×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

An Open-Source Java Port To iPhone?

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the one-can-hope dept.

Java 148

An anonymous reader writes "With the first anniversary of open-source Java coming up November 13, a Sun official believes the project could bear a fruit much sought-after in the Java community: a Java port to the Apple iPhone. Apple has not released a version of Java capable of running on the popular device. But Sun's Terrence Barr, technical evangelist for the Java mobile and embedded community, believes Apple's plans to release an SDK for iPhone in early 2008 may result in the open-source phoneME version of Java ME winding up on iPhone."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

148 comments

First Post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307599)

FP

Re:First Post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307643)

FLYING PENISES

Re:First Post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307727)

Confucius Say:

Fast girls make slow wives.

Chinese voyeur - only Peking Tom.

Woman who puts husband in dog house, soon finds him in cat house.

Girl who goes to bachelor apartment for snack gets tit bit.

Man robbed by naked woman have stick-up.

Woman with great figure is "anatomic bomb".

Chinese gynecologist say he "dilated" to meet you.

Man who try to hump trees better leave it to beaver.

He who masturbates is self-made man.

Lonely man just have to take hold of himself.

Italian position: man on top, woman in kitchen.

Advise to girl who wish to stay virgin: if you can't join them, beat them.

Man who like two-finger hand job get double-digit inflation.

Man with hot tub have balling bowl.

To be kept woman means rent always due.

He who stand with hand in pockets feel foolish, he who has holes in pockets feel nuts.

Man is young when he snatch kisses: old when he kisses snatch.

He who likes anal intercourse, gets screwed in end.

Girl who fly upside down have crack up.

Girl who is wallflower at party, dandelion in bed.

Woman who sows wild oats Saturday night, pray for crop failure next morning.

Basketball player who often engage in sodomy take many foul shot.

Clairvoyant contortionist is one who can see her own end.

When in Rome ask for Florence.

Man is like a snowstorm, you never know how many inches you'll get or how long it will last.

Gay masochist is sucker for punishment.

Man who screw bank president's daughter come into large sum of money.

Shampoo for man's pubic hair called "Head and Bolders"

Beware, in some Chinese restaurants you may eat pussy without knowing it.

Man who lays girl on ground, get "piece on earth".

Man who plays with himself pulls boner.

Never marry basketball player because he dribbles before he shoots.

Gigolo gets into sack with bag in order to make bundle.

Woman wish she could change husband of 50 for two 25's.

Simultaneous orgasms are stroke of luck.

A good lay is a humdinger, but good head is a dinghummer.

Woman who use gold dildo have "ore gasm".

Bad girls like a good licking.

Man who like hand job eventually come into his own.

Mrs. Confucius say, A dick in bush is worth two in hand.

Woman who makes love on the beach must beware of crabs.

Military man who come prematurely give dishonorable discharge.

Starlet with deep throat most likely to "suck seed".

Mrs. Confucius say, Never give head when tail will do.

Golfer want hole-in one. Others prefer one-in-hole.

Man with big bat have no trouble scoring.

Tight girls are rarely loose. . . loose girls are rarely tight.

Man who dance with tall woman often get bust in mouth.

Re:First Post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307717)

Sorry for replying to the first post, but I found this image which I think is extremely relevant to the Java/Iphone port. link here [wikimedia.org]

Re:First Post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307733)

Dirty bastard

Why? (0, Troll)

tji (74570) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307649)

I have not found any really compelling Java apps on my desktops (Linux and Mac OS), are there really any reasons for needing them on my phone?

Especially given the fact that getting a java port relies on having an open SDK for the iPhone -- meaning native apps can be produced. So, if there are native apps, why would we want Java?

Also, is my impression of Java outdated? Is it not slow, bloated (JRE + app), and have an ugly UI?

Re:Why? (1)

darjen (879890) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307757)

Also, is my impression of Java outdated? Is it not slow, bloated (JRE + app), and have an ugly UI?
Yes, your impression is outdated.

Re:Why? (1)

pauljlucas (529435) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307841)

Java's default UI is still ugly. Also, to do a Java app on the iPhone seamlessly (by which I mean it uses iPhone UI components, animation, etc.) would mean that you'd have to write native code + JNI to access the native Cocoa UI API. Apple used to have a nice Java/Cocoa bridge API for desktop OS X, but they're no longer updating it and its use is deprecated. Given that, I highly doubt they'd have a Java/iPhone bridge API. Hence, you'd have to write all the UI for your app in native code anyway. So why bother with Java at all on the iPhone?

Re:Why? (1)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308771)

"Java's default UI is still ugly"

I guess that depends on the taste . Personally , i like the Java GUI .
But i don't really care about the iphone , i'm looking into openMoko .

Re:Why? (2, Informative)

Sillygates (967271) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309565)

Java's default UI is still ugly
If you are running windows, swing will use your windows theme (by default).
And, as of jre 1.6.0 swing can also be set up to use gtk themes as well


I wish steve jobs made that iPhone keynote a little more dramatic, by saying:

"iPhone runs Solaris 10"
Featuring core stability, and java!

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

burris (122191) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308005)

Given that the only popular Java application on Mac OS X, Azureus, is universally regarded as being slow, bloated, and ugly, I'd say the GP's impression is not at all outdated.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308037)

I never even realized it was Java. Works fine for me.

Re:Why? (2)

darjen (879890) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308611)

So you're basing your assessment on one desktop app? I thought we were talking about JME, not J2SE. Anyway, speaking as an enterprise Java developer, for distributed business apps Java is hard to beat.

Re:Why? (1, Troll)

davester666 (731373) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308761)

Well, Seapine software seems to make their non-Windows client software using Java, and just for simple configuration tasks [ie, click a button to bring up a dialog to change a password], their apps were dog slow. But their server software crashed so much we had to switch to another product, that I have a very low opinion of their ability to code.

But yes, this is off topic w.r.t. Java on the iPhone.

However, what's the point of trying to get Java on the iPhone, other than to load craplets onto it.

If you're going to bother making a first-class application, where it looks and behaves similar to Apple's iPhone applications, you're already making the UI totally iPhone-specific. And the back-end code can easily be in C [possibly even C++].

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308895)

I think anybody who tried similar apps in their Java or native versions can bring lots of examples where the Java version is slow as in dead-bradypus slow, unless your Java code links to a asm,C,C++ library to do the hard stuff. In that situation you get a faster app, but by using a native library you completely lose the portability factor, which IIRC was the #1 buzzword they used back in the day to sell Java to technically challenged PHBs.

Java has zero reasons to exist outside Wall Street, and even there you can build better apps using lower level languages. It's not just about stability: some financial apps need very low latencies in order to respond very quickly to stock variations. A stack of Java calls, one on top of another, can literally burn your money even without crashing.

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

tkinnun0 (756022) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309653)

Uhhh, if the constant cost of a method call is the limiting factor, why not just get a processor with a higher clock frequency? I mean, would you trust your money on hand-written assembler in a world where regulations can change yearly and in a company which wants to skimp on the hardware?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21309513)

Really?

I always found that Java does everything, but nothing well.

You still can't beat Perl with XML-RPC for distributed business apps

Common Java apps, OS X and Mobile (3, Insightful)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309251)

Given that the only popular Java application on Mac OS X, Azureus, is universally regarded as being slow, bloated, and ugly, I'd say the GP's impression is not at all outdated.
I will admit that large Java GUI apps in particular can be slow and buggy and I can't say I can remember a whole slew of Java powered consumer applications that are popular among normal OS X users. I do however use quite a lot of Java apps at work. A few applications I can remember off the top of my head are development apps like Eclipse, Intellij, NetBeans, I have also on occasion used a of Java powered LDAP navigator, a whole collection of SAP utilities, Oracle utilities of various kinds... the list goes on. If I recall correctly I read somewhere that the new Lotus Notes 8 will be Java powered. There are probably a few more Java apps that I use but haven't noticed that they are Java apps since when are properly written and packaged, Java GUI apps can be quite hard to tell apart from regular OS X apps. It would certainly be a lot harder to use the Mac in a corporate environment without Java apps. I can certainly see why Java would be a good choice for quickly bolting together Java GUI Apps on Mobile OS'es and from a business point of view the 'write once run everywhere' cross platform aspect of Java has the same obvious appeal on mobiles as it has on desktop computers. I have seen anything from small programs like expense tracking software to things like fully fledged 3G streaming media players implemented in Java on Mobile Phones.

Re:Common Java apps, OS X and Mobile (3, Funny)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310663)

You're not going to convince people that Java isn't "slow, bloated and ugly" by citing Oracle Apps and Lotus Notes as an example. Just a little tip there.

Re:Why? (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309365)

Given that the only popular Java application on Mac OS X, Azureus, is universally regarded as being slow, bloated, and ugly, I'd say the GP's impression is not at all outdated.

So one app defines an entire platform and language? Java apps, at least on Windows, can take on multiple Look and Feels, thus it is possible for an app to look more like the native apps for Windows. Whether this is possible for Java under OSX (and the iPhone) is a different issue. If it is not possible then that is probably the fault of Apple. You also assume the developers for Azureus are the greatest devs available and thus made a perfect app that can't be sped up or written better. Their app may be slow because of their skills and not because of the language/platform they chose to use.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21309773)

You also assume the developers for Azureus are the greatest devs available and thus made a perfect app that can't be sped up or written better. Their app may be slow because of their skills and not because of the language/platform they chose to use.

And you, are desperately clutching at straws. Every Java I've used has been bloated and slow - from editors, to Genesys Workforce Management, to Siebel. They are all universally... dog-fucking-Java-slow, bloated and horrible.

Can superb devs make Java desktop apps less of a clusterfuck... probably, but it would still be polishing a turd.

Re:Why? (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310681)

Do you give the same defensive reply when someone points out how crappy Visual Basic is?

Seriously, though, you're right: It probably *is* possible to make a fast, stable and slick app in Java across multiple OSes. The problem is that nobody's done it yet; everything that people associate with the Java logo is slow, ugly and usually also buggy. What do you expect people to think of the technology?

If Sun really wanted to push Java on the desktop, they should have developed apps to show it off themselves. Since they didn't, all the examples we have are crappy, and that's that.

Couldn't be more wrong (2, Informative)

bennini (800479) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310359)

Given that the only popular Java application on Mac OS X, Azureus, is universally regarded as being slow, bloated, and ugly, I'd say the GP's impression is not at all outdated.

Azureus is the only popular Java app on OS X???....so you mean Eclipse, NetBeans, LimeWire, and JEdit are not popular?
I think u meant to say that Swing sucks...not Java.

With regards to the lack of an official Java 1.6 on OS X...
What im wondering is how many of the people griping about this actually develop applications that leverage the features in Java 1.6 or how many of you require Java 1.6 to run an already existing Java application?

The major features introduced by Java 1.5 such as generics, annotations, and AOP, are not even popular yet. How many developers even know what AOP is? Ok from that subset, how many of them design new applications that leverage cross-cutting behaviour? Ok since there are a few of you left, let's move to Java 1.6...we've now got runtime hot-patching at the class level (not just at the class loader level! woohoo)....so those of you with personal satellites with "always-on" software can now update ur buggy classes on the fly....additionally, we can embed Ruby and Groovy script languages inside of our java application and run them directly from within the JVM. Im sure IBM is quickly porting all their applications to take advantage of that feature.

i still havent heard one real convincing argument as to why java 1.6 is so important to have RIGHT NOW. aside from being able to test your existing applications with java 1.6, i highly doubt anyone functionally necessitates the new features (and no, "because its cool to access your java objects from within ruby" is not a valid argument). if industrial companies like Mercedes are telling companies like IBM that they still arent ready to move away from 1.4.2, why on earth are basic computer users in a rush to jump to 1.6/1.7 ??

Re:Couldn't be more wrong (2, Insightful)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310689)

I can't speak for the popularity of Limewire, but it's just as slow, bloated and ugly as Azureus. (Well, ok, probably less ugly-- but definitly slow and bloated!)

The other examples you cite are all programmer's tools, so I can pretty much guarantee they're not "popular" among anybody except perhaps software developers. But software developers on Mac have XCode, so there you go.

Re:Why? (5, Interesting)

huckamania (533052) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308041)

JavaME is very easy to write and very easy to learn. Eclipse plus the ME extensions plus the phone emulators really makes developing a quick and dirty app for a cell phone very easy.


I wrote this at night over about a month:

Baby Cell [download.com]

This app lets me hand my phone (or an old phone) to my 3 year old and I don't have to worry about her calling anyone or erasing stuff. It's got basic password protection and I wanted to do more, but the end product has 15 songs, a bunch of shapes and colors, her own voice. It was more interesting when she was 2, but still, it was a fun project.

Does anyone know yet what the cost will be to develop for the iPhone? It cost me nothing but time to write Baby Cell.

Re:Why? (5, Interesting)

Lisias (447563) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307769)

I agree with the ugly interface, but just it.

As a former worker on that industry, I can tell you that there's too few applications that can't be built faster and cheaper on a good KVM than on native code.

I used to run Java games on a Siemens S55, and it work well.

One of the main problems with Java ME is the lack of interest, from the mobile industry, to invest money on something that will cause beneficts to their competitors too. They prefer to loose two users to give one to the competition.

Another one are the Operators. They are alergic to anything that gives freedom to theis costumers.

On the time I used to work for Siemens Mobile (RIP), I heard a history about why in hell the JME of S55 series can't access the InfraRed device (as the S45, that I still use nowadays, has a IR API for the Java).

The answer?

The Operatos demanded that Siemens throw out the IR API, as they do not want S55 users to intercomunicate without paying something for them (by buying GSM services). If the Siemens didn't complied, it would loose a major incoming as the Operators were the bigger buyers at the time.

The problem is not the technology. It's the industry.

Re:Why? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308103)

Your article is a great reason why we should fear DRM.

WHen I read things like this from cell phone developers I only think its what exactly what Microsoft would love to do with desktop pc's and lock them into generic appliances where everything is rented out.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307815)

very out-dated. in the mobile space apperantely, the ME version is actually quite snappy from what I've heard (haven't experienced it first hand, so take that with a bit of salt). and the UI is only as pretty as the designer can make it.

a java port does not rely on an open SDK since Apple would probably be doing the port (like they did with Mac OSX - however, they could also get Sun to do it under contract and NDA). however, I seriously doubt that they're going to do a Java SDK - at least not given that Jobs hates Java (from what I've heard). it's much much more likely that it's going to be a sandboxed version of objective-c with Leopard API and the apps will have to be signed. that being said, it'll probably make it easier to hack future revisions of the firmware (hopefully).

Re:Why? (5, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307973)

I have not found any really compelling Java apps on my desktops (Linux and Mac OS), are there really any reasons for needing them on my phone?
J2ME is very different from desktop Java. It's one of the oldest APIs for handheld devices around, and there is a lot of stuff written for it already - tons of games [midlet-review.com], instant messengers [bombus-im.org], e-mail clients [movamail.com], and lots of other stuff. GMail Mobile [google.com] is a J2ME application, and so is Opera Mini [operamini.com] (granted, the latter not really needed on an iPhone or a decent smartphone, but priceless on plain Java-enabled mobiles like my Sagem my301).

So, if there are native apps, why would we want Java?
Considering the above, the short answer is: to use all the stuff already available for J2ME for other platforms.

Also, is my impression of Java outdated? Is it not slow, bloated (JRE + app), and have an ugly UI?
It is still relatively slow, of course (well, what do you expect from a language that forces everything onto the heap?), but it certainly works good enough for plain GUI apps, even on low-end phones (those not even considered smartphones). Apps are small. Tthe size of J2ME runtime is usually hard to tell since there are many different ones available, and which one your phone uses is not always obvious. UI is an interesting question: J2ME GUI toolkit is specifically designed [wikipedia.org] so that it does not enforce any specific L&F or interaction model, and a well-written J2ME application should have native L&F on any implementation, and be fully resolution-independent. For stuff like games, it still allows them to get a fullscreen canvas and draw whatever they want on it, and interact with the keypad/keyboard and touchscreen directly.

Re:Why? (1)

grimJester (890090) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308125)

So, if there are native apps, why would we want Java?
Considering the above, the short answer is: to use all the stuff already available for J2ME for other platforms.
And additionally, all the stuff not yet written that is easier to write for J2ME that natively for every phone OS.

No compelling Java apps (0)

amightywind (691887) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309069)

J2ME is very different from desktop Java. It's one of the oldest APIs for handheld devices around, and there is a lot of stuff written for it already - tons of games [midlet-review.com], instant messengers [bombus-im.org], e-mail clients [movamail.com], and lots of other stuff. GMail Mobile [google.com] is a J2ME application, and so is Opera Mini [operamini.com] (granted, the latter not really needed on an iPhone or a decent smartphone, but priceless on plain Java-enabled mobiles like my Sagem my301).

Uh huh. Like the parent said, "no really compelling Java apps." Same goes for C#.

J2ME application should have native L&F on any implementation, and be fully resolution-independent.

You mean like any other competently written cross platform API?

Re:Why? (1)

sciurus0 (894908) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310223)

Relatively slow compared to what? If you try the language shootout you'll see that it's almost universally faster than python [debian.org], mono [debian.org], and many other languages used for "plain GUI apps". Heck, the implementation of ruby in java is faster [debian.org] than the original C! The one place where java consistently lags is the startup time. Of course, this and other perceptions of responsiveness count for a lot.

Well, it depends (3, Interesting)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308213)

Eclipse is nice, an IDE for java at first but suitable for other languages, and because it is java, it could in theory run on all os'es that have java.

Azureus is nice, a bittorrent client, and because it is java, it could in theory run on all os'es that have java.

Opera for mobile phones is Java.

These are just the ones I use most often.

The bad thing about java is that the old people among us remember it from the web days when everyone used it to bloat their pages when we were on modems that already choked on dns lookups. When your memory was measured in MB and java wanted GB that is when we got our first taste of java and my god did it taste foul.

Today that matters less, we got faster internet, we got more memory and more power, so while java still has a bloated feel to it, it doesn't matter anymore.

To be fair, java is only "bloated" because it replicates what your "local" programs already have in the OS. IF java apps didn't do that, and heavily relied on the OS they wouldn't be portable.

The most important reason to want java is that it would allow ANY java app to be run under it. No more need for signing, java would be signed, not the app running on it. Suddenly the iPhone would have a ton of third party stuff available.

There is a reason american phones often lack the java capability that exists on the same model in the rest of the world, java opens up the phone.

So java is good. Yes it is a bit bloated and a big of a hog, but that is the price for having apps that port easily.

Re:Well, it depends (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308995)


There is a reason american phones often lack the java capability that exists on the same model in the rest of the world, java opens up the phone.


Out of curiousity, and because someone here will know, what the presence of Java on mobiles in the US and how does it compare to the rest of the world? Is Java standard in most countries on modern phones but not the US, or is it much patchier?

Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (4, Insightful)

Templar (14386) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307681)

Apple can't even commit to Java 1.6 for OS X -- I think you're being a wee bit optimistic.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

corychristison (951993) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307771)

Apple & Java don't play nice anymore
Ah... I know what you mean! Never dip your apple slices in your java! It doesn't taste as good as you may think.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308321)

Wake me up when Microsoft commits to Java 1.6 for Windows.

Or 1.5.

Or 1.4.

Or 1.3.

Or 1.2.

Or 1.1.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309761)

No but you can download up to date JVMs for windows from sun, you can't do that for OS-X.

How much of this is suns fault and how much of it is apples fault I have no idea.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308607)

As a home hobbiest, I would want to use Java 1.6 and leave Java 1.5 behind.

But as a Java software developer, I'd rather have a great Java 1.6 implementation than a half-baked implementation.

Few professionals Java developers I know of have migrated to 1.6 - as 1.5 is rock solid. As a developer, I'd rather remain on the rock solid platform than the newest platform.

As I am sure you know, most programming systems take years to get to maturity. Java is no exception. Developers will move to 1.6 only as soon as all of their system's dependencies are delivered on the new platform.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21309747)

Yeah, most of the stuff I use still runs fine on 1.4, actually. A few things require 1.5. Nothing I've used requires 1.6 except Sun's own alpha of Project Wonderland [java.net], which is buggy as shit (as would be expected for an alpha -- it's pretty cool nonetheless).

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

JebusIsLord (566856) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310265)

What did they add to 1.6 anyhow? I know 1.5 just introduced a bunch of non-OO crap to please .NET developers. Generics were cool, but otherwise 1.5 was a waste of time.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

olivierva (728829) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309055)

Everyone calm down! Changes are Java 6 will be released in a couple of weeks time, since Apple always does a major Java update after a OS release, read this blog: http://stuffthathappens.com/blog/2007/10/28/os-x-java-definitive-timeline/ [stuffthathappens.com]

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309827)

I guess thats one way to try and persude people to fork out for the upgrade. Unfortunately since many of them probablly won't anyone who develops in java and has OS-X as a target is probablly going to be stuck with 1.5.x for some time.

Also it looks like that timeline is just speculation based on past behaviour not actual data from apple despite the title.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

KugelKurt (908765) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310277)

Did you even read TFA? It says nowhere that Apple is doing a Java port to the iPhone, but that a Sun developer expects the community to do an independent port.

Re:Apple & Java don't play nice anymore (1)

Professor_UNIX (867045) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310731)

How would you load this port on the iPhone though? It's a closed platform. Even if Apple releases a 3rd party SDK in February, I guarantee you they'll do some stupid like require that developers submit binaries to be signed to Apple and users will need to download applications from the iTunes store for a low-low-low convenient fee for maintaining the signatures and bandwidth for serving up the applications. Something nice and round like $4.99 for a "freeware" app hosting and then perhaps off developers to let them sell their shareware and commercial apps through iTunes store for a percentage of the profits. After the whole ringtone fiasco I would not put it past Apple. It's utterly ludicrous I can't take a sound bite that I make myself and load it onto my iPhone.

Why do you even care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21310609)

What does Java 6 offer that you can't download a library to do in Java 5?

There's nothing new in Java 6. All Sun did was increase the J2SE library bloat.

You can download libraries to do anything you can do in Java 6 under Java 5. There's no reason to upgrade on a non-Apple platform and there's no reason for Apple to bother upgrading.

Ready for business. (3, Insightful)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307697)

I can't tell whether it was Apple's intention from the beginning to deliver the SDK for 3rd party development or if that's something that happened in response to industry-wide criticism, but either way, it is crucial to the acceptance of the iPhone for large business. A port of Java is icing on the cake, although that may become more important with time.

Speaking of being ready for business, the rhetoric across just about all media is that the Mac is a great computer for home use but isn't ready for business. Can anyone shed some light on why this is the widespread perception? The Mac, coupled with Mac OS X Server, can do just about anything that a Windows or Linux network can do, and even if it can't, you can always install some Windows or Linux servers to take care of whatever loose ends are left over. Couple that with iPhones capable of 3rd party development and Java, and it's a wonderful system for business.

Re:Ready for business. (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307821)

Depends what your business is. Some of the software I use daily is Windows only. Some of it is IE only. Some of it is IE 6 + .NET 1.0.2 only.

So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (4, Interesting)

maggard (5579) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307737)

A few years ago Apple was all over Java.

Apple rewrote their WebObject platform into Java. They built bindings into MacOS 10.3 making Java apps 'native', heck spent serious resources Aqua-fying Java to look native.

So now there are a coupla Mac apps that are actually Java.

But the bindings have been depreciated. And Apple is getting slower & slower about releasing Java updates. All the while additional toolsets are getting added, receiving support, etc.

Then there's the iPhone, which Apple has made clear they've little interest in adding Java to.

So does Apple perceive Java as moving into the also-ran category? Something that isn't gonna pay off development & support effort as a major player on the desktop? What makes it inappropriate for the iPhone?

Are there any Java-on-Mac developers willing to share their insights? Folks who actually use it, pay attention to it on an ongoing basis, etc.?

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (5, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307855)

So does Apple perceive Java as moving into the also-ran category? Something that isn't gonna pay off development & support effort as a major player on the desktop? What makes it inappropriate for the iPhone?

I believe that's their perception, yes. I believe it's wrong too.

Are there any Java-on-Mac developers willing to share their insights? Folks who actually use it, pay attention to it on an ongoing basis, etc.?

Sort of - allow me to pontificate for a moment please.

I develop a lot of Java code, but it typically gets deployed on other platforms other than the Mac. It's a mix of desktop and server-side, and it's for internal apps only.

I would like to develop this using my Mac - it's not that I will unleash a mass of Mac Java apps on the world (though I have unleashed one), it's more that it allows me to pick the Mac as my daily working tool. I believe Apple have underestimated the demand for Macs amongst the more technical crowd, and I am hopeful of an OpenJDK port to OS X to take this worry away.

To summarise: perhaps Apple are right about desktop apps in Java on their platform. I still believe they're wrong in the general case though, and that they should still either keep up with the JDK or just help with the port to the OpenJDK and let others keep up for them.

Cheers,
Ian

Tit for tat (3, Interesting)

2nd Post! (213333) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309033)

I bet some bad blood exists because Sun has taken so long to port OpenOffice to native Mac status. By the time they finish, Apple will have a full fledged office competitor themselves in iWork!

So essentially because Sun has decided Apple is not worth the resources to support OpenOffice on the Mac, Apple has decided Sun is not worth the resources to support Java on the Mac.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (0)

maggard (5579) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309109)

Thanks - yours is exactly the sort of viewpoint I was hoping to hear from - real life tool users, not armchair zealots.

So in your opinion an up-to-date JDK is what you require, and could live without OS hooks, native-GUI, etc.?

Do you think the special Java bindings, native-GUI, etc. are worth the effort on Apple's part, or do you believe those would continue to be under-utilized?

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308133)

Let's look at this. Supporting the latest version of Java and binding it directly to MacOS is a development issue. It is not necessarily going to effect the Mac end user. Developers are expected to primarily use XCode. Not supporting the latest version of Java is simply going to mean that developers are not going to use macs, and Mac users are not going to be able to use the absolute latest software. To me this is bad, but Apple will do what Apple will do. Java is still available, and I,as an end user, can still run the Java apps.

The question is why isn't java important to Apple anymore. One reason is that Java is not all that incredible important, it is one to get cross platform application, but not the only way, and cross platform is not as important as it used to be. Another reason could be OO.org, and the fact that after many year there is still no MacOS native port of it. Perhaps Apple could have done more. Perhaps by backing Java 100% Apple was doing more, and perhaps Sun was not.

To me the depreciation of Java is more a sign that Apple is once again going off on it's own, a la iWork, rather than depending on unreliable third parties.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (1)

burris (122191) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308187)

Maybe they dropped it because nobody was using it. A massive development effort that could be used to improve the tools that Mac developers actually use. It's not like Windows app developers use Java either, so Apple isn't losing much in the way of cross platform apps (are there ANY popular apps for the mac written in Java other than Azureus?)

Apple has done quite a bit to improve their development environment in Leopard, they aren't scorning third party developers at all on the Mac.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308567)

(are there ANY popular apps for the mac written in Java other than Azureus?)
NeoOffice.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (1)

jockm (233372) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308759)

LightZone [lightcrafts.com] A truly great photo editor (and based on Ansel Adams' zone system), is written primarily in Java (there is some native code for where Java can't fully meet native look and feel). It is a great example of an app that is written in Java. There are some others out there, but they don't make a big deal about being written in Java - they just are.

Nor should they. I don't buy/use software based on what it is written in. I pick it based on how it does at the job in question. Most of the software I write is in Java, not for idealogical reasons, but because I know it well, it does what I need, I have a good choice of tools, and it is reasonable cross platform.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (1)

maggard (5579) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308911)

... are there ANY popular apps for the mac written in Java other than Azureus?

Cyberduck [cyberduck.ch] is one I use regularly, a (s)ftp client, and it is indistinguishable from a Cocoa-based application. Indeed Cyberduck is a showcase [cyberduck.ch] of MacOS technologies: Spotlight, Bonjour, Keychain, Applescript, iDisk, drag-'n-drop, etc.

I've always assumed there are vertical applications able to operate on the Mac because of Apple's Java support, much like other *nix-based code can be migrated without major (non-GUI) trauma.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308633)

I've been working on a financial reporting application that uses Java. One of our requirements during the design phase was that the application had to work on all major operating systems (Windows, Mac, Linux, etc) because we couldn't force our users to standardize on an O/S (we're a government agency, so we have a responsibility to support everyone who might need to use the app).

I've been using NetBeans to develop the application, and Matisse to design the application's user interface. I'm also using JavaDB as an embedded database to allow the users to maintain their own records of their financial reports.

When it was time to test on Linux, everything worked, because like Windows, Linux lets you install the latest, greatest Java runtime from Sun. My development machine used Java 1.6u2, and my Linux machine did also. No problems showed up on either platform.

But when it was time to test on a Mac, nothing worked. It turned out that Matisse used GroupLayout as a layout manager, and this is only available in Java 1.6. I had to re-do EVERY SINGLE USER INTERFACE ELEMENT because Macs are stuck with JDK 1.5. This was extraordinarily irritating.

In case anyone out there has to go through the same annoying experience, here's some useful info I wish I'd had three months ago:

If you haven't started your project yet, USE ONLY METHODS AND OBJECTS FROM JDK 1.5, and use AbsoluteLayout instead of GroupLayout in Matisse.

If you've already started your project, and you have to "fix" it so it'll run on a Mac, try this:

1. Change your Java code level to 1.5 in your project preferences.

2. Install a 1.5 JDK on your machine, and target it in your project preferences (so you compile with 1.5).

3. FOR EACH WINDOW, in the visual editor:

    A. Drag the lower bounds of the window itself down until it's 2x its current size.

    B. Drag a new JPanel onto the open area and expand it to fill the whole area.

    C. Right click the JPanel and set the layout to AbsoluteLayout (this is JDK 1.5 friendly).

    D. Select all of your window's components by ctrl-clicking them and drag them all down to your panel, keeping them in the same arrangement.

    E. Drag the panel up to the top of the window, set the window's layout to AbsoluteLayout, and resize the window and panel attractively.

    F. Recompile.

OH, and by the way, I had to take out the isClosed() method call for ResultSets, so I had to recode some things there as well.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (0)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310427)

1st. There are really few desktop Java applications. Investments to port and support JDK/JRE/bindings are way too high.

2nd. Java on iPhone. Java on mobile phones happened not because it was some advantage of Java over other technologies. It happened because industry didn't managed to come up with standard for interfaces. Many efforts defaulted. And Sun had seen that as market opportunity.

3rd.

So does Apple perceive Java as moving into the also-ran category?

Absolutely. And who doesn't?

In last five or so years, I have seen Java used only and solely by Java software developers. Java secured its place in server room - as default integration technology. On desktop side it failed miserably and was forgotten many years ago. You can't expect Apple - a desktop hardware/software house - to care about such irrelevant stuff.

Re:So what happened to the Apple Java luvin'? (2, Insightful)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310653)

Speaking as a Macintosh user (and not a developer) Java does, and has always, sucked on Macintosh. I've yet to find a single Java app worth running, and it's only recently that Java applets on websites have actually worked without crashing the browser-- timely, now that most websites have ditched their Java applets.

this is exceptionally good news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21307765)

and what I find most amazing is that, in every episode, the 'Lost In Space' crew was able to find a pancake-flat place to land so the Robot, who had only narrow and shallow treads to roll on, would be able to get around just fine

Oh thank the maker! (0, Troll)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307797)

It's been almost 30 minutes since the last iPhone story. I was getting nervous for a while there. Next on the docket, is a marriage between a man and his Apple product protected by the constitution? Just like my undergraduate days, my karma was fun while it lasted...

Is Apple interested in Java? (4, Interesting)

Diomidis Spinellis (661697) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307823)

While an open source Java port would be an interesting development, the real issue is whether Apple is interested to support Java on its platforms. A recent Javalobby article [javalobby.org], titled So Long Apple. The Party's Over, gives several arguments supporting the position that Apple is doing a lot less than what it should in order to properly support Java. A high-quality implementation of the Java virtual machine needs all the help it can get from the underlying platform. For an illustration of this, see how slickly Java runs on Sun's Solaris. If Apple isn't interested to put its weight behind Java, it's unlikely that Sun will fill this role. Sun is putting a lot of effort to tune Java on the Windows platform; I doubt they have the resources and motivation to do the same with Apple's platform, due to the significantly lower market share of Mac OS X. So, while an open source port of Java is nice, full-hearted support from Apple would be a lot better.

FreeBSD Java 6 on Leopard (3, Informative)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307877)

An enterprising developer is already working to get FreeBSD's Java 6 on Leopard:

http://www.theserverside.com/blogs/thread.tss?thread_id=47500 [theserverside.com]

Re:FreeBSD Java 6 on Leopard (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308153)

Don't you think it's totally sad that an organization staffed by volunteers can port 1.6 before a multi-billion dollar company like Apple?

Why even bother with them? They're obviously not interested and anyway you'd have to work around Leopard's extensive catalog of bugs to get Java running.

Re:Is Apple interested in Java? (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308021)

Are iPhone users really that interested in Java? Given that it's an interpreted environment, I question its efficiency. That speed and efficiency loss is not that critical on a desktop, but when you get a palm-sized computer, it can become an issue.

Personally, I would rather make a native app just for iPhone than do a Java app for iPhone. iPhone really doesn't have a market fragmentation issue, it's its own segment. Given how fragmented the phone market is, a Java app would be better as a whole, but I really don't care about them.

Re:Is Apple interested in Java? (1)

chromatic (9471) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309487)

Are iPhone users really that interested in Java? Given that it's an interpreted environment, I question its efficiency.

I don't see why it's necessarily inefficient. I wouldn't expect a phone application to perform a lot of number crunching (except for media decoding), so the kinds of apps developed for a phone are likely either network or UI bound, if not both. It doesn't really matter what language you use when your app spends most of its time blocking.

Re:Is Apple interested in Java? (1)

asdfghjklqwertyuiop (649296) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309651)

Are iPhone users really that interested in Java? Given that it's an interpreted environment, I question its efficiency.


Considering that iPhone users consider the phone's web browser to be an acceptable way to write iPhone apps [37signals.com], I highly doubt efficiency is the reason for their lack of interest.

Re:Is Apple interested in Java? (1)

Trinn (523103) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309935)

most iPhone users do not consider the web an acceptable way to write apps (except for just a very few things already appropriate for the web), its just that apple hasn't allowed anything else *yet*, so we're stuck with either a (very good these days) third party created "hack" to allow native code, or the webapps

Re:Is Apple interested in Java? (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308549)

Jobs has said in interviews that he sees the software industry moving away from Java, and towards such things as web (Ajax) and Flash apps. So, the question isn't whether Apple is interested, but whether S.Jobs will listen to those that are interested in Java. 5 years ago there was no question, Java was better on OS X & PPC than any other platform... but Steve lost interest, and developers that moved to Mac are now abandoning it because of this attitude apparently cuminating in no plans for Java 6 on Leopard (but I think the jury is still out... Apple can be acrobatic with technology, and in a blink change their minds and suddenly give everyone everything they ever wanted in a platform).

jdk (-1, Troll)

eneville (745111) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307853)

i don't know why this article is tagged with pleasenojava, for me it doesn't seem like such a big issue. java is a nice language, perhaps a little slow, but it sure beats writing stuff out a thousand different times for different phones. like this http://s5h.net/u?46 [s5h.net]

Re:jdk (1)

Capt. Fodder (681168) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307915)

I agree; it really isn't as bad as some would make it out to be. I'm not an Apple fan so I really don't care about the iPhone part, but I'd like for Sony to officially do this for my PSP. Certainly not holding my breath, though...

Re:jdk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308033)

> java is a nice language

I disagree with both you and the "pleasenojava" taggers, Java is an awful language to work in; the JVM is what matters. I'm not a purist that believes C-legacy imperative programming languages are bad or need replacing. So for me, Scala is interesting and a definite pointer to the future ... as is ES4!

Re:jdk (-1, Troll)

eneville (745111) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308067)

> > java is a nice language

> I disagree with both you and the "pleasenojava" taggers,
> Java is an awful language to work in; the JVM is what
> matters. I'm not a purist that believes C-legacy
> imperative programming languages are bad or need replacing.
> So for me, Scala is interesting and a definite pointer
> to the future ... as is ES4!

you failed to give any reasons for why java is bad. for me it's a reasonable platform to work with when the target platforms are variable. it's a really good concept. did you see the link that i posted? http://s5h.net/u?46 [s5h.net]

Re:jdk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308311)

Yes a virtual machine [java.net] is a reasonable cross platform solution. The Java language and API are overly verbose and redundant in equal measure; it's COBOL redux!

No Java no apss (1)

postmortem (906676) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307979)

Surely they won't use .NET ports.

Java + nice custom Swing UI library + bunch of Java experts in industry ready to code for iPhone is very promising combination, hardly there's alternative.

J2ME? (1)

wzinc (612701) | more than 6 years ago | (#21307995)

Well, since the iPhone is running a scaled-down OSX, maybe they could go all the way and port J2SE to it...

Java = Lower quality apps? (2, Insightful)

RudeIota (1131331) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308023)

Don't get me wrong - Java SHOULD have been on the iPhone and its almost nothing but a positive thing...

BUT... Since Java hasn't been an option, people have been writing and porting native applications to the iPhone, even without the SDK.

Assuming we can all agree that usually native > Java, so I'm afraid this may lower the overall quality of available apps. Understandably, developers don't want to write native applications for every single device. Let's be honest though - Java is a shortcut - and primary reason anyone chooses to develop with it is portability and portability alone...

Not having the option of writing apps in Java equals more native apps - which I think most people would prefer. I think this was Apple's intention. I also believe it is silly for them not to embrace Java, but I do believe this is a very real consideration.

Re:Java = Lower quality apps? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308093)

Say what you want on swing in general java desktop applications but javaME really is sweet.

Google maps load in seconds on my cell phone with its tiny 200 mhz processor. I imagine with the more powerful Iphone that javaME would run quite well.

Java really is not that bad for server and micro apps.

Re:Java = Lower quality apps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308307)

Not having the option of writing apps in Java equals more native apps
Without the option of releasing Java apps, none of the apps I've already written will be on the iPhone. Nor am I about to start writing all my upcoming apps in two languages. Sum: Not having the option of writing apps in Java equals less apps.

Re:Java = Lower quality apps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308619)

don't worry - plenty of people will be happy to release iPhone apps that have equal to or greater than the functionality of your apps :)

Re:Java = Lower quality apps? (2, Insightful)

quanticle (843097) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308635)

Not having the option of writing apps in Java equals more native apps

No. You forget that there's a third option - not releasing the app for the iPhone at all. Without a Java interpreter, application providers may decide that the marketshare of the iPhone is too small compared with the marketshare of phones that support Java, and decide not to release their applications for the iPhone. In other words, not having Java apps equals fewer apps, not more native apps.

It all depends (4, Insightful)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308091)

Will the iPhone's SDK be open, or will it be closed?

Java is a hole in the "security" of devices, in that it allows the execution of arbitrary code outside of the device's native "security model". And I use scare quotes because by security, they really mean control, and by security model, they mean control over who is or isn't allowed to produce software for the device, and run software on the device. If the Java runtime were trusted, then every Java application has the same rights as the Java runtime.

But Java has also been used by those who are legitimately concerned about security, because the virtual machine does actually make the execution of injected code very difficult. And by supporting the runtime natively, it actually gives you better control over what executes and who can execute it.

But that makes it easier to limit the features available on the devices, so you can claim to support third party software and still put up an impenetrable wall between applications and the useful, built-in capabilities that the carriers want to trick customers into believing are special "services" they must pay more for. Bluetooth, GPS, camera, and even networking have found their APIs stripped from Java on certain carriers' devices.

If Apple produces an open SDK, then putting Java on the iPhone is simple matter of porting it. Apple doesn't even need to be involved.

But if Apple uses code signing to control who is and isn't allowed to release software for it, you can forget Java ever appearing, because then anyone could write software for it. They don't seem to be at all interested in supporting Java themselves.

Re:It all depends (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308391)

It may be bad form to reply to ones own comment, but I'm shocked no one has mentioned Android yet.

The reason Java has such a bad reputation on mobile devices is because the applications tend to suck or tend to be toys, and most of them are both. There is nothing wrong with Java itself. The problem is that MIDP is damn near useless for doing anything important. The controls look like ass, the base system is crippled, and you can't trust that the JSRs you require are on all the devices you want to support.

Android could change all that. We may not be wanting Java on the iPhone, we may end up wanting Android specifically on the iPhone. Java can do great things - witness JBoss and the BlackBerry - so I am eager to see what Google has done with it.

Re:It all depends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21310015)

we may end up wanting Android specifically on the iPhone

What are you smoking? The iPhone is, well, an OS X phone made by Apple. Android is a stack entirely based on Linux. How could you ever end up wanting Android specifically on the iPhone when Android is meant to be used by phone manufacturers who wants a free, standardized, Linux OS for their phone? I think Android is not what you think it is.

I agree 100% that developing Java apps for cellphones is a major pain: buggy JVMs, incomplete implementations not respecting the (very often flakey) specs, spooky JSRs support, etc. And it's true that Android may solve this to a point: Esmertec is a major JVM vendor for cellphones and they're part of the Android alliance so who knows... Maybe there shall be a standardized Java on all Android-powered phones, which would be wonderful (most Java inconvenience would be fixed and you keep the main benefit: the rock-solid-never-been-cracked-yet sandbox).

Regarding developers anyway... I understand Android is very fine for phone manufacturers but they could still decide to close the phone to third party apps (say only allowing webapps and Java apps) and then the carriers could add another layer of crippling, not unlike what we have today.

To summarize saying "we may end up wanting Android specifically on the iPhone", to me, is like saying "I want a phone that mimics the iPhone and that is powered by Linux instead of OS X and that is not produced by Apple".

P.S: I'm not saying I would mind Apple chosing Linux for their next handset... But I'm not sure that would still be an "iPhone".

Re:It all depends (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308501)

If the Java runtime were trusted, then every Java application has the same rights as the Java runtime.

This is FUD, complete and utter rubbish. JVM provides very fine grained control of what code running inside it can and cannot do. That includes file, network and peripheral access. That stuff was in Java since day one, wake up and smell coffee.

Google 'Java security manager' or 'Java sandbox'. This can be done on per application basis, you can have more and less trusted apps running at the same time with different privileges.

Re:It all depends (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309197)

LOL. Someone fails at reading comprehension.

Java privileges don't mean jack if the underlying platform is hostile to Java to begin with. Your runtime won't have the capabilities to limit.

Re:It all depends (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21310115)

You're failing at writing comprehension I'm afraid... You made a blanket statement about java that is untrue and then proceed to "rewrite" your original post by blaiming a hostile OS and not java itself. Sprint and others can lockdown so only trusted apps can be installed and various jsrs enabled/disabled...you're wrong.

Apple may soon announce to step back for Sun (3, Informative)

rpp3po (641313) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308303)

It's very questionable that they would even extend their Java efforts for the iPhone when Java support by Apple for Mac OS X might soon be over, but continued by Sun.

Main argument: Kernel APIs are stable since OS X 10.4, all major high performance graphic foundations since 10.5. The JDK could be put almost completely onto public APIs so Sun could take over development without the need for so much insider involvement anymore.

I've found the whole story here: http://javablasphemy.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] (currently overloaded)

Re:Apple may soon announce to step back for Sun (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309893)

That post looks like it is complete speculation. Do you have any evidence to the contary?

Re:Apple may soon announce to step back for Sun (1)

rpp3po (641313) | more than 6 years ago | (#21310043)

That post looks like it is complete speculation. Do you have any evidence to the contary?

I've cited an anonymous blog, duh! What could be more credible?

In the end it's just a sequence of bytes that you feel more comfortable about than other sequences of bytes. At some point in time, after you could connect it to some beliefs of yourself (like "bytes from msnbc.com always carry true facts"), you are suddenly willing to call a sequence 'evidence'.

Java Apologists (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21308343)

It's like being fed shit and told you are getting steak. It's an offense to common sense and straightforward, plain thinking.

The gPhone has them (AT&T) scared (1)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | more than 6 years ago | (#21308553)

This is so transparent.

This has *NOTHING* to do with any Java anniversary.

This is about competition, and that is good.

Java is not bad for mobile games. (2, Interesting)

radimvice (762083) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309321)

I'm a mobile phone game developer that has ported commercial games to over 200 handsets across all of the major Western carriers. This includes lots of crappy phones that could barely eke out 1fps, and lots of phones that hit 40-50fps without missing a beat. Overall though, I have a MUCH easier time porting for Java devices than for BREW [wikipedia.org], because Java is simply much easier to develop stable programs for, which means less bugs to waste time tracking down, which means you can make better quality software.

And as far as Java being slow, bloated, etc., maybe all that was true back in the 90's, but today it's perfectly fine for development on any modern machine, all of our in-house development tools are written in Java and work perfectly. And J2me [wikipedia.org], the subset of Java that you find on the phones, is particularly lightweight and speedy - most mobile JVMs compile rather than interpret the Java bytecode, and some ARM cell phone processor architectures actually execute the straight J2me bytecode directly in hardware. What varies performance most is not usually the choice of Java vs BREW for running applications, but the speed of the phone's processor and its ability to paint to the screen quickly, and in my experience these vary regardless of whether a phone is using Java or BREW. A good Java phone will be entirely indistinguishable from, if not even more capable than, a good BREW phone in terms of its game-playing ability.

If Java is ported to the iPhone, it would let existing game developers easily target their games for the iPhone during the standard porting process, and they could spend the extra time perfecting interfaces and controls to take best advantage of the iPhone's capabilities. This would mean an instant library of hundreds of quality commercial games each year, with a fast-growing library of independently-developed mobile games as well (that is, if AT&T grants its contract holders access to them). Otherwise, without a Java port it would mean a much more expensive porting process to a separate, proprietary SDK, which few mobile game companies with enough development resources will be able to profitably accomplish. So you'll probably get EA Tetris for your iPhone and little else, oh joy.

I don't know why we bother (2)

cowwoc2001 (976892) | more than 6 years ago | (#21309583)

I don't know why people bother posting Java-related stories to Slashdot. Clearly the majority of its readers are still coding in Perl and have the nerve to suggest that Java's performance or UI is any slower or uglier than Perl. Please :)

Secondly, it seems the majority of you are not aware of the fact that the vast majority of phones out there (~80%) runs JavaME. Pretty much every single one of you have been running Java applications for years on your phones without knowing it.

Java isn't fast at everything, nor is it beautiful for everything, but for 90% of the applications out there it is both fast enough and beautiful enough out-of-the-box. You can always enhance performance or UI by using custom libraries but most developers are either too lazy to or they simply don't need to for their specific application.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...