Easy Answer: MS Word!
Quid licet iovi non licet bovi as the romans said.In english: if
it's ok for Microsoft it's still not ok for you!
Thomas
snip
Then the question is, why do they need those 7000 Windows 2000 Desktops?
Wouldn't they be better served by 7000 X server workstations and
It might be easier for you, but not for the corporate IT shop you're
trying to sell your stuff to. They probably have some wacked out
compliance test to go through for everything they want to install on
their 7000 Windows 2000 Desktops (XP being too newfangled and unproven
to be used). In
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Then the question is, why do they need those 7000 Windows 2000 Desktops?
Wouldn't they be better served by 7000 X server workstations and
several Unix machines with centralized user accounts?
I know, that's old-school. The whole concept is out
Yes, you can have EJBs calls over HTTP. Google for HTTPInvoker. It's a
component from JBoss. That's what makes the Genesis framework so
interesting: http://genesis.dev.java.net See ya
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, you can have EJBs calls over HTTP. Google for HTTPInvoker. It's a
component from JBoss.
Ah, you lucky EJB guys - you're on top of it already.
That's what makes the Genesis framework so interesting:
http://genesis.dev.java.net
...to allow people with little
Zappaterrini, Larry wrote:
Your reason is a special instance of a much more general reason. Web
applications are much easier to deal with from a deployment
perspective than desktop applications.
I don't know, it's not difficult to set up an RMI server, or to deploy
a Swing client with Web
This only holds true if you have the full deployment environment under
control: Java for OS X is much different than Java for Windows, as
Johan can attest for. Just as with browsers you have to consider folks
that don't update their JDK's, and many corporate IT guys don't want
to update anything
You guys want a Tunnel library that can tunnel RMI over http?
http://sebster.com/tunnel/
works fine. We use it in our product
So if you want to code a Swing client that sort of is a browser but then a
bit fatter
and uses http (rmi over htttp or something else) you can do that just fine
johan
if you target Java 5 by using webstart
then there isnt to much of a problem just with that
But yes you do have especially with the mac the different jvm problems as
you have with browsers :(
But happily not that many problems (there are way more different browsers
and platforms) and if i have to
Actually, I use a Mac now (vista prompted the purchase) and the Mac
JVM is actually not much different... in fact I don't notice anything
at all when working with java unless I'm doing something low lever
like trying to load a YourKit agent... but even then its not so
different.
If your
the mac jvm is really horrible
We really develop eclipse/swing applications for 8 years now and throughout
all those years if there is a jvm specific problem
Its the mac, its always the mac, For me it is already so far that i really
hate everything that is a mac.
When they released leopard i
Even Mac guys agree that development by Sun would be much better :-)
They still lag behind with java 1.6 (no current 1.6.0_07), do not
support powerpc for 1.6 anymore, can't run 32bit on 1.6 and can't run
64bit on 1.5 etc.
Yeah, java by apple suckzz !
Am 17.07.2008 um 16:08 schrieb
Johan Compagner wrote:
You guys want a Tunnel library that can tunnel RMI over http?
http://sebster.com/tunnel/
works fine. We use it in our product
Excellent, that's exactly what's needed.
... multiplexed RMI Socket Factories ... together with the HTTP
tunnel this allows you to use
Daan van Etten wrote:
Yeah I know, problem are that our application are ajax heavy, and
stateless and ajax does not cope well I've heard..
Maybe not within Wicket, I know too little of Wicket to draw a valid
conclusion on that. But it is definitely possible.
Look for example at the
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Michael Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. The user can seamlessly click into the application from external
sites, and click back out again.
1 a. A Web client is good for demonstrating a new application,
because it's convenient for casual users, who
nicely.
From: Michael Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 7/16/2008 2:00 PM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: why are we coding Web apps?
Daan van Etten wrote:
Yeah I know, problem are that our application are ajax heavy, and
stateless and ajax does
16 matches
Mail list logo
