Visual J++ reader poll draws choice reader comments, record number of votes

Whenever the word Microsoft finds its way into the virtual pages of JavaWorld, reader reaction predictably escalates. And it seems that no matter what we say, we take heat for it. Case in point, last month our cover story comparing fully released 1.1-compliant IDEs brought a slew of negative reaction about our perceived failure to include VJ++ in the mix. (VJ++ 6.0 is still in beta, so was not considered for the article.)

This month the story is the same, but the scenery has changed. Our poll, which asks readers if they use (or will use) VJ++ 6.0, had readers flaming us for daring to include a “Microsoft-centric” question in a Java magazine.

We’re still scratching our heads on this one!

As the title of this article indicates, this particular poll received plenty of action in its 20-day lifespan — more than 2,700 readers felt the urge to register their opinions. That’s more than double the number of votes we’ve had in polls past!

Here’s a look at the break down.

• 46% choose not use VJ++ 6.0 because cross-platform development requires dropping into the source code, and avoiding WFC and VJ++’s non-standard language keywords

• 22% refuse to use VJ++ 6.0 for philosophical reasons
• 12% said they use/will use VJ++ 6.0, but for Windows-specific projects only
• 10% said they use/will use VJ++ 6.0 for all their development projects because they find the tool superior to other offerings
• 5% don’t use IDEs at all, preferring instead to use text editors like vi and emacs
• 1% said VJ++ is not available for their platform

Of course, as a magazine devoted to Java, such statistical data is not so surprising. What is surprising — and often helpful in sensing the mood of the industry — are the insightful (and sometimes, ahem, a little crass) comments that readers use to supplement their choice (“and furthermore….!”). Here are a select few comments gleaned from the more than 2,300 offered.

I choose not use VJ++ 6.0 due to cross-platform development difficulties (46%):

I am an avid user of Visual C++ 5 from Microsoft, as this tool fits the job — writing Windows programs in C++ — perfectly. However, I will not use Visual J++ 6 for developing Java programs, as the whole ethos of cross-platform development seems to be lost on Microsoft here. Shame, they produce good products, but have lost sight of the target on this one!

Java’s true value comes from its cross-platform support. There is no point in writing an application in Java with Windows specific hooks. I can use Visual C++ for that purpose.

When developing with Java, I don’t need the added worry that my code won’t run on a certain platforms. If I wanted to develop a pure Windows application, I would use Visual C++, instead of Java.

I’ve been a faithful user of Visual J++ 1.0 since it was released, but I’ll be looking for a new tool soon since Visual J++ 6.0 is moving too far away from the Java standard.

I choose not use VJ++ 6.0 on philosophical grounds (22%):

I felt that the original version of Visual J++ was a good tool, if a little artificial and ill-supported. I do believe, however, that Microsoft must stand behind Java in a constructive fashion before I’ll spend a nickel further on its products (of any kind or genre).

There are many other Java development environments available which are as good as or better than VJ++ and provide all of the benefits of J++ without the Windows-only mentality.

Creating Java apps that run on only Windows is insulting to me as a developer and disrespectful to the future of computing. Grow up Microsoft, you’re getting more than a black eye from the development community.

Using VJ++ 6.0 is like disengaging the clutch on your power screwdriver and using it as a manual screwdriver. Sure, you’re using the tool, but you’re not using it the way its designers intended–you’re crippling yourself and the language.

I won’t use VJ– because I am a Java programmer who happens to be using Windows, not just a Windows programmer who wants to code in Java.

I use VJ++ 6.0, but for Windows-specific projects only (12%):

Of course Microsoft is going to tailor its Java product for the Windows platform (which Unix did Sun support first?), it’d be idiotic if it didn’t. What it comes down to is using the best tool for the job.

Seems like a smart way to program the Win32 API….It leverages my Java skills onto the Win32 API, but I won’t be duped into accidentally creating Window-only apps.

Our product is server based and we use COM objects to access system resources that Java APIs don’t give us access to. VJ++ seamlessly adds Java Interfaces to our COM objects.

I use VJ++ 6.0 for all my development needs (10%):

As usual, Microsoft has created a better RAD environment than anyone else, so of course I will use it. I will continue to use products from Borland, Sybase, and Symantec as well, for specifically cross-platform work (only a small percentage of my Java development).

Although Microsoft has a tendency to make things non-standard and tailored to its platform, I still think that in terms of ease of use, help available to developers, and intuitive nature of product, Microsoft tools like VJ++ are clearly miles ahead of the others.

As usual, Microsoft has created a better RAD environment than anyone else, so of course I will use it.

I don’t use IDEs (5%):

I do not use IDEs of any kind to program with Java. I prefer text editors. But, if I had to use an IDE, I wouldn’t use VJ++ 6.0

I only use IDEs for building GUI layout classes. I find that they are all trying to be too clever and lock you into their tool. Mostly, I prefer a text editor (admittedly Microsoft VC++4!) and the JDK and JSDK.

I think really that WYSIWYG in this case could be better written as What you see is what you pray other people will see if they’re running exactly the same platform and don’t do something Microsoft hasn’t thought of.

I guess I am just an old fashion kind of person.

VJ++ 6.0 is not available for my platform (1%):

What does “cross-platform” mean when Power Macintosh machines aren’t supported?

If it don’t run on Linux, I don’t use it. ‘Nuff said.