Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Always a good read: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/10/25/are-java-and-flash-doomed-on-the-mac/ James On Oct 25, 2010, at 6:52 AM, Ian Joyner wrote: > Interesting take from Matt. A few things concern me. > > 1) He says "Executive quips always make headlines". Surely, what executives >

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Interesting take from Matt. A few things concern me. 1) He says "Executive quips always make headlines". Surely, what executives say should be based on what their technical people have told them and be well thought out. That is the mark of an agile environment where technical people are treated

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

And Matt Drance take : http://www.appleoutsider.com/2010/10/22/java > SJ Speaks: > > > > On 2010-10-22, at 7:29 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: > >> I am not advocating anything since I only develop one browser GUI for >> web-based apps my

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

There have been huge investments in Flash-based content in education. Partly because it was simpler to make SCORM compliant resources with Flash. Some of these resources are just brilliant and would be very hard to make with another technology (I don't do Flash myself). The fact that iOS does no

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 23 Oct 2010, at 01:07, Joel M. Benisch wrote: > MacApp is still in use by some, and it goes back to Object Pascal days (late > 1980s?). Wow, still around. > > C and C++ have been around for how long? And they are the horrors of all horrors. Strange how the worst technologies have the longe

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Looks like Flash is getting the same treatment: http://mashable.com/2010/10/22/macs-os-x-flash-playe/ More I think about it the more it makes sense. Most people who buy OS X don't have a need for Java anymore and those of us who do shouldn't mind installing it ourselves. Especially, if it mea

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:12 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > Can't remember the exact years but: > > 1990 I started with NeXTstep on a black box > > and then the horror began: > > Operating Systems: > - NeXTstep on several plattforms > - OpenStep > - Black Hardware dies > - YellowBox (anyone remenber?) >

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

> MS ASP with Visual Basic. Still in use by many companies who didn't switch to > .net Platform :) Sent from my iPhone On 2010-10-22, at 5:07 PM, "Joel M. Benisch" wrote: > MacApp is still in use by some, and it goes back to Object Pascal days (late > 1980s?). > > C and C++ have been around

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 22, 2010, at 9:16 AM, Ken Anderson wrote: If the UI job is boring, meaning you don't care how your application looks, I suggest doing a simple web app that any browser on any platform can render. Otherwise, UI should not be boring - it should be the best it can be on the platform

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

MacApp is still in use by some, and it goes back to Object Pascal days (late 1980s?). C and C++ have been around for how long? And there are untold numbers of applications written in those languages that are still in production. Oh, and how long has UNIX been in production? Were most of us born

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

+1 Joel -- Joel M. Benisch CPCU, President 973-992-6300 x303 PaperFree Corporation 973-992- FAX 909 Regal Boulevar

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

If the UI job is boring, meaning you don't care how your application looks, I suggest doing a simple web app that any browser on any platform can render. Otherwise, UI should not be boring - it should be the best it can be on the platform you're selling to. It's what separates the apps that are

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

OK, how about non-mainframe technology :) On Oct 22, 2010, at 8:55 AM, David BON wrote: > COBOL :-p ? > > David B. > > Le 21 oct. 10 à 22:16, Ken Anderson a écrit : > >> How is that a horror? Name me one other technology thats lasted more than 5 >> years, forget about 20! :) >> >> >> On Oc

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

COBOL :-p ? David B. Le 21 oct. 10 à 22:16, Ken Anderson a écrit : How is that a horror? Name me one other technology thats lasted more than 5 years, forget about 20! :) On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:12 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: Can't remember the exact years but: 1990 I started with NeXTstep on

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

SJ Speaks: On 2010-10-22, at 7:29 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: > I am not advocating anything since I only develop one browser GUI for > web-based apps myself. However I am stating an opinion that the platforms are > diverging at a rate where "i

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

I am not advocating anything since I only develop one browser GUI for web-based apps myself. However I am stating an opinion that the platforms are diverging at a rate where "in my opinion" (and that is all it is) a cross-development GUI tool will have difficulty in being ideal and/or perfect on

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

I cannot believe that a developper advocates doing three times (MacOS, Windows, Linux) the same boring UI job... Le 22 oct. 2010 à 04:37, webobjects-dev-requ...@lists.apple.com a écrit : > Cross-platform development GUIs, IMHO, can never offer true fidelity on any > one platform. They will most

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 21 Oct 2010, at 5:25 PM, webobjects-dev-requ...@lists.apple.com wrote: Message: 2 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:52:43 -0700 From: Dov Rosenberg Subject: Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code To: Chuck Hill ,Stefan Klein Cc: "webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com&quo

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 21 Oct 2010, at 3:17 PM, webobjects-dev-requ...@lists.apple.com wrote: Message: 6 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:12:33 +0200 From: Stefan Klein Subject: Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code To: webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com Message-ID: <4cc09eb1.3090...@buero-sde.de> Content-

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

+1 On 21 Oct 2010, at 12:27 PM, webobjects-dev-requ...@lists.apple.com wrote: Message: 2 Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 10:32:11 -0600 From: Ken Foust Subject: Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code To: Ken Anderson Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List Message-ID: Content-Type: text/p

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Dude, you sound just like Steve Jobs :) On Oct 21, 2010, at 6:34 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: > Cross-platform development GUIs, IMHO, can never offer true fidelity on any > one platform. They will mostly achieve an inferior subset of functionality at > best, and possibly only look good on the pl

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Cross-platform development GUIs, IMHO, can never offer true fidelity on any one platform. They will mostly achieve an inferior subset of functionality at best, and possibly only look good on the platform to which they have been biased from the start. This is especially true as the gap widens bet

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Better than that, we will be on WO 5.4.x + Wonder 8.0.203267. WO is java, Java is extendable, hackable, injectable, over-rideable .. I prefer the new WebObjects features to be open-source in WOnder than added as closed source in WebObjects. On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:51 PM, Joe Little wrote: >

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Ah, yes, the rapturous beauty of Swing! On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Simon wrote: > I'm just gutted that this means the end of swing. > > oh how much i loved swing apps. they were so elegant. > > simon > > On 21 October 2010 22:44, Ken Foust wrote: >> Christ now you won't even be able to

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Wait a minute... What about D2JC?! Really people. Think about it. We won't be able to do D2JC anymore Hello? Anybody? No? Well, at least something hasn't changed in the past 6 years. :-) Dave On Oct 21, 2010, at 6:02 PM, Simon wrote: > I'm just gutted that this means the end of swin

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Had Apple actually maintained their version of Swing to keep it looking current, Swing would have been elegant. Instead they always looked antiquated. Now it will be even worse. So much for cross-platform application development outside the browser. On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Simon wrote

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

I'm just gutted that this means the end of swing. oh how much i loved swing apps. they were so elegant. simon On 21 October 2010 22:44, Ken Foust wrote: > Christ now you won't even be able to do Grails. > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:52 PM, Dov Rosenberg wrote: > >> You forgot to mention that th

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Christ now you won't even be able to do Grails. On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:52 PM, Dov Rosenberg wrote: > You forgot to mention that the obj-c - java bridge finally died after 3.5.1 > - sometime in the 4.x I think > > We are on our 13th year with WO (damn that is a long time) > > Dov Rosenberg > >

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Finally Chuck admits it! ;) -Lon On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > >> OK OK, horror is not the correct word (sorry, I'm not a native speaker) but >> the last 20 years there were a lot of discussions about that. >> I missed

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

You forgot to mention that the obj-c - java bridge finally died after 3.5.1 - sometime in the 4.x I think We are on our 13th year with WO (damn that is a long time) Dov Rosenberg On 10/21/10 4:19 PM, "Chuck Hill" wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > >> Can't remembe

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

But it will still be 5.4.3 On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: > My 2 cents: > > Relax, don't panic, There is always a way forward. Look at the positive. > > I am sure that in 5 years, much of this community will still be here > developing WebObjects enterprise apps in Java

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Am 21.10.10 22:30, schrieb Chuck Hill: On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: OK OK, horror is not the correct word (sorry, I'm not a native speaker) but the last 20 years there were a lot of discussions about that. I missed to note annual WO is dead discussions :-) . WO is dead? I

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Long live WOnder!!! :-) Paul On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > >> OK OK, horror is not the correct word (sorry, I'm not a native speaker) but >> the last 20 years there were a lot of discussions about that. >> I missed to not

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:26 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > OK OK, horror is not the correct word (sorry, I'm not a native speaker) but > the last 20 years there were a lot of discussions about that. > I missed to note annual WO is dead discussions :-) . WO is dead? Is WO dead? WO IS dead! Oh my God!

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

OK OK, horror is not the correct word (sorry, I'm not a native speaker) but the last 20 years there were a lot of discussions about that. I missed to note annual WO is dead discussions :-) . But to make it clear: I like WO and I hope i will be able to work with it the next 20 years. Stefan A

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > Can't remember the exact years but: > > 1990 I started with NeXTstep on a black box > > and then the horror began: > > Operating Systems: > - NeXTstep on several plattforms > - OpenStep > - Black Hardware dies > - YellowBox (anyone remenber?)

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

How is that a horror? Name me one other technology thats lasted more than 5 years, forget about 20! :) On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:12 PM, Stefan Klein wrote: > Can't remember the exact years but: > > 1990 I started with NeXTstep on a black box > > and then the horror began: > > Operating Systems:

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

openjdk6 is on macports. maybe they will get 7 soon simon On 21 October 2010 20:44, Ramsey Gurley wrote: > From the sound of that, we really do just need OpenJDK7 to get started with > Java 7 right away (^_^)  Sweet!  So, now all I need to do is figure out how > to compile it. > > Ramsey > >

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Can't remember the exact years but: 1990 I started with NeXTstep on a black box and then the horror began: Operating Systems: - NeXTstep on several plattforms - OpenStep - Black Hardware dies - YellowBox (anyone remenber?) - YellowBox died - Next buys apple WO: - Started with WO 3.5 - WebScri

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

From the sound of that, we really do just need OpenJDK7 to get started with Java 7 right away (^_^) Sweet! So, now all I need to do is figure out how to compile it. Ramsey On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David LeBer wrote: On 2010-10-21, at 3:15 PM, Joe Little wrote: Thanks for the clarif

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

ohhh I like it! Better trademark that puppy now before the mailing list bots at Apple do :) On Oct 21, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: > Mac OS XI Cobra ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailin

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: > My 2 cents: > > Relax, don't panic, There is always a way forward. Look at the positive. > > I am sure that in 5 years, much of this community will still be here > developing WebObjects enterprise apps in Java 9 on "Mac OS XI Cobra" ;-)

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

My 2 cents: Relax, don't panic, There is always a way forward. Look at the positive. I am sure that in 5 years, much of this community will still be here developing WebObjects enterprise apps in Java 9 on "Mac OS XI Cobra" ;-) -Kieran On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:32 PM, Ken Foust wrote: > I have

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 2010-10-21, at 3:15 PM, Joe Little wrote: > Thanks for the clarification from you and David. I knew there was some apple > java dependencies but not sure of which. The only way to make openjdk work > now though is x11 I think, correct? No.

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Thanks for the clarification from you and David. I knew there was some apple java dependencies but not sure of which. The only way to make openjdk work now though is x11 I think, correct? On Oct 21, 2010, at 11:38 AM, John Huss wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Joe Little wrote: > Per

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Thank goodness!! On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:38 PM, John Huss wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Joe Little wrote: > Perhaps but not cocoa/aqua native. In other words, eclipse can't use it to > display GUI elements unless you rebuild eclipse to use x11, and then finder > drag and drop is lost

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Joe Little wrote: > Perhaps but not cocoa/aqua native. In other words, eclipse can't use it to > display GUI elements unless you rebuild eclipse to use x11, and then finder > drag and drop is lost among other things That's not true, Eclipse uses native cocoa wid

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 2010-10-21, at 2:26 PM, Joe Little wrote: > Perhaps but not cocoa/aqua native. In other words, eclipse can't use it to > display GUI elements unless you rebuild eclipse to use x11, and then finder > drag and drop is lost among other things Erm, Eclipse uses SWT which gives it access to nati

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Ahh, I see.. that sounds like more than a simple recompile :-/ On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:26 PM, Joe Little wrote: Perhaps but not cocoa/aqua native. In other words, eclipse can't use it to display GUI elements unless you rebuild eclipse to use x11, and then finder drag and drop is lost among ot

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Perhaps but not cocoa/aqua native. In other words, eclipse can't use it to display GUI elements unless you rebuild eclipse to use x11, and then finder drag and drop is lost among other things On Oct 21, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Ramsey Gurley wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:39 PM, David LeBer wrot

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:39 PM, David LeBer wrote: On 2010-10-21, at 12:29 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Couldn't we just use the SoyLatte JVM for WO development? Earlier today from twitter: mschrag 11:18 AM surprised at how smooth it was to build openjdk on mac Does this mean we'll see an Ope

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 2010-10-21, at 7:37 PM, John Huss wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Ken Anderson wrote: > Couldn't we just use the SoyLatte JVM for WO development? > > Yeah, that should work for server apps. The big loser here is Swing > applications, at least until Oracle has a new implementatio

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 2010-10-21, at 12:29 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: > Couldn't we just use the SoyLatte JVM for WO development? Earlier today from twitter: > mschrag 11:18 AM > surprised at how smooth it was to build openjdk on mac > On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:21 PM, Paulo Siqueira wrote: > >> +1 >> =p >> >> >> >

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Ken Anderson wrote: > Couldn't we just use the SoyLatte JVM for WO development? > Yeah, that should work for server apps. The big loser here is Swing applications, at least until Oracle has a new implementation for Mac. However, SWT and Eclipse are also affecte

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

I have not seen a response form Mike Schrag and would hold most comments until he responds. But what do you think of CocoaWO now My opinion Apple needs to incorporate and brilliant enterprise web dev app tied to Cocoa. On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Ken Anderson wrote: > Couldn't we just use

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

Couldn't we just use the SoyLatte JVM for WO development? On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:21 PM, Paulo Siqueira wrote: > +1 > =p > > > > > > Well, I hear that Ubuntu is nice this time of year... > > > > That was my thought as well, I swear :p > > > -- > Paulo "JCranky" Siqueira > Visit my blog: htt

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

+1 =p > > > Well, I hear that Ubuntu is nice this time of year... > > > > That was my thought as well, I swear :p > > -- Paulo "JCranky" Siqueira Visit my blog: http://www.jcranky.com/ ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 6:00 AM, David LeBer wrote: > > On 2010-10-21, at 5:16 AM, David Avendasora wrote: > >> >> On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:54 AM, David Avendasora wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I just noticed in Apple's latest Java release (Java 6, update 3) that Apple >>> has deprecated it's JV

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On 2010-10-21, at 5:16 AM, David Avendasora wrote: > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:54 AM, David Avendasora wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I just noticed in Apple's latest Java release (Java 6, update 3) that Apple >> has deprecated it's JVM. >> >> That's the bad news. >> >> The GOOD news is that they

Re: OS X Java Deprecation & JVM Source Code

On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:54 AM, David Avendasora wrote: > Hi all, > > I just noticed in Apple's latest Java release (Java 6, update 3) that Apple > has deprecated it's JVM. > > That's the bad news. > > The GOOD news is that they also included the Apple JVM source code in the > package. So a no