Skip to main content

How quickly will JavaFX be adopted as a rich client technology?

It's growth will be explosive
4% (27 votes)
Eventually it will be a dominant technology
13% (79 votes)
It will endure as a secondary option
22% (139 votes)
It will never be widely used
53% (325 votes)
What's JavaFX?
4% (24 votes)
I don't know; other
4% (25 votes)
Total votes: 619

Comments

Not what I expected

I am an experienced Java developer and just programmed a small private project in JavaFX - about 6 different scenes, using a mix of input fields and graphical design and interaction elements. I hoped that developing in JavaFX might be easier for me than using ActionScript, but I was disappointed. The only real benefit I saw was that you are able to use normal Java classes and thus can employ the well-known JSE libraries. On the downside,
  • you have to deploy using web technology (WebStart or Applets) and cannot just hand out a file
  • the language seems to be thrown together on a whim and does not cater to the Java-savvy (optional semicolons and keywords like "insert... into..." & "delete... from..." when methods would have done the trick nicely, completely different notation for function parameters and return types, constants and variable declarations - don't get me started)
  • generated Java code is horrible to debug (lots of anonymous inner classes)
  • there are no good development tools yet
  • GUI layouting is still very inflexible
  • the dependencies between your object instances remain vague, and even more so towards system-managed objects like the Stage
  • the documentation still is lacking for language featues - see "at" and "tween", for example
I think that there is still a lot of work to be done on JavaFX and that there is quite some potential, but some design decision that were already made have actually turned me off.

Not enough components...

JavaFX (Desktop) is still very dependent on Swing components, which are few and very dificult to customise and skin. I still can't change from Adobe Flex to JavaFX just because there's this lack of components with this features.

Not enough components...

"Swing components, which are few and very dificult to customise and skin." There's a huge plentiful of Swing components if you look at third parties' libraries (such as SwingX) and Swing components, if well designed (SwingX stuff is), are easy to customize and skin. Skinnability is powerful with Nimbus (included in the runtime), but also look for instance at Substance or other similar projects.

Depends

It depends what Oracle decides to do with it. The inherent advantages that JavaFX has over its competitors is its integration into the JVM and class library, and the mobile component, which shares the same API as the desktop component. If Oracle invests enough resources into it and doesn't interfere with Sun engineers, then it will be widely deployed in Java shops, especially for intranet RIA's. I can also see Google adapting it for its webaps as Google realizes that Web 2.0 will hit a wall, and that the latest HTML/CSS/JavaScript standards are not sufficient to build true RIA's.

Depends

It depends what Oracle decides to do with it. The inherent advantages that JavaFX has over its competitors is its integration into the JVM and class library, and the mobile component, which shares the same API as the desktop component. If Oracle invests enough resources into it and doesn't interfere with Sun engineers, then it will be widely deployed in Java shops, especially for intranet RIA's. I can also see Google adapting it for its webaps as Google realizes that Web 2.0 will hit a wall, and that the latest HTML/CSS/JavaScript standards are not sufficient to build true RIA's.