macOS No Java 6 on Leopard Retail!!

[ryan]

Thousands of Fortune 500 companies?

Name one that uses Java on the Mac to implement central, mission critical services.

Hell, I'd be surprised if any of them that are committed to using Java have rolled Java 6 into production yet, given SOX.

That's true, most large corporations are still using 1.2, 1.3 and in some cases 1.4 (just look at how Struts 1.x, which is 7 years old still has a 60%-70% market share). However, there a lot of developers such as myself that are involved in small, pet or open source projects that require 1.5 and can take advantage of 1.6 when available, or that like to stay up to date on the latest enhancements to the language and want to work with it on our Macs.

 

[Stella]

Well I'm picky. If an app has an ugly UI, in my opinion it sucks. Consistent UI is what sets the Mac apart from any other OS.

Don't make me pull out the car analogy

Thats a very shallow view.

There are a lot of excellent Java desktop applications out there.

Apple want OSX to be a great development machine - and it is - but it will suffer without Java.

SJ comments about 'nobody uses Java' was aimed @ the iPhone ( there are plenty of Java apps for cellphones - but I think he was talking about applets ), not for Desktop and server platforms. Java applications on both desktop and, more so, server are plentiful.

 

[whitehexagon]

Yes, Apple does all their own Java work, by choice. My hope is that if Apple isn't interested in keeping Java up-to-date on OSX that they turn it over to Sun/the OpenJDK people.

Well that would be the perfect solution. We might even get the Java 7 beta in a reasonable amount of time that way But from my understanding Sun did offer to do the OSX port, but Apple wanted to do it themselves to better integrate it into their look and feel.

In fact I see that problem already with my project. Swing looks the same on on Linux, Solaris and Windows, but on Mac my buttons get replaced with Mac buttons. That might be fine for business users who prefer a standard interface, but I'm trying to write a game and the Mac look and feel just doesn't work for it.

Come on guys, write once run anywhere!

 

[mrfrosty]

Erm dont get me wrong here.....but....doesn't Java suck big time ?

 

[therevolution]

In fact I see that problem already with my project. Swing looks the same on on Linux, Solaris and Windows, but on Mac my buttons get replaced with Mac buttons. That might be fine for business users who prefer a standard interface, but I'm trying to write a game and the Mac look and feel just doesn't work for it.

The Mac look and feel might be the default, but that doesn't mean you're stuck with it. Read up on Java look and feels, and how to change them.

 

[therevolution]

Erm dont get me wrong here.....but....doesn't Java suck big time ?

Oh crap. Really? Man, I'm always the last to find out about these things.

Thanks for the heads up!

 

[janey]

Erm dont get me wrong here.....but....doesn't Java suck big time ?

If you have nothing of importance to contribute, please feel free to screw off. Whether or not Java "sucks" is irrelevant. It's that apple loves to go on about how much they're committed to helping java devs but they're not following through. Java has its uses, and well, if you feel it "sucks" for unknown and probably preposterous reasons, don't use it.

...Java 6 Swing performance has improved even more. Java 6 Look & Feels are also great.

Apple included some swing improvements in java 5. Makes it look "more" native-ish.

Typical Java apps do suck because almost all cross-platform UI applications use the least common denominator between operating systems. Another reason why REALbasic apps suck

At least Azureus can do things native clients for OS X suck at. You know. Well, let's see...transmission, bitrocket, xtorrent, bitsonwheels (which also looks HIDEOUS)...

 

[CapitanAmerica]

That UI is 99% custom. It doesn't look like a Mac application at all. Anyone can make a UI like that. It looks just like a web page.

Typical Java apps do suck because almost all cross-platform UI applications use the least common denominator between operating systems. Another reason why REALbasic apps suck

You have choices. You can make your app look like a native app with the Swing look and feels or SWT, or you can go for a custom look and feel all the way, which is what many apps are doing anyways today.

The whole look and feel thing is funny because there is not consistency out there, and I love it when Mac people bring it up. Mac apps on Windows almost never respect the conventions in that platform, just look at iTunes and the often horrible interface provided by QuickTime (you know, the video player that won't let you go full screen unless you pay for it?)

 

[stupidregister]

That UI is 99% custom. It doesn't look like a Mac application at all. Anyone can make a UI like that. It looks just like a web page.

Typical Java apps do suck because almost all cross-platform UI applications use the least common denominator between operating systems. Another reason why REALbasic apps suck

Have you even used Azureus before or are you just making stuff up? Here is a screenshot I found online. It doesn't look exactly native and this specific screenshot seems to show a glitch, but it definitely doesn't look like a web page. That is unless you think Cocoa applications look like a web pages too.

 

[iancapable]

My point is Java UI apps on the Mac generally break the consistency that Cocoa and Carbon usually retain. Yes you can write ugly apps in Cocoa, but it's harder because Interface Builder gives you guides as to where every control should be placed.

Of course you can make a nice looking Java app for the Mac. But will that app look equally nice on Windows or Linux? Probably not because the standard UI layout is different for each OS.

Anyways, this is way off topic.

At least you guys have a version of Java running on Leopard. It's way better than M$ screwing .NET developers by not including the framework on XP.

It depends on the developer... I've made swing apps that are consistent with the look and feel of cocoa.

Java came from Objective-C in a lot of ways and I think it's heart breaking that it's not important to Apple, especially since there is so much momentum behind java, probably as much as apple...

People aren't going to to rush to cocoa, people want cross platform, especially if the Mac continues to grow like it has.

Apple need a good kick in the backside to see this.

 

[whitehexagon]

The Mac look and feel might be the default, but that doesn't mean you're stuck with it. Read up on Java look and feels, and how to change them.

Thanks for the tip. I thought the cross platform LAF was the standard default on all VM's. Now I know better

 

[iJed]

Thousands of Fortune 500 companies?

Name one that uses Java on the Mac to implement central, mission critical services.

Hell, I'd be surprised if any of them that are committed to using Java have rolled Java 6 into production yet, given SOX.

How about Apple. The iTunes Store backend is written in Java with WebObjects. As is the Apple Online Store.

Based on the new Ruby/Python/Scripting bridge support, I think Apple is smartly focusing on where the action is *now*, not on a third-party app framework that is so clunky and has massive overhead.

Even Adobe made its Aperture competitor using a scripting language for the UI (Lua or whatever it was called).

The Adobe Flex Builder development environment is written in Java on top of the excellent Eclipse framework.

The Eclipse framework is also used by Azureus. This is how it gets its semi-native look and feel. The Eclipse UI library (called SWT) wraps the native toolkit of the platform (unlike Swing.) In the case of the Mac version this is Carbon.


What I'd like to see support for on the Mac is Cocoa bindings for .NET languages and C# support in XCode. C# is by far the nicest programming language that I've ever used. C# is vastly superior to Java and is probably the single best thing ever to come out of Microsoft.

 

[iancapable]

How about Apple. The iTunes Store backend is written in Java with WebObjects. As is the Apple Online Store.



The Adobe Flex Builder development environment is written in Java on top of the excellent Eclipse framework.

The Eclipse framework is also used by Azureus. This is how it gets its semi-native look and feel. The Eclipse UI library (called SWT) wraps the native toolkit of the platform (unlike Swing.) In the case of the Mac version this is Carbon.


What I'd like to see support for on the Mac is Cocoa bindings for .NET languages and C# support in XCode. C# is by far the nicest programming language that I've ever used. C# is vastly superior to Java and is probably the single best thing ever to come out of Microsoft.

Having done both C#*and Java, I'll happily stick to java thanks... C# has some nice features, but at the end of day it's personal taste. However I do like the Properties feature in C#, but I prefer the fact that Java methods have the throws keyword, if used right, you would not believe how much easier things are...

If you're interested in .net on OSX then look at mono, it's not complete, I don't support it either, but it gives the ability to run .net stuff on any platform.

 

[Persifleur]

At least Azureus can do things native clients for OS X suck at. You know. Well, let's see...transmission, bitrocket, xtorrent, bitsonwheels (which also looks HIDEOUS)...

Let us separate the functionality of an application from its language. There is no doubt that Azureus is a capable application. But I hate using it. If tomorrow there existed a native application with the same functionality as Azureus, I'd switch. No doubt in my mind. The problem is that there are no viable alternatives, which is entirely separate from Azureus being nice to use.

It depends on the developer... I've made swing apps that are consistent with the look and feel of cocoa.

This is precisely the problem. Writing a good Swing app is hard and many people just don't know how. Couple that with the fact most programmers are terrible at UI design and you get a lot of badly performing cruft.

While I'm not saying this phenomenon is unique to Java apps (i.e. you can get native cruft as well - just look at Rational Rose), I've yet to use a Java desktop app that I actually liked. And that includes Eclipse. But again I'm forced to use Eclipse because there isn't anything better. (All other IDEs are also written in Java, which makes sense.)

People aren't going to to rush to cocoa, people want cross platform, especially if the Mac continues to grow like it has.

People want cross-platform native apps. I've been programming in Java for little over 10 years, and every time I've inherited a project which involves a Swing front-end, they've all had one thing in common: hostile users. A Java-based front end will just not get wide-spread acceptance in the presence of a viable native competitor.

What I'd like to see support for on the Mac is Cocoa bindings for .NET languages and C# support in XCode. C# is by far the nicest programming language that I've ever used. C# is vastly superior to Java and is probably the single best thing ever to come out of Microsoft.

Yes, I completely agree. C# is the nicest language I've ever used. This is pretty much what I do nowadays: C# desktop application communicating with a Java server-side application.

 

[zwida]

Thousands of Fortune 500 companies?

Nice. That may be the funniest thing. EVER.

 

[iSee]

Nice. That may be the funniest thing. EVER.

It's not that funny, since the poster was referring to thousands of services, not companies.
It was a bit ambiguous, but it seemed pretty obvious to me.

 

[iJed]

Having done both C#*and Java, I'll happily stick to java thanks... C# has some nice features, but at the end of day it's personal taste. However I do like the Properties feature in C#, but I prefer the fact that Java methods have the throws keyword, if used right, you would not believe how much easier things are...

If you're interested in .net on OSX then look at mono, it's not complete, I don't support it either, but it gives the ability to run .net stuff on any platform.

I used to think this way too. That was until I spent a few weeks writing C# 2.0 non-stop at work. I agree with you on the checked exceptions though... However I think they are far outweighed by allowing unsafe code/pointer manipulation, delegates and events, operator overloading, generic methods, multiple classes in the same file (not inner classes), a single class over multiple files, the pre-processor, unsigned types, the ability to declare nullable value types, etc. Some of the stuff - LINQ, setting properties on construction, automatic properties and extension methods - coming in C# 3.0 are also really interesting.

I've used mono a bit actually. It seems to work fairly well and has support for C# 2.0. What I'd like to see is Apple adding support for C#, through mono or otherwise.

People want cross-platform native apps. I've been programming in Java for little over 10 years, and every time I've inherited a project which involves a Swing front-end, they've all had one thing in common: hostile users. A Java-based front end will just not get wide-spread acceptance in the presence of a viable native competitor.

Yep, IMO Swing is the reason Java on the desktop has failed so miserably. The fact that Sun is still pushing this pile of crap --Swing, not Java-- I just cannot understand. Maybe it is just impossible to produce a toolkit for multi-platform UIs? Current evidence with things like Swing, SWT and GTK suggest this may be the case.

 

[Great Dave]

Speaking of no Java 6, I just ran into this error message ...

"The UML plugin currently does not support Macintosh(tm) platforms due to known issues related with the delay in the Apple(tm) JDK development."

 

[iancapable]

Let us separate the functionality of an application from its language. There is no doubt that Azureus is a capable application. But I hate using it. If tomorrow there existed a native application with the same functionality as Azureus, I'd switch. No doubt in my mind. The problem is that there are no viable alternatives, which is entirely separate from Azureus being nice to use.


This is precisely the problem. Writing a good Swing app is hard and many people just don't know how. Couple that with the fact most programmers are terrible at UI design and you get a lot of badly performing cruft.

While I'm not saying this phenomenon is unique to Java apps (i.e. you can get native cruft as well - just look at Rational Rose), I've yet to use a Java desktop app that I actually liked. And that includes Eclipse. But again I'm forced to use Eclipse because there isn't anything better. (All other IDEs are also written in Java, which makes sense.)


People want cross-platform native apps. I've been programming in Java for little over 10 years, and every time I've inherited a project which involves a Swing front-end, they've all had one thing in common: hostile users. A Java-based front end will just not get wide-spread acceptance in the presence of a viable native competitor.


Yes, I completely agree. C# is the nicest language I've ever used. This is pretty much what I do nowadays: C# desktop application communicating with a Java server-side application.

Time for a bit of eclipse/netbeans flaming... Have you tried netbeans? The GUI editor is fantastic! I've been using the NB6 beta and I have to say it gets better and better.

Eclipse is good to a point, it's good if you like to fiddle, but netbeans works properly out the box. A bit more sluggish though (well with 1.5)...

There is a lot of momentum behind java at the moment and swing! We at work were going to do exactly what you do, have a java backend talking to a nice clean .net app on the front... This idea has pretty much been dropped after I did a demo of what swing can do.

http:///www.swinglabs.org

 

[iancapable]

Nice. That may be the funniest thing. EVER.

I don't think the OP of that comment actually knew what a fortune 500 company is, I'll enlighten him:

An annual list of the 500 largest US companies, published in Fortune magazine.

 

[iancapable]

I used to think this way too. That was until I spent a few weeks writing C# 2.0 non-stop at work. I agree with you on the checked exceptions though... However I think they are far outweighed by allowing unsafe code/pointer manipulation, delegates and events, operator overloading, generic methods, multiple classes in the same file (not inner classes), a single class over multiple files, the pre-processor, unsigned types, the ability to declare nullable value types, etc. Some of the stuff - LINQ, setting properties on construction, automatic properties and extension methods - coming in C# 3.0 are also really interesting.

I've used mono a bit actually. It seems to work fairly well and has support for C# 2.0. What I'd like to see is Apple adding support for C#, through mono or otherwise.



Yep, IMO Swing is the reason Java on the desktop has failed so miserably. The fact that Sun is still pushing this pile of crap --Swing, not Java-- I just cannot understand. Maybe it is just impossible to produce a toolkit for multi-platform UIs? Current evidence with things like Swing, SWT and GTK suggest this may be the case.

I've not used a lot of c#*2.0, I'm not very interested in microsoft or the microsoft way of doing things and have shunned the OS for years except where I happened to find work as a .net dev (a few years of that)... But I generally avoid the OS if possible.

I do like visual studio though... A LOT...

At the end of the day there are a lot of problems still being faced in .net, one if you compile a service on a 32bit machine, it won't work on a 64 bit machine... Another major point: It's Microsoft, it runs on windows and will only ever run on windows. Mono is a toy, and just like classpath it will not be completed! If it is no matter how much MS say they won't sue the hell out of everyone, they will.

 

[Persifleur]

Time for a bit of eclipse/netbeans flaming... Have you tried netbeans? The GUI editor is fantastic! I've been using the NB6 beta and I have to say it gets better and better.

Eclipse is good to a point, it's good if you like to fiddle, but netbeans works properly out the box. A bit more sluggish though (well with 1.5)...

There is a lot of momentum behind java at the moment and swing! We at work were going to do exactly what you do, have a java backend talking to a nice clean .net app on the front... This idea has pretty much been dropped after I did a demo of what swing can do.

http:///www.swinglabs.org

No I haven't used NetBeans for some time. I looked at NetBeans when they were making the transition from 3.5 to 4.0, but I was using JBuilder at the time and NetBeans just wasn't nearly as good. I switched to Eclipse when they released version 3 as JBuilder was becoming increasingly bloated (ironically they use the Eclipse Framework now). I have heard that the new Swing editor in NetBeans is supposed to be much better, but I haven't had a chance to look at it. But given that Swing was released in 1998, it does make you wonder why it took so long for a decent editor to come out.

 

[iancapable]

No I haven't used NetBeans for some time. I looked at NetBeans when they were making the transition from 3.5 to 4.0, but I was using JBuilder at the time and NetBeans just wasn't nearly as good. I switched to Eclipse when they released version 3 as JBuilder was becoming increasingly bloated (ironically they use the Eclipse Framework now). I have heard that the new Swing editor in NetBeans is supposed to be much better, but I haven't had a chance to look at it. But given that Swing was released in 1998, it does make you wonder why it took so long for a decent editor to come out.

Maybe due to the fact that everyone went web mad a while ago... The new thing seems to be rich clients that connect to server based stuff.

The new swing stuff in 1.5 and 1.6 is very promising.

 

[CapitanAmerica]

This shouldn't be a surprise to anybody. What was surprising to me was the number of Java developers buying Macs for the express purpose of doing Java development.

http://sellmic.com/blog/2007/10/28/beware-of-rotten-apples/

 

[NEiMac]

I don't know much of anything about Java, not sure I care if I do, but I would love to see them keep it up to date. Nothing else its one less thing for the windows fans to latch onto in the forums.