All That Fuss? For a Button?

By: Dean Iverson 

When I read something like this, I am just amazed at the skill, dedication, and the attention to detail of the author. 

However, I have to question the value of the time and effort that this kind of thing represents.  Seriously, it's just a button.  All that effort just to figure out how to render a button-like object with HTML and CSS, followed by another round to figure out how to make the technique work across multiple browsers?  This is exactly what we mean when we say sanity must be restored to Internet application development.  Flex and JavaFX, save us!

Why shouldn't I be able to write an application in an elegant, powerful, and expressive programming language and then be able to run it on a desktop and a mobile device?   While I'm at it, why not on the web too?  If I want to include rich media support, why do I have to make the choice between easy development at the price of platform lock-in of (.Net, Cocoa), or platform neutrality at the price of pain-in-the-neck development (e.g. HTML/CSS)? ( Pain-in-the-neck is an understatement, but Jim runs a family friendly blog, here.)  This is the potential represented by Flex and JavaFX.  I suppose I should include Silverlight as well, but I still have my doubts about Microsoft's commitment to platform neutrality.  Call me crazy.

So for all of you who are still railing against JavaFX and asking how Sun could have the audacity to try to develop a new language with the power to appeal to desktop and mobile developers but the simplicity to appeal to web developers and designers, I hope this has shed some light on why some of us think it is a good thing.  And yes, Sun could have just watched passively as Microsoft and Adobe fought it out, but I, for one, am glad they did not.  I have a lot of time and effort invested in the Java platform and in the Java code I've written over the years.  I am very glad not to have to abandon all of that in order to be able to develop rich client applications for desktop, mobile, and the web.

Dean Iverson
JavaFXpert.com

Comments

[Jim Weaver]

"Since Flex is open source, do you know why Sun didn't decide to support Flex altogether? In other words, allow developers to write in Flex, and render graphics on the JVM instead of the Flash player."

Bruce,
Actually, Dean Iverson wrote the article. To answer your question: I can't speak for Sun, but the main reasons that I'm passionate about JavaFX is that
1) It *is* rich-client Java (e.g. it compiles to JVM bytecode and can use Java classes directly.)
2) The simple, declarative, scripting makes it easy to express the user interface, including UI layout classes for cross-platform development (e.g. avoids absolute positioning).

Thanks Bruce!
Jim Weaver

[Bruce Hopkins]

Jim,

I agree with you completely in this post. I think Google might be too "full of themselves". Now, it sounds like you've used Flex before, so let me ask you a theoretical question. I would expect that you can objectively compare the maturity of both JavaFX and Flex. I also find it very encouraging that JavaFX supports Flash 9 video to some degree. Since Flex is opensource, do you know why Sun didn't decide to support Flex altogether? In other words, allow developers to write in Flex, and render graphics on the JVM instead of the Flash player.

From a maturity standpoint, Flex has already worked out the kinks that JavaFX and Silverlight will have to figure out. Additionally, Flex has great tooling support that attracts both developers and designers. So, I'm curious of your thoughts.

Bruce

[Maya Incaand]

"And yes, Sun could have just watched passively as Microsoft and Adobe fought it out, but I, for one, am glad they did not. I have a lot of time and effort invested in the Java platform and in the Java code I've written over the years. I am very glad not to have to abandon all of that in order to be able to develop rich client applications for desktop, mobile, and the web."

Me too having just spent 3 years getting to grips with Java(and having to suffer jibes from compatriots:-))

If you know some Java, then JavaFX is not that difficult to pick up.