One of the reasons that swing is so slow is that it looks the same on ALL operating systems. They achieve this by not accelerating ANY DRAWING CODE.
Swing is not slow due to lack of accelerating drawing code. In fact, much of the blitting routines tap into native code such as the DirectX libs on the Windows platforms. In the newest JDK that is in beta, some images even can use the graphic card's memory directly for faster blitting to screen.
The problem with Swing comes mostly down to two things:
1. Class Loading
2. Object Creation
Because of the architecture of Swing many classes have to be loaded and at any given time there is a high object creation count. Both of these are EXPENSIVE operations. This leads to the problem of a slow GUI especially when first displaying the GUI.
If there's issues on X Windows, well, then there's issues on X Windows. I don't know enough to comment on it. I imagine even with X Windows specific implementation issues most of the performance problems still comes down to those two points.
For those who want to write better Swing apps, you need to design the app so it will create less objects in "bursts" and if possible preload classes or load classes in the background. Furthermore, cache some of the objects you create. Some of the methods in Swing components allow you to pass in objects and return those objects so as not to have to create new objects on the way back out - i.e. caching. In other words, don't be wasteful. There's handful of articles on the net that go into improving Swing performance. Visit some of the major Java sites (including 'zines) and do some searches.
Lastly, Swing and Java are not too OOP. The problem simply is that the OOP nature brings out some of the inefficiencies such as object creation which you as the developer have to take into account. You will find similar problems with object creation in many, if not most, other OO languages.
Re:Blech. Most of them are pretty bad.
on
Java IDEs?
·
· Score: 1
The fact you're assuming fast Java is by necessity poor Java and underuses the language's features reflects your lack of understanding about really improving Java performance.
Fast Java means understanding design issues to improve performance by not creating too many objects, lazy initialization, controlling class loading, and so on. Folks, most Java performance issues nowadays has less to do with executing bytecodes than it does with poor coding.
Most Swing programs have performance issues to a handful of the above issues. Eliminating them usually makes quite speedy Swing programs.
If you ask them, "Do you consider yourself below avg, avg, above avg, expert, 31337?", most will respond with atleast one level higher.
If you ask people how many years, they tend to tack on some years or include years of experience done in another language.
I've seen this many times while interviewing potential consultants and it has never ceased to amaze me. I would wager that only 1 out 5 people are at the level they say they are at. That's probably being a bit kind.
Point from the article: Who the hell has 7 years of experience in Java by 1999? (This still happens with resumes and interviews. Gotta laugh when I see it. And, yes, I interview Java applicants.)
I'm not aware of any third party readers at the moment, but Sony does sell various readers/adapters that will work with current hardware. Two in particular - they have a floppy disc adapter that you'd place your Memory stick in and use in a floppy drive. The other is a MS reader that has a USB interface. Both are definitely not power hungry drives. BTW, the USB reader is slick and small, though the only downside is people might think it's a mouse!
Another point to make is that everybody has been complaining about the MS as being pure evil. I think it should be clarified that they have two different types - one the normal MS and another type with extra copy protection. The non-copy protection one is the one that is provided by default with their products.
As for what makes them better - the slicker packaging is exactly what makes them better! They're extremely easy to carry around and use. There's reasons why stuff like the Nintendo gameboys are so popular. Sticking a game cartridge in the device is easy! Well, the memory stick is easier than that!
As already been pointed out, the person replying to you gave bad Java code. One can't extend Java's String class. But, your need for polymorphism, etc and way for an object to print itself is already built into Java.
The class Object contains a method called toString() which returns a String. Since all Java classes extend (inherit) from Object, they all have this method. Granted, the default String returned isn't that useful so one simply overrides the toString() method in their class declaration.
With this in mind, a programmer can easily send output to any stream. I'll keep it simple and use System.out:
..
Vector aVector = new Vector();
..
for(Enumeration e = aVector.getElements(); e.hasMoreElements();)
System.out.println(e.nextElement());
That simple code snippet allows one to loop through a vector and print the objects no matter what they are. This is a simple and trivial example.
Since apparently you nor the person trying to extend the String class know Java, a little hint about the above code.. e.nextElement() returns an Object.;)
"Even though its based on Microsoft software and such. It still might make persuade more kids into taking computer classes and heading into the computer industry at an early age."
That's exactly what the IT industry needs and I agree with you. I started with an Apple IIc at an early age. It's what wet my appetite to get more into computers. Mind you, it wasn't the most 31337 of old sk00l computers.;)
"Once they have gained a stable base, most will more then likely go out on their own looking for things that interest them."
Exactly. Each one of us have taken a different path. A person can be guided, but ultimately I think a geek should follow his own path.
"Not to mention, how could one be computer literate these days and not know life outside of Microsoft."
Much easier than you can imagine. Yet that's slowly changing.
"On a last note. I would tend to think most middle school and high school computer teachers have not had much open source exsposure in their lives, mostly general computer use and programming. Once those teachers retire and new teachers that have "grown up with/grown along with" open source products will attitudes change as to what is tought."
Yeah, when I was in highschool our teachers were Math teachers that had some basic programming knowledge such as BASIC, Pascal, LOGO, Fortran and maybe a little C. A friend and I use to help teach the class since we tended to know more than our teachers.
Hopefully, this'll change in the coming years and there will be more and more knowledgeable teachers. The hard part will be luring those skilled in the IT industry to education - now and not later!
Hate to say it, but Corel in my experience has been very fair in handling the deadlines. There was one week I knew I probably would not have made the required submittion count due to travel where I had no computer access. I contacted them well in advance of the deadline and was granted a reprieve.
Most testers were not dropped right away. After a few times of people failing to make the criteria, a warning was issued to all beta testers to start meeting the requirements and to make sure you do not miss the deadline otherwise you will be dropped after the next cycle.
If you can't meet deadlines and handle it in a professional manner, yeah, they probably did the "smart" thing. *shrug*
"Moot point. The UI is completely customizable. People will release all manners of UI replacements to choose from."
Most of which will be no better than original terrible UI. Some of the replacements will be nifty for maybe five minutes and quickly become irritating as time goes on. To this day I wonder whether people actually use half the skins that are released for various software or whether it's simply a penis-sizing competition for graphic artists, w4r3z d00d3z, and anime zealots.
"The biggest complaints I hear are that Netscape is bloated and it takes too long to load up. MSIE would have the same problems if they hadn't embedded everything into the OS."
As others have pointed out, this is simply a myth. I use to run 98lite and had IE seperated from the OS. If I wanted to run it, I could. The load time was the same. In either case, it was faster at loading than Netscape's browser.
"Yes, Microsoft is currently winning, after illegaly leveraging their monopoly."
Sorry, but a lot of machines come with both pre-installed. People still migrate to IE regardless.
Microsoft did use some aggressive business and marketing tactics, but all in all IE won out because it was simply better.
BTW, I fully support the current anti-trust ruling, though I think baby Microsofts will be far more dangerous to other operating systems, office suites, and browsers than they currently are as one mother Microsoft.
"In all seriousness, IE will most likely remain the dominant browser for some time to come. Why? Because it already does what most people need (and more). Why would the average user bother to download some other browser and readapt to a different interface when what they're using right now is fine?"
That's exactly the reason I'm sticking with IE.
I once was a loyal Netscape fan in the early days up 'til 4.0. I was adapted to Netscape's UI and for the most part it was a better browser. I had no reason to switch. It wasn't until I got fed up with Navigator crashing all the time, poor standards support, etc that I decided to give IE a try. Ever since I have been a happy user.
For me to switch back, Navigator or Mozilla would have to be as fast and less crash prone than whatever the current IE version. It would have to be more standards compliant by a long shot. It would have to be an actual usable tool and have a slick user interface. Lastly, IE would have to become the crappiest browser available so that I would be irritated enough to want to switch.
"Do you think they really care if the product their using is open-source or not?"
I use a mixture of both. Basically, I use what works so I can get things done. I'll lean to open-source wherever possible, but I will not use open-source strictly because the source is available.
"..and they'll fix it, like they did with the six things I found during the three years I tested Win2K. If every one of the "beta" testers did this, the product would be a far better product for it."
Unless you can point out otherwise for your particular case, only finding six things in three years is quite poor testing. That's two things per twelve monthes!
When I tested for Corel's Draw 7 Suite years back, we were -expected- to find atleast three things in a few weeks and then in later testing periods every week. People who could not find anything were slowly dropped from the program.
"That's like saying cars shouldn't have a gas pedal AND a brakes pedal, because, hey, how do you know which one to press?"
Believe it or not, that's a bug!:)
Most people can quickly learn to use two pedals effectively, just like a person could learn to use two button mice. Does that make those right and one button mice wrong? No.
In fact, Apple is right in saying that a one button mouse is easier to learn and has less chance of 'failure' - ie. the user messing up.
Take the car example.. A lot of first time drivers or those in accident situations can panic from time to time. What happens? Sometimes instead of hitting the brake, they hit the gas.. or they push down both. I hope we all can see why that's a Bad Thing (tm). That's probably one of many reasons car manufacturers are experimenting in different designs including one pedal cars. I think it's a great idea.
Hand controls made for the disabled to allow them to drive cars are my case in point. Now, granted.. Theres' many models or implementations that suck or are too overly priced, BUT the fundamental way it works is what I find to be a good feature. With most hand controls, pulling back on the controls allows one to apply gas. Pushing forward controls the breaks. Simple. The neat feature is one cannot apply gas and the break at the same time! Furthermore, the motion to apply the break is more natural than applying more gas. I think it's not too hard to see the good points about this.:)
So, in conclusion..
Question the truths you hold onto as "How things should be".. and do some reading sometime on UI design. You may learn a thing or two.
I agree with most of your post, but completely disagree with the fact that you and others are taking this as a strong prediction by Weinberg that it will happen in 2050 and then judging the article critically on those grounds. Weinberg actually states that there's strong chance it won't happen then or that it just may happen tomorrow or even later.
"There is a chance the work of unification will be completed by 2050, but about that we cannot be confident." (from end of third paragraph)
"It is impossible to say when these problems will be overcome. They may be solved in a preprint put out tomorrow by some young theorist. They may not be solved by 2050, or even 2150." (first paragraph under 'Recognizing the Answer)
The only glaring mistake I see Weinberg make is that he says that GUT will be the end of trying to get unified theory for the physical sciences.
One point that many people defending the blinds' rights to view AOL (or the web in general) keep making is that it'll help other users who aren't disabled. For instance, those who use Lynx or have slower connections.
This is something that people -really- need to figure out about the ADA. If people put some thought into their designs to make things more accessable for the disabled, in many cases they make things better for -everyone- especially if it's not an "afterthought" (ie. whoops.. I forgot about those millions of disabled Americans..)
A case in point in the real world.. A lot of people that are designing buildings and landscaping that take into account disabled persons tend to design areas with less steep terrain, ground (ie. stepless) entrances, etc. Costs are about the same or in many cases cheaper, but more importantly it actually makes things easy on everyone.
I've been using a wheelchair to get around the past few years and I'll tell ya.. Even if I was walking it, I'd prefer the same flat, barely inclined slopes that I wheel up daily over walking stairs, etc anyday.
I'm sure your post was in jest, but if it wasn't..
The Supreme Court has recently effectively narrowed the definition of disability (through a couple different cases) governed by ADA of 1990 especially in relation to work concerns.
Hence, I highly doubt the boss would have any trouble firing someone spending too much time online.
"We experimented with laser scanning & optical techniques, traditional silicon metal layers, and other even more bizarre means -- in the end, we had to use silicon interconnect, which meant that the wires which connected to these devices were thousands of times larger than the devices itself."
Interesting that you mention that problem. I just received my August issue of Popular Science and they had an article about DNA conductors. A research team at University of Basel's Institute of Physics in Switzerland were able to ground one end of DNA and attach the other end to an electric contact. What they found is that the DNA can act similar to copper and conduct electricity. Not only that, they feel that there would be less scattering and slowing down of electrons with DNA "wire" than with traditional means.
And yes.. They hope that someday the DNA wire will be used in nanodevices for the connections.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the reasons that swing is so slow is that it looks the same on ALL operating systems. They achieve this by not accelerating ANY DRAWING CODE.
Swing is not slow due to lack of accelerating drawing code. In fact, much of the blitting routines tap into native code such as the DirectX libs on the Windows platforms. In the newest JDK that is in beta, some images even can use the graphic card's memory directly for faster blitting to screen.
The problem with Swing comes mostly down to two things:
1. Class Loading
2. Object Creation
Because of the architecture of Swing many classes have to be loaded and at any given time there is a high object creation count. Both of these are EXPENSIVE operations. This leads to the problem of a slow GUI especially when first displaying the GUI.
If there's issues on X Windows, well, then there's issues on X Windows. I don't know enough to comment on it. I imagine even with X Windows specific implementation issues most of the performance problems still comes down to those two points.
For those who want to write better Swing apps, you need to design the app so it will create less objects in "bursts" and if possible preload classes or load classes in the background. Furthermore, cache some of the objects you create. Some of the methods in Swing components allow you to pass in objects and return those objects so as not to have to create new objects on the way back out - i.e. caching. In other words, don't be wasteful. There's handful of articles on the net that go into improving Swing performance. Visit some of the major Java sites (including 'zines) and do some searches.
Lastly, Swing and Java are not too OOP. The problem simply is that the OOP nature brings out some of the inefficiencies such as object creation which you as the developer have to take into account. You will find similar problems with object creation in many, if not most, other OO languages.
The fact you're assuming fast Java is by necessity poor Java and underuses the language's features reflects your lack of understanding about really improving Java performance.
Fast Java means understanding design issues to improve performance by not creating too many objects, lazy initialization, controlling class loading, and so on. Folks, most Java performance issues nowadays has less to do with executing bytecodes than it does with poor coding.
Most Swing programs have performance issues to a handful of the above issues. Eliminating them usually makes quite speedy Swing programs.
The biggest flaw in the paper is "experience"...
First off, most people over judge themselves.
If you ask them, "Do you consider yourself below avg, avg, above avg, expert, 31337?", most will respond with atleast one level higher.
If you ask people how many years, they tend to tack on some years or include years of experience done in another language.
I've seen this many times while interviewing potential consultants and it has never ceased to amaze me. I would wager that only 1 out 5 people are at the level they say they are at. That's probably being a bit kind.
Point from the article: Who the hell has 7 years of experience in Java by 1999? (This still happens with resumes and interviews. Gotta laugh when I see it. And, yes, I interview Java applicants.)
I'm not aware of any third party readers at the moment, but Sony does sell various readers/adapters that will work with current hardware. Two in particular - they have a floppy disc adapter that you'd place your Memory stick in and use in a floppy drive. The other is a MS reader that has a USB interface. Both are definitely not power hungry drives. BTW, the USB reader is slick and small, though the only downside is people might think it's a mouse!
Another point to make is that everybody has been complaining about the MS as being pure evil. I think it should be clarified that they have two different types - one the normal MS and another type with extra copy protection. The non-copy protection one is the one that is provided by default with their products.
As for what makes them better - the slicker packaging is exactly what makes them better! They're extremely easy to carry around and use. There's reasons why stuff like the Nintendo gameboys are so popular. Sticking a game cartridge in the device is easy! Well, the memory stick is easier than that!
As already been pointed out, the person replying to you gave bad Java code. One can't extend Java's String class. But, your need for polymorphism, etc and way for an object to print itself is already built into Java.
;)
The class Object contains a method called toString() which returns a String. Since all Java classes extend (inherit) from Object, they all have this method. Granted, the default String returned isn't that useful so one simply overrides the toString() method in their class declaration.
With this in mind, a programmer can easily send output to any stream. I'll keep it simple and use System.out:
..
Vector aVector = new Vector();
..
for(Enumeration e = aVector.getElements(); e.hasMoreElements();)
System.out.println(e.nextElement());
That simple code snippet allows one to loop through a vector and print the objects no matter what they are. This is a simple and trivial example.
Since apparently you nor the person trying to extend the String class know Java, a little hint about the above code.. e.nextElement() returns an Object.
"Even though its based on Microsoft software and such. It still might make persuade more kids into taking computer classes and heading into the computer industry at an early age."
;)
That's exactly what the IT industry needs and I agree with you. I started with an Apple IIc at an early age. It's what wet my appetite to get more into computers. Mind you, it wasn't the most 31337 of old sk00l computers.
"Once they have gained a stable base, most will more then likely go out on their own looking for things that interest them."
Exactly. Each one of us have taken a different path. A person can be guided, but ultimately I think a geek should follow his own path.
"Not to mention, how could one be computer literate these days and not know life outside of Microsoft."
Much easier than you can imagine. Yet that's slowly changing.
"On a last note. I would tend to think most middle school and high school computer teachers have not had much open source exsposure in their lives, mostly general computer use and programming. Once those teachers retire and new teachers that have "grown up with/grown along with" open source products will attitudes change as to what is tought."
Yeah, when I was in highschool our teachers were Math teachers that had some basic programming knowledge such as BASIC, Pascal, LOGO, Fortran and maybe a little C. A friend and I use to help teach the class since we tended to know more than our teachers.
Hopefully, this'll change in the coming years and there will be more and more knowledgeable teachers. The hard part will be luring those skilled in the IT industry to education - now and not later!
Hate to say it, but Corel in my experience has been very fair in handling the deadlines. There was one week I knew I probably would not have made the required submittion count due to travel where I had no computer access. I contacted them well in advance of the deadline and was granted a reprieve.
Most testers were not dropped right away. After a few times of people failing to make the criteria, a warning was issued to all beta testers to start meeting the requirements and to make sure you do not miss the deadline otherwise you will be dropped after the next cycle.
If you can't meet deadlines and handle it in a professional manner, yeah, they probably did the "smart" thing. *shrug*
"Moot point. The UI is completely customizable. People will release all manners of UI replacements to choose from."
Most of which will be no better than original terrible UI. Some of the replacements will be nifty for maybe five minutes and quickly become irritating as time goes on. To this day I wonder whether people actually use half the skins that are released for various software or whether it's simply a penis-sizing competition for graphic artists, w4r3z d00d3z, and anime zealots.
"The biggest complaints I hear are that Netscape is bloated and it takes too long to load up. MSIE would have the same problems if they hadn't embedded everything into the OS."
As others have pointed out, this is simply a myth. I use to run 98lite and had IE seperated from the OS. If I wanted to run it, I could. The load time was the same. In either case, it was faster at loading than Netscape's browser.
"Yes, Microsoft is currently winning, after illegaly leveraging their monopoly."
Sorry, but a lot of machines come with both pre-installed. People still migrate to IE regardless.
Microsoft did use some aggressive business and marketing tactics, but all in all IE won out because it was simply better.
BTW, I fully support the current anti-trust ruling, though I think baby Microsofts will be far more dangerous to other operating systems, office suites, and browsers than they currently are as one mother Microsoft.
"In all seriousness, IE will most likely remain the dominant browser for some time to come. Why? Because it already does what most people need (and more). Why would the average user bother to download some other browser and readapt to a different interface when what they're using right now is fine?"
That's exactly the reason I'm sticking with IE.
I once was a loyal Netscape fan in the early days up 'til 4.0. I was adapted to Netscape's UI and for the most part it was a better browser. I had no reason to switch. It wasn't until I got fed up with Navigator crashing all the time, poor standards support, etc that I decided to give IE a try. Ever since I have been a happy user.
For me to switch back, Navigator or Mozilla would have to be as fast and less crash prone than whatever the current IE version. It would have to be more standards compliant by a long shot. It would have to be an actual usable tool and have a slick user interface. Lastly, IE would have to become the crappiest browser available so that I would be irritated enough to want to switch.
"Do you think they really care if the product their using is open-source or not?"
I use a mixture of both. Basically, I use what works so I can get things done. I'll lean to open-source wherever possible, but I will not use open-source strictly because the source is available.
"..and they'll fix it, like they did with the six things I found during the three years I tested Win2K. If every one of the "beta" testers did this, the product would be a far better product for it."
Unless you can point out otherwise for your particular case, only finding six things in three years is quite poor testing. That's two things per twelve monthes!
When I tested for Corel's Draw 7 Suite years back, we were -expected- to find atleast three things in a few weeks and then in later testing periods every week. People who could not find anything were slowly dropped from the program.
"That's like saying cars shouldn't have a gas pedal AND a brakes pedal, because, hey, how do you know which one to press?"
:)
:)
Believe it or not, that's a bug!
Most people can quickly learn to use two pedals effectively, just like a person could learn to use two button mice. Does that make those right and one button mice wrong? No.
In fact, Apple is right in saying that a one button mouse is easier to learn and has less chance of 'failure' - ie. the user messing up.
Take the car example.. A lot of first time drivers or those in accident situations can panic from time to time. What happens? Sometimes instead of hitting the brake, they hit the gas.. or they push down both. I hope we all can see why that's a Bad Thing (tm). That's probably one of many reasons car manufacturers are experimenting in different designs including one pedal cars. I think it's a great idea.
Hand controls made for the disabled to allow them to drive cars are my case in point. Now, granted.. Theres' many models or implementations that suck or are too overly priced, BUT the fundamental way it works is what I find to be a good feature. With most hand controls, pulling back on the controls allows one to apply gas. Pushing forward controls the breaks. Simple. The neat feature is one cannot apply gas and the break at the same time! Furthermore, the motion to apply the break is more natural than applying more gas. I think it's not too hard to see the good points about this.
So, in conclusion..
Question the truths you hold onto as "How things should be".. and do some reading sometime on UI design. You may learn a thing or two.
I agree with most of your post, but completely disagree with the fact that you and others are taking this as a strong prediction by Weinberg that it will happen in 2050 and then judging the article critically on those grounds. Weinberg actually states that there's strong chance it won't happen then or that it just may happen tomorrow or even later.
"There is a chance the work of unification will be completed by 2050, but about that we cannot be confident." (from end of third paragraph)
"It is impossible to say when these problems will be overcome. They may be solved in a preprint put out tomorrow by some young theorist. They may not be solved by 2050, or even 2150." (first paragraph under 'Recognizing the Answer)
The only glaring mistake I see Weinberg make is that he says that GUT will be the end of trying to get unified theory for the physical sciences.
One point that many people defending the blinds' rights to view AOL (or the web in general) keep making is that it'll help other users who aren't disabled. For instance, those who use Lynx or have slower connections.
This is something that people -really- need to figure out about the ADA. If people put some thought into their designs to make things more accessable for the disabled, in many cases they make things better for -everyone- especially if it's not an "afterthought" (ie. whoops.. I forgot about those millions of disabled Americans..)
A case in point in the real world.. A lot of people that are designing buildings and landscaping that take into account disabled persons tend to design areas with less steep terrain, ground (ie. stepless) entrances, etc. Costs are about the same or in many cases cheaper, but more importantly it actually makes things easy on everyone.
I've been using a wheelchair to get around the past few years and I'll tell ya.. Even if I was walking it, I'd prefer the same flat, barely inclined slopes that I wheel up daily over walking stairs, etc anyday.
I'm sure your post was in jest, but if it wasn't..
The Supreme Court has recently effectively narrowed the definition of disability (through a couple different cases) governed by ADA of 1990 especially in relation to work concerns.
Hence, I highly doubt the boss would have any trouble firing someone spending too much time online.
*sigh*
h tml
Instead of bashing Microsoft and AOL..
Why don't you head over to IETF and provide feedback and/or help out with the standards work on Instant Messaging?
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/impp-charter.
I know MS only backs standards when they're losing, but hey - They are right. We do need a standard.
"We experimented with laser scanning & optical techniques, traditional silicon metal layers, and other even more bizarre means -- in the end, we had to use silicon interconnect, which meant that the wires which connected to these devices were thousands of times larger than the devices itself."
Interesting that you mention that problem. I just received my August issue of Popular Science and they had an article about DNA conductors. A research team at University of Basel's Institute of Physics in Switzerland were able to ground one end of DNA and attach the other end to an electric contact. What they found is that the DNA can act similar to copper and conduct electricity. Not only that, they feel that there would be less scattering and slowing down of electrons with DNA "wire" than with traditional means.
And yes.. They hope that someday the DNA wire will be used in nanodevices for the connections.