Yes. See also Sun's recently announced Project X.
> that I want to get Java development tools on my desktop
Again? Where did they go? Darn JDK always wandering off... mobile
objects, humph. I suggest the old ball-n'-chain technique - crude
> So I went surfing for +linux +Java.
www.blackdown.org is the "definitive" JDK on Linux, though OpenGroup
has a port too. Currently supported is JDK1.1.7 on x86,PPC, with
older JDK1.1s on Sparc & Alpha. Green& native threads as of 1.1.7.
JDK1.2 is expected out on Intel from blackdown within the month.
Blackdown is also a good source of general Linux/Java info - they
have links for IDEs, JITs and other tools, and they run a pretty
decent mailing list.
You realize that Sun is now recongizing Linux as an "official"
platform? (That apparently boils down to donating a couple of
Sun engineers to work directly with the Blackdown folks, early
source releases, etc.)
You may also want to check siliware.com for "big iron" (eg
Java/Linux. They're also starting to bang the Jini drum.
> The most
> interesting thing I found was Squeak. Kept me up till 4am.
IMHO, and this is just an opinion, Squeak will suffer the same
fate as Smalltalk itself, Objective-C, Python, Eiffel and all the
other 'really cool but not-quite-mainstream' OO languages. A small,
zealous developer community, a handful of moderately successful
shops doing apps & support, but never really going anywhere.
Languages are about 1-per-half-decade. The early 80s belonged to C,
the late 80s & early 90s to C++, the mid-90s-to early-00s to Java.
Squeak doesn't have a niche right now - Java is just "good enough",
and too widespread to be taken down soon.
Oh, and sorry for disturbing your Busy-ness. Automated response
received recently from Daniel W. Connolly:
> Re: Mobile Document Application Lanugage (IBM research)
> Tue, 29 Dec 1998 16:15:19 -0500
> "Daniel W. Connolly" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> 1 , 2
> According to my records, this is the first email
> message I've received from you since 19 Aug 1998.
Unless you count the garbage I send you via the FoRK archive.
> If your message regards one of my present commitments,
> I will make every attempt to respond within two working
> days, unless I feel it can wait until our next meeting.
Take your time, April 2004 should be fine.
> Otherwise, I may not be able to provide
> more than this automated resonse without putting
> my present commitments at risk.
Well, we wouldn't want that now!
> If you are inviting me to speak, write, or otherwise
> take on a new commitment, please bear in mind that
> I travel at most once per month, so if the
> month of your event is already taken, I will
> most probably decline.
> Perhaps my home page has the information you need;
> here's a summary as of
> Dan Connolly
> I work here at W3C, mostly on XML and Web Architecture.
> May '99: WWW8, Toronto
Hogtown doin' it.
> Dec '98: W3C Query Languages Workshop, Cambridge MA
Nobbin' with the finest in New England
> Nov '98: XML '98, Chicago
Whooosh! the wind!
> ... past appearances and events, bio, W3C Appearances
> Publications and Writings
> Oct '98: The XML Revolution in Nature's Web Matters
> Oct '97: XML: Principles, Tools, and Techniques
> Nov '95: HTML 2.0
> Sep '95: Cite a Source!
> ... other publications and writings
> Software Releases: Share and Enjoy!
> Mar '98: Larch Traits for XML, RDF, URIs (in progress)
> ... www_and_frame, socks for python and others
> I intend to sue those who spam my mailbox. I do not give my time to phone
Gee, the spammers are quaking. "I intend to sue" - somehow
doesn't exactly instill great dread, does it?
> W3C Team: See my status page.
> Dan Connolly
> created Feb 1994
> last revised $Date: 1998/12/10 17:35:10 $
> If you need a response from me personally, right away,
> please send a short message to mailto:email@example.com .
> Be sure your phone number is in the first 200 characters.
> If you just need a response from somebody at W3C, see:
> "How to Contact the W3C"
> for contact info for other folks that may be able to help you.
> [This is an automated reply. I realize this allows
> spammers to confirm my address, but I claim
> Copyright (c) 1998 Daniel W. Connolly
> and I do not grant your right to use this
> message for that purpose. I intend
> to sue those who spam my mailbox in any case.]
So how much trouble am I in here, anyway? Can we just settle out