3.0 beta 2

Something more promising

Try XWT (www.xwt.org):
http://launch.xwt.org/stable/www.xwt.org/xwar/sampler-0.5pre3.xwar

As a Free Software project, we're always looking to join forces with other Free Software developers.

ActiveWidgets seems a little redundant given the flexibility of tools like XWT.
October 8,
ActiveWidgets might be more suitable for people who want to keep traditional HTML development just adding a little bit more functionality here and there...
Alex (ActiveWidgets)
October 9,
Seems to me that
a) ActiveWidgets works using JavaScript and the DOM (browser technologies), requiring no added language learning on the part of the web developer, and could easily be offered in alternate browser technologies for other (non-conforming) user agents.
b) XWT works using Java, requiring user acceptance of self-certified code plus a Java RTE, frustrating the user, and doesn't address alternate formats.

Conclusion: ActiveWidgets rocks, and is by no means redundant. If 'Nobody' was really looking to join forces, they would contact the developer, not post an anonymous slam on the forum.

Thanks for the neat grid object. I for one will add it to my web developers toolkit and look forward to pleasing my site visitors with the possibilities here.
Greg Rundlett
October 29,
ActiveWidgets is hundred times better than XWT (takes ages to load with DSL!).

ActiveWidgets just needs more functions (like Java Table from Objectplanet)
http://www.objectplanet.com/Table/
November 1,
> b) XWT works using Java, requiring user acceptance of self-certified
> code plus a Java RTE, frustrating the user, and doesn't address alternate
> formats.

XWT is written in Java, yes, but it does *not* require a JRE for Linux, Solaris, MacOSX and Windows. It uses GCJ to build native platform binaries. I don't know what 'self-signed' code is; the XWT binaries are signed with a valid verisign certificate, if that counts as self-signed then *any* signed binary is self-signed.

I have no idea what "doesn't address alternate formats" means.

Yes, XWT is a bigger initial (one-time) download, so if you only need a datagrid then ActiveWidgets is probably better (even if it doesn't seem to retain its data over a browser refresh). If you need a full-fledged, zero-install, cross-platform, web-launchable GUI, ActiveWidgets is not even close to XWT. With which I do not intend to imply that XWT is 'better' than ActiveWidgets, just that they serve largely different needs which may sometime overlap.
Emiliano
February 16,
Plug-ins and applets are dead. Flash is the *only* plugin I or any of the millions of visitors to my sites ever use. With all the viruses/spy/adware these days, pop-up messages saying 'click here and trust me' are met with hasty user retreat from the offending and delusional site they originated from.

Users, don't like plug-ins/applets, never have, never will. Java Applets had their 15 minutes of fame back in 1999. They've had over 4 years to catch-on, and still haven't made any inroads.

ActiveWidgets and CSS/DHTML based componentry, rock on....
WB, Orlando FL
February 16,

This topic is archived.

See also:


Back to support forum

Search

Version 2

Looking for AW 2.6 ?
The old site is here.