Yawn. The 'Java is slow, obese and heavy' arguments are poor, out of date and largely inaccurate. Java's popularity on mobile phones suggests it is hardly a performance bottleneck, nor is it too demanding for memory.
I understand you argument, but it sure doesn't apply to phones. Maybe for a simple Java business application, but thats about it.
Find one book, one article about making apps on j2me that doesn't explain how to use obfuscation. Thats not because of all the pirates trying to steal your code, its because Java is big.
In order to make a sophisticated app, you basically have to throw out everything you have come to love about Java to make it work on a phone, namely OO....
Its not the amount of code thats the problem, that's inheirent in any language, clearly. It's the fact that adding classes, or doing anything that the language is built for or suggests you do costs alot.
The Jar footprint and class size comes straight from how many methods, variables, extends, implements, packages, etc.. You would crazy to try to run an app on a phone that have tons of getters and setters - classloader loads that and then whoop, there went 80% of your memory.
For sophisticated apps, this makes Java on a phone is basically procedural code, large case statements, public variables for direct access and maybe 3 or 4 classes tops. At that point, I have a hard time calling it Java, but also at that point, its not obese.
Its popular on phones because there are 2 options, that or BREW.
Yawn. The 'Java is slow, obese and heavy' arguments are poor, out of date and largely inaccurate. Java's popularity on mobile phones suggests it is hardly a performance bottleneck, nor is it too demanding for memory.
I understand you argument, but it sure doesn't apply to phones. Maybe for a simple Java business application, but thats about it.
Find one book, one article about making apps on j2me that doesn't explain how to use obfuscation. Thats not because of all the pirates trying to steal your code, its because Java is big.
In order to make a sophisticated app, you basically have to throw out everything you have come to love about Java to make it work on a phone, namely OO....
Its not the amount of code thats the problem, that's inheirent in any language, clearly. It's the fact that adding classes, or doing anything that the language is built for or suggests you do costs alot.
The Jar footprint and class size comes straight from how many methods, variables, extends, implements, packages, etc..
You would crazy to try to run an app on a phone that have tons of getters and setters - classloader loads that and then whoop, there went 80% of your memory.
For sophisticated apps, this makes Java on a phone is basically procedural code, large case statements, public variables for direct access and maybe 3 or 4 classes tops. At that point, I have a hard time calling it Java, but also at that point, its not obese.
Its popular on phones because there are 2 options, that or BREW.
Well, if spammers and pron sites aren't doing this and this is made-up, then surely they are on the road to doing it now as of this post on Slashdot...so its irrelevant.
From now on, enter in the catchup wrong the first time, everytime. Just in case it helps.:-)
$250 is $50 more than the competition (according to Jobs) and is roughy 10 times the capacity. Yes, for an ADDITIONAL $50, you can get another 11 gigs. If you are in the market for $199 mp3 players and now you are getting a $299 mp3 player from Apple because $50 is worth 4gigs and $50 more is worth another 11, then you are doing exactly what Apple wants.
So, you don't count.
The people who do count aren't willing to pay premium price for the iPod because they don't think they need 15gigs of music space (read: non-geek). These people like style. The minis look very cool. For $50 bucks, they might just get it cause it looks cool and it has lots more space... but not too much since they aren't a geek and don't need it.
They can't justify $299 just for space, but might justify $249 for style. So far, Apple has been able to bring techno lust to the everyday consumer, they might sell them by the gah-zillions.
The only thing is that for me- music is also my day job, and theirfore must pay.
A 'day job' in music is a tricky thing, its hard to distinguish between what is art and what sells next week. Setting your self up to _have_ to make money at it ensures that you will be interested primarily in what sells next week. The current state of music is geared to facilitate just that. Nowadays, its 'okay' to sell out because 90% of all the others are doing it too. But does that make it okay? No. As an artist, you have a responsibility to be honest with me as a listener, and with yourself as a musician. Otherwise what you are doing may as well be bubblegum pop, because it will only last that long.
How do you avoid that? You avoid it by not depending to make your livelyhood from it.
If you are lucky enough that people pay you at _all_ to express yourself and relate to them, then by God you are in a swell spot. At my programming day job, they don't pay me to do that, although my stack dumps may be more creative than the next guy's.
I got a question, why the hell does this post have a score of 4? It does nothing to answer the question asked but mention that Apple ships with Java 1.3.
Where was it in the question where it was asked "Given the hypothesis of my business that you can pull out of your ass, how do you think I run IT?"
Many people, like myself, read these articles to get tips from people and to try to learn more from our oh-so-fucking-smart geeks who know everything, even how to judge whether or not someone is making a bad business decision based of his surmized ideology. Teach me that one oh master, cause I know there are plenty of people who could benefit from knowing how to do that.
Not to make this too long of a rant, but I have been here twice now, looking to see what answers people posted, so that I too might investigate other IDEs, in that time, this dumbass post has been moded up, and other more informational posts aren't.
Why is Ask Slashdot here? If only to mod up "...if you have to Ask Slashdot, you are not a professional."
Let's lay off the picking on people, and boost up the actual information.
Slashdot Mirror
Yawn. The 'Java is slow, obese and heavy' arguments are poor, out of date and largely inaccurate. Java's popularity on mobile phones suggests it is hardly a performance bottleneck, nor is it too demanding for memory.
I understand you argument, but it sure doesn't apply to phones. Maybe for a simple Java business application, but thats about it.
Find one book, one article about making apps on j2me that doesn't explain how to use obfuscation. Thats not because of all the pirates trying to steal your code, its because Java is big.
In order to make a sophisticated app, you basically have to throw out everything you have come to love about Java to make it work on a phone, namely OO....
Its not the amount of code thats the problem, that's inheirent in any language, clearly. It's the fact that adding classes, or doing anything that the language is built for or suggests you do costs alot.
The Jar footprint and class size comes straight from how many methods, variables, extends, implements, packages, etc.. You would crazy to try to run an app on a phone that have tons of getters and setters - classloader loads that and then whoop, there went 80% of your memory.
For sophisticated apps, this makes Java on a phone is basically procedural code, large case statements, public variables for direct access and maybe 3 or 4 classes tops. At that point, I have a hard time calling it Java, but also at that point, its not obese.
Its popular on phones because there are 2 options, that or BREW.
Yawn. The 'Java is slow, obese and heavy' arguments are poor, out of date and largely inaccurate. Java's popularity on mobile phones suggests it is hardly a performance bottleneck, nor is it too demanding for memory. I understand you argument, but it sure doesn't apply to phones. Maybe for a simple Java business application, but thats about it. Find one book, one article about making apps on j2me that doesn't explain how to use obfuscation. Thats not because of all the pirates trying to steal your code, its because Java is big. In order to make a sophisticated app, you basically have to throw out everything you have come to love about Java to make it work on a phone, namely OO.... Its not the amount of code thats the problem, that's inheirent in any language, clearly. It's the fact that adding classes, or doing anything that the language is built for or suggests you do costs alot. The Jar footprint and class size comes straight from how many methods, variables, extends, implements, packages, etc.. You would crazy to try to run an app on a phone that have tons of getters and setters - classloader loads that and then whoop, there went 80% of your memory. For sophisticated apps, this makes Java on a phone is basically procedural code, large case statements, public variables for direct access and maybe 3 or 4 classes tops. At that point, I have a hard time calling it Java, but also at that point, its not obese. Its popular on phones because there are 2 options, that or BREW.
Well, if spammers and pron sites aren't doing this and this is made-up, then surely they are on the road to doing it now as of this post on Slashdot...so its irrelevant. From now on, enter in the catchup wrong the first time, everytime. Just in case it helps. :-)
Nah... If he was *really* a visionary, she would have had a pink iPod mini with the arm band accessory. *That* is the future.
Woohoo! Thanks for the link.
Clearly, that is what will sell it.
$250 is $50 more than the competition (according to Jobs) and is roughy 10 times the capacity. Yes, for an ADDITIONAL $50, you can get another 11 gigs. If you are in the market for $199 mp3 players and now you are getting a $299 mp3 player from Apple because $50 is worth 4gigs and $50 more is worth another 11, then you are doing exactly what Apple wants.
So, you don't count.
The people who do count aren't willing to pay premium price for the iPod because they don't think they need 15gigs of music space (read: non-geek). These people like style. The minis look very cool. For $50 bucks, they might just get it cause it looks cool and it has lots more space... but not too much since they aren't a geek and don't need it.
They can't justify $299 just for space, but might justify $249 for style. So far, Apple has been able to bring techno lust to the everyday consumer, they might sell them by the gah-zillions.
2 cents from a proud owner of a phat 40gig.
How do you avoid that? You avoid it by not depending to make your livelyhood from it.
If you are lucky enough that people pay you at _all_ to express yourself and relate to them, then by God you are in a swell spot. At my programming day job, they don't pay me to do that, although my stack dumps may be more creative than the next guy's.
Some one forgot along the way that it's really about the music.
Its all about image now.
I got a question, why the hell does this post have a score of 4? It does nothing to answer the question asked but mention that Apple ships with Java 1.3.
...if you have to Ask Slashdot, you are not a professional."
Where was it in the question where it was asked "Given the hypothesis of my business that you can pull out of your ass, how do you think I run IT?"
Many people, like myself, read these articles to get tips from people and to try to learn more from our oh-so-fucking-smart geeks who know everything, even how to judge whether or not someone is making a bad business decision based of his surmized ideology. Teach me that one oh master, cause I know there are plenty of people who could benefit from knowing how to do that.
Not to make this too long of a rant, but I have been here twice now, looking to see what answers people posted, so that I too might investigate other IDEs, in that time, this dumbass post has been moded up, and other more informational posts aren't.
Why is Ask Slashdot here? If only to mod up "
Let's lay off the picking on people, and boost up the actual information.