Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #17785 > unrolled thread

Swing

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Swing bob smith <bob@coolfone.comze.com> - 2012-08-13 08:04 -0700
    Re: Swing markspace <-@.> - 2012-08-13 08:41 -0700
    Re: Swing Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-13 12:23 -0400
    Re: Swing Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-08-14 17:47 -0700
      Re: Swing Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2012-08-15 06:31 -0400
      Re: Swing "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2012-08-16 19:14 +1000
        Re: Swing Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-17 21:47 -0400
          Re: Swing "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2012-08-19 14:55 +1000
            Re: Swing markspace <-@.> - 2012-08-19 10:05 -0700
              Re: Swing Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-19 16:04 -0400
                Re: Swing markspace <-@.> - 2012-08-19 13:05 -0700
                  Re: Swing Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-19 16:09 -0400
              Re: Swing "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2012-08-20 18:50 +1000
            Re: Swing Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-08-19 16:03 -0400

#17785 — Swing

Is Swing still pretty much the standard for Java graphics?  Or has it finally been replaced by something better?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#17786

On 8/13/2012 8:04 AM, bob smith wrote:
> Is Swing still pretty much the standard for Java graphics?  Or has it
> finally been replaced by something better?
>


Swing is still your only real choice, as far as I know.  JavaFX is up 
can coming, but to quote Gertrude Stein, "there is no there there."

JavaFX appears to only be about half baked;  you can do some things with 
it, but not everything Swing can do.  It's not really a mature platform 
yet.  Still worth knowing about for a Java developer, as Oracle could 
make it ready just about any time now.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17788

On 8/13/2012 11:04 AM, bob smith wrote:
> Is Swing still pretty much the standard for Java graphics?  Or has it finally been replaced by something better?

Swing is the safe choice as it is mature and has been part of Java SE
for about a decade.

If you want more native look and feel and can live with only support
on major desktop platforms then you can go for SWT.

If you want a modern (*) GUI development platform and can live with
only support on major desktop platforms then you can go for JavaFX.

As JavaFX is planned to be part of Java SE 8, then if you are looking
at long term, then JavaFX seems as something you need to look into.

*) Newer does not guarantee better, but given that SUN/Oracle (JavaFX),
Adobe (Flex) and MS (WPF & SL) all went for the model with XML markup
and code, then maybe it is better!

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17885

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:04:33 -0700 (PDT), bob smith
<bob@coolfone.comze.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
who said :

>Is Swing still pretty much the standard for Java graphics?  Or has it finally been replaced by something better?

Oracle is pushing JavaFX, but I don't think it will go anywhere. It
does not integrate. So Swing is it for now.

-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light,
but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
~ Max Planck 1858-04-23 1947-10-04 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17888

On 08/14/2012 08:47 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:04:33 -0700 (PDT), bob smith
> <bob@coolfone.comze.com>  wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
> who said :
>
>> Is Swing still pretty much the standard for Java graphics?  Or has it finally been replaced by something better?
>
> Oracle is pushing JavaFX, but I don't think it will go anywhere. It
> does not integrate. So Swing is it for now.
>
I've been spending some time exploring JavaFX.
Will you please expand on your comment that
[JavaFX] does not integrate?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17923

"Roedy Green"  wrote in message 
news:5csl28pian0391sl4iehdl47hp289i5ai7@4ax.com...

> Oracle is pushing JavaFX, but I don't think it will go anywhere. It
> does not integrate. So Swing is it for now.

Doesn't integrate???  With what exactly?  JavaFX is just another Java API, 
is now included as part of the JDK (as of 7 Update 6), interoperates 
seamlessly with Swing, works with all standard Java SE packages, works well 
with other JVM-based languages and has some very, very impressive features. 
If you want to develop new GUI apps with Java then JavaFX is a "no brainer" 
as they say in the states.

Swing will hang around for a long time yet but is not being actively 
developed by Oracle anymore and good luck trying to get any bugs in it 
fixed.  They are pouring an enormous amount of resources into JavaFX and 
rightly so - it's great technology.

IMHO you'd be nuts to start a new project with Swing instead of FX.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#17975

On 8/16/2012 5:14 AM, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Roedy Green"  wrote in message
> news:5csl28pian0391sl4iehdl47hp289i5ai7@4ax.com...
>> Oracle is pushing JavaFX, but I don't think it will go anywhere. It
>> does not integrate. So Swing is it for now.
>
> Doesn't integrate???  With what exactly?

Roedy probably just made it up.

You should not be surprised if you never get an an answer.

>                                  JavaFX is just another Java
> API, is now included as part of the JDK (as of 7 Update 6),
> interoperates seamlessly with Swing, works with all standard Java SE
> packages, works well with other JVM-based languages and has some very,
> very impressive features.

JavaFX is 10 years newer than Swing and it shows.

>                      If you want to develop new GUI apps with Java
> then JavaFX is a "no brainer" as they say in the states.
>
> Swing will hang around for a long time yet but is not being actively
> developed by Oracle anymore and good luck trying to get any bugs in it
> fixed.  They are pouring an enormous amount of resources into JavaFX and
> rightly so - it's great technology.
>
> IMHO you'd be nuts to start a new project with Swing instead of FX.

JavaFX is certainly worth considering.

But one may have a need to support a platform where JavaFX is not
available yet.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18060

"Arne Vajhøj"  wrote in message 
news:502ef432$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...

>> Doesn't integrate???  With what exactly?
>
> Roedy probably just made it up.
>
> You should not be surprised if you never get an an answer.

We you are probably right but it's just such a ridiculous comment as one of 
JavaFX's strongest selling points is its ability to integrate.  Perhaps 
Roedy is thinking of the old JavaFX versions 1.x when it wasn't a Java API 
and relied on a proprietary new language named JavaFX Script.  JavaFX 2.x is 
completely different and, as I said, integrates with anything JVM-based.

> JavaFX is 10 years newer than Swing and it shows.

Yes, it is based on a completely new hardware accelerated graphics engine 
named Prism and new windowing toolkit named Glass.  It is feature-rich and 
fast.  The properties and binding framework on its own is worth the price of 
admission.  The number of standard controls is growing constantly and 
includes a WebKit-based WebView control that supports HTML 5 and CSS 3 and 
JavaScript, a Canvas control similar to HTML 5 Canvas, video and audio 
playback controls, a vast array of charts, animations and transitions and a 
very good set of more common/basic widgets for form development.  And if 
they aren't enough, there are several ways to roll your own.  Features 
coming up in the next major release (which will be named JavaFX 8.0 as it is 
now aligned with JDK versions) include full 3D support.

> JavaFX is certainly worth considering.
>
> But one may have a need to support a platform where JavaFX is not
> available yet.

As of Java 7 Update 6 JavaFX is now supported on Windows (at least Windows 
XP, Windows 2008, Windows 7), MacOS X and Linux and also runs on some ARM 
based systems like Raspberry Pi.  In addition, Oracle is doing a significant 
amount of work on getting it to run on iOS and Android and have demonstrated 
it on these platforms several times in recent months.  I am expecting an 
"official" announcement at this year's JavaOne regarding exactly where that 
development is up to.  As far as I can tell they have resolved most of the 
technical issues by using Ahead Of Time compilation (so no JIT as executable 
memory is not supported on iOS or Metro for that matter) and the majority of 
the remaining work involves achieving good levels of performance and also in 
the development of the tools required to deploy a JavaFX app to those 
platforms.  Personally, I find this all very exciting!

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18062

On 8/18/2012 9:55 PM, Qu0ll wrote:
>  (so no JIT as executable memory is not supported on iOS or
> Metro for that matter)


Just curious: Metro = Windows 8?  Because there's a few other Metros 
floating around, and Microsoft has officially dropped the name Metro for 
their new OS.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18150

On 8/19/2012 1:05 PM, markspace wrote:
> On 8/18/2012 9:55 PM, Qu0ll wrote:
>>  (so no JIT as executable memory is not supported on iOS or
>> Metro for that matter)
>
> Just curious: Metro = Windows 8?  Because there's a few other Metros
> floating around, and Microsoft has officially dropped the name Metro for
> their new OS.

I suspect he means WP8 not Win8.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18151

On 8/19/2012 1:04 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
> I suspect he means WP8 not Win8.


OK, so again please excuse my acronym ignorance, but what is WP8? 
WordPerfect 8?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18152

On 8/19/2012 4:05 PM, markspace wrote:
> On 8/19/2012 1:04 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> I suspect he means WP8 not Win8.
>
> OK, so again please excuse my acronym ignorance, but what is WP8?
> WordPerfect 8?

Windows Phone 8

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18167

"markspace"  wrote in message news:k0r6di$4lm$1@dont-email.me...

> Just curious: Metro = Windows 8?  Because there's a few other Metros 
> floating around, and Microsoft has officially dropped the name Metro for 
> their new OS.

I meant the Windows 8 subsystem formerly known as Metro.  It does not 
support executable memory along with other nice-to-haves like OpenGL.

Whatever it is called now, it may work well and be suitable on mobile/tablet 
platforms but it is a total flop on the desktop IMHO.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18149

On 8/19/2012 12:55 AM, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Arne Vajhøj"  wrote in message
> news:502ef432$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
>
>>> Doesn't integrate???  With what exactly?
>>
>> Roedy probably just made it up.
>>
>> You should not be surprised if you never get an an answer.
>
> We you are probably right but it's just such a ridiculous comment as one
> of JavaFX's strongest selling points is its ability to integrate.
> Perhaps Roedy is thinking of the old JavaFX versions 1.x when it wasn't
> a Java API and relied on a proprietary new language named JavaFX
> Script.  JavaFX 2.x is completely different and, as I said, integrates
> with anything JVM-based.

Even JavaFX 1.x could integrate with Swing and Java code.

>> JavaFX is 10 years newer than Swing and it shows.
>
> Yes, it is based on a completely new hardware accelerated graphics
> engine named Prism and new windowing toolkit named Glass.  It is
> feature-rich and fast.  The properties and binding framework on its own
> is worth the price of admission.  The number of standard controls is
> growing constantly and includes a WebKit-based WebView control that
> supports HTML 5 and CSS 3 and JavaScript, a Canvas control similar to
> HTML 5 Canvas, video and audio playback controls, a vast array of
> charts, animations and transitions and a very good set of more
> common/basic widgets for form development.  And if they aren't enough,
> there are several ways to roll your own.  Features coming up in the next
> major release (which will be named JavaFX 8.0 as it is now aligned with
> JDK versions) include full 3D support.

Do you work for Oracle JavaFX marketing?

:-) :-) :-)

Well - it is newer and the split in FXML and Java code is very nice.

To some extent it can be viewed as the equivalent of going from servlet
to JSP to output HTML.

>> JavaFX is certainly worth considering.
>>
>> But one may have a need to support a platform where JavaFX is not
>> available yet.
>
> As of Java 7 Update 6 JavaFX is now supported on Windows (at least
> Windows XP, Windows 2008, Windows 7), MacOS X and Linux and also runs on
> some ARM based systems like Raspberry Pi.  In addition, Oracle is doing
> a significant amount of work on getting it to run on iOS and Android and
> have demonstrated it on these platforms several times in recent months.

Yes.

But there are still a few using other platforms.

And a lot that is stuck on older Java versions.

For various reasons.

But I agree that if one has the choice then JavaFX should be
preferred over Swing.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web