JavaFX Future

i did not understand properly, what is the future of javafx???\
and why javafx is look like a seprate language???

With JavaFX 2 being released, its no longer a separate language instead Its an API in Java.
There's an option to Declaratively build the UI using XML based syntax- FXML.
For more information you can read through the announcements at http://javafx.com/

for the future , this is the good concept to implement ??? and why many java programmers does not like this ???

Jimmy kalra wrote:for the future , this is the good concept to implement ???

What concept?

Jimmy kalra wrote:and why many java programmers does not like this ???

What gave you that impression?

Also, one question mark is sufficient to denote a question. Using multiple punctuation just makes you appear childish, and I'm sure you wouldn't want that.

Adding to what Darryl posted,

One thing which was concluded at the JavaOne 2011 (i read the observations of few of the attendees, another one here) is that Swing is no longer going to be improved or worked upon, instead its going to be JavaFX.

Also as its an API in Java now, it would be more likely adopted by lot of Java developers, unlike previous versions which required one to learn JavaFX Script.

javafx is act like flex with java???

sorry for wrong punctuation mr.Darryl Burke . thanks for suggest me.

Jimmy kalra wrote:javafx is act like flex with java?

Yes to some extent. But Flex doesn't provide for building standalone desktop applications. For Desktop they have Adobe AIR. But as far as I am aware, JavaFX should run in a browser or as a standalone on desktop.
I dont know how much JavaFX is different from Adobe technologies behind the scenes.

None of whatever JavaFX 2 (or subsequent versions in the foreseeable future) adds will be able to change the fact that Java on the client (whether as standalone apps, JNLP or applets) is dead. Frankly, I don't get why the resources being used for JavaFX are not applied to improving Swing. Making client-side developers go through a transition doesn't help, either, IMO.

Tim Moores wrote:None of whatever JavaFX 2 (or subsequent versions in the foreseeable future) adds will be able to change the fact that Java on the client (whether as standalone apps, JNLP or applets) is dead. Frankly, I don't get why the resources being used for JavaFX are not applied to improving Swing. Making client-side developers go through a transition doesn't help, either, IMO.

I dont think developing Swing would be useful either. I see JavaFX as a more improved version of Swing and I dont see it any wrong in taking its development further. May be one would have to learn new set of APIs, or new ideas of creating UI, but IMO shouldn't it be worth the effort? There are lot of improvements behind the scenes for JavaFX which I have not gone into much details.

Tim Moores wrote:None of whatever JavaFX 2 (or subsequent versions in the foreseeable future) adds will be able to change the fact that Java on the client (whether as standalone apps, JNLP or applets) is dead. Frankly, I don't get why the resources being used for JavaFX are not applied to improving Swing. Making client-side developers go through a transition doesn't help, either, IMO.

I don't think Oracle would agree with you. I think that they have floundered here for many years, but I don't think that it is too late to reclaim this space. This is all opinion and speculation on my part, but I feel like Flex is dying. I believe that this adds incremental opportunity to viable players in this space, and I believe that Oracle is committed to making JavaFX viable. This means being a player on the desktop, browser and mobile spaces all in one platform. That's huge.

I think that the reason for JavaFX relates to the complexity and heaviness of Swing. I don't think Swing can play effectively in all these spaces and that Oracle is playing the long game here.

Time will tell.

- Pat

Mohamed Sanaulla wrote:

Jimmy kalra wrote:javafx is act like flex with java?

Yes to some extent. But Flex doesn't provide for building standalone desktop applications. For Desktop they have Adobe AIR. But as far as I am aware, JavaFX should run in a browser or as a standalone on desktop.
I dont know how much JavaFX is different from Adobe technologies behind the scenes.

Personally, I don't why this is different than JavaFX's dependency on Java and it's associated runtimes. It's all bootstrapping and what matters to me is how transparent the desktop can make this appear. If I can click on an icon, the app comes up and is robust, lively and does what I want, I don't care what's under the hood as a user.

- Pat