Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Java Programming Sun Microsystems IT Technology

Sun Plans VB-Like Tools For Java 52

Posted by timothy from the click-move-done dept.
CokoBWare writes "Sun apparently is trying to create a more VB-like experience for developer. This article from E-Week explains Sun's strategy in providing more VBesque tools for the Java developer. Can anyone say "Good luck Sun, and all the best"?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sun Plans VB-Like Tools For Java More

Sun Plans VB-Like Tools For Java

Comments Filter:

  • Good idea. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by WasterDave ( 20047 ) <davep.zedkep@com> on Monday March 17, 2003 @03:57PM (#5531607)
    About four years too late, but hey.

    Dave
    • I thought Forte was already a VB-like environment?
    • 4 years, is that all [borland.com]

    • Yep, JAva most VB-like isn't that a kicker, after all the years of marketing hype on How JAva is "simple" language they come to this stunning realization..

      Java is toast on the client side, and is only going to survive on the server thanks to the likes of IBM and such.. Sun is too busy saving its own *ss to worry about Java

      Lets see how JAva plays out in the MicroDevices area.. if it dies, there you can sure bet java the number of Java programmers in the near future will be very few

  • VB-like? (Score:4, Funny)

    by fredrikj ( 629833 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @03:57PM (#5531608) Homepage
    Sun apparently is trying to create a more VB-like experience for developer.

    OK, is this a deliberate attempt to erase any positive feelings that anyone has ever had for Sun or Java?

    :)
    • Nonsense.

      This is about tools, not languages.

      Tools should make your life easier, not harder. Unfortunately, many Java IDEs fail to take this concept quite far enough.

      I've used NetBeans for several years, but having finished a few weeks of C# work, I am now missing the IDEs code folding.

      Yes, I know that's available in JEdit [jedit.org].

      In fact, that's part of the problem. Anything feature you could possibly want from a Java IDE is out there. Some in NetBeans [netbeans.org], some in Eclipse [eclipse.org], some in JEdit, some in Idea [intellij.com], (the list goe

  • Seriously, WTF? It's not like Java isn't braindead enough on its own [/flamebait].

    On a more serious note, I *really* don't understand the reasoning behind this decision on Sun's part. Any Java developers out there? What do you think about this?

    • Re:Umm... why? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by CokoBWare ( 584686 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @04:08PM (#5531723)
      Well as a VB developer (don't hit me please), I find that Java seems just a bit unapproachable. Now that I moved to VB.NET, I don't feel as dumb as I used to when it comes to OOP, so I think I could actually get into Java with 4 on the floor. Having a set of tools that make this transition easier for us VB developers would be beneficial for the Java market.

      However, I think that most IT departments won't care a hill of beans to migrate all their existing code to another codebase because the tools are good. I think this will bring newer projects online with Java, and create a bit more competition in the desktop application market. Look back to what C was with Windows 3.1... Visual Basic made Windows programming easy. If this is any indication, then the new Java tools will give developers a leg-up on cross-platform development with Java.

    • Re:Umm... why? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Gaetano ( 142855 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @04:20PM (#5531854)
      I work at a Java shop. At a government agency actually. There are a few people to whom anything that looks like C++ is too difficult for them. There are many developers who like java but there are those who would prefer something like VB.

      Those developers who are proficient with java could make the objects that those that aren't as proficient could use to piece together for their customers in semi-programmer business-analyst fashion.

      The business-analysts could stop writing crummy procedural based java code and use the simplified objects that other programmers make for them.

      This is already possible to some extent with java as it is, but for some people that we have here (who should perhaps be let go of, but I'm not in charge) they find java to be too complicated. Anything to make it easier for these people will make java programming more accessible to people with less programming skills which could be better for everybody.

      The

    • Re:Umm... why? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jbolden ( 176878 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @04:33PM (#5531964) Homepage
      I'm not a Java guy but I'm a strong believer in rapid development tools like VB. The why is simple. Often times applications are going to be used by a very small number of people or more generally for a small number of man hours over a larger number of people (say 10 people to run for 5 weeks and then never touch again). The cost of development can be a serious issue.

      Besides what's the real advantage of OO for GUIs if you aren't going to associated code objects with screen objects? And if you are going to do that why not just bind the code directly to the screen object? And if you are going to do that then why not just drag your object over and fill in a few boxes that ask questions?

      • a 4-GL like VB is good when all the groundwork has already been done, and focus must move towards the application. As a 3.5-level language, Java came at a moment when the basis had to be laid for a new environment: web, application servers (but not much more).

        Perhaps this new environment has now matured. If so, then there is no more reason for messing around with lower-level details. When the tehcnical infrastructure is the same for a large number of applications, then it is really time for a 4 GL.

        Ten y

    • Re:Umm... why? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by a hollow voice ( 112803 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @04:45PM (#5532053)
      Having worked in a VB shop during college while studying Java in class, I'd say one of the big reasons people use VB in a business environment is because of the relatively quick turnaround for GUI apps. There are lots of apps that get developed in certain business environments solely as simple data front-ends because the people working with the data are non-technical and need a nice interface, but the app is only expected to be needed for a few months, or maybe even weeks, so a full development cycle in a more robust language really isn't practical. What you toss together in VB may not be as efficient or elegant as it could have been, but it generally does what it needs to do and gets done fast.

      Sure Java can do a nice flexible cross-platform (in theory, anyway) GUI front end, but even setting aside the performance issues of Swing, it generally takes a good bit more time to set up than a comparable VB interface.

  • It's about time (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GOD_ALMIGHTY ( 17678 ) <(curt.johnson) (at) (gmail.com)> on Monday March 17, 2003 @04:29PM (#5531927) Homepage
    If this follows Sun's other attempts at engineering in the Java API's it should work pretty well.

    While EJBs and other API's have been a great way to create reusable components with lots of enterprise class features, the idea of writing 5 different classes where a lot of the information is repetitive then editing a global XML file or two was rediculous. Hopefully they'll take the XDoclet approach and include the meta information used to generate this stuff from a single file.

    It's really the same thing with 'JavaBeans', which I remember playing with in '97, the concept was really great but the extra maintenance on BeanInfo classes and such was a complete PITA.

    It seems to me that Sun has created a lot of flexibility and interoperability in their development kits, but they have never addressed the management of the complexity that it creates. The best thing the commercial world came up with was systems that were quick hacks tied to their development tools (WebSphere anyone?). The Open Source world has offered stuff like XDoclet, which has totally simplified these tasks, but it seems no one at Sun has noticed.

    I think Sun thought the commercial community would come up with the same level of engineering that they had in formulating their API's, now I think they realize that that market is still open and not only is it important to compete with the well-regarded tools MS puts out, but theres $$ to be made.

    Java should totally stomp .Net and C# for developing business systems, but the tools need to be on the same level. I guess you could say 'It's the tools, stupid!'. Maybe Sun will realize that decent development tools are the crack that MS has used to hook tons of developers and if equivilent tools were available to new Java developers (and experienced ones who hate tedium), the rate of adoption would pick up.
    • [quote]
      It's really the same thing with 'JavaBeans', which I remember playing with in '97, the concept was really great but the extra maintenance on BeanInfo classes and such was a complete PITA.
      [/quote]

      If Sun gave you the right tools to manage those PITA BeanInfo classes instead of the by-hand work you most likely had to deal with, you probably would think that the idea behind separating design-time classes from run-time classes was pretty sweet. Same is probably true with EJBs as well (although construct
      • That was my point. XDoclet allows the developer to control all of that by using JavaDoc tags in the code that will auto-generate the extra classes like BeanInfo and any XML needed. It's about the tools.

        My best guess is that Sun thought the commercial tool developers would rise to the challenge. Just goes to show, that if you want something done right you have to do it yourself. The only tool that has addressed this in a portable, non-proprietary manner is XDoclet.

        If you think the tools from Sun are better

  • Great! (Score:3, Funny)

    by psyconaut ( 228947 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @04:40PM (#5532012)
    Now we'll have all those idiot pseudo-programmers (the VB guys) trolling around Java mailing lists because they now think they can program in a real computer language!!! :-o

    [/sarcasm]

    -psy

    • Re:Great! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ansonyumo ( 210802 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @06:58PM (#5533083)
      Puh-leaze! Apparently you don't read those lists very often, the idiots are already out there. Lots of kiddos looking for people to do their CS homework for them.

      I done C, C++, assembly, LISP, BASIC, PERL, Ada and Java. My hands-down favorite platform for developing large projects is Java. Despite the jibes of your hardcore hands-on-the metal guys and your ivory tower OO bigots, Java is a powerful, high productivity language.

      The problem with it is that it's marketed "ease of use" brings a lot of subpar talent to the table under the guise of being able to code. It has also become the language of choice for many intro to programming classes. Hence, the unfavorable signal to noise ratio on the user boards.

  • Sun still following BEA (Score:4, Informative)

    by potsi ( 122137 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @05:00PM (#5532207) Homepage
    BEA is already pursuing this.

    The last two versions of BEA's WebLogic Platform included WebLogic Workshop, which is a 'VB Like' tool to make developing web applications and web services much easier.

    They even bought/hired a couple of ex-Microsoft guys to head the development effort.

    Maybe that is why it looks so much like Visual Studio...

    WebLogic Workshop [bea.com]

  • Java is VB by Sun.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pyrrho ( 167252 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @06:47PM (#5533000) Journal
    ... does this theory of mine make sense?

    Ok, done Sun's way might be the same as "done right", but then doing VB "right" is still a dubious achievment.

    And look the whole industry is VM hungry (when considering all the other scripting engines), with Sun's blessing. I'm not sure the herd is right on this one.

    And although Java is a resounding success on the server... has it made Sun any money?

  • JavaBeans anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ansonyumo ( 210802 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @06:48PM (#5533006)
    A VB-like experience was the whole motivation behind the introduction of JavaBeans back in '97. A JavaBean-compliant widget was supposed to be readily usable by GUI builders, a la the VB IDE.

    Heck, the marketese even claimed that a JavaBean widget could be used in VB via a COM bridge.

    Of course, none of this took off because Java never really caught on in the GUI world. Sure, you find Java GUIs now and again, but its main use has been server-side components.

    I can't imagine Sun is going to dramatically change the Java language. That would be suicide. I would imagine they are going to investigate technologies that are able to hide its complexity under a pretty IDE and possibly engineer a renewed push for the JavaBeans architecture as a GUI framework.

  • Uh oh... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Phantasmo ( 586700 ) on Monday March 17, 2003 @06:58PM (#5533073)
    We are working on tools that the historic visual developers will find very attractive. They will be all written in Java.

    I love Java on a fast machine, but most of the time I'm using a Pentium 2 with a 233MHz processor. I can't run jEdit, JBuilder or NetBeans on here because they're too damn slow!

    They should write it in C/C++. Most Java applications that I've used run just fine on this "bitty box", but IDEs and text-editors slow to a crawl.

    I guess what _I_ really need is JCreator [jcreator.com] to be ported to GNU/Linux.
    • I'm using a Pentium 2 with a 233MHz processor. I can't run jEdit, JBuilder or NetBeans on here because they're too damn slow!

      How much RAM have you got? I run jEdit on a 300MHz mobile P2 (which is probably comparable to a 233, when uplugged) with 128Megs RAM, and jEdit runs like a charm. I actually use NetBeans, too, although I must agree that it is very slow, but still usable if I really need to.

      If you don't run any of the slower plugins (like XML or SpeedJava), jEdit should run decently on your system
      • Make sure you're running the latest JVM, too. 4.01 had a ridiculous speed increase, to the point of wondering what the heck was wrong with all the previous versions.

        Gah, my fingers are faster than my brain, today. That should have been 1.4.1.
    • This is silly.

      I work on a Pentium 200.

      Java is fast enough on it to se no difference to Visual C++ in the IDE.

      I have 128MB RAM, however and a SCSI system ... no idea if that should change anything.

      angel'o'sphere
  • I think some are getting a little too excited over this. Knock MS all you want, but they do have intelligent people who put out good tools with nice features...I mean, the tool alone made VB as popular as it has become, not the VB technology itself. MS took a few pages out of Sun's book on technology, it's only fitting for Sun to take a few pages out of MS's book on tools. -Chris

  • I've just gotten interested in Jython [jython.org], although I've been using Java and Python (separately) for quite a while. I can't believe I came to it this late. Imagine having the simplicity of an award-winning [fsf.org] dynamically-typed yet fully object-oriented scripting language at your finger tips for busting out scripts and relatively simple code, but with complete "native" access to Java libraries. (Quotes because it seems oxymoronic to use the word "native" to refer to Java.)

    It's not quite the same as VB or even J

  • Apple did something very similar to this when they adapted their Applescript scripting language into an actual programming language for OS X.

    I'd learned some Basic around 10 years ago and I was quite intimidated when I found that the only programming languages usable for Mac OS X were Java and Objective-C. Then Apple came out with AppleScript Studio, which finally enabled me to write real programs with a GUI interface.

    I'm now coming back around to learn C and Objective-C, but it's AppleScript Studio t

  • yart, anybody? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kungfoobar ( 560698 ) on Tuesday March 18, 2003 @04:24PM (#5539553)
    Does the world really need Yet Another RAD Tool? I can't speak fully for the Swing/Awt world, but the medium-sized Java projects I've been on was developed with textpad and apache ant.

    One of the beautiful things about Java/C++/SmallTalk is that you just can't start coding in it. For most people, it takes time to learn. But when you do learn it, and learn it correctly, you'll start to think in terms of coding for the sake of the interface, instead of coding for the hell of it.

    With RAD tools, it's super easy to start coding what's in your head at the time being, making up classes and methods as you go. Why not global variables? You may start out coding for a prototype. This prototype doesn't get redesigned, let alone refactored for the actual implementation ('cause hey, we already have it 50% done). Then the next thing you know, you have bloatware. Then you leave your job, and some poor schmuck has to maintain your 'code'.

    I didn't fully understand why you had to do so much in Swing to do so little until I read the GOF Patterns book. Most everything in the Swing API is an abstract pattern of some sort. When you create prototypes in Swing, you can't take a lot of things for granted. You actually have to think things through. And that, you just cannot rapidly do, initially.

    But when you do understand the fundamentals, prototypes can be refactored or easily redesigned to fit the implementation. Of course, this means that the software engineer that develops the prototype must have some working knowledge of the API or framework. It means that you just can't have your average "learn XXXX in 24 hours" code monkey start the software process. It means RAD is not a tool, but a way of thinking. I professionally build prototypes for projects using textpad and ant. Much of which can be extended for the actual implementation.

Slashdot Top Deals

The goal of Computer Science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.

Close