Slashdot Mirror
An Open-Source Java Port To iPhone?
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."
Apple can't even commit to Java 1.6 for OS X -- I think you're being a wee bit optimistic.
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.?
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
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.
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
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, 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.
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 wrote this at night over about a month:
Baby Cell
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.
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.