This week's giveaway is in the EJB and other Java EE Technologies forum.
We're giving away four copies of EJB 3 in Action and have Debu Panda, Reza Rahman, Ryan Cuprak, and Michael Remijan on-line!
See this thread for details.
The moose likes JavaFX and the fly likes Can Java FX compete with Flex? Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of EJB 3 in Action this week in the EJB and other Java EE Technologies forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » JavaFX
Bookmark "Can Java FX compete with Flex?" Watch "Can Java FX compete with Flex?" New topic
Author

Can Java FX compete with Flex?

Hong Anderson
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 05, 2005
Posts: 1936
As JRE size is huge compare to Flash player, and most end-user don't know JRE.


SCJA 1.0, SCJP 1.4, SCWCD 1.4, SCBCD 1.3, SCJP 5.0, SCEA 5, SCBCD 5; OCUP - Fundamental, Intermediate and Advanced; IBM Certified Solution Designer - OOAD, vUML 2; SpringSource Certified Spring Professional
Eric Bruno
author
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 60
As for the size, changes to Java SE with the last few updates have helped to make JRE more modular. This eliminates much of the bloat problem. As for end-users not knowing about the JRE, that's good. The end user of a JavaFX application doesn't have to get involved in downloading it at all - this happens automatically, once, when the page with a JavaFX application loads. At this moment there are over 1 billion desktop computers with Java installed and something like 3-5 billion mobile devices with Java running. This is not true for Flex. As a result the potential for JavaFX is huge, and there should be no hassle for the end-user whatsoever.
Hong Anderson
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 05, 2005
Posts: 1936
What is the size of the latest JRE? Flash Player 10 is just 1.8MB.
About download automatically, that is not good in many cases, many people don't use hi-speed internet, if they open a web that use JavaFX and the page downloads JRE automatically they might not use JavaFX applications anymore.

At this moment there are over 1 billion desktop computers with Java installed

Can you give a reference, where do you get that information?

and something like 3-5 billion mobile devices with Java running.

You mean Java ME? How is that relate to JavaFX? I don't think every mobile phones that support MIDP 2.0 can run JavaFX.
Eric Bruno
author
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 60
You can review the web casts from JavaOne 2009 where there was a slide with this information, and it was spoken about several times.
Hong Anderson
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 05, 2005
Posts: 1936
Eric Bruno wrote:You can review the web casts from JavaOne 2009 where there was a slide with this information, and it was spoken about several times.

Thanks, I'll check. Actually it doesn't matter how many times it was spoken about. I interest original source of information. I hope they don't count obsolete MSJVM which has nothing to do with JavaFX.
Vyas Sanzgiri
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 16, 2007
Posts: 686

Kengkaj Sathianpantarit wrote:As JRE size is huge compare to Flash player, and most end-user don't know JRE.

Why do the people know Flash and not Java?


Kengkaj Sathianpantarit wrote:What is the size of the latest JRE? Flash Player 10 is just 1.8MB.
About download automatically, that is not good in many cases, many people don't use hi-speed internet, if they open a web that use JavaFX and the page downloads JRE automatically they might not use JavaFX applications anymore.


source?


===Vyas Sanzgiri===
My Blog
Hong Anderson
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 05, 2005
Posts: 1936
Vyas Sanzgiri wrote:
Kengkaj Sathianpantarit wrote:As JRE size is huge compare to Flash player, and most end-user don't know JRE.

Why do the people know Flash and not Java?

Ask end-users. Most people don't know what Java is. But most people know what Flash is.

Vyas Sanzgiri wrote:
Kengkaj Sathianpantarit wrote:What is the size of the latest JRE? Flash Player 10 is just 1.8MB.
About download automatically, that is not good in many cases, many people don't use hi-speed internet, if they open a web that use JavaFX and the page downloads JRE automatically they might not use JavaFX applications anymore.


source?

I'm not sure what you're talking about, source of what?
Anyway, download automatically in many cases is not a good thing especially if connection speed is low. Think about it, what do you feel if you use low speed internet and you open a web page that uses JavaFX, the page downloads JavaFX automatically and then the other pages is loading very slowly. What will you feel about JavaFX?
Vyas Sanzgiri
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 16, 2007
Posts: 686

Ask end-users. Most people don't know what Java is. But most people know what Flash is.
--> I do not agree with you. Is this an assumption?

I'm not sure what you're talking about, source of what?
Anyway, download automatically in many cases is not a good thing especially if connection speed is low. Think about it, what do you feel if you use low speed internet and you open a web page that uses JavaFX, the page downloads JavaFX automatically and then the other pages is loading very slowly. What will you feel about JavaFX?
-->What is your source?

It looks like you are making a lot of assumptions about speed/customer base/platforms.
Hong Anderson
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 05, 2005
Posts: 1936
I tell from my experience. You don't need to trust me. You can use JavaFX in your web-based applications, if you believe Java is so popular. And you can make your page to download JRE automatically without notify users, assume that everybody who uses your website uses Hi-speed internet.

I haven't seen a page that download Flash player automatically (maybe there are web pages that do that, but I don't know), but downloading Flash player is easy because its size is small.

I just checked, size of JRE 6 Update 14 is 15.5MB, it would take up to 1 hour to download using 56K speed.
Vyas Sanzgiri
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 16, 2007
Posts: 686

OK!!
Eric Bruno
author
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 60
No need to argue about it. Download size is a valid point, and knowing this, Sun has made the Java platform more modular so that smaller pieces will be downloaded on demand as opposed to one large JRE as in the past. Going forward, this will be enhanced in the next version of Java. Sun is aware of the selling points of Flex and is working to make sure JavaFX compares well in all aspects. If you're looking for something negative to say about JavaFX, I'm sure you'll find something. However, if as a Java developer you keep your mind open to the fact that it allows you to build Flex-like Internet applications in Java, you might find it works well. My suggestion: give it a try and determine if it's right for you. If it is, then you have increased your tool-kit and knowledge base. If not, stick with what works well for you.
Hong Anderson
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 05, 2005
Posts: 1936
Eric Bruno wrote:No need to argue about it. Download size is a valid point, and knowing this, Sun has made the Java platform more modular so that smaller pieces will be downloaded on demand as opposed to one large JRE as in the past. Going forward, this will be enhanced in the next version of Java. Sun is aware of the selling points of Flex and is working to make sure JavaFX compares well in all aspects. If you're looking for something negative to say about JavaFX, I'm sure you'll find something. However, if as a Java developer you keep your mind open to the fact that it allows you to build Flex-like Internet applications in Java, you might find it works well. My suggestion: give it a try and determine if it's right for you. If it is, then you have increased your tool-kit and knowledge base. If not, stick with what works well for you.

Thanks Eric. It's good to know that Sun is trying to make JRE more modular, I think size of JRE for JavaFX module shouldn't be larger than 2.5MB.

And just to clarify, I wasn't looking for something negative about JavaFX, actually I don't interest much in RIA. Some folks who live only in developed countries mightn't understand that the entire world doesn't use Hi-Speed internet.

But if I will implement a lightweight RIA, IMO Flex is safer because it runs on Flash player.
For intranet applications, there is no different in term of download size, but for internet applications that anybody from any country, any continent can access, download size does matter.

I heard from some marketing guys, even sites that use only HTML, CSS, JavaScript need to be optimized to make loading time shorter. JavaScript frameworks also provide Minified source to minimize loading time.

Thanks for your suggestion.
Eric Bruno
author
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 15, 2009
Posts: 60
Thanks and I appreciate what you said about download sizes and time. It is indeed easy to get spoiled by high-speed Internet access. Remember also that with JavaFX you can easily build standalone GUI applications that can leverage your existing Java code. This eliminates the RIA-aspect of it. It will also work on mobile devices in the near future, which will be more appealing to those without high-bandwidth Internet connections to the desktop.
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Can Java FX compete with Flex?
 
Similar Threads
Does JavaFX require plugins?
Minimum Client Requirements
Should I install the complete JDK to run my application using Tomcat 5.0
Tomcat 6
Netbeans classpath problem