Slashdot Mirror
Jazilla Milestone 1 Released
mcbridematt writes "Many of the long time Slashdot readers will remember the Jazilla project to rewrite the Mozilla browser in Java. It went into hibernation in 2000 and I took it over last August. I have completely rewrote the browser which now follows a more Mozilla-like architecture. The Result: Jazilla Milestone 1 has been released. Download it from here. No prizes for guessing that it's Alpha software." Read on below for a list of what Jazilla can do, so far.
"Significant (implemented) features include:
- chrome:// support
- JavaScript implemented for the GUI thanks to the Mozilla.org Rhino engine. HTML Scripting coming.
- GUI in part, uses XUL and W3C DOM
- Written in 100% Java
- Open Source
- Uses the NetBrowser renderer, which is actually based on Jazilla-classic work."
Once you expand and extract this puppy, just cd into the folder it made and, assuming Java is properly installed on your machine, you need only run:
Good luck, and enjoy! The browser's still lacking in many obvious areas, but it does work on a lot of sites. Too cool -- props for all the hard wo\ rk. :-)
I used to dislike Java, but now I'm a convert. Virtual machines are so obviously cool... I need to download this and give it a spin.
The question had to be asked
Other than being Java-based, what's the point of this web browser?
Does the browser call a new java runtime layer, so it's a java layer running a web browser running a java layer, or does the original java layer detect the attempt to run Java and intercept to run it itself?
What happens if I run the java web browser in a web browser?
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
dont get me wrong i think its an interresting project but why write in Java a software that is already available on a huge variety of platforms (its mainly the advantage of writing java apps).
also Mozilla is lacking a bit of speed im sure you wont help in java.....
Overuse of the Pumping Lemma causes blindness
It seems to not work with OS X using instructions above, perhaps something else has to be done.
Modular Redundancy--Because 4 out of 5 Nodes agree
Combine the speed and java with the speed of Mozilla.... I bet you can reboot into windows, run IE, and get 3 first posts before Jazilla starts up.
Hee. I told him it would get him laid, then forgot to mention it was a joke. A year and a half later, it was just too funny not to let him keep running with it. Shh! My bad!
mozilla is slow. java is slow. jazilla is slow^2
I wonder if Intel is backing this project. They desparately need a reason to sell high-end chips.
Table-ized A.I.
Does it have support for Java applets, or do you need to install the Java plugin to have applets? :P
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
any idea why anybody would want or need to use that?
mozilla runs on at least as many platforms as any JRE, and many more if you expect swing to work properly.
i don't get it.
Dev elpizw tipota, dev phoboumai tipota eimai lephteros http://euclidian.org
I think Mozilla is slow enough, thank you.
It allows you to close tricked-into Goatse windows before they are finished. Goatsephobia has changed they way people browse. Slow is in.
Table-ized A.I.
Just plain question - what is intended usage of it?
I wonder whether the RHUG people will be able to build Jazilla using gcj and so create a native binary package. Then we could see whether it is faster or slower than Mozilla.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I may be being a little harsh here but what exactly is the point in this?
Java's redeeming feature is that it is a cross platform environment. Which is all well and lovely.
Everything else about Java is horrible, like speed issues etc.
This project is to "make a mozilla clone in java". So by doing this you'd assume they'd be making mozilla cross platform (because that's the only logical reason for using java)... But Mozilla is already cross platform!!! Any platform it doesn't support you shouldn't be using for browsing the web with!
And anyways, you still need java to be installed to run it... Install java for a crappy browser or install Mozilla? I know which I'd prefer to do.
Jezz
If you're gonna call it fuckzilla, you'd better write it in f*ckf*ck instead ;)
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
Ok grandpa it might be time to upgrade your 386sx to some more modern processor. You will be shocked at how much faster late 90's technology is, and if you want to live on the edge you might even try some system built in the last few years. You will find that any of those run Mozilla and or Java great. Oh yeah, while you are at it you will find that 16MB of RAM won't cut it anymore, you should probably get around 512MB. The good news is that you can get a system like that for under a grand. I do realize that living on social security makes it tough to buy a new system every 20 or so years, but just stop buying so much crap from those late night tv ads, and you should have enough saved up in no time.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
perhaps that was a little harsh - the OSDN page rendered pretty good - Hell my scroll mouse worked with your app automatically!!! good shit
Before adopting WHATWG, read the moonlight.NET EULA [http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/moonlight.mspx]
Since half the comments so far seem to be "What is the point" I'll offer one justification.
There is still a serious lack of a good modern HTML browser for embeding in java applications. Swing provides an EditorKit which handles HTML3 reasonable well, but most of the other quality offerings are non free.
Major Java IDEs (Eclipse, NetBeans) have projects to implement something like this. Many other Java applications could potentially benefit. It's a good idea.
The Java-based browser concept worked really well for Sun Microsystems' HotJava browser so I believe Jazilla will be a phenomenal success as well. Go Jazilla team!
Why do geeks do anything?
BECAUSE THEY CAN!!
No, you can't. I assume this was intended as a joke, but I may as well point out that unless a program is not an applet, unless it implements the interface Applet (I think thats the right name...). You can't run any random Java program from a web browser or applet viewer.
Amaya is written in C. Perhaps you were thinking of Sun's HotJava?
Chu vi parolas Vikipedion?
I mean they do have libpr0n :)
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
Some of us prefer not to upgrade our computer every fucking month because all of a sudden the idiots at Microsoft/Apple/Netscape decide that our computing experience is incomplete without shiny new throbbing widgets. Even when I'm on a screaming fast computer, I throttle down every single bit of eye candy. Result: I can use my computer for actual work. Even so, I find that either Mozilla (on Linux) or IE (on XP) is entirely capable of reducing a Pentium 4 with plenty of memory into a quivering heap of dung.
Example: I'm often forced to use Microsoft Word. However, I have yet to utilize any feature that is not present in Word 5.1a, which runs quite happily on my stone-age PowerBook. Neither do any of my coworkers or collaborators, apparently; most of them would be served just as well by Emacs or Vi. That doesn't stop them from mailing me Word 2000 documents (nor does the fact that I run Unix pretty much everywhere). Result: I can't use my office computer or my Mac, and I have to walk down the hall to use one of the shared PCs. This is progress?
In short: fuck you. Fuuuuuuuuuuck you.
Works and looks great for me screenshot.
Doesn't take care of CSS, but hey I like to have another choice. Rigth?!
I was using the same command to start it:
java org/jxul/xulrunner/Main &
>> Had I been going to bed earlier every night? Have I been sleeping later? Has Tyler been in charge longer and l
But wouldn't the second and third be second and third posts?
This means that when you go to the store to buy an application, you don't buy the "Mac version" or the "Microsoft Windows version." You buy the "Java technology version." And as long as you have the Java Virtual Machine--which is free, and available from a large number of vendors--you can buy the program without having to worry whether it's going to run on your particular computer.
I think this might be a really cool idea if someone could do something like this. Say for example someone is in a really restrictive corporate or government environment which only allows HTTP and HTTPS out, and no SSH or anything like that. Now say for example you have Webmin installed on your home computer set to port 443. You use your work web browser to view your home's Webmin server inside SSL, and then if Jazilla were made into an applet and put inside a Webmin module that sends all of its information through the Webmin SSL encrypted connection, similar to the way Shell-in-a-Box does, one could use a really nice browser to surf in complete privacy.
Well, it's just a thought anyway.
I tried it, suprisingly alot faster than I thought it would be. Granted there is many missing features that may add more bloat later, but this thing looks like it will have great potential for embedded devices.
Hmmm..think It's about time to start up "funzilla", a mozilla browser ported to a functional language like Concurrent ML. Who's with me?
"Recursive bipartite matching"- try it!
Aww come on, this isn't fair. First, you mod the parent of my post flamebait just because it has some bad language in it. Hell, it was a joke completely on topic, it even had a link to a real programming language in it. Then you moddded me down, for the same reason. Go and get a sense of humor...
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
Actually I am looign forward to trying this browser out..
given the nice way aps such as LimeWire run and that you rarely notice that they are running under java.. this may also be agood prove of that as well.
Now if we coul donly free java from the cluches of Mordor(SUN)....
Don't Tread on OpenSource
You already can, with Mozilla, as this screenshot shows.
Imagine this uncommon but very possible setup.
You are working on a weekend all by yourself, you get the average of one phone call every 3 hours and nobody EVER comes into the office on weekends but you, the poor tech support guy.
You work for a small company that uses a Netware 5 file server for the firewall. (Remember, Netware 5 is Java based)
You don't have admin access.
The server doesn't have the console locked.
The server IS the firewall, and therefore can be outside of it.
You REALLY want to get your dose of porn, which the firewall wont let you do.
The firewall is unlocked........
Yep, time to load up a JAVA browser on the file server for your own porn surfing pleasure.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
there will be no problems getting the java plugin to work...right?
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
I find this line of reasoning a bit pathetic.
Just because we have more CPU power do you think that justifies wasting this power? I guess that Java is for people that already have computers more powerful than they can handle? Personally, I'd rather even give my cycles to SETI@HOME than give them to some VM.
And Java is still slow. Or Swing, or whichever excuse... perhaps it's slow because my VM is optimizing my code behind the scenes.
You've lowered your standards for performance, that's the whole story. Your reason is neither good nor bad nor compelling to someone that still values performance.
These Java processes take 15 meg and up on solaris, at least. They half the power of my machine, they half it's value. I need two machines instead of one. Is that good? Why the hell should I care if they run just as well as old applications on old machines? Why in the hell would I be happy about that... you think I'm nostalgic or something?
-pyrrho
Why ? I can only guess this guy or group wants some KUDOS . So I give you some props. Good job. But i wont be using it since Firebird runs fine . Maybe could be used for Cellphones or embedded ?
you should pay a visit to
m l )
.84 secs per tx but still)
http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno
It's a virtualised machine that runs hosted on Windows, Lunix & FreeBSD (& maybe others) and also runs native on some hardware (such as my IPAQ)
It has some really neat features, many borrowed from plan9.
Version 3 and below is not totally open (the source is $100).
The next version is considering making changes (see http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/4thedoverview.ht
Even if you never downlaod it, it's still worth reading the documentation.
Inferno follows the concept that threads are cheap (as an experiment someone recently had 90,000 concurrent threads passing a message from one to the other (admitedly it took
You'll wonder why anybody uses Java at all.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I guess there's probably no option to turn off Java support.
"You'll wonder why anybody uses Java at all."
Yes I sometimes wonder.
Troll signs (à la "worm signs" in Dune):
- dogmatic offensive pseudotruths (1st line);
- meaningless insult, liberally sprinkled with swear words (2nd line);
- main troll bait, hoping that mozilla users will feed him (3rd line);
- deadbrain conclusion (4th line).
Leave him alone and do not feed him, please.
I believe that if people want to experiment, they should.
Thufir Hawat
Part-time Mentat
. But i wont be using it since Firebird runs fine
It can't hurt to have a web browser besides you database.
I thought the thing was that people shouldn't buy software. The whole FSF theory is programmers need to live in their parents basement and write code for free. It's only moral to charge the people that can't figure out how to download, build, install, configure, troubleshoot , etc. You also aren't allowed to charge enough to make a living or help people that aren't truely worthly, like WebTV users.
Use the right tool for the right job.
Java can be very productive (as a lot of the optimizing is done behind your back)
Also, it encourages you to code for maintainability.
The VM will take care of optimizing your code (and yes they get better at it all the time)
I supose just because all that power is available will give developers more choice to work the language they like or *fear* might even be the right job for the task
Java is not only a language for writing pretty
applets (which aren't the same as full applications
which run from the CLI) or just for platform independence. It is a language which has many good security features, makes coding things such as networking much easier, has a vast amount of existing code and is a language which is just generally safer to program in and more object-oriented. If there weren't other benefits to coding Java programs, why would compilers such as GCJ exist for compiling Java programs to native code? Also, the speed problems with Java are now far less as compiling on demand becomes more common in Java runtimes. Whereas a C program can cause a segfault in about five lines, major problems with Java are more likely to be due to the runtime, which can even be eliminated. Also, there is no reason that just because Mozilla is slow (mainly because the code has to do a lot of layering to make the platform-independence work) doesn't mean that a port has to be -- a port would take substantial work and even though the ideas are the same, the finished product won't include the same code and so doesn't have to be as slow!!!
That's why it's called alpha. .BILL-GATES..er..I mean MONO is pre-alpha.
You know, the way
Anyway, you ain't the real Miguel, you's just a troll..
Does anybody know if there isn't already a database name JFirebird??? Cause if nobody bothered to check it out,I should say there's another lawsuit coming pretty soon....;o)
1. No sig. 2. ???? 3. Profit!!!
Is anyone here familiar with the MPL enough to give a run-down on how well this will play with Java? Given the fact that Java and the classlibs (as far as I know) are closed-source, does the MPL have any GPL-like clauses about linking to closed-source libraries?
While I'm at it, would it be possible for Sun to contribute a few engineers and integrate this into the Java class libraries? The current HTML component...well...it renders links, I guess, but it would be *great* to have a more capable rendering library.
You know, I don't know this guy, or have any mod points, but its really sad this was modded a troll as it obviously isn't. Maybe off topic, but in that case its just as off topic as the post he's replying to. I can tell you if this comes up in meta mod its getting an Unfair. BTW: the_gnat, you'd be less likely to get modded down on stuff like this if you avoided cursing. Just a tip.
OK, could someone explain to me why using XUL to implement the GUI isn't just a way of adding a useless extra layer of bloat? It seems like it provides you flexibility, but honestly I can't think of why I'd want the flexibility to run a browser within a browser. I just want to browse web pages, and that's all. It seems like web browsers lost sight of that as a goal long ago...
If you really felt this way, you'd be running nothing but hand-optimized assembly language programs in batch mode. No GUIs, not even a CLI.
Something tells me you're not doing that, though.
What's needed in this world isn't another clone of *zilla written in the language du jour. The problem with anything written with the Mozilla (or Gecko engine) is speed: Why should it take more than a few fractions of a second to render HTML?
/. and Yahoo just fine.
And yes, it's been done already: Dillo is a blindingly-fast HTML engine/browser that runs from a binary less than 300Kb. No, it doesn't support frames, nor Javascript, nor any of the other kitchen-sink items all other browsers strive to be. Instead, Dillo sports a plug-in interface (open-source, naturally) that allows for all of this to happen, if the user wants it to happen.
So here's my suggestion: Take a cue from Dillo and go for speed, not for bloat.
Oh, and I should add that Dillo renders
Ok it was kinda a joke but I will address it more seriously this time.
1. Java is slow. This was true in 1.0 release of Java, but with todays JIT's the speed difference is small. I can point you to numerous sites, but at the end of the day it comes down to good coders. Your experience must be with some bad coders.
2. SWING is slow. This again use to be true with 1.18 + SWING and 1.2x JVM's the 1.3 and 1.4 have increased SWINGS speed considerably.
3. JAVA takes up too much memory. Yes it is true that the base JVM can take around 5-16MB of RAM per JVM instance. But with todays systems, on a lot of applications that isn't too bad. Now the core issue is that it takes up that amount for EVERY JVM that is used. So to your point: If I launch a Java calculator program, and then launch a Java notepad, I will have lost around 10-32MB of RAM in just JVM's. This is currently true, however it is being addressed and should be solved with the 1.5 release. Once this is done, then it would be possible to have ONE JVM running on the system for all Java applications. The JVM could launch at startup and then even the inital load times would be greatly reduced. I believe that this is the way Apple is handling Java (Can't confirm it though).
So, when this issue is resolved, running Java on a machine could mean only giving up a maximum amount of 16MB of RAM for the JVM and the rest for the application. To be honest that is what most Java programs are doing today. Most run as an application server and run Servlets and JSP's all day long.
Another poster mentioned that you use the correct tool for the job. I agree, but I will add that the issues for not using Java for speed has and is going away. The reasons for not using it for memory are going away on most computers.
We do agree on one point. Most people do have computer processors far greater than they need.
Lastly, if you are having so many issues running Java apps on your system you should look at newer JVM's. They make a huge difference.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
Maybe I want to write an application in Java that has a more dynamic user interface. Swing makes things like this hard. What if you could make a great GUI in seconds in Java using dynamically generated XUL with call outs to Java instead of broken impared JS.
o neEditor", XUL.TEXT);
:) I'm impressed with the speed. Maybe it will send some of those idiot trolls about Java being slow back to the drawing board so they can complain about something else for a while when it gets done.
I'm all for duct taping a rendering engine on the front of real Java just because I don't like to deal with any of the popular layout managers for swing. Ideally, I would have my own Java widgets (because swing gets extendible widgets right like no other GUI API anywhere) that were rendered in a sane fasion (plus the native XUL widgets for when you don't need to extend them).
Swing layout is one of the reasons Java GUIs seam to be broken. If you resize a window, you get a lot of grey boxes. Sure, Mozilla could use some double buffering on their resizing, but it doesn't leave me with a gray screen instead of seeing how the components will look after resizing.
It would be even better if you could extend the XUL language in some manner with custom widgets.
For example:
XUL.registerComponent(MyPhoneEditor,"ph
These are all the more reasons why we need a good renderer in Java.
On a side note:
Anyone notice that with Java 1.4.2, jazilla starts faster than mozilla? A little over a second for me. It just won't render any web-site properly
Karma Clown
that would be sweet we could have Jazilla but writen in a language that is much faster!
It's been possible to run IE inside IE for years already. (using ActiveX components)
No way man Word Perfect 5.1 for Dos all the Way. All you need is an 8088 with a CGA graphics card, Hit F11 to reveal codes and look all 31337, and you can even render what the printed output will look like on your screen. All on an 8088 with 640k of Ram. Damn I wish they would release the source code for it. I'd start porting it to linux soon as I could CVS it.
--- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
2) Java will always be slower than a native, non-interpreted language, even if you compile it into a binary.
Not true. First of all, Java is compiled, except it's compiled into byte-code instead of machine-code. This is unlike languages such as PHP and Perl, which must recompile the text source code into machine-code or byte-code each time it's run. While not as fast as machine-code in most cases, byte-code is definitely much faster than interpreted.
One advantage of byte-code to machine-code, in addition to portability, is that it can actually run faster in some cases. My friend did a project for his super-computing class in which he tested a simple algorithm written in both C++ and Java to see what would run faster. He used every level of gcc optimization, as well as a few JVM's. As expected, the compiled C++ version kicked the pants off of the Sun and Blackdown JVM's, but the IBM J9 JVM was around 50% faster than the C++ version. This speed advantage is due to the fact that IBM's JVM is able to optimize the code at runtime, while gcc must do all optimizations at compile-time.
Most people's misconceptions of Java are due to two factors: An incredibly shitty MS JVM and the horrid Swing GUI toolkit. When Sun wrote JWT and Swing, they tried to stick to the write-once, run-everywhere philosophy as much as possible. Unfortunately, the different OS's have very little in common when looking at GUI functions, so they basically had pixel capabilities to work with - no widgets. This means that the widgets are all done in Java instead of using libraries available from the host system. This is why most Java applications look nothing like the operating system they are running on, and run very slow. The SWT GUI toolkit, which is part of the Eclipse Project, uses the host system's libraries to render widgets wherever possible. This leads to an application that runs much faster and looks just like any other application for that operating system. Of course, they have to implement SWT for every host system they want to support, but it still runs on systems where support is incomplete/missing, albeit more like JWT/Swing.
So who is going to port this to SWT? I really need a browser written in a cross-platform language that depends on platform-specific libraries.
Hmm, I had already forgotten that there was a database with the same name.
Someone is wrong on the Internet!
The stock layout managers suck ass, but there are better ones out there. If you're doing GUIs in Swing, check out TableLayout, HIGLayout, FlexGridLayout. These are all free and Free. There are probably other ones out there too.
I've been using TableLayout and although there are some little things I don't like about it, it does let me code Swing GUIs without the pain associated with the stock layout managers. Haven't tried the other two yet but they look interesting.
You're correct in an anal, trivial, boring sense.
The difference between an Applet and an application is often fairly trivial; relatively small changes to the application can enable it to run in the web browser window.
I assume this was intended as a joke, but I may as well point out that unless a program is not an applet, unless it implements the interface Applet
It's usually fairly easy to add the extra interface though. I've written Java that runs as both; at the same time if you want.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
You can always run it under dosbox or dosemu, though.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
I'm not understanding - how can this be Mozilla or even a Mozilla-clone, if it's not using the Gecko renderer? I mean, kudos and all for doing it, but Gecko is the key to Mozilla. Everything else is eye-candy.
To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
Given the Zaurus's Java Suport with some mods this would be a great application for it.
In fact I am posting this from Dillo.
Links 2 is rather impressive as well, in that is handles Javascript now, and runs under DirectFB.
My system is a P166 laptop w/ 80MB of RAM. This is low-end by today's standards, and it will run Mozilla, but for 90% of my browsing Dillo is more than adequate.
It may be true that people now have much faster machines, but there is just no excuse, for, say, the performance of Mozilla with text-boxes and the Mail composer.
It is just unbelievably slow, not really slow, not goddamn slow, but really, truly, unbelievably slow.
How do you spend so many years writing an app and end up with performance like this?
I totally agree and think that Dillo has a bright future, If it runs this well on a P166 I am quite keen to use it when I get something faster.
You might also want to check out Links 2, it does graphics, and Javascript now, and runs under DirectFB too which is kind of neat..
Is the next step to rewrite Mozilla in .NET?
"...I have completely rewrote..."
???
How about "I have completely rewritten," or more concisely "I rewrote."
At least he's got a compiler to catch his syntactic code errors.
That's why they're moving to the Firebird (aka Phoenix) base after the next release - the UI code in it is hugely faster.
Go to http://mozilla.org/projects/firebird and download either the latest release, or the latest nightly if you don't believe me.
What we really need is for Mozilla to be bundled into Java! Think about it... Mozilla binaries already exist for all of major platforms on which Java runs. All that's needed is a Java wrapper for it and presto, reliable, native-optimized browsing (and more) anywhere you've got a JVM.
+3 Insightful? WTF? Did the all the anti-Java FUD /.ers get their mod points today?
First you place the blame on Java as one of the bloat/UI "candies" that are forcing people to upgrade thier PC. Then you say that Java has mostly expanded on the server market. So which is it? They aren't big currently big in the GUI department (although if you go here, you'll see that is changing). So tell me again how Java, which runs mostly on servers, is forcing people to upgrade their PC because of UI bloat?
Or how this is part of this conspiracy since Java is made by a company that doesn't make a desktop PC, a company that until recently didn't even support the x86 architecture very well, a company that makes high-end servers and workstations that have exceeded your "typical" PC mentioned above for years?
I agree that Java does on the server "what was easy to program and cheap to run using Apache/CGI/PHP/Perl/Python". It also does it faster (Python, by about 20%), with more maintainable code (Perl) and more securely (CGI). Apache (and by extension Jakarta) has always worked hand-in hand with Java quite well. But then, there are times when Perl and Python are the better choice, so use the right tool for the job.
Comparing Swing to Flash is like comparing Gnome with HTML. That's right....apples and oranges. Excellent strawman attack but it doesn't work. The two are for totally different UI environments.
Mods, just because you don't know Java or agree with the FUD doesn't make this guys tripe right.
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
It is fast and is designed to run on constrained devices. Channing
Once this is done, then it would be possible to have ONE JVM running on the system for all Java applications. The JVM could launch at startup and then even the inital load times would be greatly reduced. I believe that this is the way Apple is handling Java (Can't confirm it though).
So, when this issue is resolved, running Java on a machine could mean only giving up a maximum amount of 16MB of RAM for the JVM and the rest for the application. To be honest that is what most Java programs are doing today
After more than 10 years of getting computer users to OSes that separate and protect applications and processes, now we are going back to the old monolithic model, so that one bad JAVA app can compromise all other JAVA apps within the JVM.
Give me a break guys... This is not the direction a platform or programming model should be pushing developers just because Sun cannot get performance to a reasonable level.
Heck even look at VB and its runtime engine, it even consumes less memory and runs as an isolated process. (And VB has tons of stuff in it that weighs it down considerably.)
Come on Sun, give us what you promised six years ago. Quit wasting time suing companies and actually put some work into development.
No wonder that even the Server developers at Sun have been complaining about JAVA and its performance on their own OSes.
Interesting stuff. Thanks for the link. This might be grounds for renewed faith.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
As long as geeks (and other desperate guys) keep thinking of getting laid as the prime goal of a relationship, they'll fail anywhere but in a bar. The first girl I got anywhere with, things began not as me horny and lonely, but simply as me taking refuge in an interesting conversation from a lot of other females I'd pissed off. Don't seek sex.. seek women.
Reality is indistinguishable from any sufficiently advanced fantasy.
SourceForge's download counters claim that Jazilla M1 has been downloaded zero times. Looks like either no-one's actually bothered to download the thing at all, or the mighty SourceForge has failed us. Ho hum...
If you have a java application, it might be useful to have built in browsing capabilities. Like for displaying help, web-mail, web based forums. Your java application would no longer have to be fully client based or fully web-based. I can think of a million uses for this...
If you need a bzip decompresser, here's a free one www.davidcampaign.net/dczip.html
I wonder if you could run Jazilla as an applet inside a web browser?
Sure beats running Internet Explorer.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Java did already win (partially) the market of web-servers. And that did not force desktop users to upgrade their PCs. But now, after few previous failed attempts, Java comes again to desktops and if it will succeed it will force desktop users to upgrade their PCs. I thought it was clear.
Java is made by a company that doesn't make a desktop PC
Also, Sun doesn't make x86 desktop PCs. But IBM does and so does HP. And Sun make money on licensing other Java vendors. Besides, Sun is still trying to push low-end sparc station on the market of desktops - working in two diff companies I was invited to the meeting where Sun reps used their charm to sell us their Ultra-10 and similar workstation. And in in one case my boss even forced me to support that decision. I think, a part of the conspirancy is to push more Sparc workstations to the desktop market too.
Java versus ytho/Perl/CGI
Java is a right tool, let's say, in 20 % cases, but it's decided to be used in 80 % - looks disproportional to me.
Comparing Swing to Flash is like comparing Gnome with HTML. That's right...
Less is more !
This will be very useful for any client side Java projects that need a browser component. Unfortunately it looks like it needs a lot of work. It's pretty sad when every website I tried didn't even come close to rendering properly. I'll look forward to future releases however.
plz advise further, Mr. Wizard!
By what do you mean "High Performance"?
Do you mean doing a video game in SWING? That would be weird, I would look at something like Java3d or even the 2d stuff, but SWING is mostly used for client side form stuff (buttons, textfields, tables ect).
Also realize that we are not talking about unaccaptable levels of performance to a screaming eagle here.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
How said anything about one bad Java App taking down the rest of them? By no means did I say that someone could do something like:
System.exit(1) and take down every running application...
Also understand that this is being developed by multiple people/vendors NOT SUN. It is in their community process and I hope that Apple is helping with this. I would say that most of the work being done on Java is not from Sun, but IBM. (Just my observation). However, Sun has final say (kinda like some kernel guy...)
You say that VB uses a smaller runtime engine than Java.... SHOCKER!!! How much of it is built in to Windows that it doesn't need to load??? How well does that VB app port to any other platform?
You mention that Sun's server developers complain about Java. You are correct, but not for the reason you mention. They complained about the speed of their JVM to that of the Windows JVM. Sun in it's wisdom decided that to make Java more successful, it needed to make sure that the JVM for Windows ran great. They focused so much attention to it that the one for Solaris suffered. That isn't the case anymore. Now does that mean that every developer in Sun loves Java????? NOPE! Every large company has sharp people who disagree on stuff. I bet you will find people in Microsoft who think Linux rocks and WindowsXp isn't that great.
Another point you made is you want Sun to give the developers what they promised six years ago. I for the life of me can't think of anything they promised except a write once run anywhere thing. I would say that they have 'mostly' achieved that goal. I run Java stuff on NetWare, Windows, Linux, Solaris, AIX and various phones and palm/pocket pc systems. Other than the small devices, no modifications of code have been necessary!
If you give me a great IDE in Java and it runs 10% slower because of Java, I generally don't care. i.e. Oracle Jdeveloper 9i, is the example. I now have an IDE that runs acceptable on most platforms!
The only real problem with Java is that so many kids are taking it today (I have heard it is being taught in more colleges than English), and those kids are being put in to positions they are not ready for (Bad economy, that wants cheaper labor). That coupled with the fact that it is a relatively new language screams for performance issues. This isn't the languages fault.
If you remember when C was first around, just to write a very simple program almost always took 5k (we laugh at that now), but I remember developers (myself included) who thought "What a piece of crap!! I can do that in Assembler in 300 bites and it's startup time is way faster!
What percentage of code is done in Assembler nowdays? Heck the same could be said about COBOl.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
I wrote a java web browser in about 3 weeks of classtime back in high school that rendered html as good as that does, at least on the sites I checked (google.com and mozilla.org).
Not to sound like I'm complaining. It's free afterall. And it's nice to see they haven't abandoned the project.
Even so, I find that either Mozilla (on Linux) or IE (on XP) is entirely capable of reducing a Pentium 4 with plenty of memory into a quivering heap of dung.
You know that you can disable JavaScript window pop-ups from the Mozilla control panel? That way when you're using your dad's PC in his study (oops...I mean your "coworkers' PC" in their "offices") to surf for amputee fetish porn, your poor little P4 PC won't be brought to its knees with 187 simultaneous pop-up browser windows offering cheap Viagra and kiddie porn. Now it's time for you to fuck off. Go on...fuck off. Good boy.
You ask why?
It reminds me of when we did the first Virtual PC for Mac. When we demo'd it at trade shows, about one out of every 20 people who stepped to ask about it asked if they could run Executor [a Mac emulator of sorts] within Virtual PC, and then Virtual PC in that, and then...
It was an interesting question the first time, to think about. And it was interesting to see customers ask about it. About the fifth time, it got really tiresome.
Personally, I think a browser written entirely in Java is a pretty cool accomplishment, especially when it's not Sun doing it, but just someone with a LOT of spare time. Useful, no. Cool, yes.
I think people deriding Jazilla because they think it's not terribly useful, or because they don't think it's something anyone would pay for, miss the point. It's like asking why would you climb a mountain? I mean, c'mon. Why would you build a device that can levitate a cow? #1 reason: so you can say to your friend: "Dude! Look at this! I built a device that can levitate a cow!"
And besides, the browser world is filled with this sort of stuff. In the wake of Safari, why is there continuing work on MacNetscape or MacIE, which only cost their companies money? Hell, why did Microsoft *ever* work on MacIE? You just have to expect things to happen in the world of browsers that can't be explained in logical terms.
jbx
ps I can hear it already "Dude, like we ran Virtual PC on a Mac, and then we ran Virtual PC for Windows inside that, and then we ran a Java Virtual Machine for that, and then we ran this new browser inside that, and then we ran an Apple ][ emulator that somebody wrote in JavaScript, and like, dude, it's like sooooooo slow!" I mean, when someone says that to you, *what*do*you*say*?
pps No! You can't scream out "Get a life!" It's a trade show! He might buy a copy!
ppps And I'm sick and tired of "Dude, like maybe the reason Neo can stop the sentinels is that they think they're out of the Matrix, but the Matrix is in another, bigger Matrix. And maybe *that* Matrix is in another Matrix. And..."
(sig) The last bug isn't fixed until the last user is dead. (/sig)
Can it run java applets? Because phoenix won't for me.
It appears not to support scrolling. And the /. layout is completly messed up. Cool idea for embedded stuff, though. i'll still stick with phoenix for now.
Here's further proof that Java is best suited for applets and all attempts to kludge it into a general purpose tool for developing applications is appealing to academics, introverts and the type of people who like to compile all the software that they use. Command Line arguments?! Double-click on the Mozilla icon, for God's sake!
I for the life of me can't think of anything they promised except a write once run anywhere thing. I would say that they have 'mostly' achieved that goal. I run Java stuff on NetWare, Windows, Linux, Solaris, AIX and various phones and palm/pocket pc systems
.NET web services or ported to the requesting OS. As arrogant as Microsoft can be, at least they were willing to give away C# technology and concepts to a standards body so anyone, anywhere could use it.
For the most part I do agree with you; however the statement above is stretching reality just a bit. The write once, run anywhere simply is not as ready for prime time as people want to make it sound. Because, it simply doesn't always run everywhere, and on some platforms the performance is atrocious.
Additionally, Sun promised a more robust environment, and even with the upcoming announcements in place, it still won't be there.
I would rather commit to a real language that can easily port and run on 99.9% of the OSes out there, than put any more resources in to JAVA. As screwed up as Microsoft can be, C# which is actually an 'open' standard that Microsoft 'doesn't have the final say on' is a better place to look for JAVA like development, even if the apps have to be implemented in
Sun is so determined to be the God of JAVA, their arrogance will kill it. They would have been better off to let it become a standard by opening it up as well. A lot of posts here are so afraid of putting all their eggs in Microsoft's basket, but yet with JAVA, Sun is the only basket. If Sun moves in another direction, JAVA developers are at their mercy and will be until the end of time. At least with C#, now that it is an open standard, even if Microsoft abandons it or screws up their version of it, we can choose from other vendors like Borland for development and not be dependant on one company.
As for the VB code utilizing the GUI API calls of Windows, yes it does, but if it was put on any other GUI OS, it would use the GUI API calls of the OS just the same. There still would not be the overhead that there is with JAVA.
Sun is trying to reinvent too much to achieve their cross platform compatibility, when in fact they could be leveraging what IS consistent among the modern OSes and off loading a lot of what JAVA is now doing itself. This is major waste of CPU and memory when it is normally sitting upon an OS that provides basic GUI features that can be called. And if the underlying GUI doesn't support the calls, then and only then implement them.
If you really take a look at JAVA, they (Sun) are trying to build an OS foundation for a development language, instead of making a development language that would universally sit on 99% of all OSes. This is completely backwards and if you look at JAVA down the long road, the intent is to virtually kill ALL OSes and move the world to JAVA.
JAVA is so against the Open Source movement and freedom of OSes that everyone here seems to support, it shocks me to see developers pushing the open movement and yet also being JAVA advocates.
Everyone just has to look a bit in the future to see that if Sun truly does achieve their goals, all OSes and the variety of architectures and competition in OSes will be lost. Write for JAVA now and you are really writing for a JAVA OS model. This is totally against what the open source community stands for, and ironically, is also totally against what even Microsoft stands for.
I will not make Sun the next software God that I have to bow to for crumbs. Just like everyone now is running around trying to get crumbs to get their JAVA creations to run right on even three of basic main OSes (OSX, Linux, and Windows), and even getting it to run on just these three is still a challenge.
I once believed in what JAVA promised, but after watching where they have tried to take it, I totally disagree with their ideology, JAVA is not the answer anyone is really looking for if they look at the big picture.
Why is Java on the client harder to support in a corporate infrastructure?n If anything that is the easiest place to support Java as you have total control over what is on the client and you're not worried about users with dial-up connections.
My blog: http://jkratz.dyndns.org/~jason/blog/
As long as geeks (and other desperate guys) keep thinking of getting laid as the prime goal of a relationship, they'll fail anywhere but in a bar. The first girl I got anywhere with, things began not as me horny and lonely, but simply as me taking refuge in an interesting conversation from a lot of other females I'd pissed off. Don't seek sex.. seek women.
:(
You sound like you're not getting laid enough.
I can use a third party popup management tool for IE (Popupcop) which is more flexible than anything in Mozilla.. and even while running that plus IE, it will still be much faster than Mozilla alone. Oh well.. you can lead a horse to water, but you may have to severely beat him before he'll drink.
the differences:
the C++ compiler really is as good as most people at assembly, but VMs are only promised to be as efficient as compiled languages.
the CLI and GUI interfaces actually introduce a new paradigm for a program that itself makes the program capable of some new ability. Slow imperative languages offer little that you cannot obtain with fast imperative languages.
Also, I write in slow languages all the time. I'm not a speed freak. I'm just tired of the argument that faster machines mean slower software is a non-issue. That's no argument at all. Slower is slower, bloated is bloated, it counts against you. If you want to say it's only one set of factors... of course I agree, but be specific about the other factor you're trying to obtain.
You can't call it a general purpose solution; with baggage like that you have to justify it. I'm not buying the more rapid development argument either for any scripting language. Any speed gained in creation is lost in debugging. Other speedups are just familiarity with the correct libraries. To get better productivity you have to leave imperative languages, because that's where the real woes in developmental struggles are. imnsho, of course.
PS: I'm not saying I intend to leave the imperative languages, but it's clear that CASE addicted people begging to be let out from underneath the hood clearly need development models of their own (indoubtably built using imperative languages). I'm fond of citing Zope at the moment, which has an interesting mix, going from Products you simply drop in and use (changing art, or title type parameters), a template language, and then a relatively a smooth transition to the underlying python, allowing full access to an OO language.
By the way, this is a good example of why you would use a VM based language, use of this in Zope allows all the levels to exist in the same namespace (e.g. python code fragments in template language expressions).
-pyrrho
I have not found it particularly portable. You end up having to learn the VM, instead of the real machine. Each VM behaves a little different. It's strategies are different, it's bugs.
I know a lot of C++ programs that are portable. There are a lot of good paradigms to follow if you want to make portable code in C++ (or any compiled language).
EXCEPT: in a situation where you want binary compatibility. You want to deliver the code in a binary package to processors with incompatible machine code. Like a distributed processing situation on heterogeneous harware. With Java you can pass that code around regardless of the CPU type knowing it will run (assuming you use the right VMs). However, with everybody always reminding me how much faster computers are getting, I'm thinking you could get this with ANSI C++, compiled on the fly. Why not?
-pyrrho
I knew someone was going to say that. I put halve and it didn't look right. I went to dictionary.com and it was down. I then realized I didn't care too much and went with half. At least every single person will understand what I meant.
-pyrrho
well, regarding joking, I got the joke, and frankly, your little rant was merely an opportunity for my own, because we have both heard these things that set us off before.
As far as Java getting better. I'm open minded. The day it really performs better, I'm admitting it.
Turning to good programmers. The point is to compare like to like. Average programmer to average programmer. The Average programmer makes much faster code in C++, and can be instructed to use safe idioms to address some of the problems average programmers supposedly have with memory management issues. Good java programmers might make more repsonsive GUIs, good C++ programmers make particle simulations happen. That goodness gets more effect.
In fact, comparing good programmer to good programmers is my whole point with this efficiency question. A good programmer has no trouble mastering a compiled language, and is just as fast. I'm just feeling like I'm getting too much marketing hype in, where is the beef, as the old lady asked. Ok so there is a wide library of calls, documented in a central place. Well, there is a huge array of C++ libraries and tools too. And most of what Java offers is stuff Sun has provided VIA Java. Sun could have made a standard class system for C++ too... would we be better off? Probably.
-pyrrho
The only real problem with Java is that so many kids are taking it today (I have heard it is being taught in more colleges than English), and those kids are being put in to positions they are not ready for (Bad economy, that wants cheaper labor). That coupled with the fact that it is a relatively new language screams for performance issues. This isn't the languages fault.
I think it is Java's fault. Like VB it's supposed to be the language so robust you can't hose it. Code away, think nothing of memory, automagic at your service! It promotes a totally false idea of what the pitfalls of programming really are. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
-pyrrho
Calling a BBS a "database" seems like overstatement to me.
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Security features? Most of the "security" features in Java are aimed at permitting more than one trust boundary in a single address space. This is a poorly understood problem that Java doesn't actually solve. But even if it did, a stack security system is much more complex and difficult to configure than Unix setuid(2) and therefore even less likey to be used properly in practice. Furthermore, putting different programs in separate address spaces has advantages for robustness.
As for the rest (mainly array bounds checking and garbage collection), equivalent or better alternatives are available in C. Better still, they can be used only where they're needed. Check out Apache resource pools and the glib object system for some examples. Obviously C++ has even more of these toys. And if we don't restrict our choices to these three there are hundreds of interpreted languages with equivalent or better features. Lisp comes to mind...
I find that I'm far more productive in Java than I ever was in C++ and C. I find that's even truer for less experienced programmers.Exactly the problem. A rigid system like Java is indeed wonderful if the goal is to allow mediocre programmers to create mediocre applications. Cobol had the same sort of appeal in its day. There's nothing wrong with that, but those who aim for excellence don't need to be pampered. All those fluffy features just get in the way.
Real hackers do it without a net. ;-)
Not all those who wander are lost.
Well, sort of.
It does load quite fast with or with out X11, and in both case, the text rendering is as smooth as Safari.
However, the GUI needs a lot of work - it doesn't even have a backward or forward button! Most sites (apple.com, hp.com, cnn.com, yahoo.com) don't load at all. Only ibm.com and news.com display some sort of contents.
In short, a long long way to go.
Probally one of the reasons it was so damn good. I might just see if I can find some install disks and fire up DOSemu.
--- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
SWING is still slow. It may be faster than it used to be, but it's still far too slow to use for anything requiring
high performance.
Probably you could come up with some examples.
I use SWING based Java applications on my old 200 MHz Pentium with 128 MB RAM and on my newer 1400 MHz Athlon with 512MB RAM.
I use A Java IDE and a Java CASE tool. Neither one is slow! The IDE is as fast as Microsoft Visual C++ IDE, and the CASE System is as Fast as Rational Rose.
So
That it sometimes takes indeed a noticeable glimps of time to display a dialog? Or do you indeed see how screens get drawn or that menues open slow or what?
Strange is, on my old 200 MHz Pentium SWING is FAST since I use it in production, I never could follow the constantly repeated
regards,
angel'o'sphere
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
After more than 10 years of getting computer users to OSes that separate and protect applications and processes, now we are going back to the old monolithic model, so that one bad JAVA app can compromise all other JAVA apps within the JVM.
Erm
Seems you have no clue about the VM architecture
Or you have far more clue then I
As Java "processes" inside of one VM are completely seperated, they cant interfear with each other. The only way to harm each other is to eat up shared resources like file handels/descriptors, but that can happen in ordinary OSes with ordinary processes as well.
regards,
angel'o'sphere
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Seems you have no clue about the VM architecture :-)
This is really not worth the time to debate; just watch how JAVA plays out my friend.
Just as an example, look at the stability within a single java VM instance and its interaction with the applet. The current VM model has no protection or design mechanism to restrain the applet now, let alone if multiple applets are let loose in the same VM.
Applets can already hang the VM they are residing in; how do you think this will NOT affect other applets running in the same VM if it is moved to a multiple model.
Look at the Win16 VM on the early NT platform, they ran in a shared VM as well, and since they also didn't have the protection mechanisms, one Win16 application could bring down the whole Win16 VM.
This is why NT implemented separate processes (or an option for) Win16 applications so that they would get their own VM to protect them from other errant Win16 applications.
This was moving the model forward; however, it appears that Sun is moving everyone backwards.
Again it kills me that people here are the ones that are so for their 'own' control of enriching and optimizing their OSes and software development, and JAVA is just the opposite of this. You have no control over Java's implementation or performance.
Can you say, "Slave to Sun out loud?"
TheNetAvenger
Not just while it was being developer. JavaScript was called LiveScript in the initial releases of Netscape. It was changed to JavaScript when Java started becoming the "hot" technology.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Dude, Sun didn't hire that goat. He lives in your closet.