"Who defined Swing? Only Sun."
I read the first 2 replies to my post. I do admit that you have some good points in your posts. I think the biggest message people should be taking away from this SWT/Swing affair is that the bottom line is about advancing Java, and that surely is something we all agree on. My original post was written in that spirit. Perhaps I should add to that post by saying that I sincerely do hope that whatever GUI API is adopted (whether that be only 1 or perhaps many), the API should truly allow developers to write the kind of rich-client apps Java developers are wanting. I also sincerely hope that to the many people involved in this discourse whose statements are derived from whether they like Sun or IBM as a company, be less heard compared to the people who truly discuss for the sake of Java.
Also, I'd to point out in reply to your statement:
"Who defined Swing? Only Sun."
Who defined SWT? Only IBM. It may be open now, but the majority of it, done by IBM, simply will not be changed. Instead of looking at this from company perspective, I think we simply need to find a way to make Java even better. I think an interesting question is whether or not having 2 large GUI APIs will effect the development community in terms of reading others' code (some people may only be familiar with one of the APIs) and in terms of whether a majority of developers will learn both SWT and Swing? |
java.net RSS Feeds
