Being in the "OO Mentality" and observing OO Design are two different things. The real features of OO Design depend heavily on Polymorphism and Inheritance - something which modules or procedures do not. This is not to say that the modules themselves to not use objects, but don't mistake the consuming of libraries and functions in a C Program for OO programming.
The difference between the systems in not so clear cut. It is true that JAVA programs (generally) have a larger startup time. The reason for this is NOT because of the Java language nor the byte code it generates, rather the extra startup time is because Java needs to run on Intel based machines using a Virtual Machine. This is both an advantage AND disadvantage to JAVA, one that a company (or programmer) would need to evaluate before choosing the language and Platform.
Do NOT, however, mix this up with C# and Windows Programs. Like Linux, Windows is an Operating System. Debates aside, the usage of.NET and COM programs is a lot closer to what you would find in the Linux environments then what you would find in the Java Virtual Machine. Running Java on a NATIVE Java Machine, however, and you'll notice all of those startup delays disappear.
The real truth here is scale. Bigger programs take longer to start up then smaller programs. In large implementations, the JVM start time becomes negligible. If start time is a consideration, then by all means writing code NATIVE to the machine will always have an advantage. JAVA, however, offers a WIDE variety of advantages over its older counterparts which, in my opinion, makes it a very strong competitor to other platforms.
As far as calling Java Programs LARGE is not a fair assessment. Many of them are simply because Java makes it easier to implement large system then it's native counterparts. Furthermore, one of JAVA's biggest advantages - it's cross-platform compatibility - is typically needed most in large applications. Your analogy of starting up your laptop is a valid (albeit a bit exaggerated) assessment of JAVA, but it greatly oversimplifies your assessment of the language in general. Good OOPs do ONLY what they need to in a class and then return. Similar concepts exist in C++ and C#. Perhaps the Windows libraries are not as LEAN as they should be, but again the concept behind their ten millions dlls is the same as in Linux, to provide small tools that a master program can piece together.
Yah, I agree with LDog. What in the hell have you been smoking. In my opinion JAVA is pretty much the undisputed leader is serious Web-Applications.
Don't get me wrong, I like little languages like.PHP and Pearl, and you can do a lot of things with them. But there is a reason that serious large-scale software companies do not use these technologies.
As for the embedded market, look at the Cell Phones comming out, or even look at your American Express Blue card. Embedded JAVA processors have been amiditedly slow to break into the market, but they are starting to hit the market big-time.
I agree with this assessment. The point is to use Java for what Java does well, and much like those little clever things you do in C/C++ to get everything to work correctly, programming Java is as much art as science.
Is it a language that should be used for every purpose under the sun? No, absolutely not. But I would argue that neither is C/C++. When it comes to programming platform independent applications as well as online applications that include various character sets and the like, C/C++ implementations are ackward at best.
I was a C/C++ developer for 4 years before I started in JAVA, and have been a JAVA programmer almost exclusively for 6 years now. The company I work for has both JAVA code and C/C++ Legacy code. In three years our JAVA solution has surpassed our C/C++ solution in speed, ease of use, realiability, and maintainability. We still use the C/C++ code to control out Legacy systems, but the JAVA client has become the preferred front end of our clients.
Just my two cents.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference between the systems in not so clear cut. It is true that JAVA programs (generally) have a larger startup time. The reason for this is NOT because of the Java language nor the byte code it generates, rather the extra startup time is because Java needs to run on Intel based machines using a Virtual Machine. This is both an advantage AND disadvantage to JAVA, one that a company (or programmer) would need to evaluate before choosing the language and Platform.
Do NOT, however, mix this up with C# and Windows Programs. Like Linux, Windows is an Operating System. Debates aside, the usage of .NET and COM programs is a lot closer to what you would find in the Linux environments then what you would find in the Java Virtual Machine. Running Java on a NATIVE Java Machine, however, and you'll notice all of those startup delays disappear.
The real truth here is scale. Bigger programs take longer to start up then smaller programs. In large implementations, the JVM start time becomes negligible. If start time is a consideration, then by all means writing code NATIVE to the machine will always have an advantage. JAVA, however, offers a WIDE variety of advantages over its older counterparts which, in my opinion, makes it a very strong competitor to other platforms.
As far as calling Java Programs LARGE is not a fair assessment. Many of them are simply because Java makes it easier to implement large system then it's native counterparts. Furthermore, one of JAVA's biggest advantages - it's cross-platform compatibility - is typically needed most in large applications. Your analogy of starting up your laptop is a valid (albeit a bit exaggerated) assessment of JAVA, but it greatly oversimplifies your assessment of the language in general. Good OOPs do ONLY what they need to in a class and then return. Similar concepts exist in C++ and C#. Perhaps the Windows libraries are not as LEAN as they should be, but again the concept behind their ten millions dlls is the same as in Linux, to provide small tools that a master program can piece together.
Don't get me wrong, I like little languages like .PHP and Pearl, and you can do a lot of things with them. But there is a reason that serious large-scale software companies do not use these technologies.
As for the embedded market, look at the Cell Phones comming out, or even look at your American Express Blue card. Embedded JAVA processors have been amiditedly slow to break into the market, but they are starting to hit the market big-time.
I agree with this assessment. The point is to use Java for what Java does well, and much like those little clever things you do in C/C++ to get everything to work correctly, programming Java is as much art as science. Is it a language that should be used for every purpose under the sun? No, absolutely not. But I would argue that neither is C/C++. When it comes to programming platform independent applications as well as online applications that include various character sets and the like, C/C++ implementations are ackward at best. I was a C/C++ developer for 4 years before I started in JAVA, and have been a JAVA programmer almost exclusively for 6 years now. The company I work for has both JAVA code and C/C++ Legacy code. In three years our JAVA solution has surpassed our C/C++ solution in speed, ease of use, realiability, and maintainability. We still use the C/C++ code to control out Legacy systems, but the JAVA client has become the preferred front end of our clients. Just my two cents.