jole writes: "With the X Window System, your user interface code runs on the server and the terminal is fairly dummy. Vaadin}> tries to bring back this programming paradigm for Java EE and RIA. Development is done in pure server-side Java — no Ajax-programming is needed. On the user side any modern web browser will do — no plugins are needed. As the framework is released with Apache license, it should get quite a lot of attention from commercial application developers."
jole writes: "IT Mill Toolkit enables one to build rich web user interfaces in pure Java using Swing-like API, run them in the server and use the result on any modern web browser without plugins. After one year extensive beta, IT Mill Toolkit 5.3.0 GA is released under Apache -license.
Developers can build rich web applications easily with Java on the server-side, much like creating regular desktop applications with Swing or AWT. There is no need to know anything about HTML, Ajax or JSON working under the hood. Unlike the client-side RIA frameworks, like GWT or Flex, where one needs to implement both server and client, in IT Mill Toolkit you only implement the server application.
While being an extensive framework for RIA development, it is just one JAR that you can drop into any Java Web project and use side-by-side with other frameworks. This is also the only server-side Java toolkit where the extensions to the framework are also created in pure Java. If the (fairly extensive) set of included widgets is not enough, developers can continue coding with Java on the client-side using GWT."
Dietrich Kappe of Ajaxian seems to like it."
Andy Updegrove writes: "Microsoft decided to escalate the OOXML/ODF air wars yesterday by sending IBM a "valentine," posted as an open letter at the Microsoft Interoperability Web page. In that letter, Microsoft recalls its passive role during the adoption by ISO/IEC of ODF forcefully accuses IBM of waging a global, hypocritical campaign to thwart the approval of OOXML in JTC 1. The action is hardly surprising, and from a strategic point of view even overdue. Till now, Microsoft has taken the position that many of the comments offered in JTC1 during the contradictions phase will prove to be neutral, or even positive, but soon they will become public. If they turn out to be strongly negative, Microsoft will need to revert to a Plan B, such as a plot by IBM "to limit customer choice," which is exactly what Microsoft appears to have decided to do."
SeanAD writes: "The Register has an article of its impressions of Vista. With the manyarticlescomparing it to OS X, this article also deals with expectations of what a new OS should include. The closing paragraph is pretty telling: "It does benefit from a lot of good ideas, many of them Apple's, of course, but good nevertheless. It simply doesn't work very well, unfortunately. There are serious problems with execution; it's not polished; it's not ready. It should not be on the market, and certainly not for the outrageous prices being charged. Don't buy it, at least until after the first service pack is out. Don't pay to be a beta tester.""
Microsoft put all those functionality-crippling features into Vista because it wants to own the entertainment industry. This isn't how Microsoft spins it, of course. It maintains that it has no choice, that it's Hollywood that is demanding DRM in Windows in order to allow "premium content" — meaning, new movies that are still earning revenue — onto your computer. If Microsoft didn't play along, it'd be relegated to second-class status as Hollywood pulled its support for the platform....... Unfortunately, we users are caught in the crossfire. We are not only stuck with DRM systems that interfere with our legitimate fair-use rights for the content we buy, we're stuck with DRM systems that interfere with all of our computer use — even the uses that have nothing to do with copyright.