Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
grahpical interface?

Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
great.

Thanks.

BillJosephson wrote:
> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
> bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
> develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
> grahpical interface?
> 
> Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
> great.

My guess is that it just means that those where the Windows
versions available when Codewarrior 7 was released.

It will probably work fine on XP.

I don't know the product, but if it is professionally
grade, then you can configure it to use a newer Java version
(even though maybe syntax highlighting may not work optimal
with the new Java 1.5 syntaxes).

Arne

BillJosephson wrote:

> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered
> on my bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000,
> ME.  Can I develop a command line application that will work on my
> XT machine? A grahpical interface?

Are you meaning Windows XP? If so, you should already be aware that XP 
is a descendant of the NT/2000 family (in opposition to the 9x 
family). So the answer to your question is: yes.

> Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that
> would be great.

FWIW, Microsoft's Visual C++ 2005 Express edition is free for 
download. Just google for it.

Cheers,
-- 
IR

IR wrote:

> BillJosephson wrote:
> 
>> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++

I forgot to mention Eclipse for Java development (which is free also).

Incidentally, you could also use it's CDT plugin for C++ development.


Cheers,
-- 
IR

BillJosephson wrote:
> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
> bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
> develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
> grahpical interface?

Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
simply won't be possible to do real Java development.

If you're looking to write Java code, you're going to need newer
hardware.  I recommend at least a Pentium I (80586 processor) as an
absolute minimum.  And then, for the Microsoft Windows family, you'll
need Windows 2000 or newer (e.g., Windows XP) to use the current
version of Java -- scrap Windows 95/98/ME since these are no longer
supported by Microsoft (and Windows ME will be soon if it hasn't been
discontinued already).

You might also consider using Unix or Linux (I recommend NetBSD Unix
with Gnome {GUI} because they aren't known to be memory hogs, and
NetBSD has a very novice-friendly support community in IRC, etc.) if
you can't afford the newest hardware since the hefty cost of a Windows
license can be used to purchase better hardware.

As for C++, you can probably do it with an XT, but that's beyond the
scope of the Java newsgroup you posted this in.

> Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
> great.

If I were you, I'd worry about getting a newer computer -- you
obviously got more value out of your XT than anyone I know given that
the 8088 processor is ancient hardware nowadays.  Given the speed
difference between an XT processor (typically up to 8 MHz) and modern
PC processors (typically measured in GHz which is well over 1,000 times
faster given additional enhancements such as Caching, Pipelining,
HyperThreading, and so much more), it doesn't really make sense to
consider using an XT for any levels of serious software development
anymore.

> Thanks.

You're welcome, and congratulations on having an XT that actually still
works (maybe the Guiness Book of World Records will add an entry for
you in their next book?).  =)

kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
> BillJosephson wrote:
>> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
>> bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
>> develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
>> grahpical interface?
> 
> Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
> 80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
> versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
> since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
> earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
> simply won't be possible to do real Java development.

The other replies has assumed that XT was typo and the
poster meant XP.

Well - it do say XT.

Arne

Arne Vajh=F8j wrote:
[sNip]
> The other replies has assumed that XT was typo and the
> poster meant XP.
>
> Well - it do say XT.

Considering that one of my clients just got rid of their XT less than 2
years ago (they sure got their money's worth out of it), it didn't seem
all that unrealistic.  Anyway, good-bye DOS, and hello Java & friends!

BillJosephson wrote:
>>> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++

IR wrote:
> I forgot to mention Eclipse for Java development (which is free also).
> 
> Incidentally, you could also use it's [sic] CDT plugin for C++ development.

There are many IDEs (integrated development environments) available for Java 
development, and few not-so-I DEs like emacs, many of which are free. Java 
itself is free ("as in beer").

GIYF.

- Lew

Lew wrote:
>  Java itself is free ("as in beer").
> 
And in Speech.  Sun is GPL'ing Java.

kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
> 
> 
> Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
> 80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
> versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
> since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
> earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
> simply won't be possible to do real Java development.
> 

No, 2.11 would run on a straight 8088.  Not very well, but it *would* run.

Even Windows 3.0 would run on an 8088 in real mode.  Windows 3.1 was the 
first version (not counting Windows/386) which would not run on an 8088.

Arne Vajh�j wrote:
> The other replies has assumed that XT was typo and the
> poster meant XP.
> 
> Well - it do say XT.

Two things make me think that the OP actually meant XP:

- "WinXT" in the post subject
- the mention of a _newer_ compiler

But well, I guess only the OP can tell ;-)


Cheers,
-- 
IR

kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
> BillJosephson wrote:
> > Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
> > bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
> > develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
> > grahpical interface?
>
> Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
> 80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
> versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
> since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
> earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
> simply won't be possible to do real Java development.
>
> If you're looking to write Java code, you're going to need newer
> hardware.  I recommend at least a Pentium I (80586 processor) as an
> absolute minimum.  And then, for the Microsoft Windows family, you'll
> need Windows 2000 or newer (e.g., Windows XP) to use the current
> version of Java -- scrap Windows 95/98/ME since these are no longer
> supported by Microsoft (and Windows ME will be soon if it hasn't been
> discontinued already).
>
> You might also consider using Unix or Linux (I recommend NetBSD Unix
> with Gnome {GUI} because they aren't known to be memory hogs, and
> NetBSD has a very novice-friendly support community in IRC, etc.) if
> you can't afford the newest hardware since the hefty cost of a Windows
> license can be used to purchase better hardware.
>
> As for C++, you can probably do it with an XT, but that's beyond the
> scope of the Java newsgroup you posted this in.
>
> > Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> > compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
> > great.
>
> If I were you, I'd worry about getting a newer computer -- you
> obviously got more value out of your XT than anyone I know given that
> the 8088 processor is ancient hardware nowadays.  Given the speed
> difference between an XT processor (typically up to 8 MHz) and modern
> PC processors (typically measured in GHz which is well over 1,000 times
> faster given additional enhancements such as Caching, Pipelining,
> HyperThreading, and so much more), it doesn't really make sense to
> consider using an XT for any levels of serious software development
> anymore.
>
> > Thanks.
>
> You're welcome, and congratulations on having an XT that actually still
> works (maybe the Guiness Book of World Records will add an entry for
> you in their next book?).  =)



Hi, sorry for my mistake, I meant a PC running windows XT. I have
several machines I can use from my Dell D800 laptop to my dual opteron
workstations.

I fuzzily recall that there machines called XTs.

I also remember going to a little dumpy shop in a strip mall that sold
computers back in the 80s. They had two kinds, and I think the least
powerful was an XT, and the more powerful was an AT and that was the
only kinds of PCs then. The AT was an 80286 I think and the XT was just
an 8086.  The person who owned that little shop in Austin was named
Michael Dell.

BillJosephson wrote:
> kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
> > BillJosephson wrote:
> > > Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
> > > bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
> > > develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
> > > grahpical interface?
> >
> > Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
> > 80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
> > versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
> > since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
> > earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
> > simply won't be possible to do real Java development.
> >
> > If you're looking to write Java code, you're going to need newer
> > hardware.  I recommend at least a Pentium I (80586 processor) as an
> > absolute minimum.  And then, for the Microsoft Windows family, you'll
> > need Windows 2000 or newer (e.g., Windows XP) to use the current
> > version of Java -- scrap Windows 95/98/ME since these are no longer
> > supported by Microsoft (and Windows ME will be soon if it hasn't been
> > discontinued already).
> >
> > You might also consider using Unix or Linux (I recommend NetBSD Unix
> > with Gnome {GUI} because they aren't known to be memory hogs, and
> > NetBSD has a very novice-friendly support community in IRC, etc.) if
> > you can't afford the newest hardware since the hefty cost of a Windows
> > license can be used to purchase better hardware.
> >
> > As for C++, you can probably do it with an XT, but that's beyond the
> > scope of the Java newsgroup you posted this in.
> >
> > > Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> > > compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
> > > great.
> >
> > If I were you, I'd worry about getting a newer computer -- you
> > obviously got more value out of your XT than anyone I know given that
> > the 8088 processor is ancient hardware nowadays.  Given the speed
> > difference between an XT processor (typically up to 8 MHz) and modern
> > PC processors (typically measured in GHz which is well over 1,000 times
> > faster given additional enhancements such as Caching, Pipelining,
> > HyperThreading, and so much more), it doesn't really make sense to
> > consider using an XT for any levels of serious software development
> > anymore.
> >
> > > Thanks.
> >
> > You're welcome, and congratulations on having an XT that actually still
> > works (maybe the Guiness Book of World Records will add an entry for
> > you in their next book?).  =)
>
>
>
> Hi, sorry for my mistake, I meant a PC running windows XT. I have
> several machines I can use from my Dell D800 laptop to my dual opteron
> workstations.
>
> I fuzzily recall that there machines called XTs.
>
> I also remember going to a little dumpy shop in a strip mall that sold
> computers back in the 80s. They had two kinds, and I think the least
> powerful was an XT, and the more powerful was an AT and that was the
> only kinds of PCs then. The AT was an 80286 I think and the XT was just
> an 8086.  The person who owned that little shop in Austin was named
> Michael Dell.


Duh.....WindowsXP !!   My brain took MLK day off.

Lew wrote:
>>  Java itself is free ("as in beer").

red floyd wrote:
> And in Speech.  Sun is GPL'ing Java.

Personally I only care about the "as in beer" part.

- Lew

red floyd wrote:
> kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
>
> > Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
> > 80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
> > versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
> > since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
> > earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
> > simply won't be possible to do real Java development.
>
> No, 2.11 would run on a straight 8088.  Not very well, but it *would* run.
>
> Even Windows 3.0 would run on an 8088 in real mode.  Windows 3.1 was the
> first version (not counting Windows/386) which would not run on an 8088.

Oh yeah, that's right.  It wouldn't be of much use though because most
of the useful applications for Windows 2.x required an 80286 processor,
and for Windows 3.0 required an 80386 processor respectively.  It was
certainly enough for countless hours of Solitaire and Reversi [0]
though.

[0] "Othello" is the better-known name for that game.

BillJosephson wrote:
> BillJosephson wrote:
> > kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
> > > BillJosephson wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
> > > > bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
> > > > develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
> > > > grahpical interface?
> > >
> > > Windows 2.11 (the earliest version I've ever seen), which requires an
> > > 80286 processor, won't even run on an XT, let alone any of the Windows
> > > versions you mentioned.  The XT is primarily useful as a DOS machine
> > > since it's limited to a maximum of ~1 MB of RAM.  Since Windows 3.x and
> > > earlier, and those older DOS versions, don't support long filenames, it
> > > simply won't be possible to do real Java development.
> > >
> > > If you're looking to write Java code, you're going to need newer
> > > hardware.  I recommend at least a Pentium I (80586 processor) as an
> > > absolute minimum.  And then, for the Microsoft Windows family, you'll
> > > need Windows 2000 or newer (e.g., Windows XP) to use the current
> > > version of Java -- scrap Windows 95/98/ME since these are no longer
> > > supported by Microsoft (and Windows ME will be soon if it hasn't been
> > > discontinued already).
> > >
> > > You might also consider using Unix or Linux (I recommend NetBSD Unix
> > > with Gnome {GUI} because they aren't known to be memory hogs, and
> > > NetBSD has a very novice-friendly support community in IRC, etc.) if
> > > you can't afford the newest hardware since the hefty cost of a Windows
> > > license can be used to purchase better hardware.
> > >
> > > As for C++, you can probably do it with an XT, but that's beyond the
> > > scope of the Java newsgroup you posted this in.
> > >
> > > > Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> > > > compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
> > > > great.
> > >
> > > If I were you, I'd worry about getting a newer computer -- you
> > > obviously got more value out of your XT than anyone I know given that
> > > the 8088 processor is ancient hardware nowadays.  Given the speed
> > > difference between an XT processor (typically up to 8 MHz) and modern
> > > PC processors (typically measured in GHz which is well over 1,000 times
> > > faster given additional enhancements such as Caching, Pipelining,
> > > HyperThreading, and so much more), it doesn't really make sense to
> > > consider using an XT for any levels of serious software development
> > > anymore.
> > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > You're welcome, and congratulations on having an XT that actually still
> > > works (maybe the Guiness Book of World Records will add an entry for
> > > you in their next book?).  =)
> >
> > Hi, sorry for my mistake, I meant a PC running windows XT. I have
> > several machines I can use from my Dell D800 laptop to my dual opteron
> > workstations.
> >
> > I fuzzily recall that there machines called XTs.
> >
> > I also remember going to a little dumpy shop in a strip mall that sold
> > computers back in the 80s. They had two kinds, and I think the least
> > powerful was an XT, and the more powerful was an AT and that was the
> > only kinds of PCs then. The AT was an 80286 I think and the XT was just
> > an 8086.  The person who owned that little shop in Austin was named
> > Michael Dell.
>
> Duh.....WindowsXP !!   My brain took MLK day off.

Heheh, that was fascinating!  Thanks for not giving up on us.  =)

Lew wrote:
> BillJosephson wrote:
> >>> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++
>
> IR wrote:
> > I forgot to mention Eclipse for Java development (which is free also).
> >
> > Incidentally, you could also use it's [sic] CDT plugin for C++ development.
>
> There are many IDEs (integrated development environments) available for Java
> development, and few not-so-I DEs like emacs, many of which are free. Java
> itself is free ("as in beer").
>
> GIYF.
>
> - Lew

Yeah, I looked at this a while back. I like the sound of jEdit but
never could figure out how to get it configured like an IDE, with
debugger window and a way to watch variables, etc. There just doesn't
seem to be much approachable documentation.

Would you recommend an IDE that sort of looke like Visual IDEs or
Codewarrior? With an editor window, a debugger with conditional
breakpoints, a way to watch varibles, an output window....all at the
same time?
Preferrably with lots of clear documentation?

Thanks.....

BillJosephson wrote:
> Would you recommend an IDE that sort of looke like Visual IDEs or
> Codewarrior? With an editor window, a debugger with conditional
> breakpoints, a way to watch varibles, an output window....all at the
> same time?
> Preferrably with lots of clear documentation?

I'm not familiar with Codewarrior but I suspect most IDEs would fit the 
requirements stated. I use Eclipse, it does all the above.

In article <1168934738.134795.130270@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, 
billjosephson@hotmail.com says...
> 
> Lew wrote:
> > BillJosephson wrote:
> > >>> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++
> >
> > IR wrote:
> > > I forgot to mention Eclipse for Java development (which is free also).
> > >
> > > Incidentally, you could also use it's [sic] CDT plugin for C++ development.
> >
> > There are many IDEs (integrated development environments) available for Java
> > development, and few not-so-I DEs like emacs, many of which are free. Java
> > itself is free ("as in beer").
> >
> > GIYF.
> >
> > - Lew
> 
> Yeah, I looked at this a while back. I like the sound of jEdit but
> never could figure out how to get it configured like an IDE, with
> debugger window and a way to watch variables, etc. There just doesn't
> seem to be much approachable documentation.
> 
> Would you recommend an IDE that sort of looke like Visual IDEs or
> Codewarrior? With an editor window, a debugger with conditional
> breakpoints, a way to watch varibles, an output window....all at the
> same time?

Eclipse.  If you only need java support, you could also look at the free 
version of NetBeans.

-- 
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the 
newsgroups if possible).

David Kerber wrote:
> Eclipse.  If you only need java support, you could also look at the free 
> version of NetBeans.

All versions of NetBeans are free.

- Lew

In article <3_idncfviZRFSzHYnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com>, 
lew@nowhere.com says...
> David Kerber wrote:
> > Eclipse.  If you only need java support, you could also look at the free 
> > version of NetBeans.
> 
> All versions of NetBeans are free.

Ok, thanks.  Somehow I had it in my mind that they had both free and 
non-free versions.

-- 
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the 
newsgroups if possible).

kingpin+nntp@lumbercartel.ca wrote:
> [0] "Othello" is the better-known name for that game.

"Othello" is a trademark. "Reversi" is the real name of the game, far 
older, and not a trademark.

-- 
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
   -- Charles Williams.  "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"

David Kerber wrote:
> In article <3_idncfviZRFSzHYnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com>, 
> lew@nowhere.com says...
>> David Kerber wrote:
>>> Eclipse.  If you only need java support, you could also look at the free 
>>> version of NetBeans.
>> All versions of NetBeans are free.
> 
> Ok, thanks.  Somehow I had it in my mind that they had both free and 
> non-free versions.

A long time ago SUN sold a modified NetBeans as Forte for Java.

Arne

David Kerber wrote:
> In article <1168934738.134795.130270@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> billjosephson@hotmail.com says...
> >
> > Lew wrote:
> > > BillJosephson wrote:
> > > >>> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++
> > >
> > > IR wrote:
> > > > I forgot to mention Eclipse for Java development (which is free also).
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, you could also use it's [sic] CDT plugin for C++ development.
> > >
> > > There are many IDEs (integrated development environments) available for Java
> > > development, and few not-so-I DEs like emacs, many of which are free. Java
> > > itself is free ("as in beer").
> > >
> > > GIYF.
> > >
> > > - Lew
> >
> > Yeah, I looked at this a while back. I like the sound of jEdit but
> > never could figure out how to get it configured like an IDE, with
> > debugger window and a way to watch variables, etc. There just doesn't
> > seem to be much approachable documentation.
> >
> > Would you recommend an IDE that sort of looke like Visual IDEs or
> > Codewarrior? With an editor window, a debugger with conditional
> > breakpoints, a way to watch varibles, an output window....all at the
> > same time?
>
> Eclipse.  If you only need java support, you could also look at the free
> version of NetBeans.
>
> --
> Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
> newsgroups if possible).


Thanks. I tried netbeans but it looked like it was going to take some
work to get a handle on. For one, I didn't see  how to set it up with
variable watch window, code window....I imagine it can do it and I
should take the time to check into it, since after all it does come
free with java. 

Is Eclipse free?

In article <1168996902.771768.324960@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, 
billjosephson@hotmail.com says...

....

> > > Would you recommend an IDE that sort of looke like Visual IDEs or
> > > Codewarrior? With an editor window, a debugger with conditional
> > > breakpoints, a way to watch varibles, an output window....all at the
> > > same time?
> >
> > Eclipse.  If you only need java support, you could also look at the free
> > version of NetBeans.
> >
> > --
> > Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
> > newsgroups if possible).
> 
> 
> Thanks. I tried netbeans but it looked like it was going to take some
> work to get a handle on. For one, I didn't see  how to set it up with
> variable watch window, code window....I imagine it can do it and I
> should take the time to check into it, since after all it does come
> free with java. 

Yes, it has all those functions; you just have to learn how to activate 
them.

> 
> Is Eclipse free?

Yes, from www.eclipse.org.  I found it a bit less intuitive than 
netbeans, with a somewhat (though not dramatically) steeper learning 
curve, but it is also more versatile, since it can work with other 
languages than just java.

-- 
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the 
newsgroups if possible).

In article <1168888483.455270.97660@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com>, 
billjosephson@hotmail.com says...
> Hi, I want to write a program in Java or C++, and just discovered on my
> bookshelve Codewarrior 7. It says Windows 95, 98, NT, 2000, ME.  Can I
> develop a command line application that will work on my XT machine? A
> grahpical interface?

Win2K and WinXP are quite similar in what they will run, so I would 
think you're probably ok.

> 
> Thanks a lot for any thoughts on this. I know I should get a newer
> compiler but if I could save the money for the time being that would be
> great.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 

-- 
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the 
newsgroups if possible).

David Kerber wrote:
> 
> 
>>Is Eclipse free?
> 
> 
> Yes, from www.eclipse.org.  I found it a bit less intuitive than 
> netbeans, with a somewhat (though not dramatically) steeper learning 
> curve, but it is also more versatile, since it can work with other 
> languages than just java.
> 

Starting with version 5.5, Netbeans has a C++ plugin, available free 
from the Netbeans website.

lew@nowhere.com says...
>> All versions of NetBeans are free.

Arne Vajh�j wrote:
> A long time ago SUN sold a modified NetBeans as Forte for Java.

Which was not called NetBeans.

- Lew

Greymaus wrote:
> Starting with version 5.5, Netbeans has a C++ plugin, available free 
> from the Netbeans website.

For gcc C/ C++, I have found nothing I like better than emacs, make and gdb.

emacs has wonderful integration for these tools.

For Java I prefer Netbeans. I also use Eclipse and WebSphere Application 
Developer, also emacs + Ant. I have used a handful of others.

- Lew

Lew wrote:
> Greymaus wrote:
> > Starting with version 5.5, Netbeans has a C++ plugin, available free
> > from the Netbeans website.
>
> For gcc C/ C++, I have found nothing I like better than emacs, make and gdb.
>
> emacs has wonderful integration for these tools.
>
> For Java I prefer Netbeans. I also use Eclipse and WebSphere Application
> Developer, also emacs + Ant. I have used a handful of others.
>
> - Lew


Lew, do you do much graphical interfacd development?  I've used emacs,
and I wonder if it has tools like graphical interface development tools
these days. Also, how does it do in integrating with APIs (I mean
toolboxes that work with a parcitular OS)?

Thanks.

> Lew wrote:
>> For gcc C/ C++, I have found nothing I like better than emacs, make and gdb.
>>
>> emacs has wonderful integration for these tools.
>>
>> For Java I prefer Netbeans. I also use Eclipse and WebSphere Application
>> Developer, also emacs + Ant. I have used a handful of others.

BillJosephson wrote:
> Lew, do you do much graphical interfacd development?  I've used emacs,
> and I wonder if it has tools like graphical interface development tools
> these days. Also, how does it do in integrating with APIs (I mean
> toolboxes that work with a parcitular OS)?

I am not using emacs for heavy development these days because Netbeans is 
stronger for Java. When I used emacs for C++ I did not miss GUI wizards, I 
just programmed from the source text and did many compile/run cycles to test 
the output. I would also write a GUI-only facade and test it, then inherit 
that to fill in the logic (sort of a "poor-man's MVC" before I was familiar 
with the MVC pattern).

To step back, your question has me re-evaluate my position. I still use emacs 
for small, quick steps, but I think by now I am addicted to IDEs for major 
sessions of work.

- Lew

Lew wrote:
> lew@nowhere.com says...
>>> All versions of NetBeans are free.
> 
> Arne Vajh�j wrote:
>> A long time ago SUN sold a modified NetBeans as Forte for Java.
> 
> Which was not called NetBeans.

It is still a version of NetBeans even though it
does not have NetBeans in the name.

WSAD is also a version of Eclipse.

WAS CE is a version of Geronimo.

IBM HTTPD is a version of Apache HTTPD.

Etc.

Arne

Lew wrote:
> > Lew wrote:
> >> For gcc C/ C++, I have found nothing I like better than emacs, make and gdb.
> >>
> >> emacs has wonderful integration for these tools.
> >>
> >> For Java I prefer Netbeans. I also use Eclipse and WebSphere Application
> >> Developer, also emacs + Ant. I have used a handful of others.
>
> BillJosephson wrote:
> > Lew, do you do much graphical interfacd development?  I've used emacs,
> > and I wonder if it has tools like graphical interface development tools
> > these days. Also, how does it do in integrating with APIs (I mean
> > toolboxes that work with a parcitular OS)?
>
> I am not using emacs for heavy development these days because Netbeans is
> stronger for Java. When I used emacs for C++ I did not miss GUI wizards, I
> just programmed from the source text and did many compile/run cycles to test
> the output. I would also write a GUI-only facade and test it, then inherit
> that to fill in the logic (sort of a "poor-man's MVC" before I was familiar
> with the MVC pattern).
>
> To step back, your question has me re-evaluate my position. I still use emacs
> for small, quick steps, but I think by now I am addicted to IDEs for major
> sessions of work.
>
> - Lew

Yeah, Codewarrior on the Mac did that for me. I am spoiled. There was a
pretty nice IDE under KDE on Linux, not sure what's up with that now.
Since you seem a nice chap....can you suggest the quickest thing to
read to get on top of net beans enough to configure it like a good IDE?
 When I took a java class I downloaded it along with the runtime engine
from Sun, so I figure it must be OK, but it seemed like it was going to
take some time (read: too much RTFM) to get going so I did the class
with jGRASP. Not a very good environment though. So if you have any
suggestions that would be great. Maybe the supplied docs are the way to
go though. Just was hoping for something like the third party books
that got me up and running with Codewarrior so much faster than the
voluminous Metrowerks docs.

Thanks...

Lew wrote:
> lew@nowhere.com says...
>>> All versions of NetBeans are free.
>
> Arne Vajh�j wrote:
>> A long time ago SUN sold a modified NetBeans as Forte for Java.

ITYM "Attempted to sell".

>
> Which was not called NetBeans.

At times it was and at times not.  The basic Forte for Java was free and was 
clearly a packaged and branded version of Netbeans.  Sun attempted to sell 
"advanced" Netbeans modules for building web applications and EJBs. 

Mike Schilling wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> lew@nowhere.com says...
>>>> All versions of NetBeans are free.
>> Arne Vajh�j wrote:
>>> A long time ago SUN sold a modified NetBeans as Forte for Java.
> 
> ITYM "Attempted to sell".

About right.

:-)

Arne