Thoughts on Flash
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Java hasn't died at all in the enterprise market.
Which is an other way of saying that it's dead. COBOL hasn't died - in the economic sector. Remember almost every site used to have a Java applet even if it was just to make a funky menu that took an hour to load?
harold aptroot wrote:
Which is an other way of saying that it's dead.
Not according to the facts: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html[^]
harold aptroot wrote:
Remember almost every site used to have a Java applet even if it was just to make a funky menu that took an hour to load?
That's a different market.
Jeremy Falcon
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Which is an other way of saying that it's dead.
Not according to the facts: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html[^]
harold aptroot wrote:
Remember almost every site used to have a Java applet even if it was just to make a funky menu that took an hour to load?
That's a different market.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
Just because you are out of touch with the Java world does not mean it is dead.
Actually it does - if there is so little Java that I do not even encounter it without trying to avoid it, that means it has become a niche thing. And therefore dead. Like COBOL.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
No I don't. The Applet did not take off that well.
Perhaps you didn't frequent the same parts of the 'net that I did.. Besides the whole discussion is only about applets anyway. I wouldn't see some crappy phone app as a competitor to Flash.
modified on Thursday, April 29, 2010 2:18 PM
Java on the desktop and as web applets is almost dead - no doubts or arguments there. It was dead long time back. But Java server market is huge. I encounter a lot of Java because I develop enterprise applications. J2EE/JSP are still very popular.
-
Yes it is. It's an indication of how many people are writing about it, which is a direct result of how many people know about it. Which you can derive that the more people that know about it the more popular it is. People tend to use languages they know. And while there is room for flaw in that, I have also personally seen enterprise markets where J2EE is used quite a lot. Maybe searching job wanted ads will help you believe it's not dead. Scroll down to craigslist if you don't bother to read the whole site. Or look at the Google Code part and see just how many people are using it. http://langpop.com/[^] And, I still provided data to back up my claim. Where is yours to say that Java is dead?
Jeremy Falcon
-
Java on the desktop and as web applets is almost dead - no doubts or arguments there. It was dead long time back. But Java server market is huge. I encounter a lot of Java because I develop enterprise applications. J2EE/JSP are still very popular.
-
Yes it is. It's an indication of how many people are writing about it, which is a direct result of how many people know about it. Which you can derive that the more people that know about it the more popular it is. People tend to use languages they know. And while there is room for flaw in that, I have also personally seen enterprise markets where J2EE is used quite a lot. Maybe searching job wanted ads will help you believe it's not dead. Scroll down to craigslist if you don't bother to read the whole site. Or look at the Google Code part and see just how many people are using it. http://langpop.com/[^] And, I still provided data to back up my claim. Where is yours to say that Java is dead?
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Darn! PHP is more popular than C#. That can't be right. ;P
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
Just because you are out of touch with the Java world does not mean it is dead.
Actually it does - if there is so little Java that I do not even encounter it without trying to avoid it, that means it has become a niche thing. And therefore dead. Like COBOL.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
No I don't. The Applet did not take off that well.
Perhaps you didn't frequent the same parts of the 'net that I did.. Besides the whole discussion is only about applets anyway. I wouldn't see some crappy phone app as a competitor to Flash.
modified on Thursday, April 29, 2010 2:18 PM
harold aptroot wrote:
Actually it does - if there is so little Java that I do not even encounter it without trying to avoid it
C is still popular and I do not encounter it at all in my current line of work. That just means you're in the wrong market.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Yes it is. It's an indication of how many people are writing about it, which is a direct result of how many people know about it. Which you can derive that the more people that know about it the more popular it is. People tend to use languages they know. And while there is room for flaw in that, I have also personally seen enterprise markets where J2EE is used quite a lot. Maybe searching job wanted ads will help you believe it's not dead. Scroll down to craigslist if you don't bother to read the whole site. Or look at the Google Code part and see just how many people are using it. http://langpop.com/[^] And, I still provided data to back up my claim. Where is yours to say that Java is dead?
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Where is yours to say that Java is dead?
- View a random site. Does it have a Java applet? Probably not. 2) Download a random program. Is it a Java program? Probably not. So where is Java used then eh? Some niche markets? Java is also taught at lots of colleges, I'm sure that contributes to the perceived "popularity" even though it is nowhere to be seen in real life.
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Darn! PHP is more popular than C#. That can't be right. ;P
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
Darn! PHP is more popular than C#. That can't be right.
:laugh: You know I thought that, but I didn't say it.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Where is yours to say that Java is dead?
- View a random site. Does it have a Java applet? Probably not. 2) Download a random program. Is it a Java program? Probably not. So where is Java used then eh? Some niche markets? Java is also taught at lots of colleges, I'm sure that contributes to the perceived "popularity" even though it is nowhere to be seen in real life.
harold aptroot wrote:
- View a random site. Does it have a Java applet? Probably not. 2) Download a random program. Is it a Java program? Probably not.
How many times do we have to repeat "that's a different market" before you get it?
Jeremy Falcon
-
harold aptroot wrote:
- View a random site. Does it have a Java applet? Probably not. 2) Download a random program. Is it a Java program? Probably not.
How many times do we have to repeat "that's a different market" before you get it?
Jeremy Falcon
-
harold aptroot wrote:
- View a random site. Does it have a Java applet? Probably not. 2) Download a random program. Is it a Java program? Probably not.
How many times do we have to repeat "that's a different market" before you get it?
Jeremy Falcon
-
Just once more? No I get it, really, but I don't get why you don't think that that just means that it's dead. If something is only used on servers .. ? How many servers are there, compared to desktops?
harold aptroot wrote:
Just once more? No I get it, really, but I don't get why you don't think that that just means that it's dead. If something is only used on servers .. ? How many servers are there, compared to desktops?
You are comparing apples to oranges. For one, if there was less servers that does mean Java is dead. Which is YOUR point I'm debating. For two, considering you don't know this answer yourself, then you have zero way of knowing for sure it is dead. For three, because of point two, that means you're pretty much just arguing there bub. Now, lets pretend this measure is important to a point, it's a metric that I do not know faithfully. I know sites like Facebook have 30,000 servers. There are at least 20 billion websites registered for DNS services (sure it's not a 1 to 1 server ratio but you get the idea). And lets not forget the servers that don't serve web pages. Apparently 92 million computers were sold last year. Not sure which of those were servers or not. But, I'll leave that to you to actually do some research. But the server market is not small potatoes just because you have no experience in it. And lets not forget Java is used on mobile platforms as well.
Jeremy Falcon
-
And besides, I was just comparing it to Flash. And I'm pretty sure you're not looking at the market that Flash targets.
harold aptroot wrote:
And besides, I was just comparing it to Flash.
And COBOL, and deskop apps, and everything else...
harold aptroot wrote:
And I'm pretty sure you're not looking at the market that Flash targets.
That's because we're talking about Java yo. And thanks for the downvote.
Jeremy Falcon
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Just once more? No I get it, really, but I don't get why you don't think that that just means that it's dead. If something is only used on servers .. ? How many servers are there, compared to desktops?
You are comparing apples to oranges. For one, if there was less servers that does mean Java is dead. Which is YOUR point I'm debating. For two, considering you don't know this answer yourself, then you have zero way of knowing for sure it is dead. For three, because of point two, that means you're pretty much just arguing there bub. Now, lets pretend this measure is important to a point, it's a metric that I do not know faithfully. I know sites like Facebook have 30,000 servers. There are at least 20 billion websites registered for DNS services (sure it's not a 1 to 1 server ratio but you get the idea). And lets not forget the servers that don't serve web pages. Apparently 92 million computers were sold last year. Not sure which of those were servers or not. But, I'll leave that to you to actually do some research. But the server market is not small potatoes just because you have no experience in it. And lets not forget Java is used on mobile platforms as well.
Jeremy Falcon
Lol well a couple of things 1) you're feeding the obvious troll. 2) the apples and oranges can be compared. Java applets are comparable to Flash - tell me it aint so. 3) for servers the number of discrete machines is not useful knowledge as they will be clustered anyway - a larger cluster does not create a bigger market. 4) are mobile platforms that use flash as "normal programs"? I didn't think so, but if there are some then you have a small point there.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
And besides, I was just comparing it to Flash.
And COBOL, and deskop apps, and everything else...
harold aptroot wrote:
And I'm pretty sure you're not looking at the market that Flash targets.
That's because we're talking about Java yo. And thanks for the downvote.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And COBOL, and deskop apps, and everything else...
I like to argue. See above.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
That's because we're talking about Java yo.
O rly? Well obviously when I say "java is dead" in a Flash context, I wouldn't be talking about usage on servers. I guess it wasn't obvious enough.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And thanks for the downvote.
:confused:
-
Just once more? No I get it, really, but I don't get why you don't think that that just means that it's dead. If something is only used on servers .. ? How many servers are there, compared to desktops?
harold aptroot wrote:
How many servers are there, compared to desktops?
That's funny! If there are more servers compared to desktops, it does not mean more development goes on the desktop platform rather than on the server platform :).
-
harold aptroot wrote:
How many servers are there, compared to desktops?
That's funny! If there are more servers compared to desktops, it does not mean more development goes on the desktop platform rather than on the server platform :).
-
Lol well a couple of things 1) you're feeding the obvious troll. 2) the apples and oranges can be compared. Java applets are comparable to Flash - tell me it aint so. 3) for servers the number of discrete machines is not useful knowledge as they will be clustered anyway - a larger cluster does not create a bigger market. 4) are mobile platforms that use flash as "normal programs"? I didn't think so, but if there are some then you have a small point there.
harold aptroot wrote:
- you're feeding the obvious troll.
Dude you just called yourself a troll.
harold aptroot wrote:
- the apples and oranges can be compared. Java applets are comparable to Flash - tell me it aint so.
This is a straw man tactic.
harold aptroot wrote:
- for servers the number of discrete machines is not useful knowledge as they will be clustered anyway - a larger cluster does not create a bigger market.
In part this is true. But can also indicate just how large the market is. Desktops aren't the only things sold, and desktop computers was your focus like it was the end all be all.
harold aptroot wrote:
- are mobile platforms that use flash as "normal programs"? I didn't think so, but if there are some then you have a small point there.
This makes no sense dude. Sorry, but really Java is not dead. You can beat your dead horse until you're blue in the face, but it won't change that. Now I gotta get back to work to finish a website. And guess what, it's NOT written in Java!
Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And COBOL, and deskop apps, and everything else...
I like to argue. See above.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
That's because we're talking about Java yo.
O rly? Well obviously when I say "java is dead" in a Flash context, I wouldn't be talking about usage on servers. I guess it wasn't obvious enough.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And thanks for the downvote.
:confused:
harold aptroot wrote:
O rly? Well obviously when I say "java is dead" in a Flash context, I wouldn't be talking about usage on servers. I guess it wasn't obvious enough.
Well, then why compare it to COBOL and desktop apps? And why not mention servers until we do?
harold aptroot wrote:
Confused
Someone down voted me. Gonna share with you a little secret of mine. It may not have been you, but that's my way of trying to lure out the person that did it. :cool:
Jeremy Falcon