Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Maher Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: JavaFX disappearing in Java 11 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 11:09:03 +0800 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: jOhPn0KFjrxwuMc9OPMmCw.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 Content-Language: en-US X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:38129 On 09-Mar-18 8:37 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 3/8/2018 7:30 PM, Richard Maher wrote: >> On 09-Mar-18 3:15 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 3/8/2018 2:10 PM, Chris Riesbeck wrote: >>>> https://www.infoworld.com/article/3261066/java/javafx-will-be-removed-from-the-java-jdk.html >> >> > >>> Interesting. >>> >>> Note though that JavaFX is/was not part of Java - it is/was part of >>> Oracle Java. Subtle difference. >>> >>> I hope that JavaFX will stay around. >> >> You're dreamin' >> >> The browser *is* the GUI. Resistance is futile. >> >> As with .NET C#, Java is consigned to server based mvC (capitalization >> deliberate) serving up RESTful JSON APIs. > > That is the most common model on desktop. > > (phones and tablets are slightly different) Legacy phone and tablet Apps have traditionally been slightly different. > > I am not dreaming that Java is going to get a comeback > on the desktop. Java *is* the new COBOL. > > But one size does not fit all. > > Most common != all. > > For those that for whatever reasons want a desktop application > and want to write it in Java, then JavaFX is better than Swing > and AWT. Sure, Java will always have a part to pay in mainstream Slot-machines, ticketing machines, and other esoteric niches. > > Arne >