I'd initially always suggest using the bundledYou know what, I'm gonna be mighty surprised if you're implying that Oracle hasn't 'tested and proven' the releases at http://www.oracle.com./technology/software/products/sql/index.html other than the first 77 MB download labeled Oracle SQL Developer for Windows... :)
package, since that's supposed to be a tested and
After having problems with a graphics card forHuh?!? Not a clue what you're talkin' 'bout! :S
example, installing the latest JDK might be
It's also easy for users who don't know which JavaFirst of all, it says right there on the download page (http://www.oracle.com./technology/software/products/sql/index.html) that:
version to download, or even where to find it! You
guys have proven that: although it's stated you need
And given users might have several versions runningAnd every JRE installation (atleast all of Sun's) make sure they update the default (via PATH and other required system variables) JRE point to the latest one installed. So if you have anything 1.5+ you're good to go; if not, you've got an incompatile JRE. Doesn't sound that hard to me!
on the same machine (I have half a dozen), sqldev
could easily pick up a wrong version.
As for being bulky, even without the bundled JDK, itYa missed the point. Developers are making Java applications bulkier by including the JRE/JDK with their distributions. A SQL Developer release sans JDK is about 46 MB; with JDK that climbs to 77 MB (sizes quoted from download page linked above).
You say you don't have to bring over the VB runtimeI don't believe you had to do that since VB 5; and that's because MS realized that they messed up on this very point upto then! Sun worked the simple solution to that into their deployment strategy- install only ONE runtime and run all apps off that. As for you're half-a-dozen, I think you can safely uninstall the five older versions; because, even today, people are running apps developed using JDK1.1 on Java SE 6.0!
for each app? I remember in the 90's doing it all the
time. Of course, being MS, now that's not necessary
anymore, since it's "magical" Windows. I don't have
any machine from Sun, but for sure they've got Java
bundled with it, right?
Again, I find the most logical difference between JREI think it's a little naive to differentiate between the JRE and JDK on just the debugger! Aside from the obvious inclusion of a compiler, the JDK has several other tools for monitoring/managing the heap, threads and logging on the fly. There's also the Doclet API and Sun's javadoc implementation, dev interfaces for instrumenting the VM, native interfaces, ...
and JDK being the debugger. As you say it yourself:
JRE for end-users, who don't need to do any
Now, sqldev is not just a table browser, but also for
debugging PL/SQL. 1 + 1 = 2.
Nevertheless, as said in the other thread, if theYou're right, it won't work like a standard Windows OOTB app. But, it WILL work as a Java OOTB that only mandates that there be a JRE available; just like the scores of Java apps out there- from tiny little Pong clones to large IDE's like NetBeans.
team discloses how to circumvent the SDK check at
startup, you can go ahead and use the JRE. In any
case, you'd have to agree that won't work as
It's not because you're such a bright mind thatCute! If I messed up that point, you messed this one up. I didn't mean to be rude then, and I don't mean to e rude now; but, how's about I lob the, "but SQL Developer users are Developers, they should know better" point of view here?
others are so too. Apparently you haven't spend much
time around here. You'd be amazed how many users
screw up the very basics (for starters, did
you read the sticky post on the forum "read
before posting"?). If you want to call them idiots,
go ahead, but Oracle still has to provide for them
too. And after numerous dozens of people missing the
required version and even asking where to download
the SDK, trust me, you'd include the damn thing with
your application too. Still some people think they
download the one "with SDK included", but really it
says "with SDK installed", even they could just have
glanced at the size of the package...
Also you might use new functionality that isThat argument is for developers of Java software, not users.
not available to users with older versions.
You've got still a lot to learn, my friend. (And so have I,I'm with you on that point. We've all got a lot to learn, all our lives. That's the only way to grow.
of course, but you're definitely not one of the
people that can call me naive).
I didn't "differentiate between the JRE and JDK onYou only hurt the people you really love. I love Oracle, I really like SQL Developer and I am pretty much a Java evangelist (hence the strong focus on JRE/JDK separation here). So I'm only carrying this discussion so far because I don't want any of them to be used/implemented incorrectly. The root of my frustration, as clarified in the other discussion (Re: Why mandate a JDK? is that I don't think using JDWP was a very smart choice for a PL/SQL debugger protocol. That's what's forcing the JDK anyway.
just the debugger", just emphasized on it being the
major difference directly related to sqldev.
Apparently you STILL don't get it, because you're
still advocating for the JRE.
You don't see MS apps where you have to copy theI remember having to download and install .NET Framework several times. 1.1, then 2.0 and the download is about the same size as the JRE (and the upcoming 3.0 won't make that easier)
Win32 SDK or VB apps where you have to bring over the
VB runtime for each app, do you?
Sun designed the JRE with that exact deploymentWell it's more the users who don't want to "install" another piece of software just to run the application and so they ask for a complete download.
strategy in mind! It's sad that some Java app
developers just don't get it.