[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Actually I think XAML is more of a threat to Java WebStart than anything
else, unless MS drops support for conventional HTML/CSS or stops
expanding it and lets it stagnate.
I think healthy competition is good for Java. Sun has been a lot more
arrogant than Microsoft; Sun makes a lot of noise, and very little
progress. Microsoft takes a good technology, learns from the lessons of
their competitors, and comes up with a good alternative that is well
documented and well supported.
I worked on a XUL app earlier this year -- there is hardly any
documentation out there, the implementation is buggy, and you can't mix
XUL and XHTML cleanly because JavaScript DOM treats XHTML, XUL and XML
differently.
So, I can certainly see Microsoft learning a few ideas from XUL, XForms,
etc. and coming up with what they believe is a better technology and
making it incredibly easy for developers to use. Compare it with
competing technologies... XAML will probably work wonderful from within
Dev Studio, while for everything else you need to use Vi and your best
judgement as to whether your XML is correct or not.
I hate Microsoft as much as everyone else, but unless W3C standards are
accompanied by tools and documentation that makes it really easy for
developers to use them, W3C will be irrelevant (just like U.S vs. U.N.)
. What is the use for, say, an XForms standard if nothing useful
supports it and there are hardly any tools for XForms development ? Same
goes for XUL, Cocoon, and just about everything else out there.
(disclaimer: XForms has a lot more issues, it seems, than lack of tools,
but it is a different topic for a conversation).
So, how to fight back and ensure that your GUI apps work across all
platforms ? Use Java applets and XUL via Luxor; help document things
like XUL and Cocoon. Documentation is the only way to keep Microsoft at
bay (Linux is a perfect example, but it took advantage of the
availability of UNIX documentation).
Oleg
P.S.: I am one of those users who use Mozilla 1.5 , Mac OS X, and Linux,
and disable popups, images, and all plugins and are only interested in
textual content. But for userland applications, I certainly prefer to
develop for IE/Windows because that is what the users expect AND because
it is so well documented.
Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> clbullar@ingr.com (Bullard, Claude L (Len)) writes:
>
>>Why is it a good thing if the XULies do it and
>>a bad thing if MS does it? Neither invented it
>>so the "copied XUL" arguments are horsefeathers.
>
>
> I'm more annoyed about the copied XHTML+SVG+XForms+whatever else you'd
> like to put in the stew. XUL is the least of it to me. The part that
> matters is that they appear to be reinventing for the sole reason of
> making it theirs, proprietary, kicking out the NIH.
>
> The goalposts have been high before. None of that's new. All that I
> see changing here is ownership.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
|
