🚀 go-pugleaf

Jordan does have a point, though it is clearly a fault of the browsers, not Java.
Their failure to support JDK 1.1 is a serious limiting factor in Java becoming a
serious development option. JDK 1.0 is too immature, and 1.1 has been out how
long?--cripes we're working with 1.2 betas already.  I wince everytime I hear a
developer say, oh I'd better stick to 1.0.

The practical browser lock-in of Java versions at such an immature phase of the
language's development is really holding the acceptance of Java as a serious
development option back. The language is getting there but people aren't seeing
it, because the browsers are forcing most applets to be build for old versions of
the technology. If we want a future with this language, let's hope the browser
vendors get with the program, and that Sun's Java plug-in takes off.

Microsoft clearly doesn't want to cooperate and Andreeson's recent comments about
client side Java aren't very encouraging either.

John Niesz wrote:

> their browsers are simply too old.  MS and Netscape can't keep up with Sun
> (although Sun itself is slow in updating Java).  For JDK 1.1 I think the user
> needs Navigator 4.0 or IE 4.0 or better.  Right now it's safest to stick with
> JDK 1.0 until everyone has upgraded their browsers.
>
> Good luck!
>
> news/earthlink.net wrote:
>
> > Ever since I have employed Java 1.1 as a language for my web page, I have
> > been getting negative feedback from customers that claim that my web page
> > causes their browser to crash.  I have since discovered that their browser
> > are not capable of handling Java 1.1.  Needless to say I have reverted back
> > to Java 1.0 to avoid the bad vibes I was getting from my client.
> >
> > It is plain that this attribute of Java 1.1 will spell the end of Java as a
> > programing language for the WEB.  Too bad, Java added a lot to the web.