Talk:Java (software platform)
The article's quality is appalling! sentences and language use are pretty bad. This will need some work! Npovmachine 16:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I felt it necessary to significantly modify the Language section of this page to address perceived bias and better reflect the more thorough Java programming language article. In addition, I may have inadvertantly inserted my own bias by promulgating the "less-pure" meme. Please feel free to do what you will.
--gortsack 20:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
- You edits were on target, you just didn't go far enough. :-) I worked on it some more, but it was pretty poorly worded compared to the Java programming language article that most of this content was taken from. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 18:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
problems!
I disagree very strongly with the following statement made in the article:
Standalone applications have fallen out of favor as computing has switched to a Web-based model. New programming techniques have produced powerful Web applications....
The advent of portable drives, knoppix, etc. contradicts the preceding statement. The demand for small, self-contained, and portable binaries is higher than ever. Take for example, utorrent.
(The following paragraph contradicts itself, and my own personal experience is that 1.5 and 5.0 apps don't get along with just one JRE, so I purposefully avoid all Java to preclude 500Mb of JRE ;) )
...Because of incompatibilities between different versions of the JRE, rather than rely on pre-installed JREs, many applications install their own JREs in order to function predictably. Java applets can detect which version of Java they are running on and the high level of compatibility between different versions of Java ensures it is a simple matter to support older versions of Java whilst making use of the additional features of later versions.
- I've found a high level of compatibility between Java versions, to the extent that the same byte code runs on all versions. See Clesh for one example (needs broadband). Also, services like Google mail and in fact Google itself have become more popular and these are web based applications. Stephen B Streater 22:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
why isnt OOo being mentioned as a good example for a nice java-desktop app?
- because it isn't one, its a C++ app that happens to use a tiny bit of java for its scripting functionaility. Plugwash 23:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I have suffered from the JRE incompatibility problems referred to above, but not being an expert in Java, I've added cleanup tags to two sections, and added fact tags to some statements. In fact some compatibilty claims in the article are directly counter to my experiences but I guess that would be OR. -Wikianon 11:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
don't merge
we tried having the top level java article and the programming language as one article and it was frankly a mess with the "java as a whole" people constantly fighting over what the article should contain with the "java programming language" people.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Plugwash (talk • contribs) 23:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC).
I agree, so I'm removing the merge tags. Someone can always readd the merge and include reasons that might gain consensus in the two Talk pages. -Wikianon 11:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)