Very valid points here Jan.
I just quite simply agree: Web browser with whatever tricks are
feature maturity which it will be 'hard' to compete against MS and the
lack of Java robustness. Sucks, but such is the lollipop.
>Murray Altheim wrote:
>> Yes, but I'm not thinking we're going to be using this within a browser,
>> and standalone Java apps work pretty well in general. (And believe me,
>> I don't say this because I'm a Sun employee)
>My opinion is that if "it" can be done in the browser, then for
>the simple sake of getting more people to know the idea, it should.
>You can do a lot more with a standalone Java app than with
>and installing a fully-blown "Semantic Web Mosaic" could well become
>difficult. Also, Java has performance problems with rendering web-like
>content on current hardware. We will not see any pure Java browser
>which comes close to MSIE or Mozilla any time soon, so I'd recommend
>using it as a client platform with care.
>A prototype can be written in Java, why not. It also used to be possible
>to embed a browser component (= MSIE) into a Java application. I don't
>know whether it would still be a good idea, however, given that Microsoft
>no longer cares about JavaMS interoperability. The embarassing thing
>is that Sun doesn't really care about it either -- why are there no
>official platform-specific extensions to Java, why don't they provide
>the Visual J++-like functionality themselves, why do I have to shrug
>if you ask me for a stupid little UI tweak? In the name of promoting
>"Java pureness", they are ignoring the real world needs of normal users.
>(Another example: since September 1999 there is a bug in their database
>which lists over 30 incompatibilities between Java's Windows Look &
Feelbrgt;and real Windows.)
UK: (44) 777 953 3856
US: (1) 877 239 1010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:58:07 PDT