Talk:Java

From iA wiki

I hate Java.. I think it's garbage. I've never been impressed with anything any of it's forms have ever put out. Not one piece of java software, not one javascript.. nothing. There, I had to get that off of my chest, I feel much better.

Now if someone thinks my beliefs are misguided, please enlighten me. I don't like having such a negative opinion. I like microsoft more than I like java.. help me, I'm drowning in my own loathing.

Of course, on the other hand.. perhaps we need an anti-java page <code> =( </code> -- rack

---

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you. Nobody hates Java more than I do. --Erik

Wow, that's a pretty harsh attitude. What about server-side Java? Personally I hate Java in all of it's client-side incarnations (applets, apps, etc)... but when used on the server in servlets, JSPs or EJBs I really like it. Of course, my job consists primarily of directing Java software products so I'm a little biased. But still, if I need to code something quickly for personal use I always turn to Perl or Java first. My two cents. -- LukeyBoy

My brain hurts from essay work elsewhere, so I'll try to be monosyllabic. Hey wait.. doh.

I haven't had so much experience with Java that I can line bunches of apps and uses together and shoot them down. Server-side might be dandy and I wouldn't know, since some java stuff is buried very neatly away from user-perception. My opinions are based purely on using anything openly labelled as "java". -- rack

A few of our client-side applications runs in Java, and we test on 500MHz machines with 64MB RAM with pretty decent performance. Most of our clients have 1GHz+ computers with 128MB+ RAM and as far as they're concerned it's not a whole lot different to a native Windows app, aside from the fact it takes a bit longer to start up and each new window needs to be JIT compiled on its first use. When you're running the app all day it's no big deal. One of the biggest benefits is that we can have clients running all versions of Windows, Linux or anything else and the app doesn't need to be changed.

To me, it's server-side Java that's the truly stupid invention. Servers aren't like workstations - they stay the same all the time, and EVERY company (including Microsoft) has packages to allow compatibility with other operating systems because companies can't afford to have their servers go down, so write-once-run-anywhere is utterly pointless. Every JSP-served page i've ever visited takes forever to load, and i see absolutely no reason why it couldn't have been implemented in PHP or ASP or any of a million other proven server-side environments that perform much better. Oh well.

That said, Java sucks to program. Object-oriented is all well and good, but Java is structured in such a way that if you don't want to use something that is already in the API it's a massive pain in the ass to develop a custom object/package to do it. I can always get what i want done faster in C than in Java. It's a hell of a lot easier to trace through core dumps than to figure out what all kinds of obscure hidden API threads are trying to do. Even Windows API programming (not MFC) is better than that. -- Amw

Solaris vs Java: http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321

Oh man... I quite like Java (eek!). IMO, customizing Java API packages/objects is cool, and easy. You can just extend something similar, and and the extra functionality. As far as cross-platform compatibility goes, I've heard a lot of bi-atch-ing about Java and the problems people have had. IMO, these people need to learn to write better code =)!!! JIT compiling is obviously always going to be slower than ready-to-go, specific executable files, but, hey, everything's so bloated anyway these days, what's a nanosecond? Maybe I like it because it's named after coffee... [_]o TheDarkShirt

---

I do enjoy coding in Java. If I didn't have to deal with the stupid JVM, then Java would be really great. For some things, thus, GCJ is exactly what I want. See also JWZ's rant on Java, in which he points out that the name "Java" is used for a number of things which can be (and often ought to be) separated. -- mlc

It's a good rant. Yes, the JVM does suck. It's damned annoying having to declare possible throwing of an IOException every time you use System.in, when you know that the app is never going to be run over the internet, too... but I still like it. --TheDarkShirt

---

I'm sorry to have to tell you that Java and JavaScript, even though they sound similar, have nothing at all to do with each other.

Note: If you have no idea what you're talking about and just want to get attention (like this guy), please... STFU.

Confused? Are these comments both from the same person? And if so, who's it aimed at? Not me, I hope...=) and who mentioned anything about JavaScript anyway? If there is any misunderstanding, please note that I use app as an abbreviation of 'application', not applet... =) BTW, I'm not sure that STFU is a very helpful comment, particularly on a /Talk page... I dunno...or is the post by STFU? =) TheDarkShirt

OK...just checked previous revisions and they're from the same person. So I guess you're having a dig at me because you think the because I said 'run over the internet' you thought I was talking about JavaScript. I wasn't. Cool. Can we be friends now? --TheDarkShirt

Darkshirt: its not just you: I read this whole think looking for something about javascript but I didn't post anything because... well, its not directed at anything. This is obviously a confused poster. I mean, I suppose I like typing "STFU" as much as the next man but we need a context. CONTEXT. Webfork

Hmm... just read thru the whole thing again, and did find a JavaScript ref. Second line of the entire thing... so that could have a kind of valid application, then. But even so... gah! =) TheDarkShirt

Someone who can't use our formatting system to answer a statement BELOW the line that it was written has no sway with me. Webfork

Hence the 'Gah!' =) TheDarkShirt