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 using swing and want to use the Mac LAF then you have to
consider the way the UI works, but even then its pretty portable.
I don't know if anyone is truly concerned about how well it works, but
there is the result of my recent experience.
- Brill
On 17-Jul-08, at 5:34 AM, Johan Compagner wrote:
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 say only one really bugs me (mac)
johan
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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 (including browsers!). So probably the easiest
deployment platform still remains the browser, since most shops do
have at least IE6 (while a shitty product in itself, it is manageable
to get it to work).
Deployment of anything, even web apps is an exciting thing in
Corporations.
Martijn
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Michael Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
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 Start (gives the user a single-click launch
from the browser). I've done it, and frankly it's easier than
messing
with Tomcat and Web frameworks (no offense to Wicket).
And any developer who's coded a GUI using a proper toolkit, such as
Swing, will never willingly trade it for a Web framework. (A big
part
of the attraction of Wicket is its Swing-like, component design.
But
it can't approach the real thing.)
Also, there are firewall and security issues surrounding access to
central data repositories that web applications handle nicely.
That security coddling is a mixed blessing. The browser's sandbox,
for instance, makes it a complicated business to provide the user
with
normal access to resources on the desktop. With Swing, your app
is a
full peer on the desktop.
True, there are firewall and NAT hurdles for RMI clients. I googled
for "RMI over HTTP" and "HTTP tunneling", and I didn't get a
comfortable, reassuring response. Why is that? It's a
mystery... It
should be a well beaten path.
--
Michael Allan
Toronto, 647-436-4521
http://zelea.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://
wicketinaction.com
Apache Wicket 1.3.4 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
