[farrell2k]

CTphpnwb, on 19 January 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

The point I was trying to make is that the proof is in the pudding. I've never seen Java be quick, or even reasonably fast.

And this is what it all boils down to, folks - The argument from ignorance. I've never seen it be false, thus it is true. You cannot demonstrate or have not demonstrated it to be false, thus it is true.

I'd mention that Java has been the just about the most popular language in the world for the past 8 - to 10 years, but then I'd be cmomitting a logical fallacy myself, the appeal to popularity, so I won't. But wait! I kind of just did!

In nany event, it is Java's benchmarks that speak for themselves. Java is fast. Anyone who claims otherwise is simply ignorant.

[CTphpnwb]

I do unfortunately need to use a Java app occasionally, and just as back then I can tell when it's running that it is Java by the sluggishness it exudes. I certainly can't say that I've used every Java app in existence, but experience has taught me not to look forward to trying one.

[macosxnerd101]

When was the Java app developed?

In all fairness, the Java apps that I see taking a minute to open are NetBeans and Eclipse. In all fairness, Visual Studio takes a minute to open as well. So for comparable applications, there is no real difference.

[macosxnerd101]

I came across a couple interesting articles. this one has a graph comparing C++ to Java (client and server) performance. In a lot of cases, Java is faster than C++. It should be noted as well that most Java applications are server-side or run on mobile devices.

[baavgai]

CTphpnwb, on 19 January 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

baavgai, on 18 January 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

Granted, Java occupies a strange place in the OS. It runs as a program in a program.

A good reason to be rid of it. It promises cross platform compatibility but what it delivers is slow software and security issues.

If the reason to get rid of it is that it's an interpreted language, then you'll need to chuck .NET too. The running p-code in a virtual machine model is common to both.

Slow is relative. Java is slow compared to C. It's about the same as C#. It's generally faster than other main stream interpreted brethren like Python.

Java of old was noticeably sluggish. With .NET there was a kind of desktop arms race. Modern Java implementations are certainly snappy enough for a standard GUI app. It would be interesting to do an identical C# and Java app side by side...

[xclite]

The only "slowness" I've ever perceived is JVM startup time. That's fine, I'll write my scripts in a scripting language. Once it gets running, it's pretty performant.

And yeah, Eclipse et al are resource hogs. Not exactly a reflection on Java, thankfully.

[Ghlavac]

Another slowness I think people focus too much on in java applications is the visual aspect of it, that being swing; which is just frankly terrible, hopefully with the new GPU accelerated toolkit we'll see that fade away.

[quim]

The problem is not with Java the problem is with Oracle. This Dude knows database, but he (Oracle) knows nothing about programming languages, and he has been doing a bad job marketing Java.

JavaFX is great, very easy to use with MVC and integrates well with modern technologies such as HTML5, CSS. But, Oracle is stuck with their Netbiens. They don’t try to develop any JavaFX plugins to integrate with other IDE’s.

They dont do a good job marketing JavaFX. So alot of people dont know about JavaFX, and instead they use Silverlight (WPF) or Flex.

Google helps them out by making Java the language programming for Android, and what Oracle does? They try to sue Google.

This post has been edited by quim: 19 January 2013 - 10:28 PM

[Ghlavac]

You don't need the scene builder to do fx2, also there's already plugins available for eclipse for it.

[quim]

Ghlavac, on 20 January 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

You don't need the scene builder to do fx2, also there's already plugins available for eclipse for it.

When i started using JavaFX they didnt have nay Eclipse Plugins, only Netbeans.
Can you share the link?

[Ryano121]

e(fx)clipse

[jjh08]

Quote

Java on the client side has turned into a malicious hacker's best friend, and developers really don't need it anymore

Yes, this is coming from someone who is a programming expert. *Sarcastic*

Quote

the fact is that apps get tied to a specific Java version.

What are these "apps" that you are referring to, o' wise and cunning one.

Quote

I even know some who've had to give users two PCs because one app uses a Java version supported only by IE7 and another app uses Java supported only by IE8, which both can't be installed on the same PC

This statement...WOW. Those must have been really important apps if you needed two PCs.

This article reminds of a time when one of my computer illiterate co-workers told me "I hate Java. It makes me mad." I replied "What do you hate about Java?" He replied "I hate that stupid, slow Javascript." I replied "Um...no. Java is a programming language commonly used to create software applications, applets, and etc. and Javascript is a scripting language commonly used in web browsers to enhance web pages. They are two totally different things. They just share a common name. Kinda of like how their can be two different people named John Williams from two totally different backgrounds. My co-worker's final response was "I didn't know that. I've been hating on Java all of these years. I didn't do any research."

To summarize : Epic FAIL LOL

[farrell2k]

quim, on 20 January 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

Ghlavac, on 20 January 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

You don't need the scene builder to do fx2, also there's already plugins available for eclipse for it.

When i started using JavaFX they didnt have nay Eclipse Plugins, only Netbeans.
Can you share the link?

You don't need any plugins at all. JavaFX is just another Java API. You can create your fxml files and everything through eclipse. No plugins.

[Ryano121]

True but it's a lot easier. You get an integrated FXML and CSS editor with intellisense for all the built in JavaFX properties. If that's not a reason then I don't know what is. You also get integration with the scene builder just like in Netbeans (which is not the best tool in the world but not that bad either).

You also apparently get support for FXGraph which is a simple object graph definition language that is easier to write than FXML but gets converted into it in the background. I don't know much about that yet but it looks like it could be interesting.

[TheGuy]

CTphpnwb, on 19 January 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

I've never seen Java be quick, or even reasonably fast.

You never played any Java games? Here's a good (in my opinion) and free MMO entirely Java-based: Spiral Knights.
Play for a week (as there's a daily "time" restriction), then come back and tell us what you think.

By the way, anyone know of any more good and fast java-based games out there?