Every website in this world is served as HTML and JavaScript (excluding plugins like Flash); that's all web browsers can interpret. The underlying code is (for the most part) indiscernible to the end user. For example, you wouldn't be able to significantly discern between a .NET web app coded in VB, a .NET web app…

I'm sorry Dave, but it does get more Eurostile than that.

It's really annoying whenever someone points out that language evolves as evidence to negate the value of semantics.

Guardians of the Galaxy got you all excited for space movies again? I feel like there may have been a few other good space movies recently...

Without any plugins (e.g. Flash), "server-side code" (i.e. web applications) are served to the browser as HTML and JavaScript; whatever the programming language may be, it ends up as HTML and JavaScript for the end-user.

You totally missed the OP's point; there is no reason to needlessly "pick up" other languages because learning new languages is easy if you're a competent programmer.

Pretty much. Once you can program, learning a new language is really just a matter of understanding the different syntax.

I rarely see any desktop applications that are built in Java, most of them are C family and .NET.

Each language provides their own benefits (and detriments). For example, the difference between compiled code and interpreted code is significant. Also, it's hard to provide enough reason to convert to or introduce another language in existing ecosystems, systems, and teams.

Java isn't "trending" because of apps; it's one of the oldest and most widely used programming languages.

Because any professional can pick it up fairly quickly. It almost doesn't even count as a programming language...

Interestingly enough, Java tops the list for all of the rankings. To account for the weighting to be skewed by people needing help with the languages rather than actual popularity, IEEE Spectrum separated some sources to differentiate between queries that were asking questions versus resources for current coders. See…

Those are full distros intended to be packaged with software (e.g. for use in an install wizard), rather than actual updates.

Right there with ya; the thought of having a mobile app be the "core" rather than always-on hardware doesn't jive well with me... :(

The plot thickens... According to Wink's site (which is surprisingly uninformative), Hue devices are compatible with the Wink app and do not require the Wink Hub. So it seems the Hue Bridge (which would control Hue devices) relays communications to and from the Wink App.

Oh~ There may be hope after all! Thanks for the lead!

Well, yea, an Aerostich suit is the best!

Alternatively, you could just keep a rain suit in your backpack... It's not like they take up a lot of space when stowed.

Hm, both the Wink Hub and Hue Bridge use wi-fi for communication with connected devices. Really, that similarity is what triggered my curiosity; if they both use wi-fi, it's possible the Wink Hub could totally replicate the Hue Bridge, making it unnecessary or redundant.