Re: Re: (...)and Java Questions

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:58:20 +0000, rhkelly wrote:
> This is somewhat similar to the situation with VB applications on
> Win32: you immediately see that these are 'lower grade' software
> products, slower, more cumbersome, with less convenient user
> interface etc.
>

I have to disagree with you there.  Getting started coding in Java is MUCH more difficult than VB.  Java is more geared toward real OOP solutions to problems.


> I do not put down Java as "D-I-Y" platform; and those that 'program
> for themself' (as you imply) can make good use of it; but those
> that write software for distribution - i.e., for others, commercial
> *or* free, would, it appears to me, do well to stear clear of it.
>
> Roger
>

I've written applications in real life that others are using.  I did not compromise by choosing Java.  I needed the classes that Java provides (especially for XML) to get the job done.  I also have java applications that I use.  Heck JBuilder is written in Java (of course in its latest iteration, it's the only IDE I've used that recommends 512meg of RAM and they weren't joking).

I have no desire to turn this into a "who's language is best" flame war.  I use whatever language and tools will get the job done.  I've used assembler, C, C++, Java, Pascal (Delphi), Perl, Actor and numerous other languages.  You won't catch me saying that xyz language is the be-all end-all language that is right for everyone.

Now, having said all that, I think the Java runtime on the Zaurus is extremely weak compared to the latest JVMs available for the desktop.  I would have to regress in order to use it, knowing all the while that I could have gotten the job done hours ago if I had a recent JVM with a decent set of classes builtin.  The Zaurus is powerful enough to NOT need to be lumped into the cell-phone J2ME class of JVMs.

So, as much as I like doing Java development, I will probably switch back to C++ to get real work done on Zaurus-only development.

Matthew Zaleski