RE: SWT History and Design Decisions (WAS: [platform-swt-dev] AWT Toolki

["Brad O'Hearne" <brado@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

David,

Thanks a bunch for the response.  This is now taking the dialog directly
to the issues I am curious about.  Responses below:

> IBM isn't endorsing SWT per se.  It's the media that's making 
> it a SWT vs. Swing competition.  

While I understand this on one hand, on the other, I don't think this
assertion can be written off as pure hype.  I think many could come to
this conclusion on their own based on a few things:  

- Sun is the author of the Java platform, and has provided Swing.  IBM
(through Eclipse) has introduced SWT, a direct alternative for Swing.
- Eclipse (promoted by IBM) is a direct competitor to Netbeans (promoted
by Sun).  
- Eclipse uses, and encourages use, of SWT. Netbeans uses, and
encourages use, of Swing.
- IBM's GUI products are based on Eclipse (Websphere suite), while Sun's
GUI products are based on Swing.

I think practice somewhat bears out what direction each company is
behind.

> SWT was a toolkit developed 
> because Swing did not meet the Eclipse designers requirements 
> *for Eclipse*.  SWT is not being marketed to be the solution 
> to everyone's needs, nor is it being marketed against Swing 
> (for that matter, I don't believe SWT is being marketed at 
> all).  

Again, I agree with you on one hand.  But back on the other, I don't
think it is a far-out notion to say that while "Swing did not meet the
Eclipse designers requirements *for Eclipse*", the reasons are ones
common to general GUI development, not just an Eclipse-like product.  I
think the SWT project recognizes this, as question #1 in the SWT FAQ is:
"Can I use SWT for stand-alone apps?"

> Again, IBM isn't pushing any particular GUI widget 
> philosophy.  

I suppose this is again word vs. deed.  Perhaps there haven't been
official statements by IBM and Sun, but in practice the directions are
pretty evident.  The real crux of the matter is how these directions wer
taken.  To an outsider (which I am) the evolution is a curious one --
from being united in the JFC effort, to IBM throwing weight behind a JFC
alternative.  If IBM viewed Swing as sufficient (JFC), then why Eclipse
with SWT?  If IBM viewed Swing as insufficient, then why not try to
change Swing, or design it originally to begin with?  The chronology
just seems to suggest that somewhere along the lines, there was a
difference in design philosophy, or how Java should position itself on
the desktop, between Sun and IBM.  I can't be the only one that sees
this.

Choice *is* good.  But part of choosing involves understanding why you
choose one option over another, and while in a perfect world, this would
involve only technical considerations, the real world involves market
factors, industry direction, and corporate influence.

Anyway, I don't wish to dominate this mailing list with politically
charged questions -- my original question was a historical one simply
for charting the evolution of Java GUI development.    If someone wishes
to respond privately, feel free to do so at brado@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.  And
finally, to clarify my position, I think SWT is terrific, I am already a
convert (as SWT solves some direct concerns of projects I have worked
on) and I am already singing its praises to others.

Back to real tech issues...

BradO