And, really, who wants an office suite written in pure Java? Didn't Corel try that once upon a time?
Oracle, apparently. Perhaps not on Android's not-quite-Java Dalvik VM but nevertheless delivering office functionality to devices using a re-badged applet technology known as JavaFX.
Larry made a song and dance how web applications using AJAX were no longer flavour of the month and that JavaFX was the panacea.
As for Corel failing, advances in virtual machine technology since that time and that most of Swing is now rendered using DirectX/OpenGL mean performance is unlikely to be a factor this time.
Well I must say, I don't care too much. To me, despite the hype about the revolutionary process model, it's just another web browser. And yeah I've tried IE, konqueror, opera, safari and chrome yet I still come back to firefox...
(As I said, google entering an over-saturated browser space seems more about world domination...)
i think a winelib app could be acceptable if they polished it up with some native theming and paid attention to detail such as basic platform integration such as drag and drop, unix clipboard, using the native print and file dialogs etc. This would be where investing some 'love' into wine would go some way into earning the respect of the Linux hordes.
If they still don't feel much respect for Gtk and Qt, another possibility is to use the OpenStep API common to both Apple's Cocoa and GNUStep.:) Then at least the unix ports (OS X and Linux) could share a common codebase!
I know Chrome is a small step towards Google's new world order but if it contains so many Win32isms, one wonders why they bother writing a Linux version for 10% of the desktop market. I'd be content if Google made the best Windows browser possible and then spent their time and resources into fixing wine, as they did for Picassa. Having wine run Chrome flawlessly is a good test case for wine's robustness. By exposing seldom used API calls and performance issues, this benefits the community in terms of improving compatibility with closed source applications which would never benefit from a Linux port anyway.
Perhaps it's treason on Slashdot to suggest that Win32(through wine) is a legitimate cross-platform toolkit. However, if google isn't going to use Qt or similar for its Windows ports from the get-go then perhaps their long term strategy ought to be to improve wine to the extent that they can say with a straight face, "just download the windows installer and double click".
Swing. While it's not a popular choice for Linux distros, I'd hazard a guess that there are as many in-house corporate desktop apps written in Java as those 'also-ran' toolkits.
You're advocating Qt, a toolkit used by thousands of applications, break its event paradigm to fit in with Chrome, an application?
Without knowing the technical details, it sounds to me that Chrome is inflexible with respect to integrating with Qt. Or rather, certain architectural assumptions were made that fit well with Win32 but not other environments.
Well I guess if Canonical sees value, as I suggested, in providing developer assistance for this new Ubuntu-Android partnership they would be an ideal candidate to take upstream ownership, given no-one else has.
(1) some wacky adventurers may want to wipe Android and run raw ubuntu on the handset - so it will have the same hardware.
(2) support for hardware features may be added in future netbooks. GPS might be emulated via 3G network triangulation, tilt may be added to forthcoming netbook tablets*. And as for the dimensions, run apps in windowed rather than full screen mode...
* Only a matter of time before Asus, Acer & others smash the lucrative tablet PC market.
If Canonical do see Android as a beneficial software stack, perhaps they'll focus a bit more energy on the Java-related developer tools too.
Specifically Eclipse. Android's developer plugin requires Eclipse 3.3 or higher, whereas Ubuntu comes with 3.2. I don't know the technical details of why packaging eclipse in.deb archives should be so difficult (Fedora manage to do it for rpm)but this bug entry has been open for almost 2 years!:-( Shuttleworth commented on it 15 months ago, yet still no progress.
Sure, one can download it manually but it kinda defeats the purpose of having a package manager for such scenarios.
Android allows developers to write applications using the Java language but doesn't claim to be compatible with either the Java SE or ME platforms. Nor does it license any code from Sun or OpenJDK.
Sugar is already a commodity targetted for Fair Trade and grown by other Latin-American nations.
Pay the Cubans a reasonable price and you're still probably getting it cheaper than growing it on US farms due to the relative costs of living in each country.
I won't comment on AMD's future offerings but Via already have a competitor in this space but the Nano runs at a slightly higher TDP than 15 watts for > 1.6GHz. What kickbacks MS get from Intel for excluding the Nano from the netbook market niche is anyone's guess.
15 watts for the CPU is huge compared to what some of the ARM chips are doing
Windows 7 doesn't run on ARM. However, it runs on Via Nano, but at > 15 watts for their flagship CPU. Smell a rat? Yep, this version of Windows will only run on Intel Atom. Call it a conspiracy theory if you will but MS and Intel are both afraid of losing market share.
MS don't care about solving the world's energy crisis. They're simply doing a deal with Intel to keep the status quo.
Via's Nano is a potential competitor for the Atom platform in netbooks. However its TDP clocks in at 17 watts at 1.6GHz, and 25 watts for the 1.8GHz version. So for Via to compete with Intel in this market, they have to under-clock their CPUs, which naturally sacrifices performance - making Atom competitive in benchmarks.
The other limitation in Intel's favour is the single-core requirement, which cements the N270/N280 as the dominant CPU. x86 vendors such as nVidia & AMD won't bother with this market segment when they have multi-core designs on the table. Hence Intel doesn't cannibalize sales of Nehalem CPUs.
The Wintel cartel is alive and well. Let's hope low-cost Linux netbooks with multiple core ARM and MIPS chips will erode their market at this price range; forcing MS and Intel to compete on a level playing field.
"what they're supposed to be" is different for each person. Good battery life, weight, price, noise and dimensions are all factors. Each person considering one will have different preferences for each model based on these criteria.
For me, a 15" laptop is too big, portability wise, and I downgraded to a 12". The screen has the same # of pixels and the keyboard is much the same size except there's no space at the edges. The difference? A 12" Core 2 Duo is more expensive because the laptop market is flooded with cheap 15" 1200x800 laptops with noisy fans. And yet the battery life on this thing is abysmal.
So the only thing stopping me from buying a 11.6" 1336 x 768 netbook for my next purchase is performance, being somewhat a power user... Atoms have a reasonable TDP as compared with a Core 2 CPU but aren't speedy! Particularly if MS insists on the full Windows 7 shebang for this model because of the screen size.
For the time being the MS-Intel alliance otherwise known as the Wintel monopoly continues unabated. Intel can keep producing crippled CPUs(single core, lacking 64 bit, VT and SSE4), dictating use of the atom as various nettop, MID and netbook varieties, pairing them with approved chipsets etc. All the while, artificially inflating the price of Core 2 by releasing crippled-by-design Pentium Dual-Core to unsuspecting budget customers. Microsoft, meanwhile, can intentionally cripple low-end Windows by imposing artificial differentiations such as this 3-app limit. It's one thing to say they'll offer builds of Windows 7 client without bells and whistles - it's another to employ programmers to intentionally disable functionality.
For the consumer, all is not lost. A year, or so from now Intel will face strong opposition from Via, Nvidia and perhaps even AMD's system-on-chip they've been working on since the ATI acquisition. MS likewise from Linux machines running multi-core ARM or Loongson 3.
I guess that would explain why running it under wine isn't without problems.
Part of me would like to imagine that philanthropic Google would write 'clean' Win32 code, so that in the event they couldn't be bothered with a Linux port (as now), they'd at least make it run smoothly via wine as they did with Picasa.
Slashdot Mirror
Oracle, apparently. Perhaps not on Android's not-quite-Java Dalvik VM but nevertheless delivering office functionality to devices using a re-badged applet technology known as JavaFX.
Larry made a song and dance how web applications using AJAX were no longer flavour of the month and that JavaFX was the panacea.
As for Corel failing, advances in virtual machine technology since that time and that most of Swing is now rendered using DirectX/OpenGL mean performance is unlikely to be a factor this time.
Well I must say, I don't care too much. To me, despite the hype about the revolutionary process model, it's just another web browser. And yeah I've tried IE, konqueror, opera, safari and chrome yet I still come back to firefox...
(As I said, google entering an over-saturated browser space seems more about world domination...)
i think a winelib app could be acceptable if they polished it up with some native theming and paid attention to detail such as basic platform integration such as drag and drop, unix clipboard, using the native print and file dialogs etc. This would be where investing some 'love' into wine would go some way into earning the respect of the Linux hordes.
If they still don't feel much respect for Gtk and Qt, another possibility is to use the OpenStep API common to both Apple's Cocoa and GNUStep. :) Then at least the unix ports (OS X and Linux) could share a common codebase!
I know Chrome is a small step towards Google's new world order but if it contains so many Win32isms, one wonders why they bother writing a Linux version for 10% of the desktop market. I'd be content if Google made the best Windows browser possible and then spent their time and resources into fixing wine, as they did for Picassa. Having wine run Chrome flawlessly is a good test case for wine's robustness. By exposing seldom used API calls and performance issues, this benefits the community in terms of improving compatibility with closed source applications which would never benefit from a Linux port anyway.
Perhaps it's treason on Slashdot to suggest that Win32(through wine) is a legitimate cross-platform toolkit. However, if google isn't going to use Qt or similar for its Windows ports from the get-go then perhaps their long term strategy ought to be to improve wine to the extent that they can say with a straight face, "just download the windows installer and double click".
Swing. While it's not a popular choice for Linux distros, I'd hazard a guess that there are as many in-house corporate desktop apps written in Java as those 'also-ran' toolkits.
That sounds backward to me.
You're advocating Qt, a toolkit used by thousands of applications, break its event paradigm to fit in with Chrome, an application?
Without knowing the technical details, it sounds to me that Chrome is inflexible with respect to integrating with Qt. Or rather, certain architectural assumptions were made that fit well with Win32 but not other environments.
Well apparently it's still the in thing to troll Java.
I haven't downloaded this mind you but I just spotted a blog on downloading the android source. Hope this helps...
Well I guess if Canonical sees value, as I suggested, in providing developer assistance for this new Ubuntu-Android partnership they would be an ideal candidate to take upstream ownership, given no-one else has.
The OP asked for a 'Free IDE'. Last I checked XCode cost $US599 but came with a free Mac mini. :)
JDK 1.5 runs on OpenVMS, with 1.6 in beta, so yes.
DOS and OS/2 (eComStation keeps it on life-support) are dead platforms. Eclipse could possibly be set up to cross-compile for them if necessary.
(1) some wacky adventurers may want to wipe Android and run raw ubuntu on the handset - so it will have the same hardware.
(2) support for hardware features may be added in future netbooks. GPS might be emulated via 3G network triangulation, tilt may be added to forthcoming netbook tablets*. And as for the dimensions, run apps in windowed rather than full screen mode...
* Only a matter of time before Asus, Acer & others smash the lucrative tablet PC market.
If Canonical do see Android as a beneficial software stack, perhaps they'll focus a bit more energy on the Java-related developer tools too.
.deb archives should be so difficult (Fedora manage to do it for rpm)but this bug entry has been open for almost 2 years! :-( Shuttleworth commented on it 15 months ago, yet still no progress.
Specifically Eclipse. Android's developer plugin requires Eclipse 3.3 or higher, whereas Ubuntu comes with 3.2. I don't know the technical details of why packaging eclipse in
Sure, one can download it manually but it kinda defeats the purpose of having a package manager for such scenarios.
Android allows developers to write applications using the Java language but doesn't claim to be compatible with either the Java SE or ME platforms. Nor does it license any code from Sun or OpenJDK.
Um, you already can.
Sugar is already a commodity targetted for Fair Trade and grown by other Latin-American nations. Pay the Cubans a reasonable price and you're still probably getting it cheaper than growing it on US farms due to the relative costs of living in each country.
Sure, but it costs more to grow than import from places such as Cuba...
Yes, CUBA! Drop that silly 50 year old cold-war embargo and you'll have an abundance of cheap sugar cane from Uncle Raul.
Historically, sugar has been the linchpin of the Cuban economy. For decades prior to the 1959 Revolution, sugar provided around 80 percent earnings and was so pervasive that a popular fatalistic phrase often heard in Cuba was "sin azucar no hay pais," meaning without sugar there is no country.
I won't comment on AMD's future offerings but Via already have a competitor in this space but the Nano runs at a slightly higher TDP than 15 watts for > 1.6GHz. What kickbacks MS get from Intel for excluding the Nano from the netbook market niche is anyone's guess.
Windows 7 doesn't run on ARM. However, it runs on Via Nano, but at > 15 watts for their flagship CPU. Smell a rat? Yep, this version of Windows will only run on Intel Atom. Call it a conspiracy theory if you will but MS and Intel are both afraid of losing market share.
MS don't care about solving the world's energy crisis. They're simply doing a deal with Intel to keep the status quo.
Via's Nano is a potential competitor for the Atom platform in netbooks. However its TDP clocks in at 17 watts at 1.6GHz, and 25 watts for the 1.8GHz version. So for Via to compete with Intel in this market, they have to under-clock their CPUs, which naturally sacrifices performance - making Atom competitive in benchmarks.
The other limitation in Intel's favour is the single-core requirement, which cements the N270/N280 as the dominant CPU. x86 vendors such as nVidia & AMD won't bother with this market segment when they have multi-core designs on the table. Hence Intel doesn't cannibalize sales of Nehalem CPUs.
The Wintel cartel is alive and well. Let's hope low-cost Linux netbooks with multiple core ARM and MIPS chips will erode their market at this price range; forcing MS and Intel to compete on a level playing field.
Okay, point taken. Sorry, I misread your previous 1-line comment as '10 inches should be enough for anyone'! :)
"what they're supposed to be" is different for each person. Good battery life, weight, price, noise and dimensions are all factors. Each person considering one will have different preferences for each model based on these criteria.
For me, a 15" laptop is too big, portability wise, and I downgraded to a 12". The screen has the same # of pixels and the keyboard is much the same size except there's no space at the edges. The difference? A 12" Core 2 Duo is more expensive because the laptop market is flooded with cheap 15" 1200x800 laptops with noisy fans. And yet the battery life on this thing is abysmal.
So the only thing stopping me from buying a 11.6" 1336 x 768 netbook for my next purchase is performance, being somewhat a power user... Atoms have a reasonable TDP as compared with a Core 2 CPU but aren't speedy! Particularly if MS insists on the full Windows 7 shebang for this model because of the screen size.
For the time being the MS-Intel alliance otherwise known as the Wintel monopoly continues unabated. Intel can keep producing crippled CPUs(single core, lacking 64 bit, VT and SSE4), dictating use of the atom as various nettop, MID and netbook varieties, pairing them with approved chipsets etc. All the while, artificially inflating the price of Core 2 by releasing crippled-by-design Pentium Dual-Core to unsuspecting budget customers. Microsoft, meanwhile, can intentionally cripple low-end Windows by imposing artificial differentiations such as this 3-app limit. It's one thing to say they'll offer builds of Windows 7 client without bells and whistles - it's another to employ programmers to intentionally disable functionality.
For the consumer, all is not lost. A year, or so from now Intel will face strong opposition from Via, Nvidia and perhaps even AMD's system-on-chip they've been working on since the ATI acquisition. MS likewise from Linux machines running multi-core ARM or Loongson 3.
A new netbook will come with 1-2 years warranty and your 2nd hand powerbook is unlikely to come with a new battery.
Sorry, LARP is already taken.
I guess that would explain why running it under wine isn't without problems.
Part of me would like to imagine that philanthropic Google would write 'clean' Win32 code, so that in the event they couldn't be bothered with a Linux port (as now), they'd at least make it run smoothly via wine as they did with Picasa.
Apple slammed netbooks as being junky.