I'm writting diploma work about JavaFX 2.0, and I need some information about further growth of this technology. I thought it will be super-multi-platform, but after googling I little disappointed: there are a lot of problems with iOS and android, also in the roadmap of JavaFX there are information only about desktop OSs... So, can developers expect some progress of technology in mobile direction? Will JavaFX be desktop-oriented or wide-universal technology? Or, maybe, it will be some special branch "Mobile JavaFX2"? If JavaFX don't support mobile phones development, Oracle will haven't modern and competitive technology for this huge area of developing?... I really need some answers! Thanks!)
If you asked the same question three years ago i would say that javafx has a bright future. Same thing for Silverlight and Adobe Air or flex.
Today i would say just a single word... HTML5
Java will always try to find a seat on the client side... Adobe sucks because they abandoned their flex developers few months ago and who says that it will not happen again with Air?... Microsoft still tries to convince us that silverlight is a good tech while on the other side they promote ASP.NET with ajax capabilities as their main weapon.
See how fast the browsers are struggling to comply with HTML5 (future!!!) standards and you will agree with me that the above technologies were born obsolete.
there are a lot of problems with iOS and android
There are no problems but one - iOS and Android are not supported in the current (JavaFX 2.1) version.
can developers expect some progress of technology in mobile direction?
Not until it is in the public roadmap (which it is not today).
Answering your other questions would just be speculation on the part of anybody who does not know Oracle's private plans. If you are interested in speculation, you can find some here.
This is probably not a direct answer to your question, but i hope it might point you in an alternative direction
Adobe air is architectually very simalar to java. It also runs on a vm on multiple platforms such as windows, osx, and ... Android and IOS. And it's gui's are sexy ... Real eye candy. For mobile there are some considerations, but currently it is the best cross platform language for gui building in my opinion. Not for server side though. But it integrates like a dream with a java server by means of blazeDS or LCDS.
I know that apple has restrictions as set out by their terms and conditions that you are not allowed to run your app in a virtual machine. So adobe had to compile the entire air app as a native application that basically includes the entire air framework. My guess is that oracle is facing similar issues, and that is probably why it is taking some time to roll out
Having fxml with the power of the java language, definately something worth while waiting for and looking forward to it.
HTML 5 has no future.. this tool has lot of problems of it's own..HTML 5 can't be used to develop enterprise applications, it is very difficult to code,debug and maintain which is very important for any long term projects on other hand JAVAFX 2 is on the rite track of creating GUI with use of object oriented concepts which makes java developers to easily code,debug and maintain without any hustle..
Related
I have been looking framworks for developing mobile apps and i have been told to work on rhomobile framework but i did google and i found very limited resources and tutorial... my apps are bit complicated and at this point i am not even sure rhomobile framework is good choice....
do you guys think it will worth investing time in learning?
any suggestions?
Thank you,
It depends on your requirements. If your application is data centric then I highly recommend Rhomobile, and If your application has less data and more static page then better use Native frameworks.
You can quickly start with following resources http://rhomobile.com/resources/
If you have some knowledge in ruby it is not very difficult to start using rhodes, but it will always depend on your requirements and on how much time you want to invest to develop apps for different OS.
I have found Rhomobile very easy to follow. Of course it is limited as it is a relatively new framework, but you can get very good help on their Google Group.
I have developed on iOS and Android, and I must say I hated Objective C. Android with Java was more familiar and easier for me, but still, it is not compared to doing one app that works for all (even though you have to make dome minor tweaks for each OS).
One thing I did have problems developing in Rhomobile was working with maps. Rhomobile's Maps have different limitations depending on the OS of deployment.
Anyways, specially if you are working by yourself, I would recommend experimenting with Rhomobile. I believe you will get your job done faster that developing for each one (Objective C is a nightmare!)
One thing I love about Rhomobile Rhodes framework is their support for those old Symbian S40 phones, although they are not the mainstream phones today but still those platforms need to be supported in many enterprise apps
For the past 5 months or so, I've spent time learning C# using Andrew Troelsen's book and getting familiar with stuff in the .NET 4 stack... bits of ADO.NET, EF4 and a pinch of WCF to taste.
I'm really interested in graphics development (not for games though), which is why I chose to go the .NET route when I decided choose from either Java or .NET to learn... since I heard about WPF and saw some sexy screenshots and all. I'm even almost done with the 4 WPF chapters in Troelsen's book.
Now, all of a sudden I saw some post on a forum about how "WPF was dead" in the face of something called Silverlight. I searched more and saw all the confusion going on at present... even stuff like "Silverlight is dead too!" wrt HTML5.
From what I gather, we are in a delicate period of time that will eventually decide which technology will stabilize, right?
Even so, as someone new moving into UI & graphics development via .NET, I wish I could get some guidance from people more experienced people. Maybe I'm reading too much? Maybe I have missed some pieces of information? Maybe a path exists that minimizes tears of blood?
In any case, here is a sample vomiting of my thoughts on which I'd appreciate some clarification or assurance or spanking:
My present interest lies in desktop development. But on graduating from college, I wish to market myself as a .NET developer. The industry seems to be drooling for web stuff. Can Silverlight do both equally well? (I see on searches that SL works "out of browser").
I have two fair-sized hobby projects planned that will have hawt UIs with lots of drag n drop, sliding animations etc. These are intended to be desktop apps that will use reflection, database stuff using EF4, networking over LAN, reading-writing of files... does this affect which graphics technology can be used?
At some later point, if I become interested in doing a bit of 3D stuff in .NET, will that affect which technologies can be used?
Or what if I look up to the heavens, stick out my middle finger, and do something crazy like go learn HTML5 even though my knowledge of it can be encapsulated in 2 sentences?
Sorry I seem confused so much, I just want to know if there's a path of least resistance that a newcomer to graphics-technology-adoption can take at this point in the graphics world.
I understand your confusion (having been there myself), but first let me start by saying Silverlight and WPF are not dead yet! And you would not be wasting your time in learning either!
There are quite a few (terrifying) posts to the contrary, but if you keep searching you'll also find those that support WPF/Silverlights extended life in development, one for example is http://www.wpfblogger.com/post/Silverlight-is-not-dead-clarifies-Bob-Muglia.aspx (this is a nice summary of what Bob Muglia said - there's a link to his full statement). Another assurance is that Microsoft has invested quite a bit in WPF themselves in designing VS2010 in it, so its not likely that they're about to give it the boot.
As for your hobbies and projects, if you intend on sticking to desktop clients I recommend WPF of which Silverlight is a subset, so you'll find that the transition isn't anything major on the face of it (there's a few more controls and such in WPF that aren't in silverlight and gives more flexibility for desky stuff [here's an article you can read if interested - http://briannoyes.net/2010/06/01/WPFNdashIrsquomNotDeadYet.aspx ]), this should be able to handle most of your stuff including playing with 3D objects (to create them I'd use something like Blender 3D, its free but the learning curve for a first timer is kinda steep).
Lastly, it probably wouldn't be a bad thing to learn HTML5, but booting out Silverlight to do it probably isn't the way you want to go. There's bound to be ways in which Silverlight will enrich the browsing experience even with pages using HTML5 in the future, so don't kick it all out yet :)
My present interest lies in desktop development. But on graduating from college, I wish to market myself as a .NET developer. The industry seems to be drooling for web stuff. Can Silverlight do both equally well? (I see on searches that SL works "out of browser").
The industry likes the web because deployment is easy and you usually don't have to support users running different versions of your application. Still, are reasons to choose WPF over SL (performance, things not yet implemented in SL). I'd say stick with learning XAML + C#. You'll be able to leverage it for WPF, Silverlight, and Windows Phone programming.
I have two fair-sized hobby projects planned that will have hawt UIs with lots of drag n drop, sliding animations etc. These are intended to be desktop apps that will use reflection, database stuff using EF4, networking over LAN, reading-writing of files... does this affect which graphics technology can be used?
Either way, database access should be done through services (not directly from a WPF app). There will be differences, but they should be mostly similar.
At some laaaater point, if I become interested in doing a bit of 3D stuff in .NET, will that affect which technologies can be used?
Silverlight 5 will have 3D support. Beta should be announced by this year's MIX conference and released by the end of the year. In the meantime, you can check out the WPF 3D API.
Or what if I look up to the heavens, stick out my middle finger, and do something crazy like go learn HTML5 even though my knowledge of it can be encapsulated in 2 sentences?
While SL is nothing like web programming, I think there is an expectation in the market that SL programmers should have a little ASP.NET (Web Forms or MVC) experience too. (Because, hey, you should know how to work with the environment its hosted in.) I think HTML5 is still a ways off since HTML5 applications will require users to have the latest browsers which are just coming out. Still, couldn't hurt to know it :-)
Fear not, WPF and Silverlight is going to be strong in Line of Business applications, there are some serious security features added even in SL5 and it ties in nicely with all the existing Microsoft infrastructure most corporations have.
It's a similar thing to all the bloggers crying the end of Flash after seeing some planned HTML5 features (and yet not even the codec for the video tag is settled), but upgradeable runtimes to support any browser (IE6 corporate market share is still sky high...) and the really nice Microsoft developer stack (VS + Blend) makes these technologies more resilient than people only using cutting edge technology would think.
Having used Flash for years before Silverlight I can tell you that developing custom UI with SL is a really pleasant experience, so if you're less into multimedia and games (which are areas where Flash still has edge), this is the place to be for you.
And there's Windows Phone 7, with the Nokia strategic partnership I doubt no one would want to get anything developed.
These being said, if you have the chance don't be afraid to venture off to learn some completely different programming languages, for me personally learning Ruby on Rails changed the way I look at backend development, and some of these eye opener ways of doing things more efficiently transfer nicely between environments.
WPF and Silverlight are definitely alive and well. Also, don't let people fool you into thinking it has a "steep learning curve" (which is a common myth.) WPF isn't a walk in the park, granted, but it is also not the hardest thing to learn.
I recommend the book "WPF 4 Unleashed" by Adam Nathan.
http://www.amazon.com/WPF-4-Unleashed-Adam-Nathan/dp/0672331195
It will teach you everything you need to get started with WPF (and Siverlight, which is WPF-based.)
Yes, silverlight can do desktop and web environment equally well, and is your best bet right now. As for 3D designs, you might want to learn XNA. Its quite easy to use.
Now with Silverlight 3 (offline, out of browser stuff), what are the main differences between the two technologies?
There are some significant differences right now in the Beta, no idea if these will still be differences in the release version.
There is no way to hide the window chrome in Silverlight OOB.
No ability to create a notification tray icon.
Air apps can be multi-window, Silverlight OOB cannot.
Air apps have more access to the system, Silverlight apps are sandboxed.
There are differences in the install and update procedures, not sure of al of the details.
AIR gives you access to the file system and a SQLite db. SL3 only lets you write to the file system with user interaction (a Save As dialog) and doesn't have any support for a DB in Isolated storage or on disk.
SLOOB runs in a sandbox still, so you're limited to the same cross-domain issues as a Silverlight app running in the browser.
It's a three way war: Adobe AIR, MS Silverlight and Mozilla Prism.
Read this blog-post and this article. A quote from the second article:
Silverlight is the clear winner in terms of power, but as one of my colleagues pointed out the other day does it matter? His point was that Flash has an incredible penetration rate. According to Adobe it’s in the 99% range. When considering rolling out a new product that requires a plug-in why introduce another barrier to adoption?
and another one from the second:
We then asked of those who answered yes which formats they use. Unsurprisingly, given how long it has been available, Flash leads with 61% of respondents. More surprising was Silverlight’s very small market share of a little over 2%, essentially the same as that of the Real format. Quicktime did surprisingly well, at just under 20%.
As for VOIP support in SL read this.
Read up on Prism here.
In addition to what Dave said, Silverlight seems to be missing device support (microphone and web cam).
One thing I'd like to point out, that nobody else has mentioned is (and I'm not picking favorites when I say this, as we use Air/Flex for a project at my job):
Adobe doesn't have the talent needed to create quality run times and IDEs for developers. Their ideas are fine, it's the execution of those ideas that I doubt. I think we can all agree that Visual Studio is light years ahead of any IDE out there. Quality wise I'd even go as far as to say that VS2005 is better made than anything on the market (it's now 2011) 6yrs later.
If you feel Flex/Air meets your needs better, my all means, go with it. But if feel either platform will give you what you want, I'd say Silverlight wins every time. It's more mature, it's substantially more stable.
Our biggest headache for our commercial app is that Air does not managed garbage collection well, for the past year and a half, our app has suffered from slowdown, the only resolution is to do a nightly reboot on a kiosk because we nest objects inside objects, once you hit the 3rd nesting, it seems Air cannot flush those objects correctly, Adobe is will aware of it, and considering how much time has passed and all the newer versions, Adobe has no resolution. That is the sign of poor run times and Adobe developers who just aren't very good. Despite the fact people love to bash MS, these days their platforms are pretty reliable is reliable overall, especially their .NET runtimes. Adobe feels like Microsoft circa 1997, they're years away from offering reliable solutions.
PS: I'm sure a couple koolaid drinking Adobe devs will be down voting this answer.
Assuming only minor changes are necessary to run a Silverlight app on the desktop, the differences are in implementation details. Silverlight is a .NET-space framework based on WPF. Flash/Flex/AIR are proprietary Adobe products based on ActionScript.
In terms of capability, they seem to be roughly equal with complementary strenghts and weaknesses. Example: SL3 will have GPU and pixel shader support. The latest Flash as Inverse Kinematics. Different strokes, etc.
From the users standpoint I like the Silverlight installation process a lot more... Specially on the Mac - Air app installation is unnatural (to many clicks and processbars) but oneclick Silverlight install is nice :)
I've been developing with XHTML, CSS and Javascript for about 4 years now.
I love it a lot and hate it a little. I've looked into Flash and Silverlight a bit, but as a developer, I'm not too keen on them.
One reason is that they lock you into a vendor and generally, into using that vendor's tools. E.g. Adobe Flash or Microsoft Visual Studio, etc.
Also, Silverlight seems to mix content, layout/styling and behavior and into a single markup language, whereas I like the XHTML way of separating them out in code, but bringing them together in the user's web browser.
I also applaud the usability of the web, e.g. back button, hyperlinks, etc. which are set-in-stone standards that people are used to dealing with.
However, I'm seeing a lot of industry support for Silverlight and Flash. As far as .NET Developer jobs, I'm seeing less jobs for front-end/.NET developers and more jobs for Silverlight/.NET developers.
Will HTML developers still be employable in the future, or should I consider moving to a proprietary platform such as Silverlight?
While Flash/Silverlight skills may be worth developing, I think you will find that general web development skills will still be required for some years to come. Mobile apps in particular seem to place more emphasis on good, basic web design without dependence on plugins and or client-side code. Eventually, I would expect web standards to evolve to subsume the best (or at least most used) features of proprietary plugins. The web, at least, seems to be a place where people tend to favor solutions that maintain independence over lock-in to specific vendor technologies.
No, I think that idea will never fully catch on. The problem is really about the platform being developed on.
Look at how accessible the web is. Almost any machine can get on the web. My phone, my iPod, my laptop, my 11 year old PII machine, my gaming tower, all can access the same web.
The devices I have are not the limit to what can reach the web either. I think just about every gaming platform and cell phone can get on the web, as well as thin terminals running any OS imaginable. I'm sure there are others also.
The big thing looks like it's going to be the mobile market in the next few years. Some mobile devices can run flash, but it isn't used much because of the poor support & performance. The only way that the mobile web can work is by using pure standards based solutions, because that's really the only baseline that can be trusted to exist.
No matter what proprietary technologies come out, I can always rely on the fact that my XHTML pages will still render successfully on whatever device decides to access it. The same can't be said for flash or silverlight.
At the same time, I can also guarantee you that there will be a bigger market for flash and silverlight because the web is becoming more "media rich" in some niche markets (YouTube, Adobe Air, Hulu, Google Gears, etc. to name a few examples). There will absolutely be a market for it, but I wouldn't say it will defeat XHTML and web standards because the web is constantly being redefined.
No matter how much Flash or Silverlight try to take on, the technology will move so fast that the only baseline that I think will remain will be standards like XHTML and CSS.
Flash has been around for years and still hasn't taken over. I think that is one good example of how hard it is to replace XHTML.
Go for server-side development of any kind, but I wouldn't become a Silverlight or Flash specialist.
<CrystalBallMode>
To be honest I can't see it happening. Other than the reasons mentioned by tvanfosson and DanHerbert, the XHTML + CSS + JS stack just grew mature enough so that things like AJAX and jQuery make pretty much all the lightweight client side stuff easy with these tools (as opposed to things like streaming video, heavy computations or sockets etc.)
Common technological inertia will just guarantee that the existing things will stay around. People are much more likely to use something that has been around for a while and has been extended to meet the latest requirements than to use something totally new. Of course there are great paradigm shifts every now and then like the native to managed code transition but I don't see that happening with Flash or Silverlight.
</CrystalBallMode>
My hope is that what comes out of all of this is a new standardized web platform truly suited to building the web applications that people want to see with tools that developers really want to use. I see all of the effort going to trying to shoehorn these legacy web technologies into the "Web 2.0" model and I just wish that this effort could go towards making a truly revolutionary "Web v.Next".
Don't get me wrong, I really like what jQuery is doing to make Javascript client code easier, but it's still Javascript and my personal preference is to work with strongly typed languages with productive development tools.
In the meantime, I think tools like Silverlight and Flash have a lot to offer and help you do things more easily in some cases than in other web technologies, and there are some things you simply can't do any other way. But I don't think Silverlight or Flash or any other technology is the end game, just a step in the right direction.
Consider for a moment that you can manipulate a web page using Javascript, (X)HTML, and CSS with a great deal of overlap in functionality and yet ALL three technologies remain in prominent use today. The reason for this is because all three languages are different tools meant to solve different problems and no one of them can serve as an adequate replacement for the other.
Its the same thing with Flash / Silverlight vs these existing web technologies. In fact, I work in a dev shop that builds Flash based e-learning. One of our current products was originally built to use a purely Flash-based solution for navigation, etc. However, as the product has continued to evolve we have actually moved a lot of the functionality from the Flash-based e-learning module and into regular html pages.
In other words, I don't think that we'll be abandoning the current tools that web developers use any time soon. For the most part I see Flash / Silverlight as additional tools that will solve particular problems better than we were able to solve them previously.
Neither one is going to win out anytime soon. I expect which one is used will depend entirely on the purpose for many years to come.
The reason you're seeing so many job offerings for Silverlight of late is because it's a relatively new technology and just recently gained some momentum.
Though, I do expect Silverlight to make quick work of Flash.
I sure hope so. And yes, I think they will. There will be some development on legacy (XHTML/CSS/JS) apps for re-tuning purposes, but I think there will come a day when new apps are simply not created on those platforms.
Mobile phones are the issue right now. Flash isn't available on many of the major phone models. And their browsers are all over the map. Luckily there's Webkit (iPhone and G1).
If Silverlight makes it to a web platform then it will be a nice viable alternative to the hodgepodge of technologies that are currently in use. FYI, Microsfoft says Silverlight on Android is very possible. On the iPhone, hard to say, Apple is weird about such things.
AOL recently created a RIA version of it's email client in Silverlight. Looks nice and there's no Javascript errors to worry about. From a developer standpoint, that's huge.
How is Silverlight going to change the internet in the next 10 years?
Is this going to be a scene changer or just another blip?
People often underestimate Microsoft. I don't know if it's going to change the Internet, but Silverlight will probably become pretty widely used, especially in web-based business applications that require rich interfaces. Flash is good, but being able to develop rich web interfaces with .NET and WPF is much nicer, particularly in that realm.
It will be another blip. It's not seriously cross-platform, unlike Flash or any of its other competition, and no one seems particularly interested in it. It might be neat and shiny but I haven't seen any real reason to move past playing around with it.
Put another way, it's a cool toy but not much else.
Until Silverlight has respectable implementations in other operating systems (read: OS X and Linux) and it can differentiate itself from Flash considerably, it's never going to grab a significant percentage of the rich content web app market, IMO.
I personally think Silverlight will be popular, its got a good "feel" about it IMO as a developer.
The cross-platform issue will be solved soon, as Mono continues to grow fast.
But I think it will be a very long time before anything knocks Flash/Flex off its perch on the top of RIA development platforms.
Silverlight allows the developer to offload some processing to a CLR on the client, using the native language such as C#, provide rich interfaces that are not restricted to HTML/CSS/DOM differences between browsers, and potentially reduce the need for scripting in javascript.
Although I might seem antagonistic here, I really, full heartedly don't like Silverlight, and I don't like Flash either.
They don't bring anything to the table anymore, now that browser are truly fast at rendering and processing. You can do most of the same things with pure Javascript and HTML/CSS. And what you can't do you will be able to do with HTML 5.0. What we need are not more proprietary frameworks, but better tools for what what we already have.
So my guess is 10 years from now, Silverlight and Flash won't be more than wikipedia articles.
I feel that while you can do most of what you need with Javascript and CSS, Silverlight programming feels much more fluid and fast to me. This is especially true when it comes to easily building a rich design with loads of animations. It is very easy for a team of designers and developers to collaborate on Silverlight and WPF projects, and that efficiency is important. Visual Studio being a fantastic IDE has kept many developers on the Microsoft ranch. The Expression suite feels like the next big advancement in allowing your IDE to do a lot of your work for you.
Deep Zoom is another big winner for Silverlight - check out the Silverlight implementation of the Hard Rock Memorabilia collection. Now look at the Flash implementation of SF Moma's art collection.
Don't knock Silverlight until you try it. I am no Microsoft fanboy, but it is very easy to use. People who have never developed using Microsoft technologies don't know the meaning of a good IDE.
I mostly develop with PHP, and I use Aptana for development. VS200x is lightyears ahead of any other IDE in just about everything.
The only real thing standing in the way of Silverlight becoming more widely used is better cross platform support; which would be pretty amazing thing I don't see happening at all. If Microsoft could loosen the reins up a bit, it would do wonders for it. Then again, Microsoft has gotten got at getting certain really good tools out there for free: The Express VS tools, the Dreamspark suite, etc.
One area that Silverlight will catch on is business applications. As architecture models shift into the service oriented realm there will be many companies looking to port their old client/server apps. Silverlight enables them to maintain the rich UI of the forms application while providing the messaging capabilities necessary to talk to the services. Also,t he deployment is wider than what they would get with strictly WPF and xbapps. Flash doesnt really compete in this area and a straight asp.net or other web technology front end, while getting nicer with Ajax and all that fun stuff, wouldnt support the richness you can get out of silverlight.