[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-openjfx-dev
Subject:    =?utf-8?Q?=E7=AD=94=E5=A4=8D:_Talk_about_OPENJFX's_future?=
From:       <a1032453509 () 163 ! com>
Date:       2018-09-21 12:03:33
Message-ID: 5BA4DE15.B27F95.08090 () m12-17 ! 163 ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Well, it is happy hear that JavaFX perform well in embedded, my original intention \
isn't condemn this video, 

just for an example, though it is little ridiculous..
发件人: John-Val Rose
发送时间: 2018年9月21日 17:52
收件人: Johan Vos
抄送: a1032453509@163.com; openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net
主题: Re: Talk about OPENJFX's future

That video is typical marketing "smoke and mirrors".

With no access to the code of either app, it is simply unfair and disingenuous to \
claim a performance advantage.

I am certain I could post an almost identical comparison video where the results \
would be the complete opposite.

Yeah, good programmers can write slow code (especially if you have a motive)...

On 21 Sep 2018, at 19:29, Johan Vos <johan.vos@gluonhq.com> wrote:

> > 
> > We can't defeat QT in performance, but we can defeat it at applicability
> > and just don't get too far behind QT in performance. (bad example
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh6K-yEp_JY)
> > 
> 
> That video demonstrates the creator has absolutely no development skills in
> Java, or he intentionally misleads the viewer. I leave it to the reader to
> judge what would be worst.
> 
> I am not going to make performance statements without numbers, but my first
> observations using JavaFX 11 with the Bellsoft Liberica VM are very
> encouraging (see https://gluonhq.com/javafx-11-early-access-on-embedded/)
> 
> - Johan


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]