Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: tools for programming applets
Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 22:01:53 -0400
Organization: albasani.net
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <ircf67$f9f$1@news.albasani.net>
References: <028d2009-98b7-43a3-b02d-83eaa89db79e@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> <ir6o3o$uae$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <ir931a$sod$1@speranza.aioe.org> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105221433430.31828@urchin.earth.li> <MPG.2842c7a1112317ee98974f@news.justthe.net> <irc9ki$58p$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <ircbic$g3e$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.albasani.net dwgwbRRv1jqTDL1jtlW2JpMNH050UX1isMNlKO9p3zhjkL3l/fVi/Q9xX9aNuSudM5ZXhUzZY5WQrHRVgBQ6UlJJm49C5ocTtcot9MRlNB22OXWTE06J0UocNFH/rb1s
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 02:01:43 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="m2vAG/xhjy/avL+WXI9vkThJ+VpASsGoYrmSpmrByW/IwiJC/DbRWYPWwBufUR98C/mMKoEv8w9e8ZlfnoQh4zeBCWa2BzW3iysFLr4rUZL11cfdjghD0K/3kY2PmHO3"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
In-Reply-To: <ircbic$g3e$1@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:R3HsqzyKF2Zy8ZF3bKe0WBPMEs0=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4433

On 05/22/2011 08:59 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> On 05/22/2011 08:26 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> Why do you think JavaScript/DHTML/AJAX has grown by leaps and bounds, while
>> Java, which in some ways was a pioneer of the dynamic Web, has stagnated?
>
> Why do you insist on bashing Java in a Java newsgroup?
>
> To be fair, none of the technologies you mention has really made "leaps and
> bounds". AJAX, or rather XHR (the underlying technology), itself was specified
> several years back and hasn't been modified (to my knowledge) since the
> introduction of the cross-origin specifications, which is more or less
> incidental to the actual spec. JavaScript itself has had no more fundamental
> changes than Java has had. As far as I can see, the only truly new things
> (i.e., not present in any implementation for some time) were the introduction
> of functional methods to Array, i.e., arr.forEach, arr.filter, etc.
>
> The only technologies that have really changed are the DOM, in particular the
> introduction of <canvas>, web storage, and ... I think that's about the only
> major interoperable new thing. SVG doesn't count since it's been around for
> eons, nor does <video> since it's actually worthless as no single format will
> be accepted by >75% of the browser market. I'll also leave out CSS changes,
> since most of those are pretty much either pie-in-the-sky experiments or
> attempting to sanely specify what browsers already do.
>
> Now, let me end by pointing out that Java has been able to do all of these
> things for over a decade. That's right, all of these growing "by leaps and
> bounds" is merely trying to get CSS/DOM/HTML up to the same level of support
> that Java has already had since version 1.0. And there are still things that
> Java can do that this approach is having problems with--case in point number
> 1, designing traditional UI (i.e., flexing models for layout). Java doesn't
> need to grow by leaps and bounds because it already is a mature, working
> facility ... unlike the current Web 2.0/3.0 stuff.

To use Lawrence's logic, we should hire him instead of you because your 
knowledge is mature and stable, and not growing as quickly as his presumably 
is at his stage of development as a programmer.  Or, alternatively, we should 
elect an infant as the nation's leader because their brain is growing so much 
faster than a mature adult's.

This leaving out the fallacy that Java has stagnated, a blazingly false 
assertion that Lawrence made with, as is usual for Lawrence, absolutely zero 
evidence cited (as if there were any) or reasoning proffered.

So, Lawrence, care to provide any actual factual or evidentiary basis for your 
apparent attempt to foment a flame war, Lawrence?  We're waiting breathlessly, 
Lawrence.

Aaaany time now, Lawrence.

-- 
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg