Slashdot Mirror


IBM Releases Fastest SDK For Java 6

IndioMan writes "IBM is releasing an SDK for Java 6 and is sponsoring an Early Release Program to gather feedback from the Java community. Product binaries and documentation are available for Linux on x86 and 64-bit AMD, and AIX for PPC for 32- and 64-bit systems. In addition to supporting the Java SE 6 Platform specification, IBM's SDK also focuses on platform stability, performance, and diagnostics. It's tops on every benchmark."

15 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. x86_64 plugin = Heros by baptiste · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If they include a x86_64 browser plugin they'll be heros. It's 2007 and Sun still refuses to release a 64-bit browser JRE plugin because..... why?

    1. Re:x86_64 plugin = Heros by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
      maybe because the JIT compiler has to convert the java instructions to x86-64 instructions, so it's not just a simple recompile.
      Right, because that's so different when it's running under a browser than under the standalone VM that ALREADY EXISTS FOR X86-64.
    2. Re:x86_64 plugin = Heros by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Interesting

      By March, 100% of Java will be available under GPL, right? So at that point, I would think that anybody who has the skills and time will be able to clean up any code that's not 64-bit clean, and compile a 64-bit browser plugin. I'm looking forward to seeing some really good things happen in OSS with Java, now that all the licensing impediments are going away.

    3. Re:x86_64 plugin = Heros by this+great+guy · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are 2 ways to get a 32-bit Java plugin running under a Linux/AMD64 environment (BTW, AMD64 is the official arch name implemented by AMD and Intel, x86-64 has been officially abandonned):

      • Use the Blackdown Java plugin, they provide a 64-bit version (it works ok, but I have come across at least 1 applet able to crash it).
      • Use nspluginwrapper that allows you to load 32-bit plugins in 64-bit browsers.

      Of course, since Sun has open sourced Java, a 64-bit Java plugin is likely to appear soon.

  2. Re:Open Java? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sun didn't want to delay the launch of Java 6, so it's Java 7 that's open source.

    --
    GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  3. Re:Open Java? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 4, Informative

    I forgot to include my sources for that:
    Behind the scenes -- from Mark Reinholds Blog.

    --
    GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  4. Re:The Fastest JDK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Funny, but even Sun's JDK blows Perl out of the water.

  5. Re:The Fastest JDK? by thule · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know the statement was tagged as funny, but Java is quite fast these days. Java7 will only get faster with some really spiffy JVM ideas. I don't see Python, Perl, and Ruby catching up for a while.

    It seems to me that once Java is opened up and is included with every Linux distro out there, Java will not be perceived as large and slow anymore. It will be a simple apt-get, yum, etc away. It will just work.

  6. Re:The Fastest JDK? by Yosho · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why did the parent modded as troll? It's quite true. For example, look at The Computer Language Shootout. Sun's JVM is much faster than Perl in almost every benchmark except for startup times. Perl's memory consumption is somewhere better, but not even close to the same degree that Java is faster.

    Those benchmarks are based on Java 1.5, too. 1.6 is even faster.

    --
    Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
  7. Not all benchmarks better by greg_barton · · Score: 4, Informative

    Scimark wasn't even close:

    IBM java6:
    Composite Score: 482.8282568762099
    FFT (1024): 551.8002634079949
    SOR (100x100): 568.7588552216857
    Monte Carlo : 64.62096017621073
    Sparse matmult (N=1000, nz=5000): 219.84569330460474
    LU (100x100): 1009.1155122705532

    Sun java6:
    Composite Score: 617.5119705454583
    FFT (1024): 510.7586118547276
    SOR (100x100): 829.8686416193439
    Monte Carlo : 118.25350583943022
    Sparse matmult (N=1000, nz=5000): 470.6355733620428
    LU (100x100): 1158.0435200517468

    Higher scores are better. Both run on AMD X2 5000+

    Sun VM stomped on IBM's. That wasn't true with earlier VM's. IBM used to smoke Sun on scimark. Maybe there's more development to be done.

  8. Re:The Fastest JDK? by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why did the parent modded as troll?

    Because this is slashdot, and perl is one of the Chosen Few Languages, along with C, Ruby, Python and PHP. Java, being both closed (for the moment) and slow (5 years ago on the client side) is not. Therefore, any statement that compares Java favourably with one of the Few Chosen Languages must be either a troll or flamebait.

    It's easier when you stop fighting the groupthink.

  9. Re:The Fastest JDK? by kv9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because this is slashdot, and perl is one of the Chosen Few Languages, along with C, Ruby, Python and PHP. Java, being both closed (for the moment) and slow (5 years ago on the client side) is not.

    I believe you mean "Chosen-Few-Languages-for-Slamming". they all get it from the slashcrowd, in no particular order:

    • Java - slow, bloaty
    • C - old and krusty, pointers baaaad, get with the times
    • Ruby - it's the new Visual Basic
    • Python - haha whitespace
    • PHP - insecure, noobs
    • Perl - gruesome syntax and readability
  10. Re:Open Java? by rdean400 · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's not true. The source code has already been opened as a project:

    https://jdk.dev.java.net/

    The fact that they haven't made their first release from that product changes nothing.

  11. Re:Does this mean a faster Eclipse? by owlstead · · Score: 4, Informative

    The slow performance of Eclipse is not due to the JVM, it's about the SWT library and it's bindings with the native libraries. There was an SWT port called SWT Fox that quickened things up a bit. It doesn't seem to be maintained anymore, but the performance speedup was very noticable. Changing the VM probably won't make the slightest of difference.

    That cost me two moderations. Why aren't moderations in a discussion depended on the *branch* of the discussion? Oh well...

  12. Re:The Fastest JDK? by Decaff · · Score: 4, Informative

    In the meanwhile, we've still got customers stuck on 1.3, because our "write once, run anywhere" code doesn't run on 1.4, and it's too much effort to puzzle out why because Sun's runtime is just such a mess.

    There could be several reasons why Java 1.3 code won't run on 1.4. One is if you use sun.* or com.sun.* packages directly, which is funcamentally against portability guidelines. Another could be real incompatibilities. There are very few incompatibilities between 1.3 and 1.4. They are listed here:
    http://java.sun.com/javase/compatibility_j2se1.4.h tml

    If you keeping customers from using Java 5.0 or Java 6.0 because you can't sort this out, you are keeping them from major performance and functional improvements.