Presentation: Ted Neward demos WPF-Java & other .NET+Java integrations
Watch Java + .NET, Why Exactly? (one hour)
Ted also wrote an article on InfoQ in the past covering some of these strategies at a higher level.
how to start with XAML?
thanks a lot in advance,
Re: how to start with XAML?
Bear in mind, too, that XAML is just a means of constructing objects via XML--there's nothing "WPF"-ish about it, as XAML itself can be used to construct other object models, including Workflows.
Could you provide the link for download including both video and transcript
Re: Could you provide the link for download including both video and transc
Who do we serve?
As Ted went through his demo though, I was overwhelmed by the amount of software employed to do something relatively simple. Of course his response would be that, well this is just a demo, in the real world we would be doing things much more complex than this. But in truth are we? And if we are, should we?
So Sun and Microsoft have kissed and made up, good for them. But does this technology fest actually meet the needs of our customers? I struggle to keep up with the proliferation of Java API's, never mind trying to learn the Microsoft ones as well, plus MS Office to boot.
I can see this stuff keeping consultants and developers busy for years, not to mention book authors, and trainers. I can't help feeling that we have become obsessed with our own navels, and have lost touch with the needs of our customers.
So we launch into more death march projects, overladen with our technology bandwagons, spending millions and delivering very little if at all. IMO I just don't see the nineties repeating themselves, some customers have learned the lessons, and are seeking small, simple, bottom-up solutions. For this I find more and more that I need to turn to open source technology, like Rails for instance.
Then again, there are others destined to repeat the mistakes of the past. They say that you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time. So we can choose to carry on serving ourselves with other peoples money, but surely it is only a matter of time before our customers wise up to the game!
BTW. I think Teds presentation is good and useful. I can see myself learning some of the technologies he mentioned just to further my career. My point though is that in the long run is this approach to 'job security' tenable and rewarding?
Re: Who do we serve?
Here's the thing--no, I seriously doubt anybody is going to go off to a brand-new, green-field project and say, "Let's generate a browsable WPF application from a Java servlet container!", just because it's fun. In a situation where existing application servers want to yield rich user interfaces back to Windows clients, however, this is a viable option, and, in many respects, may be simpler and easier to deliver than a full-out XML service-based solution (as a counterexample).
I guess what I'm drilling down to, is I assume that for any given technology "X", readers/listeners have already put the "caveat emptor" tag on it, regardless. :-)
Re: Who do we serve?
That's a fair response. Your article focused on Java and .NET interopability. As readers we can decide for ourselves. BTW there is some interesting competition in this space. Flex and Appollo are good alternatives to WPF, and Ruby/Rails and Flex interop is a good alternative to using Java or .NET on the server. Vista Smalltalk is also emerging as a good client side alternative that wraps both WPF and Flex. BTW I have noticed you posting on the Strongtalk discussion forum. Are you contributing to Strongtalk? and if so what are your plans?
Back to my original question, I think who we serve comes down to developer choice, and you can't make a real choice without a selection of viable alternatives. To me Java and .NET are just more of the same :^) Great article BTW, and I look forward to an article on Strongtalk perhaps?
New coming on this ground: eFace