dunno much about linux

[Ender]

And I did not know it could do other languages. Downloading the JDK normally comes with an offer to download Eclipse, so the thought of "Eclipse is for programming in Java" stuck to my head. Ignorance I suppose on my behalf.

Actually Sun doesn't affiliate with Eclipse because they're open-source. They advertise NetBeans and some other crappy IDEs but not Eclipse. And I have to say, Eclipse is definitely awesome but it's not necessarily the best Java IDE. IntelliJ IDEA is pretty sweet but you have to pay for it... I'm basing my opinion off of the free trial. All heavy-hitting IDEs are bulky, so I stick with Vim, Emacs, or Notepad++ when my projects aren't huge.

Hmm... I just exhausted my quote-quota. Back to @'s.

@newby:
Well, of course you don't have Java stuff on your computer. Microsoft doesn't package it with Windows because Sun's a competitor, many linux distros don't automatically package it because it's not open-source, and you don't download any Java apps because you're morally opposed to Java.

@myndfyre, newby
Newby said Java was a crappy language. I said .NET should be shot. All in good gesture.

@java haters
http://www.sun.com/java/everywhere/

[Newby]

Actually Sun doesn't affiliate with Eclipse because they're open-source. They advertise NetBeans and some other crappy IDEs but not Eclipse.

Ah, that was the craphole IDE they package it with. My mistake!

@newby:
Well, of course you don't have Java stuff on your computer. Microsoft doesn't package it with Windows because Sun's a competitor, many linux distros don't automatically package it because it's not open-source, and you don't download any Java apps because you're morally opposed to Java.

I always thought the Microsoft Java Virtual Machine came with my computer, since it's always upgraded in Windows Update, but I don't know how that compares to the real JVM.

Java came with Slackware, so I use it when I need to use Java programs.

I am not morally opposed to Java. Java runs fine in Linux. It just runs like shit in Windows. And I run JavaOp daily (well, used to) so eh?

No comment at the Sun site. Sun is a dying company (cutting 4-5K jobs to "continue profitability", that's a damn good company!) so their only flagship at this point is Java. I would be proud of it too, personally.

[rabbit]

The reason Java is praised as such a great language is that once compiled, you can run it on any system with the JVM.  Programs don't have to be recompiled for each arch or distro: they just work.  The tradeoff: a slow, bulky language, with too much emphasis on objects.  I actually looked forward to Java for a while, but after taking a class to learn it and using it hands-on for a year, I realised it sucks.  The end.

[MyndFyre]

The reason Java is praised as such a great language is that once compiled, you can run it on any system with the JVM.  Programs don't have to be recompiled for each arch or distro: they just work.  The tradeoff: a slow, bulky language, with too much emphasis on objects.  I actually looked forward to Java for a while, but after taking a class to learn it and using it hands-on for a year, I realised it sucks.  The end.

Note that this is true about .NET too. 

[rabbit]

Really?  O.  Whatever.  Java still bugs me -.-

[Rule]

Platform independence is way too over-rated.  Most code in C, C++,  (or any decent language) will compile without any problems on 99% of the platforms people use.  In arguments, frothing Java supporters often say "platform independence" as though that phrase is supposed to bring about pause and mould one's expression into an image of mystical awe and appreciation, when it's really more like a 20 cent discount coupon that may or may not come with the pizza you order.

[MyndFyre]

Platform independence is way too over-rated.  Most code in C, C++,  (or any decent language) will compile without any problems on 99% of the platforms people use.  In arguments, frothing Java supporters often say "platform independence" as though that phrase is supposed to bring about pause and mould one's expression into an image of mystical awe and appreciation, when it's really more like a 20 cent discount coupon that may or may not come with the pizza you order.

Well, Java (and .NET) are theoretically binary platform-independent with the given runtime, whereas C and C++ are not.

In theory.

[rabbit]

Platform independence is way too over-rated.  Most code in C, C++,  (or any decent language) will compile without any problems on 99% of the platforms people use.  In arguments, frothing Java supporters often say "platform independence" as though that phrase is supposed to bring about pause and mould one's expression into an image of mystical awe and appreciation, when it's really more like a 20 cent discount coupon that may or may not come with the pizza you order.

It's because it doesn't have to be recompiled on each system, like C/++ do.

[Joe]

if you know what you are doing

Nailed 'er on the head.

[Newby]

if you know what you are doing

Nailed 'er on the head.

Well, the same could be said about Windows, so really I didn't nail anything on the head. That's common sense.

That's like saying "nailed it on the head" because I said "if you work hard you will do a better job than if you do not try" :/.

[Rule]

It's because it doesn't have to be recompiled on each system, like C/++ do.

My point was that the amount of re-compiling that happens is minimal, and not really an issue anyways when it has to be done.

[nslay]

It's because it doesn't have to be recompiled on each system, like C/++ do.

My point was that the amount of re-compiling that happens is minimal, and not really an issue anyways when it has to be done.

It really depends.  A large project can take hours to compile.

[Newby]

It's because it doesn't have to be recompiled on each system, like C/++ do.

My point was that the amount of re-compiling that happens is minimal, and not really an issue anyways when it has to be done.

It really depends.  A large project can take hours to compile.

Or, in the case of KDE, a millenium or so.

[Joe]

if you know what you are doing

Nailed 'er on the head.

Well, the same could be said about Windows, so really I didn't nail anything on the head. That's common sense.

That's like saying "nailed it on the head" because I said "if you work hard you will do a better job than if you do not try" :/.

Not always true. IE, someone's parent just died, and you try to comfort them but you end up getting bitchslapped because something came out wrong.

[mynameistmp]

I was reading some material for work and stumbled upon this which turned out to be a semi-decent read:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0374292795/ref=sib_dp_top_toc/104-0504079-8892722?ie=UTF8&p=S00D#reader-link

Chapter 2, "Flattener #4" is really all that's pertaining to this discussion, though the book was good in general.

The principal logical fallacy that I notice in these discussions (open source vs closed source, windows vs linux, etc, whatever you want to call it) is one that seems to work both ways. For some reason, the Windows supporters seem to think that Linux users should want more market share. And for some reason, most Linux users think we should too, and so argue that we will somehow obtain that market share. I sincerely doubt a non-profit organization is going to dominate any market, especially since market domination (nor profit) is the objective of the organization. I also don't know why anyone cares if Linux gets the market share or not.

Personally, I've preferred Linux for years now. I couldn't care less what the rest of you are running, or how much you're paying for it. The way you guys push the market share thing it seems like I should go buy a Chevy Cavalier, because the majority of people use them, therefore they must be the best. That is a stupid premise for purchasing cars, and even so, cars are much less ambiguous in terms of personal use and application. A one OS/software foundation fits all idea is just a little bit far-fetched. You guys are indirectly implying that Windows must be better because the majority of people use it. We believe you that the majority of people do, stop trying to argue that. However, I definitely do not use my PC to the same ends as Ma and Pa 150 million AOL users, so it would be surprising to me if I used the same OS/software. I'm also not the least bit surprised that Windows is, in fact, "better" for Ma and Pa 150 million. It's not better for me though. Quite frankly, I think it sucks. Sort of like Chevy Cavaliers. Anyways...

Basically, if you touch on the policy vs mechanism aspect, Windows is always going to have problems as long as it tries to combine all of that functionality into one OS, then instill enough policy to keep Ma and Pa happy. I think either you're a family car, or you're a race car. Not a mini-van with 400hp. Note that many Linux distributors are worse than Windows for this.