It's one hell of a statement. Just like in poker, playing your cards right doesn't always mean you'll win. Hell it doesn't even mean you'll come out well. Just like poker, it's possible for EVERYONE to play their cards right and there still to be only one victor.
Saying that a bankrupt nation with a low population could have conquered the entire world simply by using proper strategy is one hell of a statement. To pick a random example, no matter how well they play their cards, Poland for instance couldn't have then, or now even began to conquer the world.
It's not even like we are talking about numerous things, we are talking about a single strategic decision.
Your mistaken, the device I'm pointing out is not the output device.
The device I'm pointing out IS the device which implements his programing language, you wrote the code using the device and it outputted in binary on tape... but the code you wrote wasn't binary.
Here You will find a picture and some information about the "The Z4's Planfertigungsteil (program construction unit), which was used to create punch tapes for the Z4 in an easy way."
"One fear is that some predatory monopolist, a Microsoft of the airwaves, would end up owning all of the spectrum. That won't happen. First, the market value of the spectrum would approach $1 trillion, out of the reach of any individual corporation. Second, antitrust laws would remain on the books. The Department of Justice could wield the Sherman Antitrust Act to challenge unlawful conduct and block mergers."
Right, because we know how well the Sherman Antitrust Act worked for reigning in Microsoft.
Perhaps you should read 1984 before you determine that history doesn't matter.
What is true and not true now is merely the culmination of history up to this moment. If you can define history you define the present, and if you can define the present you can maintain a tight control over the future.
All human advancement is based on the past. If we lose a piece of history we may very well lose the piece that will inspire the invention of tommorow.
Actually he DID develop a programming language and hardware compiler for the computer. It compiled directly to punch tape not memory or electronic storage but it WAS binary storage;)
"The US is by far the strongest single country on the Earth. And, although not a Unified State as such the E.U. is an up and coming second."
I'm confused by what your saying here. The US isn't a unified group of nations. The US is a single unified nation with a central government over the states which is far more powerful than the EU?
"The US's strengths are many. The principle ones being the protection of the "Individual" from the "Majority" and our willingness and indeed hunger for Immigrants and their traditions."
Protection of the individual from the majority is old idea which rarely even gets lipservice in the US anymore. This idea and the strengths you name are things which once existed but are dying in the US.
It's not that I don't agree with you on your overall point, because I do. You've just chosen very poor examples.
Let me ask you something, are you a USian who has lived abroad for many years? You include yourself as a USian but it almost sounds as if you haven't experienced the modern day US... by modern day I mostly mean the past decade or two.
Actually it was terminating their own nuclear project that cost them the nuke race. Without exporting Einstein there wouldn't have been a nuke race to begin with, it would have just been germany.
If hitler hadn't terminated the german nuke project they would have beaten us to it, even with Einstein it's unlikely we would have caught up, they had a SERIOUS headstart.
Agreed to a point. It was precisely the fact that they were fighting the entire war that cost them the war.
There is no question now germany was a military super power. The fact they were bankrupt to boot makes it all the more impressive... Germany could have finished off Russia, yes they were hurting and low on resources but they were having no problems defending their western front. As it was the english barely were holding their own ground.
Nope the stupid move was supporting Japan when they bombed Pearl Harbor, taking on two super powers at once was simply too much. The US kept Japan busy as it was clear they would, in the meantime the Germans should have wrapped up Russia and used it's vast resources. Combine nazi germany and german weapons with Russian resources and you'd have an unstoppable force.
Hitler was camped outside the walls of Stalingrad. It's not like there was any chance that he would have lost if he HADN'T picked a fight with the US.
Taking on BOTH of the other military super powers in the world was just a tad bit stupid. If the military leaders had been in control, that wouldn't have been what was happening.
Although to the best of my knowledge that was something Japan did on it's own, after doing it hitler supported them (he certainly was wrapped up in too much not to pay lip service to his ally at that point). I think he shouldn't have, if hitler had denouced Japan at that point, the US still would have attacked Japan but likely would have stopped there... with some token support the US may have even allied with Germany (it's not like we REALLY have any morals and they certainly wouldn't have announced the death camps in the US media).
After he finished with Russia then hitler easily could have polished off the Brits and been in a fine position to take the US who have never fought using modern technology (air power for starters) on their home soil. Our technology (US) was phenominally inferior to what the germans had as well, the germans didn't have the resources to mass produce their advanced weaponry. With Russia under their belt they'd have all the resources they needed...
I suppose what is truely amazing is that he DID get as far as he did, and with a bankrupt nation besides. The scary thing is that he got far enough that if he had played his cards right, he would have won. Not might, would have, period.
Ok, just one question. What do the english have to do with anything? It's true that the english did manage to keep hitler from making quick work of them by air, and may even have halted his advance on that front (not that there was any further to go). But they certainly showed no signs of GAINING ground against hitler, and he didn't suffer significant loses to the english. It's actually quite unlikely that Hitler wouldn't have succeeded in taking the English however, who couldn't have lasted much longer against German fighter jets developed later in the war.
When speaking of two fronts everyone is talking about the other two military super powers (besides Germany of course), which would be soviet russia and the US.
Of the two Soviet Russia actually did more damage in fact, even if the US delivered the final blows. Germany took massively greater loses in Russia than everywhere else put together. They lost several hundred times as many units in their advance on Russia as they lost in the entire rest of the war.
And they would have beaten Russia, had it not been for the Japanese bombing pearl harbor. The Brits were doing everything they could to hold their own island, forget trying to advance. Germany wasn't under any immediate signficant threat aside from the US. If they had finished off Russia first, and then sat on their territory for a year with their newfound Russian riches and troops... Well we might be speaking German today.
Their technology was advancing rapidly, they had rockets and there is strong evidence they had a nuclear project of their own. They had jets, they had computers. Technology was definately on their side, toward the end almost every piece of german weaponry was superior to what anyone else had. Their planes were inferior to the British, so they invented the jet. Their navy was inferior to what the US had, so they devised subs. Their tanks were inferior to those of the Russians, so they invented the Panzer.
It was technical superiority, and a general who was arguably on par with the legandary Hannibal that got them as far as they were in Russia. They had incredible weapons but little money and resources to produce them. Most of what they did have was due to VERY creative accounting. With Russia and a year or two they would have all the resources they needed. Their jets would have made short work of Britain then and after that the US would have had a serious run for their money (in fact they'd likely lose.. the US has never had to fight a serious battle on their home turf with anything vaguely like modern weaponry). Also with what we know now (the US didn't exactly have nukes coming out their arses and weren't even vaguely prepared to have more anytime soon).
After that they would need to regroup and take out Japan. Since controlling the US (the true jackpot of virtually infinite wealth and resources) and Russia (next runner up on wealth and resources at the time) AND England (certainly no slouch even if not comparable to the other two). The germans would have had enough resources that eliminating their former allies in Italy and Japan would be a fairly simple task. After that it's really a matter of cleanup.
The far east is a simple matter of being willing to throw enough men and bombs at them to do the job, since the far east is mostly all deeply entrenched in their homelands. I doubt Hitler would have cared how many men it took.
Africa... well without us breaking their codes and intercepting fuel being sent to Africa (essentially leaving Romel sitting on a fleet of useless tanks) conquering Africa would have been trivial.
Oh wait, that's right, the Canadians would have stopped them!
"This may really be Open Sources secret weapon. It helps of course, but it doesn't really have any such requirement to function tolerably well."
Are you serious? Have you ever seen a major project which forked for any other reason??? Look at XFree86, you don't really believe the true reason for forking was the license do you?
The community has been pushing for a fork for a long time and the license change was just the straw that broke the camel's back.
They stopped accepting patches regularly and remained stagnant for years. Yes the community didn't fork right away, giving respect and space to the maintainers but it sure as shit happened and if the maintainer ignores the community than yes, java will fork, name or no name and for good reason.
Once things are open source, yes Sun will actually have to take care of the project and give no legitimate reasons for forking. Like ignoring the community, patches, fixes, suggestions have to be implemented and in a reasonable time frame (this is NOT intended to read 6 months, it means more like 6hrs for a minor bugfix, 6 months for a major rework of the jvm).
The community doesn't let a fork become the de facto new official fork unless there is a damn good reason. If Sun intends to give the community such a reason and they don't want forking, their right, they shouldn't open source.
Cooperative licensing? If the drivers are gpl'd they should be gpl'd in solaris as well along with any modifications sun has to make to get them working.
If they had nuclear power supplies then alot of the risks woudln't be there in the first place.
1. deep crater likely means less sun and thus less juice to the solar cells. Power will drop while in the crater.
2. right now the biggest question isn't so much will the rover flip or what have you when coming out. But will it have enough power to climb the hill.
With nuclear power you don't have to worry about whether or not the sun can reach the rover.
With nuclear power you have more juice and thus can have more powerful motors as well... and they won't have to worry about reduced juice to the motor after a couple days in the crater.
Considering columbus didn't discover america, nor even north america, nor the giant seperate landmass which includes north america and south america. I'd say nothing much was at risk.
You do understand the rovers have already done everything their supposed to do and everything now is just whatever extra we can squeeze in before they die?
First the ads are outright lies, it's not as if it's questionable material. Microsoft themselves have admitted their TCO is actually higher in internal memos which the EU kindly published for us.
Second, of course we don't need or want to shelter anyone, that doesn't mean we have to serve up the anti-linux fud on pro-linux sites, saying here, have some of this, it's good stuff.
There are plenty of anti-linux websites that people can go to hear about anti-linux arguments. You don't see pro-linux ads on them do you?
You do realize that less than half of slashdot is pro-linux right? Most are microsoft users who love windows up and down.
Simply because there is a good mix and linux supporters are vocal doesn't make the site pro-linux or the crowd.
Slashdot has alot of posts from the technical side of things, and the technical side of things favors linux and unix which are technically superior operating systems.
No but it shouldn't be outright lies either. MICROSOFT has admitted that the windows TCO is high. Not the public, but in internal memos published by the EU in their report.
Simple logic and all the details will tell you the studies are lies, but we actually have it from the horses mouth.
The more accurate and correct information they have the better. Especially since that kind of information favors Linux over windwos, in terms of TCO and most everything else.
But even without that, yes the only information they should be getting from a pro-linux site is pro-linux information. If they want anti-linux information they can visit anti-linux sites. See how that works?
One amendment which unfortunately invalidates your point... on this subject at least:
"More information is always better than less information when it comes to making decisions."
More ACCURATE and CORRECT information is always better than less information when it comes to making decisions.
The problem is that these ads point to false and doctored information. When a CEO is going to linuxtoday because he's being asked to make a multi-million dollar switch and wants to have a peek at what he's buying... well there's nothing wrong with him seeing accurate information from both sides. But when he goes to linuxtoday and sees links to slander published by Microsoft... that's pretty serious. To the level it should be illegal and may well be an abuse of their monopoly.
Microsoft isn't actually allowed to do anything to support or encourage their own status as a monopoly after all.
"but please try it out, you may be pleasantly surprised"
Java or a caching jvm? I've certainly played with Java.
"the most perfomance issues in Java comes strictly fromt he fact that the whole JRE (in essence a platform itsself, hence the term Virtual Machine) has to load first before the application."
Aye loading the interpretor and the interpretor compiling the app. Like any other interpreted language.
"I didnt make a general claim on java performing as well as a compiled language, I gave a specific instance."
I really didn't mean to imply you had, actually your comments seem to be missing any outlandish statements at all.
All I'm really trying to point out is that java isn't a compiled language to be compared or used in place of compiled languages. It's an interpreted language, to be compared against and used for the things interpreted languages are good at.
My stand might make more sense if I spelled out the weaknesses I percieve in interpreted languages.
1. Load and compilation overhead 2. Dependance on a compatible interpretor 3. The interpretors generally aren't included in the OS. If they are and don't meet weakness #2 than being included hurts more than #3. 4. Less standardized than compiled languages. 5. They are generally slower in actual function than compiled high level languages, usually because of extra overhead from the interpretor being written with the generic functions of compiled high level languages (C, C++) themselves.
" What I did was create a special Java based Shell for launching Java Apps, and with the special cahcing JIT, Java applications ran tremendously faster. Java applications were precomiled when the JAR was installed into the shell, then afterwards whenever the application was loaded it it was native from the word go. Extremely fast, even the notorious Swing."
Now that sounds like a great idea. Not just for java, for any interpreted language. Actually a nice idea for a play off that (that might work better in day to day practice if I'm understanding your description right) would be to have the cache stored in a file upon application termination, using a special directory the jvm is aware of and a way for the jvm to recognize there is a preexisting cache for that application when the application is loaded. It can then load the cache, possibly further optimizing the cache with every run.
That way you don't have to keep the java shell persistant, anytime you open a java app in your default jvm it checks for a cache and if it exists loads and uses it. Not QUITE as fast as already having it in ram, but I bet you'd still get a significant performance increase:)
"Of course C++ etc have their place, just dont diss Java because of the percieved "slowness" of a bytecode situation."
Slowness is relative, I mean slow in the sense that it's still an interpreted language and slow in the way all interpreted languages are. The bytecode scenerio is a faster way of doing it, and gives java a leg up in my mind compared to other interpreted languages... not the other way around.
When I say slow, I mean slow relative to compiled languages, not other interpreted ones. I certainly don't find java slow compared to other interpreted ones.
Slashdot Mirror
You might have missed it, the law said what Microsoft is doing is illegal.
Surely nobody would question it's immoral.
It's one hell of a statement. Just like in poker, playing your cards right doesn't always mean you'll win. Hell it doesn't even mean you'll come out well. Just like poker, it's possible for EVERYONE to play their cards right and there still to be only one victor.
Saying that a bankrupt nation with a low population could have conquered the entire world simply by using proper strategy is one hell of a statement. To pick a random example, no matter how well they play their cards, Poland for instance couldn't have then, or now even began to conquer the world.
It's not even like we are talking about numerous things, we are talking about a single strategic decision.
Your mistaken, the device I'm pointing out is not the output device.
The device I'm pointing out IS the device which implements his programing language, you wrote the code using the device and it outputted in binary on tape... but the code you wrote wasn't binary.
Here You will find a picture and some information about the "The Z4's Planfertigungsteil (program construction unit), which was used to create punch tapes for the Z4 in an easy way."
I agree overall, however it's worth noting.
"One fear is that some predatory monopolist, a Microsoft of the airwaves, would end up owning all of the spectrum. That won't happen. First, the market value of the spectrum would approach $1 trillion, out of the reach of any individual corporation. Second, antitrust laws would remain on the books. The Department of Justice could wield the Sherman Antitrust Act to challenge unlawful conduct and block mergers."
Right, because we know how well the Sherman Antitrust Act worked for reigning in Microsoft.
Perhaps you should read 1984 before you determine that history doesn't matter.
What is true and not true now is merely the culmination of history up to this moment. If you can define history you define the present, and if you can define the present you can maintain a tight control over the future.
All human advancement is based on the past. If we lose a piece of history we may very well lose the piece that will inspire the invention of tommorow.
Think about that a bit.
Actually he DID develop a programming language and hardware compiler for the computer. It compiled directly to punch tape not memory or electronic storage but it WAS binary storage ;)
"The US is by far the strongest single country on the Earth. And, although not a Unified State as such the E.U. is an up and coming second."
I'm confused by what your saying here. The US isn't a unified group of nations. The US is a single unified nation with a central government over the states which is far more powerful than the EU?
"The US's strengths are many. The principle ones being the protection of the "Individual" from the "Majority" and our willingness and indeed hunger for Immigrants and their traditions."
Protection of the individual from the majority is old idea which rarely even gets lipservice in the US anymore. This idea and the strengths you name are things which once existed but are dying in the US.
It's not that I don't agree with you on your overall point, because I do. You've just chosen very poor examples.
Let me ask you something, are you a USian who has lived abroad for many years? You include yourself as a USian but it almost sounds as if you haven't experienced the modern day US... by modern day I mostly mean the past decade or two.
Actually it was terminating their own nuclear project that cost them the nuke race. Without exporting Einstein there wouldn't have been a nuke race to begin with, it would have just been germany.
If hitler hadn't terminated the german nuke project they would have beaten us to it, even with Einstein it's unlikely we would have caught up, they had a SERIOUS headstart.
Agreed to a point. It was precisely the fact that they were fighting the entire war that cost them the war.
There is no question now germany was a military super power. The fact they were bankrupt to boot makes it all the more impressive... Germany could have finished off Russia, yes they were hurting and low on resources but they were having no problems defending their western front. As it was the english barely were holding their own ground.
Nope the stupid move was supporting Japan when they bombed Pearl Harbor, taking on two super powers at once was simply too much. The US kept Japan busy as it was clear they would, in the meantime the Germans should have wrapped up Russia and used it's vast resources. Combine nazi germany and german weapons with Russian resources and you'd have an unstoppable force.
Hitler was camped outside the walls of Stalingrad. It's not like there was any chance that he would have lost if he HADN'T picked a fight with the US.
Taking on BOTH of the other military super powers in the world was just a tad bit stupid. If the military leaders had been in control, that wouldn't have been what was happening.
Although to the best of my knowledge that was something Japan did on it's own, after doing it hitler supported them (he certainly was wrapped up in too much not to pay lip service to his ally at that point). I think he shouldn't have, if hitler had denouced Japan at that point, the US still would have attacked Japan but likely would have stopped there... with some token support the US may have even allied with Germany (it's not like we REALLY have any morals and they certainly wouldn't have announced the death camps in the US media).
After he finished with Russia then hitler easily could have polished off the Brits and been in a fine position to take the US who have never fought using modern technology (air power for starters) on their home soil. Our technology (US) was phenominally inferior to what the germans had as well, the germans didn't have the resources to mass produce their advanced weaponry. With Russia under their belt they'd have all the resources they needed...
I suppose what is truely amazing is that he DID get as far as he did, and with a bankrupt nation besides. The scary thing is that he got far enough that if he had played his cards right, he would have won. Not might, would have, period.
Ok, just one question. What do the english have to do with anything? It's true that the english did manage to keep hitler from making quick work of them by air, and may even have halted his advance on that front (not that there was any further to go). But they certainly showed no signs of GAINING ground against hitler, and he didn't suffer significant loses to the english. It's actually quite unlikely that Hitler wouldn't have succeeded in taking the English however, who couldn't have lasted much longer against German fighter jets developed later in the war.
When speaking of two fronts everyone is talking about the other two military super powers (besides Germany of course), which would be soviet russia and the US.
Of the two Soviet Russia actually did more damage in fact, even if the US delivered the final blows. Germany took massively greater loses in Russia than everywhere else put together. They lost several hundred times as many units in their advance on Russia as they lost in the entire rest of the war.
And they would have beaten Russia, had it not been for the Japanese bombing pearl harbor. The Brits were doing everything they could to hold their own island, forget trying to advance. Germany wasn't under any immediate signficant threat aside from the US. If they had finished off Russia first, and then sat on their territory for a year with their newfound Russian riches and troops... Well we might be speaking German today.
Their technology was advancing rapidly, they had rockets and there is strong evidence they had a nuclear project of their own. They had jets, they had computers. Technology was definately on their side, toward the end almost every piece of german weaponry was superior to what anyone else had. Their planes were inferior to the British, so they invented the jet. Their navy was inferior to what the US had, so they devised subs. Their tanks were inferior to those of the Russians, so they invented the Panzer.
It was technical superiority, and a general who was arguably on par with the legandary Hannibal that got them as far as they were in Russia. They had incredible weapons but little money and resources to produce them. Most of what they did have was due to VERY creative accounting. With Russia and a year or two they would have all the resources they needed. Their jets would have made short work of Britain then and after that the US would have had a serious run for their money (in fact they'd likely lose.. the US has never had to fight a serious battle on their home turf with anything vaguely like modern weaponry). Also with what we know now (the US didn't exactly have nukes coming out their arses and weren't even vaguely prepared to have more anytime soon).
After that they would need to regroup and take out Japan. Since controlling the US (the true jackpot of virtually infinite wealth and resources) and Russia (next runner up on wealth and resources at the time) AND England (certainly no slouch even if not comparable to the other two). The germans would have had enough resources that eliminating their former allies in Italy and Japan would be a fairly simple task. After that it's really a matter of cleanup.
The far east is a simple matter of being willing to throw enough men and bombs at them to do the job, since the far east is mostly all deeply entrenched in their homelands. I doubt Hitler would have cared how many men it took.
Africa... well without us breaking their codes and intercepting fuel being sent to Africa (essentially leaving Romel sitting on a fleet of useless tanks) conquering Africa would have been trivial.
Oh wait, that's right, the Canadians would have stopped them!
ok there is one little flaw in your logic that stands out like a blazing iron. And I don't even like debian ;)
You see they call it backporting, meaning the security patches are in the new versions and they backport the patch to the old versions.
You don't need to backport to unstable because unstable gets the new versions instead which include security updates and general bug fixes as well.
A good deal of those OSS are maintained on European servers and thus subject to Euro law.
"This may really be Open Sources secret weapon. It helps of course, but it doesn't really have any such requirement to function tolerably well."
Are you serious? Have you ever seen a major project which forked for any other reason??? Look at XFree86, you don't really believe the true reason for forking was the license do you?
The community has been pushing for a fork for a long time and the license change was just the straw that broke the camel's back.
They stopped accepting patches regularly and remained stagnant for years. Yes the community didn't fork right away, giving respect and space to the maintainers but it sure as shit happened and if the maintainer ignores the community than yes, java will fork, name or no name and for good reason.
Once things are open source, yes Sun will actually have to take care of the project and give no legitimate reasons for forking. Like ignoring the community, patches, fixes, suggestions have to be implemented and in a reasonable time frame (this is NOT intended to read 6 months, it means more like 6hrs for a minor bugfix, 6 months for a major rework of the jvm).
The community doesn't let a fork become the de facto new official fork unless there is a damn good reason. If Sun intends to give the community such a reason and they don't want forking, their right, they shouldn't open source.
Cooperative licensing? If the drivers are gpl'd they should be gpl'd in solaris as well along with any modifications sun has to make to get them working.
If they had nuclear power supplies then alot of the risks woudln't be there in the first place.
1. deep crater likely means less sun and thus less juice to the solar cells. Power will drop while in the crater.
2. right now the biggest question isn't so much will the rover flip or what have you when coming out. But will it have enough power to climb the hill.
With nuclear power you don't have to worry about whether or not the sun can reach the rover.
With nuclear power you have more juice and thus can have more powerful motors as well... and they won't have to worry about reduced juice to the motor after a couple days in the crater.
Considering columbus didn't discover america, nor even north america, nor the giant seperate landmass which includes north america and south america. I'd say nothing much was at risk.
The vikings were here long before columbus.
You do understand the rovers have already done everything their supposed to do and everything now is just whatever extra we can squeeze in before they die?
First the ads are outright lies, it's not as if it's questionable material. Microsoft themselves have admitted their TCO is actually higher in internal memos which the EU kindly published for us.
Second, of course we don't need or want to shelter anyone, that doesn't mean we have to serve up the anti-linux fud on pro-linux sites, saying here, have some of this, it's good stuff.
There are plenty of anti-linux websites that people can go to hear about anti-linux arguments. You don't see pro-linux ads on them do you?
You do realize that less than half of slashdot is pro-linux right? Most are microsoft users who love windows up and down.
Simply because there is a good mix and linux supporters are vocal doesn't make the site pro-linux or the crowd.
Slashdot has alot of posts from the technical side of things, and the technical side of things favors linux and unix which are technically superior operating systems.
No but it shouldn't be outright lies either. MICROSOFT has admitted that the windows TCO is high. Not the public, but in internal memos published by the EU in their report.
Simple logic and all the details will tell you the studies are lies, but we actually have it from the horses mouth.
The more accurate and correct information they have the better. Especially since that kind of information favors Linux over windwos, in terms of TCO and most everything else.
But even without that, yes the only information they should be getting from a pro-linux site is pro-linux information. If they want anti-linux information they can visit anti-linux sites. See how that works?
One amendment which unfortunately invalidates your point... on this subject at least:
"More information is always better than less information when it comes to making decisions."
More ACCURATE and CORRECT information is always better than less information when it comes to making decisions.
The problem is that these ads point to false and doctored information. When a CEO is going to linuxtoday because he's being asked to make a multi-million dollar switch and wants to have a peek at what he's buying... well there's nothing wrong with him seeing accurate information from both sides. But when he goes to linuxtoday and sees links to slander published by Microsoft... that's pretty serious. To the level it should be illegal and may well be an abuse of their monopoly.
Microsoft isn't actually allowed to do anything to support or encourage their own status as a monopoly after all.
"but please try it out, you may be pleasantly surprised"
:)
Java or a caching jvm? I've certainly played with Java.
"the most perfomance issues in Java comes strictly fromt he fact that the whole JRE (in essence a platform itsself, hence the term Virtual Machine) has to load first before the application."
Aye loading the interpretor and the interpretor compiling the app. Like any other interpreted language.
"I didnt make a general claim on java performing as well as a compiled language, I gave a specific instance."
I really didn't mean to imply you had, actually your comments seem to be missing any outlandish statements at all.
All I'm really trying to point out is that java isn't a compiled language to be compared or used in place of compiled languages. It's an interpreted language, to be compared against and used for the things interpreted languages are good at.
My stand might make more sense if I spelled out the weaknesses I percieve in interpreted languages.
1. Load and compilation overhead
2. Dependance on a compatible interpretor
3. The interpretors generally aren't included in the OS. If they are and don't meet weakness #2 than being included hurts more than #3.
4. Less standardized than compiled languages.
5. They are generally slower in actual function than compiled high level languages, usually because of extra overhead from the interpretor being written with the generic functions of compiled high level languages (C, C++) themselves.
" What I did was create a special Java based Shell for launching Java Apps, and with the special cahcing JIT, Java applications ran tremendously faster. Java applications were precomiled when the JAR was installed into the shell, then afterwards whenever the application was loaded it it was native from the word go. Extremely fast, even the notorious Swing."
Now that sounds like a great idea. Not just for java, for any interpreted language. Actually a nice idea for a play off that (that might work better in day to day practice if I'm understanding your description right) would be to have the cache stored in a file upon application termination, using a special directory the jvm is aware of and a way for the jvm to recognize there is a preexisting cache for that application when the application is loaded. It can then load the cache, possibly further optimizing the cache with every run.
That way you don't have to keep the java shell persistant, anytime you open a java app in your default jvm it checks for a cache and if it exists loads and uses it. Not QUITE as fast as already having it in ram, but I bet you'd still get a significant performance increase
"Of course C++ etc have their place, just dont diss Java because of the percieved "slowness" of a bytecode situation."
Slowness is relative, I mean slow in the sense that it's still an interpreted language and slow in the way all interpreted languages are. The bytecode scenerio is a faster way of doing it, and gives java a leg up in my mind compared to other interpreted languages... not the other way around.
When I say slow, I mean slow relative to compiled languages, not other interpreted ones. I certainly don't find java slow compared to other interpreted ones.