity for JavaFX is for rich, cross-platform, non-browser apps -
which really means desktop enterprise apps. Very limitin
Java applets were the first "programs" to run inside a web browser and for
a (little) while they were flavour of the month.
But then along came Flash which had several advantages such as faster load
times, consistent loads and antialiased fonts/graphics and soon completely
surpassed applets.
But
19 matches
Mail list logo
