Related
I'm currently planing an application (brainstorming, more or less), designed to be used in small organizations. The app will require syncronization w/ a backend-server, e.g. for user management and some advanced, centralized functionality. This server has to be hosted locally and should be able to run on Linux, Mac and Windows. I haven't decided how I'm going to realize this, mainly I simply don't know which would be the smartest approach.
Technically speaking, a very interessting approach seemed to be node.js + mongoose, connecting to a local MongoDB. But this is where I'm struggeling: How do I ensure that it's easy and convienient for a organization's IT to set this up?
Installing node.js + MongoDB is tedious work and far from standartized and easy. I don't have the ressources to provide a detailled walthrough for every major OS and configuration or do take over the setup myself. Ideally, the local administrator should run some sort of setup on the machine used as server (a "regular" PC running 24/7 should suffice) and have the system up and running, similar to the way some games provide executables for hosting small game-servers for a couple friends (Minecraft, for instance).
I also thought about Java EE, though I haven't dug into an details here. I'm unsure about whether this is really an option.
Many people suggest to outsource the backend (BaaS), e.g. to parse.com or similar services. This is not an option, since it's mandatory that the backend will be hosted locally.
I'm sorry if this question is too unspecific, but unfortunately, I really don't know where to start.
I can give you advice both from the sysadmin's side and the developers side.
Sysadmin
Setting up node.js is not a big task. Setting up a MongoDB correctly is. But that is not your business as an application vendor, especially not when you are a one man show FOSS project, as I assume. It is an administrators task to set up a database, so let him do it. Just tell them what you need, maybe point out security concerns and any capable sysadmin will do his job and set up the environment.
There are some things you underestimate, however.
Applications, especially useful ones, tend to get used. MongoDB has many benefits, but being polite about resources isn't exactly one of them. So running on a surplus PC may work in a software development company or visual effects company, where every workstation has big mem, but in an accountant company your application will lack resources quite fast. Do not make promises like "will run on your surplus desktop" until you are absolutely, positively sure about it because you did extensive load tests to make sure you are right. Any sensible sysadmin will monitor the application anyway and scale resources up when necessary. But when you make such promises and you break them, you loose the single most important factor for software: the users trust. Once you loose it, it is very hard to get it back.
Developer
You really have to decide whether MongoDB is the right tool for the job. As soon as you have relations between your documents, in which the change of of document has to be reflected in others, you have to be really careful. Ask yourself if your decision is based on a rational, educated basis. I have seen some projects been implemented with NoSQL databases which would have been way better of with a relational database, just because NoSQL is some sort of everybody's darling.
It is a FAR way from node.js to Java EE. The concepts of Java EE are not necessarily easy to grasp, especially if you have little experience in application development in general and Java.
The Problem
Without knowing anything about the application, it is very hard to make a suggestion or give you advice. Why exactly has the mongodb to be local? Can't it be done with a VPC? Is it a webapp, desktop app or server app? Can the source ode be disclosed or not? How many concurrent users per installation can be expected? Do you want a modular or monolithic app? What are your communication needs? What is your experience in programming languages? It is all about what you want to accomplish and which services you want to provide with the app.
Simple and to the point: Chef (chef solo for vagrant) + Vagrant.
Vagrant provides a uniform environment that can be as closed to production as you want and Chef provides provisioning for those environments.
This repository is very close to what you want: https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost-Vagrant
There are hundreds of thousands of chef recipes to install and configure pretty much anything in the market.
I always seem to have this internal struggle when it comes to user interface. I build up an application "engine" and tend to defer user interface to after I get my algorithms working. Then I go back and forth trying to decide how to let a user interact with my program. Personally, I'm a fan of the command line, but I can't expect that of my users generally.
I really like what's possible in the browser in the age of web 2.0 and ajax. On the other hand it's not so hard to make a Swing front-end either, and you can generally count on a more consistent presentation to the user (though using a good javascript framework like YUI or jQuery goes a long way toward normalizing browsers).
Clearly both approaches have their merits and drawbacks. So, what criteria / parameters / situations should lead me to use a lightweight (e.g. web-based) GUI? What criteria / parameters / situations should lead me to use a heavier (e.g. Swing-based) GUI?
It is not my intent to start a flame war, merely interested in the community's constructive/objective opinions.
Edit #1
In light of the first few responses, I would like to clarify that I would like to deploy my application regardless, not host it on some internet server necessarily. So I would have to deploy with a light-weight web-server infrastructure a la Jetty/Tomcat or similar.
It depends on the application and this is essentially a usability driven question (though there are considerations like data storage and platform requirements). Think of the pros and cons.
Pros of a lightweight Web UI:
Ease of distribution
Platform independent
Ease of maintenance
Cons of a lightweight Web UI:
Less environmental control
Markup standards vary between browsers
Requires a web server and everything that goes with it
Pros of an executable UI
More environmental control (i.e.: full screen applications, etc)
Not necessarily subject to latency and outages
Cons of an executable UI
Pushing updates may be more difficult
Requires installation
Potential platform requirements (frameworks, packages, etc)
Potentially requires knowledge of advanced networking topics (web services, etc)
One small factor you may want to consider is that the user will have go through some type of installation (albeit minimal) if you distribute a swing application.
Also a web application will allow you to accurately track the usage of your application (via google analytics or something similar). Not sure if that's a concern but it may be useful to you in the future.
If it is a client-server application I would normally go for a web frontend for the application.
You will save yourself of countless problems with things like installed JRE versions, distributing upgrades, application permissions, disappeared shortcuts...
You need to break the requirements of the application down to decide this...
Do the users have Java of sufficient version installed? It will need to be, to run a Swing GUI.
Do you have a web server?
Do you need the flexibility of a Swing GUI or the accessibility of the web interface?
Is Java Webstart and option, if so, you can distribute a Swing GUI via the web.
Does your application perform extensive calculations or processing? If so, a client app may be the answer.
There are a million questions such as these. I would suggest a brain storming session and keeping track of all the pros and cons of each, adding a point score, than throwing it all away and going with your gut feeling :)
If you anticipate there being frequent updates to the app then web based may be better since the user would not have to update the client or install a new client containing the updates.
If you think that the user may need the ability to use the app while not conencted to the internet then swing would be better.
Just two things off the top of my head.
Think about the users and use cases of your project.
Do users expect to have access to it when they're disconnected from the Internet (for example, on an airplane or in a coffee shop with no Internet access)? Use Swing.
Do you want users to be able to access the same tool from different computers (for example, both at work and at home)? Use a web UI.
Also consider whether the user needs to save and load data, and whether the tool produces data files that some might consider sensitive (if so, storage on the web might be an issue).
Do make a quick guess I often try to ask myself/customers if the application has a high "write" demand.
For a mostly read-only application a thin-client solution is perfectly well suited.
But if a lot write actions are needed then a swing desktop application has more flexibility.
Personally I always prever a swing desktop application. It can easily deployed using Java Webstart.
Not knowing anything about your application I can not give the best recommendation possible. However I can state from personal/professional experience that installing an application on clients machines is a LOT more of a pain in the ass than it seems.
With AJAX/web you really only have to worry about supporting like three browsers. Installation messes/updates are only felt once when you deploy the product to the web server.
With like a stand-along Swing app, you get to deal with the really really big mess that is installing the application onto unknown systems. This mess was so bad that things like AJAX were really pushed along to make web apps behave/feel like a real native app.
Alright, so I am a compsci college student who, being in college, has not branched out towards a certain specialization yet. I have been programming since I was a young teenager, certainly know my stuff - well versed in about eight different languages as well as compsci theory, etc. In addition, I have about four years of web programming (PHP mainly) behind me, having started freelance work in that area since web 2.0 became hot.
My summer job now as an intern of sorts is to write an application for an industrial, not software-related startup. This application will be used to manage production lines and logistics flow. I have chosen Java for my language because I don't want to shoot myself in the foot.
I am well-versed in the syntax of Java, in its data structures, language theory, and such, but I have absolutely no idea where to start. I can picture the program perfectly in my mind, I understand the problem clearly and got the solution's theory nailed. Namely, I have no idea what libraries to use, and am scared that they won't be well documented.
Here are some general outlines of what I'm going to make:
Two applications, one server and one
client (of which there will be many
copies).
The server and clients obviously will
communicate via (I don't know).
Both the server and the client
software will have GUIs.
The server software will have to
query a MySQL database.
The client software must be 'live' in
the sense that the GUI updates when a
change is made to the database. This
is one of the reasons why it can't be
a web application.
I'm not even sure if a framework is right for me or not. I've used MVC tons of times in my web freelance work, but I dont know how that will translate for desktop applications.
In short, I'm looking for the right libraries for the job, as well as advice on whether or not I should use a framework (and if so, which). Thanks.
This is a summer intern job? To be honest, this sounds more like a major project if you ask me. You say the start-up is not software related? Who came up with this idea? Do they have any idea of the (huge) scope that something like this might actually entail?
The business of software development is something quite different to language syntax and libraries. It's about requirements gathering, defining a spec, writing code, ensuring quality of that code, having it tested and so on. These are not things an intern should reasonably be expected to pick up. For something like this you should be under more experienced supervision, someone you can learn from, someone who has done this before.
That being said, unless there's a really good reason, I would probably do such a thing as a Website rather than a desktop app. Desktop apps are a lot more complicated in many ways. You need to code both a client and a server. Communication is a bit trickier. You have to worry about the issue of maintaining state in multiple applications, how to handle updates being pushed around and so on.
In short, it's a big job. Even a Web site is a big job but a lot of these issues go away. You could do this with Java. I've certainly coded my fair share of Java Websites but PHP might be a far simpler bet.
Also, desktop development on Java is, well, torture. Swing is (imho) tried and true but also incredibly painful to develop in. Other desktop libraries (eg Netbeans RCP, Eclipse SWT) are more modern but have other idiosyncrasies.
Desktop remoting libraries include things like Spring remoting, even Web services and other things like Burlap. For the server side, I'd be using either Tomcat or an application server (Glassfish is my preferred choice), servlets and Spring. Persistence can be done via Hibernate or Ibatis (or lots of other options).
But honestly, the desktop option is so much more complex than a Web-based one. You'd probably get a lot more done faster using PHP + jQuery + MySQL.
If you are doing this keep it as absolutely simple as possible. Try to define the absolute minimum you need to initially deliver and do that. Once someone has that they'll then have a better idea of what works for them and what doesn't. Basically it's easier to refine something that already exists vs define something that doesn't.
I recommend that you only build a web application. A web application can be 'live' in the sense you are describing it by using AJAX. It would be much easier to build just one thing. If you also want to have a rich client, then you need to build the UI in a technology you are not familiar with (like Swing or SWT) and design/implement the communication mechanism.
Have a look at Hibernate (ORM tool) and Spring (IoC framework). They have a somehow steep learning curve, but they will make your life easier at the long run. For the UI part perhaps JSF is easier for a beginner.
As a last note, I think you have an over-ambitious plan. What you are describing is not an easy project and requires expertise with a lot of technologies. Do not try to do everything in one shot.
Java Desktop 6 (JRE)
JDBC (built-in in any JRE)
MySQL JDBC drivers (freely downloadable)
for communication you have several choices: RMI (built-in) however this days I recommend
learning something like Java Web Services (JAX-RS)
Libraries?
JDBC for the database. You may want to look at ORM mechanisms like Hibernate
I would recommend the Apache Commons libraries for all your utility work (handling files, IO etc.). There's a lot of stuff there to save you reinventing the wheel.
A standard logging framework like Log4j will allow you to log in lots of different ways, filter your logs and plug into monitoring solutions easily.
You don't say whether browser-based solutions are acceptable for the client/server GUI, and that decision will drive a lot of the further architecture.
If you're looking at browser-based solutions, then I would advise a grounding in servlets regardless of any framework you ultimately choose (no doubt a lot will be recommended here).
By this stage it's getting to be a major project. Perhaps you need to concentrate on getting the fundamentals (client/server functionality) working, and worry about the GUI later. Otherwise it's a huge amount of work (and GUI work can draw an enormous amount of time).
Just one nitpicking:
Both the server and the client software will have GUIs.
I advice you to have a headless (in awt parlance) server, with an administration GUI, not a GUI-server.
Well this can go as wild as you can think of or you can go and do KISS.
If you would like something that is really simple (as in not using any frameworks):
* In the server side you can use RMI. This server side will use plain JDBC to connect to your MySQL database. But some said that this is kind of old, so if you want to get funky you can try JAX-RS which can return a JSON objects/XML to your client.
* Your client can be made using Swing (assuming you are developing desktop) or Servlet + JSP (assuming you are developing webapp) and connect to your server by calling the RMI objects/JSON objects/XML that is exposed by the server.
If you would like to get nasty which will help you in terms of code maintainability you might want to plug-in Spring + Hibernate into this application.
Good luck!
Currently Google App Engine supports both Python & Java. Java support is less mature. However, Java seems to have a longer list of libraries and especially support for Java bytecode regardless of the languages used to write that code. Which language will give better performance and more power? Please advise. Thank you!
Edit:
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java/web/will-it-play-in-app-engine?pli=1
Edit:
By "power" I mean better expandability and inclusion of available libraries outside the framework. Python allows only pure Python libraries, though.
I'm biased (being a Python expert but pretty rusty in Java) but I think the Python runtime of GAE is currently more advanced and better developed than the Java runtime -- the former has had one extra year to develop and mature, after all.
How things will proceed going forward is of course hard to predict -- demand is probably stronger on the Java side (especially since it's not just about Java, but other languages perched on top of the JVM too, so it's THE way to run e.g. PHP or Ruby code on App Engine); the Python App Engine team however does have the advantage of having on board Guido van Rossum, the inventor of Python and an amazingly strong engineer.
In terms of flexibility, the Java engine, as already mentioned, does offer the possibility of running JVM bytecode made by different languages, not just Java -- if you're in a multi-language shop that's a pretty large positive. Vice versa, if you loathe Javascript but must execute some code in the user's browser, Java's GWT (generating the Javascript for you from your Java-level coding) is far richer and more advanced than Python-side alternatives (in practice, if you choose Python, you'll be writing some JS yourself for this purpose, while if you choose Java GWT is a usable alternative if you loathe writing JS).
In terms of libraries it's pretty much a wash -- the JVM is restricted enough (no threads, no custom class loaders, no JNI, no relational DB) to hamper the simple reuse of existing Java libraries as much, or more, than existing Python libraries are similarly hampered by the similar restrictions on the Python runtime.
In terms of performance, I think it's a wash, though you should benchmark on tasks of your own -- don't rely on the performance of highly optimized JIT-based JVM implementations discounting their large startup times and memory footprints, because the app engine environment is very different (startup costs will be paid often, as instances of your app are started, stopped, moved to different hosts, etc, all trasparently to you -- such events are typically much cheaper with Python runtime environments than with JVMs).
The XPath/XSLT situation (to be euphemistic...) is not exactly perfect on either side, sigh, though I think it may be a tad less bad in the JVM (where, apparently, substantial subsets of Saxon can be made to run, with some care). I think it's worth opening issues on the Appengine Issues page with XPath and XSLT in their titles -- right now there are only issues asking for specific libraries, and that's myopic: I don't really care HOW a good XPath/XSLT is implemented, for Python and/or for Java, as long as I get to use it. (Specific libraries may ease migration of existing code, but that's less important than being able to perform such tasks as "rapidly apply XSLT transformation" in SOME way!-). I know I'd star such an issue if well phrased (especially in a language-independent way).
Last but not least: remember that you can have different version of your app (using the same datastore) some of which are implemented with the Python runtime, some with the Java runtime, and you can access versions that differ from the "default/active" one with explicit URLs. So you could have both Python and Java code (in different versions of your app) use and modify the same data store, granting you even more flexibility (though only one will have the "nice" URL such as foobar.appspot.com -- which is probably important only for access by interactive users on browsers, I imagine;-).
Watch this app for changes in Python and Java performance:
http://gaejava.appspot.com/
(edit: apologies, link is broken now. But following para still applied when I saw it running last)
Currently, Python and using the low-level API in Java are faster than JDO on Java, for this simple test. At least if the underlying engine changes, that app should reflect performance changes.
Based on experience with running these VMs on other platforms, I'd say that you'll probably get more raw performance out of Java than Python. Don't underestimate Python's selling points, however: The Python language is much more productive in terms of lines of code - the general agreement is that Python requires a third of the code of an equivalent Java program, while remaining as or more readable. This benefit is multiplied by the ability to run code immediately without an explicit compile step.
With regards to available libraries, you'll find that much of the extensive Python runtime library works out of the box (as does Java's). The popular Django Web framework (http://www.djangoproject.com/) is also supported on AppEngine.
With regards to 'power', it's difficult to know what you mean, but Python is used in many different domains, especially the Web: YouTube is written in Python, as is Sourceforge (as of last week).
June 2013: This video is a very good answer by a google engineer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLriM2krw2E
TLDR; is:
Pick the language that you and your team is most productive with
If you want to build something for production: Java or Python (not Go)
If you have a big team and a complex code base: Java (because of static code analysis and refactoring)
Small teams that iterate quickly: Python (although Java is also okay)
An important question to consider in deciding between Python and Java is how you will use the datastore in each language (and most other angles to the original question have already been covered quite well in this topic).
For Java, the standard method is to use JDO or JPA. These are great for portability but are not very well suited to the datastore.
A low-level API is available but this is too low level for day-to-day use - it is more suitable for building 3rd party libraries.
For Python there is an API designed specifically to provide applications with easy but powerful access to the datastore. It is great except that it is not portable so it locks you into GAE.
Fortunately, there are solutions being developed for the weaknesses listed for both languages.
For Java, the low-level API is being used to develop persistence libraries that are much better suited to the datastore then JDO/JPA (IMO). Examples include the Siena project, and Objectify.
I've recently started using Objectify and am finding it to be very easy to use and well suited to the datastore, and its growing popularity has translated into good support. For example, Objectify is officially supported by Google's new Cloud Endpoints service. On the other hand, Objectify only works with the datastore, while Siena is 'inspired' by the datastore but is designed to work with a variety of both SQL databases and NoSQL datastores.
For Python, there are efforts being made to allow the use of the Python GAE datastore API off of the GAE. One example is the SQLite backend that Google released for use with the SDK, but I doubt they intend this to grow into something production ready. The TyphoonAE project probably has more potential, but I don't think it is production ready yet either (correct me if I am wrong).
If anyone has experience with any of these alternatives or knows of others, please add them in a comment. Personally, I really like the GAE datastore - I find it to be a considerable improvement over the AWS SimpleDB - so I wish for the success of these efforts to alleviate some of the issues in using it.
I'm strongly recommending Java for GAE and here's why:
Performance: Java is potentially faster then Python.
Python development is under pressure of a lack of third-party libraries. For example, there is no XSLT for Python/GAE at all. Almost all Python libraries are C bindings (and those are unsupported by GAE).
Memcache API: Java SDK have more interesting abilities than Python SDK.
Datastore API: JDO is very slow, but native Java datastore API is very fast and easy.
I'm using Java/GAE in development right now.
As you've identified, using a JVM doesn't restrict you to using the Java language. A list of JVM languages and links can be found here. However, the Google App Engine does restrict the set of classes you can use from the normal Java SE set, and you will want to investigate if any of these implementations can be used on the app engine.
EDIT: I see you've found such a list
I can't comment on the performance of Python. However, the JVM is a very powerful platform performance-wise, given its ability to dynamically compile and optimise code during the run time.
Ultimately performance will depend on what your application does, and how you code it. In the absence of further info, I think it's not possible to give any more pointers in this area.
I've been amazed at how clean, straightforward, and problem free the Python/Django SDK is. However I started running into situations where I needed to start doing more JavaScript and thought I might want to take advantage of the GWT and other Java utilities. I've gotten just half way through the GAE Java tutorial, and have had one problem after another: Eclipse configuration issues, JRE versionitis, the mind-numbing complexity of Java, and a confusing and possibly broken tutorial. Checking out this site and others linked from here clinched it for me. I'm going back to Python, and I'll look into Pyjamas to help with my JavaScript challenges.
I'm a little late to the conversation, but here are my two cents. I really had a hard time choosing between Python and Java, since I am well versed in both languages. As we all know, there are advantages and disadvantages for both, and you have to take in account your requirements and the frameworks that work best for your project.
As I usually do in this type of dilemmas, I look for numbers to support my decision. I decided to go with Python for many reasons, but in my case, there was one plot that was the tipping point. If you search "Google App Engine" in GitHub as of September 2014, you will find the following figure:
There could be many biases in these numbers, but overall, there are three times more GAE Python repositories than GAE Java repositories. Not only that, but if you list the projects by the "number of stars" you will see that a majority of the Python projects appear at the top (you have to take in account that Python has been around longer). To me, this makes a strong case for Python because I take in account community adoption & support, documentation, and availability of open-source projects.
It's a good question, and I think many of the responses have given good view points of pros and cons on both sides of the fence. I've tried both Python and JVM-based AppEngine (in my case I was using Gaelyk which is a Groovy application framework built for AppEngine). When it comes to performance on the platform, one thing I hadn't considered until it was staring me in the face is the implication of "Loading Requests" that occur on the Java side of the fence. When using Groovy these loading requests are a killer.
I put a post together on the topic (http://distractable.net/coding/google-appengine-java-vs-python-performance-comparison/) and I'm hoping to find a way of working around the problem, but if not I think I'll be going back to a Python + Django combination until cold starting java requests has less of an impact.
Based on how much I hear Java people complain about AppEngine compared to Python users, I would say Python is much less stressful to use.
There's also project Unladen Swallow, which is apparently Google-funded if not Google-owned. They're trying to implement a LLVM-based backend for Python 2.6.1 bytecode, so they can use a JIT and various nice native code/GC/multi-core optimisations. (Nice quote: "We aspire to do no original work, instead using as much of the last 30 years of research as possible.") They're looking for a 5x speed-up to CPython.
Of course this doesn't answer your immediate question, but points towards a "closing of the gap" (if any) in the future (hopefully).
The beauty of python nowdays is how well it communicates with other languages. For instance you can have both python and java on the same table with Jython. Of course jython even though it fully supports java libraries it does not support fully python libraries. But its an ideal solution if you want to mess with Java Libraries. It even allows you to mix it with Java code with no extra coding.
But even python itself has made some steps forwared. See ctypes for example, near C speed , direct accees to C libraries all of this without leaving the comfort of python coding. Cython goes one step further , allowing to mix c code with python code with ease, or even if you dont want to mess with c or c++ , you can still code in python but use statically type variables making your python programms as fast as C apps. Cython is both used and supported by google by the way.
Yesterday I even found tools for python to inline C or even Assembly (see CorePy) , you cant get any more powerful than that.
Python is surely a very mature language, not only standing on itself , but able to coooperate with any other language with easy. I think that is what makes python an ideal solution even in a very advanced and demanding scenarios.
With python you can have acess to C/C++ ,Java , .NET and many other libraries with almost zero additional coding giving you also a language that minimises, simplifies and beautifies coding. Its a very tempting language.
Gone with Python even though GWT seems a perfect match for the kind of an app I'm developing. JPA is pretty messed up on GAE (e.g. no #Embeddable and other obscure non-documented limitations). Having spent a week, I can tell that Java just doesn't feel right on GAE at the moment.
One think to take into account are the frameworks you intend yo use. Not all frameworks on Java side are well suited for applications running on App Engine, which is somewhat different than traditional Java app servers.
One thing to consider is the application startup time. With traditional Java web apps you don't really need to think about this. The application starts and then it just runs. Doesn't really matter if the startup takes 5 seconds or couple of minutes. With App Engine you might end up in a situation where the application is only started when a request comes in. This means the user is waiting while your application boots up. New GAE features like reserved instances help here, but check first.
Another thing are the different limitations GAE psoes on Java. Not all frameworks are happy with the limitations on what classes you can use or the fact that threads are not allowed or that you can't access local filesystem. These issues are probably easy to find out by just googling about GAE compatibility.
I've also seen some people complaining about issues with session size on modern UI frameworks (Wicket, namely). In general these frameworks tend to do certain trade-offs in order to make development fun, fast and easy. Sometimes this may lead to conflicts with the App Engine limitations.
I initially started developing working on GAE with Java, but then switched to Python because of these reasons. My personal feeling is that Python is a better choice for App Engine development. I think Java is more "at home" for example on Amazon's Elastic Beanstalk.
BUT with App Engine things are changing very rapidly. GAE is changing itself and as it becomes more popular, the frameworks are also changing to work around its limitations.
I recently used a Java Web Start application. I launched it from my web browser using an embedded jnlp link in the page I was viewing. The application was downloaded, launched and worked just fine. It had access to my local file-system and remembered my preferences between restarting it.
What I want to know is why are Java Web Start applications not a more popular delivery format for complex applications on the web? Why do developers often spend considerable time & energy replicating desktop functionality in html/javascript when the power of a desktop application could be delivered more easily using Java & Java Web Start?
I know that in some corporate environments, e.g banking, they are relatively popular ways of delivering complex trading applications to clients, but why are they not pervasive across the web as a whole?
(For the sake of discussion let's assume a world where: download sources are "trusted" & applications are "signed" (i.e. no security concerns), download speeds are fast (load time is quick) and developers know Java (in the numbers they know html/js/php)).
I think the reason is not security nor startup time of the app. Let's understand what's behind the scene before we find out the root cause.
Java Control Panel has settings that allow users to use the default browser's proxy settings or to override them. In other words, infrastructure teams are able to customize the Windows or OS installation images to have JVM pre-installed with enterprise proxy settings. So I believe this is not an issue at all.
Java Web Start actually caches all apps with customizable settings in Java Control Panel. Once the app is cached, the app is "installed" just like other apps. Although first time execution may be slow, the second time will be fast due to JVM's smart memory allocation technique. So start up time could be an issue but a lot of web sites (even enterprise internal) are now migrated to portal. A web portal normally contains lots of unused libraries for development purposes due to the fact that the portal itself does not anticipate what kinds of portlets are built and deployed on a specific page. Therefore, downloading a single portal page could consume up to MBs and complete a page in more than 5 seconds; this is only one page and caching helps up to 30% but there are still lots of HTML/Javascript/CSS components required to download every time. With this, I am sure Java Web Start is an advantage here.
Java Web Start does not download again if it is cached as long as the server copy is NOT upgraded. Therefore, if, e.g. a project management software like MS Project, is completed using SmartClient (similar to JWS), the information exchange between the client and server would be purely data without presentation like browser's full page refresh. Even with the help of Ajax, it doesn't eliminate full page download entirely. Besides, a lot of companies consider Ajax to be immature and unsecured still. That is why Ajax is a hot topic in the circles of developers but not within enterprise software yet. With that in mind, JWS apps definitely have more advantages such as how JWS apps are deployed and executed in sandboxes, signed, and have much more interactive GUI.
Other advantages include faster development (easier to debug in code and performance), responsive user interface (does not require Comet Servers to provide PUSH functionality), and executing faster (for sure because client computers renders GUI without translation like HTML/Javascript/CSS, and less data processing).
After all these, I haven't touched the question yet, why JWS is not so famous?
My opinion is that it is the same as Brian Knoblauch's comment, it's without awareness.
IT folks are too attracted by the hype of Web Technologies, Ajax PUSH, GWT, and all those buzz words make them bias towards the fun of using different technologies or to resolve technical challenges instead of what's really working for the clients.
Take a look at Citrix. I think Citrix is actually a great idea. Citrix allows you to build your own app farms behind the scene. There are tons of upgrade and implementation strategies you can go for without impact to client experience. Citrix deployment is extremely easy, stable and secure. Enterprises are still using it. However, I think JWS is even better than Citrix. The idea of JWS is to run apps on client machines instead of hosting tons of server farms where client machines are capable of running these apps themselves. This saves a company a lot of money!!! With JWS, development team can still build business logic and data on server side. However, without the web processing unit and let the client computers do the rendering process, it greatly reduces the amount of network consumption and server processing power.
Another example of why JWS is an amazing idea is Blackberry MDS. Blackberry apps are actually Java apps translated from Javascript. With BB's MDS studio, you use the GUI tool to build BB app GUI, coding GUI logic in Javascript. Then apps are then translated and deployed on a BES server. Then the BES server will distribute these apps to BB. On each BB, it runs a thin Java App with GUI rendering and networking capability only. Whenever the app requires data, it communicates with the BES through web services to consume services from other servers. Isn't this just JWS BB version? It's been extremely successful.
Finally I think JWS is not popular because of how Sun advertises it. BB never advertises how good their BB Java apps are, they believe clients won't even care what is it. BB advertises the benefits of using MDS to develop apps: Fast, Cost Saving, Business Return.
Just my, a bit long, 2 cents... :)
A major roadblock for Java Webstart is probably that you still need to have a JVM installed before it can even attempt to download and start your application. Everyone has a browser. Not everyone has a JVM.
Edit:
I've since acquired some hands-on webstart experience and can now add these two points:
The Deployment Toolkit script and the modularized JVM released somewhere around Java 1.6u10 make the JVM requirement less problematic since it can automatically download a JVM and the API core and start the program wile downloading the rest.
Web Start is seriously buggy. Even among the Java 1.6 releases there was one which downloaded the entire app every time, and another which downloaded it and then failed with an obscure error message. All in all, I cannot really recommend relying on such a fragile system.
I think it's mostly due to a lack of awareness. It works very well. Quite seamless. App only downloads if it's the first time, there's been an upgrade, or if the end-user has cleared the cache. Great way to deploy full-blown desktop apps that user won't have to worry about manually upgrading!
The problem with Webstart is, that you actually have to 'start' something which isn't at all that fast even with a fast connection, while with a webapp you enter the URL and the app is there.
Also a lot of things can go wrong with webstart. Maybe the intended user doesn't have the privileges needed, or the proxy of webstart is configured wrong, or something went wrong with jre dependencies or there is simply no java installed in the first place. So for the average john doe in the internet it is not at all pleasent.
In controlled environments like a company it is a good and easy solution in many cases.
I've worked on a JWS-deployed application for a few years over a user base of a few thousands and its automatic upgrades are actually a huge pain.
On every update for some reason dozens of users get "stuck in the middle". All you get is the "class not found" exception (if you're lucky), or uninformative "unable to launch" from JWS before it even gets to your code. Looks like the update is half-downloaded. Or, in other words, it does not download and apply the update atomically AND has poor caching so that relaunching the app from the same URL does not fix anything.
There's no way to resolve it other than clearing JWS cache or providing a different URL (e.g. append ?dummyparam=jwssucks at the end). Even I as a developer hit it sometimes and don't see a way around.
When it works, it works. But too often it doesn't, and then it's a huge pain for you and your helpdesk. I would not recommend it for enterprise or mission-critical use.
There is a very big issue namely that it doesn't allow for "start the program instantly and THEN check for and download any updates in the background" deployments, which is what the defacto behaviour of applications are converging to.
I consider this personally so big an annoyance that we are actively looking for another technology which provides that.
From these posts it looks like when using Web start, it is important to make a good care about the server. The "huge pain" of downloading application on every startup may be caused by incorrect time stamp delivered from the server. Here not the application but the server must be configured to use caching properly and not just to disable it. About buggy start, I am not that much sure, but it seems to me that this also may be caused by unreliable connection.
Important advantage of Web start is that it works nicely with OpenJDK under Linux. Clients of some happy developers use Windows only but my clients do not.
HTML and JavaScript, mentioned in the initial question, are lighter approaches that work fine with smaller tasks like animated buttons or even interactive tables. Java niche seems around much more complex tasks.
Java Web Start is kind a successor of Java Applets, and applets got burned around the new millenium.
But, I still think Java Applets are way better than GWT or Javascript hell.
Java Web Start vs Embedded Java Applet