Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #33735
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: A very dark day indeed :-( |
| Date | 2016-02-09 20:27 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <n9e3m4$1vcp$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <960ef14f-1fa8-43df-aca9-c6425d65cb70@googlegroups.com> <n9bfft$1o9g$1@gioia.aioe.org> <c62fbb88-cf3d-4d95-b456-82bde2f075ec@googlegroups.com> <n9bkr5$1u4q$1@gioia.aioe.org> <bd3283c9-433c-4520-8ce9-31af324f67d3@googlegroups.com> |
On 2/9/2016 8:27 AM, Eric Douglas wrote: > On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 10:02:11 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm >>> wrong) is all your example uses the browser for is downloading >>> the JNLP file? After that your running a desktop app in isolation >>> with nary an awareness that the browser exists. >> >> That is correct. >> > You sound very confused. You tell me "you click on a link, answer > yes to run and the Java app starts up". That "link" you click to > start is the file you downloaded. Then you tell the next guy "That > is correct", referring to the fact web start indeed has no connection > to the browser, which is why it is not going away like the applets. It happens that I get confused. But in this case I don't think it is that bad. "you click on a link, answer yes to run and the Java app starts up" and: "But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm wrong) is all your example uses the browser for is downloading the JNLP file? After that your running a desktop app in isolation with nary an awareness that the browser exists." are consistent. The browser is used to launch the application but nothing more. >> Java Web Start never became a success. >> > How so? reference? I've been using web start, I would guess roughly > 8 years now. It is based on: - very few questions here and in other Java fora - very few job ads asking for it - very few public known examples of usage >> And I think that what most people think about when they hear Java >> Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start is used to run >> applets. >> >> But that is really only a very special case. >> >> And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then I would >> expect this possibility to be dropped together with classic applet >> support. > > reference? I've never heard of that case, though it sounds more > secure than applets started from a browser since you had to run the > jnlp and acknowledge the security prompt authorizing the vendor to > get there. Reference to what? That it will also become deprecated? As I said I have not read anything about it. It is pure speculation based on an assumption about consistent behavior from Oracle. Applets via JLNP? I think I posted this link yesterday: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/deploy/applet_dev_guide.html#JSDPG1032 it describes it briefly. Arne
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
A very dark day indeed :-( Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-08 19:36 +0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 08:45 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-08 14:50 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 12:37 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 12:55 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-09 05:39 +0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 17:22 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 17:08 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 20:30 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 18:31 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 22:02 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 20:04 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:18 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:55 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 06:32 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 05:27 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 15:24 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 06:38 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 16:00 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 07:20 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 16:39 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 07:50 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 17:16 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:40 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 06:28 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 17:21 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:03 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 09:33 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 05:32 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 15:42 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 21:58 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2016-02-09 15:59 +0000
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 17:24 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2016-02-09 16:30 +0000
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 01:47 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 08:55 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 01:59 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:48 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 17:35 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:05 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 09:39 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:30 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:28 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:27 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 05:27 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:23 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 13:58 -0800
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 17:20 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-08 19:44 +0100
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 14:06 -0500
Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 22:39 +0100
csiph-web