[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java Code Geeks
|
Yeah, people that haven't used IntelliJ just don't get how much better an IDE experience can be. I last used IntelliJ in 2004 and I still remember it fondly. It was a better IDE for developing Java code *then* then Eclipse is *now*. IntelliJ **runs rings** around Eclipse in areas like code completion and navigation. And as discussed a few months back, JDT hasn't really improved much in these areas of basic productivity for much of the last ten years, while IntelliJ has laser focus on that every release.
Recently, I've been doing some Javascript code, and to be brutal about it, I've found the JSDT tools to be not much better than using a text editor. How can you have a first class eco-system when the second most popular dev language target (http://readwrite.com/2012/06/05/5-ways-to-tell-which-programming-lanugages-are-most-popular#awesm=~oi09oZbgVoEtim) is so poorly supported? But I think there is a pretty clear way forward:
#1 Invest in the crown jewels. This is a base line for Eclipse to continue to be a vibrant, dynamic community. This isn't totally doom-and-gloom -- the Eclipse ecosystem fills a niche that it isn't likely to get supplanted from. And yeah, it's free, but really do we want to hang our hat on that? Eclipse is in real danger of becoming less relevant to the majority of devs and that has ramifications way beyond the IDE. With Open Source ecosystems that work, there need to be one to a few companies whose core strategy is tied to the project. That used to be IBM, but it isn't any more and hasn't been for a long time. So something needs to happen to encourage companies to pool resources and then target those resources at specific areas of concern. As someone already mentioned, companies like Ericsson (with -- just for example ;) -- their funding of Gerrit improvements) have been stepping up to the plate to fund development efforts, and we need to see a lot more of that. The key here is not focussing on pet projects but on stuff that will benefit the overall usability experience.
#2 Deep, disruptive innovation. But we're never going to be better than IntelliJ at that stuff; we "merely" need to suck a *lot* less. Eclipse has to play to its' strengths, and that comes from the openness and diversity of the whole eco-system. That's something that we've been *very* good at. And I think -- as much as I am desperate for better tooling -- that's where the real growth and dynamism is going to come from. Because the question that is begged above is "if you loved IntelliJ so much, why did you adopt Eclipse?" No, it wasn't because it was free. It was because I needed a meta-modeling facility, and Eclipse had that (EMF) and IntelliJ didn't. (They were trying but it wasn't mature.) To me, if Eclipse is going to continue to be really relevant, it's going to come down to stuff like:
1) Modelling, through efforts like Xtend and XCore
2) Exploiting Runtime, packaging and deployment technologies and tool chains, like OSGi
3) (Bias here!) Having a deep focus on social coding enabling technologies -- reviews, task management, deployment, life-cycle etc...
4) …add your best ideas here!
Just my $0.02 canadian. (Note that we're phasing pennies out.)
-Miles
On 2013-09-19, at 11:51 AM, Andrew Eisenberg <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> More than just inconsistencies and lack of feature discoverability, IDEA just *feels* faster. Sometimes this is just perceived performance (eg- the UI doesn't get locked up during certain tasks, or background tasks are just better hidden), and sometimes it is a real performance defference (ie- certain features, like content assist just run faster).
>
> Power users can easily get around these problems, but regular devs will likely have trouble.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> That was my reaction too :). $600 per seat buys you a lot of developers…
>
> And, yes, the inconsistencies is what drives me mad. That's been my hope that if we treat the Eclipse IDE as a single product with open communication and co-operation between all the players, we could address that. But the way Eclipse is structured at the moment, and without that $600, it's difficult to achieve.
>
> Doug.
>
> From: David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Reply-To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thursday, 19 September, 2013 1:15 PM
>
> To: Discussions about the IDE <ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java Code Geeks
>
> By golly I think he's found the solution ... all we need to do is charge $600 for our "IDE Package" :)
>
> In more seriousness, I think all the things he implied "you can't do with Eclipse", you in fact can ... but, agreed, inconsistencies abound (e.g. which validations you get automatically, which you have to turn on, what you have to install in order to get them (such as Dali for JPA support), etc.)
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx" <eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>, ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx,
> Date: 09/19/2013 12:44 PM
> Subject: [ide-dev] Why we dropped Eclipse in favour of IntelliJ | Java Code Geeks
> Sent by: ide-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> FYI,
>
> http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/09/why-we-dropped-eclipse-in-favour-of-intellij.html
>
> Wayne
> --
> Wayne Beaton
> Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
> Learn about Eclipse Projects
> _______________________________________________
> ide-dev mailing list
> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ide-dev mailing list
> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ide-dev mailing list
> ide-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ide-dev
