Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > what can't you do in swing but in awt?

Reply
Thread Tools

what can't you do in swing but in awt?

 
 
glin@tollnz.co.nz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2005
what can't you do in swing but in awt? thank you.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alex Molochnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2005
Swing is a superset of AWT. So, by definition, anything that you can do in
AWT, you can do in Swing.

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> what can't you do in swing but in awt? thank you.
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Casey Hawthorne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2005
First:

Some operations might be simpler in AWT!

Second:

For a resource light device (PDA, cell) you might need to use AWT
which is much lighter than Swing!

AWT - Awkward Windows Toolkit

--
Regards,
Casey
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alex Molochnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2005
The question was stated in the unqualified form: what can you do in AWT that
cannot be done in Swing. And the answer to THAT question remains: nothing.
Whether the operations might be simpler is of no consequence here, since AWT
has reduced functionality in comparison with Swing, and for this reason
alone is simpler in all respects. And AWT is, of course, lighter than
Swing - which again has nothing to do with the OP question.

"Casey Hawthorne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> First:
>
> Some operations might be simpler in AWT!
>
> Second:
>
> For a resource light device (PDA, cell) you might need to use AWT
> which is much lighter than Swing!
>
> AWT - Awkward Windows Toolkit
>
> --
> Regards,
> Casey



 
Reply With Quote
 
Hal Rosser
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2005
You can operate in a java 1.1 environment with awt - but not with swing

"Alex Molochnikov" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:VY4Xd.599318$6l.200383@pd7tw2no...
> The question was stated in the unqualified form: what can you do in AWT

that
> cannot be done in Swing. And the answer to THAT question remains: nothing.
> Whether the operations might be simpler is of no consequence here, since

AWT
> has reduced functionality in comparison with Swing, and for this reason
> alone is simpler in all respects. And AWT is, of course, lighter than
> Swing - which again has nothing to do with the OP question.
>
> "Casey Hawthorne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > First:
> >
> > Some operations might be simpler in AWT!
> >
> > Second:
> >
> > For a resource light device (PDA, cell) you might need to use AWT
> > which is much lighter than Swing!
> >
> > AWT - Awkward Windows Toolkit
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Casey

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Alex Molochnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2005
"Hal Rosser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:kF7Xd.5183$(E-Mail Removed)...
> You can operate in a java 1.1 environment with awt - but not with swing


Perhaps you forgot to put a smiley at the end of your statement. Otherwise
it is hard to take seriously claims of Swing deficiency in the timeframe
before Swing came into existence.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Wiseguy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2005
"Alex Molochnikov" <(E-Mail Removed)> scribbled on the stall wall:
> The question was stated in the unqualified form: what can you do in AWT that
> cannot be done in Swing. And the answer to THAT question remains: nothing.
> Whether the operations might be simpler is of no consequence here, since AWT
> has reduced functionality in comparison with Swing, and for this reason
> alone is simpler in all respects. And AWT is, of course, lighter than
> Swing - which again has nothing to do with the OP question.


Is AWT really (lighter) than Swing? I guess it depends on your definition
of lighter.

From page 3 of Sun's Mastering the JFC:

Swing is a set of mostly lightweight components built on top the AWT.
Swing provides lightweight replacements for the AWT's heavyweight components,


The introduction chapter gives a lengthy description of the history of
Swing and how it is suppose to overcome the (serious flaws) in the AWT
peer-to-peer architecture.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alex Molochnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2005
"Wiseguy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:422d4519$1_1@127.0.0.1...
> Is AWT really (lighter) than Swing? I guess it depends on your definition
> of lighter.
>
> From page 3 of Sun's Mastering the JFC:
>
> Swing is a set of mostly lightweight components built on top the AWT.
> Swing provides lightweight replacements for the AWT's heavyweight

components,

It is. Don't be misled by the word "lightweight" in the Sun's description of
Swing. In Sun's terminology, "lightweight" means not dependent on the native
GUI components of the underlying platform, the native components being
considered "heavy". Performance and memory-wise, Swing is much heavier than
AWT.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Rogan Dawes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2005
Alex Molochnikov wrote:
> "Hal Rosser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:kF7Xd.5183$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>You can operate in a java 1.1 environment with awt - but not with swing

>
>
> Perhaps you forgot to put a smiley at the end of your statement. Otherwise
> it is hard to take seriously claims of Swing deficiency in the timeframe
> before Swing came into existence.
>


I think it was actually a fair comment, and did not require smiley's.

The reality is that there are still Java 1.1 environments around
(Windows 95, Win98?), and if you are writing an applet, you need to
consider this.

Rogan
--
Rogan Dawes

*ALL* messages to http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) will be dropped, and added
to my blacklist. Please respond to "nntp AT dawes DOT za DOT net"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alex Molochnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2005
"Rogan Dawes" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:d0jm5c$qfp$(E-Mail Removed)...
> I think it was actually a fair comment, and did not require smiley's.
>
> The reality is that there are still Java 1.1 environments around
> (Windows 95, Win98?), and if you are writing an applet, you need to
> consider this.


I cannot imagine anyone writing for Java 1.1 env. these days - where would
one even get it from? Applets are all but extinct now, and the few that
still survive make use of Java plugin available from Sun - and it ain't 1.1.

Again, the original question was - what can be done in AWT that cannot be
done in Swing? And my answer still is: nothing.

The lifespan of this thread has already far exceeded its importance, and the
OP does not seem to care of the result of this debate either way, so I will
let you have the final word in it.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swing is dead! Long live Swing. Knute Johnson Java 32 02-29-2012 05:10 PM
Why not using javax.swing.event with swing? S.T Java 2 05-25-2007 12:10 AM
javax.swing.Popup, javax.swing.PopupFactory lizard Java 0 01-30-2006 09:34 PM
Swing Model Classes Updating Swing Components on a Thread Other Than AWT mkrause Java 0 05-06-2005 04:32 PM
Java 1.2 Swing vs. Java 1.5 Swing Big Daddy Java 2 04-16-2005 01:14 PM



Advertisments