b> Did someone use java to write compilers, linkers, loaders?

It’s not right for Cappuccino to compete with jquery for everyday web sites, or even web apps of flickr or flickr demo type or most of the web apps built today.
Cappuccino would loose.

But it’s not right for jquery to compete with Cappuccino for the types of apps which Cappuccino is supposed to build like 280 slides or a web version of photoshop.

I have been using jQuery for years now. However,

I see the need for Cappuccino, imagining the kind of web we are dreaming to build.

Cappuccino definitely has some fantastic technology – but to count jQuery out as script-kiddie is a plain lie.

I just wrote up a post that goes into depth about what Cappuccino is, when to use it vs jQuery, and why. Love your thoughts:

http://welcome.totheinter.net/2008/09/07/cappuccino-taking-the-web-out-of-web-development/

Cheers

I’ve messed around with a few other libs (YUI, Moo, Dojo) but I like JQuery the best — clear and easily understood syntax, small library footprint and good performance. Plus a wide array of plugins and an active, friendly developer community.

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~dburger/demos/prototype/flickr/flickr.html

display: -moz-inline-box; /* Firefox 2 */
display: inline-block; /* Firefox 3, IE8, etc. */
*display: inline; /* IE7 and lower; star hack. */

The last line, which starts with an asterisk (a syntax error), is only recognized by IE7 and lower. It takes advantage of IE’s broken box model to emulate inline-block using an inline element with hasLayout. By setting the width, you’re already triggering hasLayout, so all we need to do is make sure IE sees the element as inline. The star hack is used to hide this change.

- The Cappuccino example works just like iPhoto, when you drag the slider, it does not just resize the images by increasing relative height and width like your jQuery script does, it zooms the images in keeping them centered (both vertically and horizontally) in their own “cell” and each row of cells in its column, until the bounds of the image (and cell) are bigger than the column’s width, therefore moving the image to a new column so it fits. I think that’s a more complex calculation and so takes more time to be processed by the JS engine
- Obj-J or whatever you call the language behind Cappuccino is meant for creating very complex, scalable software (like 280 Slides), with easy handling and desktop-like handling of the project, something I don’t think jQuery can do all by itself. So they have very different publics and objectives, let’s not start comparing them – Cappuccino did wrong by talking about jQuery, but at least they’re saying what is the difference, and not what is better or worse.