9 ms·

I do think Java has a bad rep as a "dry, corporate, enterprise" language, but I think there is an ecosystem around Java that is pretty awesome and you can build

I do think Java has a bad rep as a "dry, corporate, enterprise" language, but I think there is an ecosystem around Java that is pretty awesome and you can build incredible applications with Java if you want to. Java has a branding problem. Java (and Oracle) missed the wave of the last 15 years when tech became "cool." If you were new to tech/programming and wanted to pick up a language, which of these three would you pick, based on the website? - Java: https://www.java.com/en/ https://www.java.com/en/ - Kotlin: https://kotlinlang.org/ https://kotlinlang.org/ - Scala: https://www.scala-lang.org/ https://www.scala-lang.org/ Java just doesn't have the cool factor that other languages have. A little rebranding could go a long way to reinvigorating the language in the eyes of newcomers. And I say that because the author of this blog post is a newcomer. Experiened developers know that, despite the ugly Oracle branding, Java is a good language with a sophisticated ecosystem of tools surrounding it. He seems to be mostly enamored with the developer experience of IntelliJ + Java + Maven. And while it is great, that experience is possible with most programming languages. Disclaimer: I haven't used Java since my early University classes 10+ years ago.

Jaxkr 6y ago
I actually laughed out loud at the Java.com homepage. I was so surprised, I expected a sleek, modern homepage but instead I got a portal to 2010.
- systemvoltage 6y ago
  To be fair, lots of websites were far better in 2010 than today’s white space filled, massive typography, bright colored potpourri of rounded corners, scroll jacked bullshit. Full screen, infinite scroll, hamburger menus. So many awful contemporary design choices. Don’t pool it all together with this Java website - which sucks but not because it was from 2010. I abhor and loathe modern web design.
  - Jaxkr 6y ago
    I love old web design too. Sometimes I go look at 2007 WorldOfWarcraft.com on Archive.org to enjoy old design. I just remember the Java.com homepage from visiting it in computer lab in 2011 so I could play Minecraft.
- tmerr 6y ago
  You weren't kidding. The page has barely been tweaked since 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080701171554/http://java.com/en/ https://web.archive.org/web/20080701171554/http://java.com/e...
- kasperni 6y ago
  The website is a leftover from when you had to download Java to run programs. Microsoft Silverlight homepage have a similar simplistic feel[1]. I expect it to be updated at some point once there is no need for people to download a JRE. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/ https://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/
- toyg 6y ago
  That's more like 2000-2005. By 2010 we had GMail and clumsy 3d gradients were on their way out.
- lelanthran 6y ago
  > I actually laughed out loud at the Java.com homepage. I was so surprised, I expected a sleek, modern homepage but instead I got a portal to 2010. The Java download button looks clickable without me having to hover over it. The Kotlin "get-started" link doesn't look clickable, because it's next to a different link that has a different style (both actually are clickable). The Scala one has a download link that also doesn't look clickable. Rubbing salt into the wound, if you click on the second link for Kotlin ("learn more"), the back button doesn't work. Summary Java website: made as obvious as possible, prominent download and search interface on main page; type in your search and press enter. Kotlin: Links differ in appearance from each other, back button broken for some links, which don't even look like links. Cannot type in a search term until after visually finding and clicking a search icon. Then you type in your search term (two-step process). Scala: download link looks like neither a link nor a button. Never found a search button. At least "Back" works. I have to say, the Java landing page works best. That your personal preference is for less obvious and less simple user interfaces doesn't make the simple and easy to use interface a bad choice.
thrower123 6y ago
I maintain that that lull between 1.6 (2006) and 1.7 (2011) did a large amount of harm to Java. Changing too fast is bad; stasis is also bad. They've played catch up pretty well with features that proved themselves useful in other languages quite well in recent years, but it really fell behind over that five year stretch.
joshxyz 6y ago
When I tried android dev I jumped to Kotlin because it's well presented Lol
twic 6y ago
This is a funny comparison, for sure. What is really going on here is that there isn't a "the Java website". There is no single organisation or project behind Java which could put such up a website. Similarly, where is the C++ website? The C website? java.com was originally the website aimed at end-users who need to install Java to use desktop applications written in Java. It looks like it's from 2010 because that's when the last of those went extinct.
- veltas 6y ago
  C++ website: https://isocpp.org/ https://isocpp.org/ C website: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/ http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/
- dcchambers 6y ago
  That's a good point, but the various Java JDK websites, intended for developers, really aren't any better. - https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase-downloads.html https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase-downloads.ht... - https://jdk.java.net/ https://jdk.java.net/ - https://openjdk.java.net/ https://openjdk.java.net/
  - jopsen 6y ago
    Is javadoc any better these days?
oftenwrong 6y ago
This is both hilarious and a great point. Java has no "cool factor". HN headlines will add "written in Rust/Go/Julia/Elixir" for coolness points. If you put "written in Java", it would actually make it seem less cool.

Jaxkr 6y ago

I actually laughed out loud at the Java.com homepage. I was so surprised, I expected a sleek, modern homepage but instead I got a portal to 2010.

systemvoltage 6y ago
To be fair, lots of websites were far better in 2010 than today’s white space filled, massive typography, bright colored potpourri of rounded corners, scroll jacked bullshit. Full screen, infinite scroll, hamburger menus. So many awful contemporary design choices. Don’t pool it all together with this Java website - which sucks but not because it was from 2010. I abhor and loathe modern web design.
- Jaxkr 6y ago
  I love old web design too. Sometimes I go look at 2007 WorldOfWarcraft.com on Archive.org to enjoy old design. I just remember the Java.com homepage from visiting it in computer lab in 2011 so I could play Minecraft.
tmerr 6y ago
You weren't kidding. The page has barely been tweaked since 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20080701171554/http://java.com/en/ https://web.archive.org/web/20080701171554/http://java.com/e...
kasperni 6y ago
The website is a leftover from when you had to download Java to run programs. Microsoft Silverlight homepage have a similar simplistic feel[1]. I expect it to be updated at some point once there is no need for people to download a JRE. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/ https://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/
toyg 6y ago
That's more like 2000-2005. By 2010 we had GMail and clumsy 3d gradients were on their way out.
lelanthran 6y ago
> I actually laughed out loud at the Java.com homepage. I was so surprised, I expected a sleek, modern homepage but instead I got a portal to 2010. The Java download button looks clickable without me having to hover over it. The Kotlin "get-started" link doesn't look clickable, because it's next to a different link that has a different style (both actually are clickable). The Scala one has a download link that also doesn't look clickable. Rubbing salt into the wound, if you click on the second link for Kotlin ("learn more"), the back button doesn't work. Summary Java website: made as obvious as possible, prominent download and search interface on main page; type in your search and press enter. Kotlin: Links differ in appearance from each other, back button broken for some links, which don't even look like links. Cannot type in a search term until after visually finding and clicking a search icon. Then you type in your search term (two-step process). Scala: download link looks like neither a link nor a button. Never found a search button. At least "Back" works. I have to say, the Java landing page works best. That your personal preference is for less obvious and less simple user interfaces doesn't make the simple and easy to use interface a bad choice.

thrower123 6y ago

I maintain that that lull between 1.6 (2006) and 1.7 (2011) did a large amount of harm to Java. Changing too fast is bad; stasis is also bad. They've played catch up pretty well with features that proved themselves useful in other languages quite well in recent years, but it really fell behind over that five year stretch.

joshxyz 6y ago

When I tried android dev I jumped to Kotlin because it's well presented Lol

twic 6y ago

This is a funny comparison, for sure. What is really going on here is that there isn't a "the Java website". There is no single organisation or project behind Java which could put such up a website. Similarly, where is the C++ website? The C website? java.com was originally the website aimed at end-users who need to install Java to use desktop applications written in Java. It looks like it's from 2010 because that's when the last of those went extinct.

veltas 6y ago
C++ website: https://isocpp.org/ https://isocpp.org/ C website: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/ http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/
dcchambers 6y ago
That's a good point, but the various Java JDK websites, intended for developers, really aren't any better. - https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase-downloads.html https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase-downloads.ht... - https://jdk.java.net/ https://jdk.java.net/ - https://openjdk.java.net/ https://openjdk.java.net/
- jopsen 6y ago
  Is javadoc any better these days?

oftenwrong 6y ago

This is both hilarious and a great point. Java has no "cool factor". HN headlines will add "written in Rust/Go/Julia/Elixir" for coolness points. If you put "written in Java", it would actually make it seem less cool.