digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at macrumors.com

Sun Bringing Java to iPhone

macrumors.com — Sun announced that they are developing a Java Virtual Machine for Apple's iPhone with the newly released Software Development Kit (SDK)."We're going to make sure that the JVM offers the Java applications as much access to the native functionality of the iPhone as possible," he said. The specific ve...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • gigabyte3d, on 03/09/2008, -7/+32About time.
    • sachmanb, on 03/09/2008, -0/+5And now that it's here we can wait sluggishly for it to respond.......
    • danielsamuels, on 03/09/2008, -3/+1Maybe we can have Azureus on iPhone.
    • willynilly, on 03/09/2008, -3/+4So, according to Jobs, the phone's too slow to run Flash. But it'll run Java no problem?

      Somebody's full of ***** here.
      • cthellis, on 03/09/2008, -0/+6It's in no way "too slow." It's been said that it's too power-hungry, inefficient, and memory-hungry for proper portable purposes, which is many ways it is. Which is why Adobe has a "Flash Lite," which itself isn't compatible with other Flash versions.

        ...and if you notice Apple isn't making Java available by default in this case. Sun is using the SDK to make it available for people who want it. I guess we'll see how power-consuming Java is after that point.
    • skeen07, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1Except it's not: http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/03/10/iphone_jv ...
  • serff, on 03/09/2008, -12/+60Thank you Sun for doing what Apple won't. I really don't get why Apple is shying away from Java. It bums me out...
    • bradspry, on 03/09/2008, -3/+12It's in Sun's business interest, not Apple's. I just don't see Jobs on stage "booming" about Java, do you?
      • adolfojp, on 03/09/2008, -2/+6Apple insists on making Java's SDK for the Mac and then take forever to finish it. And it is in Apple's best interests to have Java. Many developers write business apps in Java, and Apple's presence in the business sector is almost nonexistent.
        • dualityim, on 03/09/2008, -3/+6It's against Apple's business model. Apple insists on making developers work on their platform and use their APIs, so they have full control over what kind of behavior people can expect form software. In a way this has been important to the consistency of the Mac experience and the stability of it. It is against Apple's model to have unauthorized third party platforms and interpreted code running on their platforms.
    • chillypacman, on 03/09/2008, -21/+29Apple never has been friendly to developers...
      • dustinmacdonald, on 03/09/2008, -7/+8Is that a joke?
        • NerveBand, on 03/09/2008, -10/+4No, not really. One way they ***** over developers with their change of processors from Motorolla to 68k to PPC to Intel. Very very bad.
          • cthellis, on 03/09/2008, -1/+5Yes, much better to be stuck on a dead platform for years with no suitable advancement than move, remain competitive, and make as many tools available as possible to ease the transition.
      • Bamborzled, on 03/09/2008, -5/+15Really? Is that why Apple includes a full-featured development suite packaged with their OS?

        http://developer.apple.com/tools/xcode/
        • natenovs, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1xcode is a joke of an ide, but it is free, so i'll give them that.
      • virtualball, on 03/09/2008, -2/+4I've had Xcode for five years now. I started out with AppleScript, then AppleScript Studio, and now I know Cocoa. Hopefully, I can now program for my phone because of it. I could never have done this without Apple distributing one of the best IDEs out there, especially for free.

        You're an idiot.
      • jferrari, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2What a $100 million fund for developers is not developer friendly?
    • mrhahn, on 03/09/2008, -3/+4During an open lecture at my uni, James Gosling said the only reason Jobs has stated there wouldn't be Java on the iPhone was for business reasons, i.e. to get Sun to lower the licensing costs out of desperation. I guess he was wrong, but either way it's worked out.
    • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/09/2008, -19/+5Java is trash. Use a real programming language.
      • Atomic1fire, on 03/09/2008, -3/+3can you run any other language as an application or an applet
        and for so many platforms
    • ORBAT, on 03/09/2008, -8/+4I guess you've never developed in Java? It's a freakin' mess.
      • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -1/+3Hm, I develop J2ME apps as my day job and program in Objective-C during my free time. Java is definitely a more modern language (hey, it IS much younger). Don't mix up the java language and the fact that afterwards it gets compiled as bytecode and runs in a VM.
      • mlavergn, on 03/09/2008, -0/+0Compared to what exactly? The only parts of Java that can even be considered messy are the Calendar/Date split and AWT's continuing lack of an absolute layout manager. Other than that, it's an excellent OO language with very good readability.
        • natenovs, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2it's implementation of generics is a little screwy. but i agree, the people bashing java just don't know how to use it properly.
        • groverblue, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1I ***** hate their streams.
    • Barbarino, on 03/09/2008, -1/+7For us idiots, why is Java important? What can Java do on an iphone that an iphone can't do right now?
      • ganlet, on 03/09/2008, -1/+3Its not specific to the language, its that there will finally be a platform for developers to work on. Apple has dragged their feet releasing their own SDK.
        My own opinion of why Java is a nice addition to iphone is it is a rather simple language for new users, and its a safe language; unlike more powerful languages like C++, you have no direct access to memory. I believe Java enables people who aren't professional programmers tinker and explore what is possible.
      • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -0/+5Simple example: my company sells a java aplication that keeps people informed about road trafic and radars (in Switzerland). Currently the answer for iPhone users is: sorry. If there's a cheap way to port the existing application (only rewriting some parts of the UI to work with fingers on a touchscreen) then our users with iPhones will have access to our software. There's no chance in hell my company would pay me to write a native version for the iPhone (although I'd like to!).
      • cgomez, on 03/09/2008, -4/+3So that you can have terribly inefficient code run sluggishly in the palm of your hand too.
  • MrViklund, on 03/09/2008, -8/+12Thanks SUN. This is really exciting, for users and developers. Also, check out the article from zdnet: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Gardner/?p=2619
    • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/09/2008, -13/+5No it's not. Java is trash.
      • Atomic1fire, on 03/09/2008, -6/+1Java is not trash
        Java can run on linux
        adobe air still cant do that...
        Java can do applets and programs at the same time
        but flash required a program that was just recently released and has to be installed seperately because adobe is too slow to hook it with flash
        and there is not a flash for the iphone yet
  • DarkDx, on 03/09/2008, -31/+11NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
  • SpookyApplePie, on 03/09/2008, -8/+28YAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY
  • Prombar, on 03/09/2008, -25/+2printn("Thats gana be awesome")
    • vibrokatana, on 03/09/2008, -2/+26that would be:
      System.out.println("That's gonna be awesome!");
      • magoghm, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3Furthermore, it would be kind of useless on JME if you don't have somewhere to see what you send to System.out
    • ORBAT, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Prombar.fail()
  • nightmare1228, on 03/09/2008, -5/+62Hope flash follows shortly after.
    • sachmanb, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2I'd prefer to hear flex has made it to iPhone which would implicitly mean Flash support as well as rich applications. Hell, I'd be tempted to even buy one at that point....and store really weird information on it to trip up the AT&T employees/feds reading my personal content.
    • cthellis, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1There'll probably be a 3rd party Flash module of some sort, but I'm not seeing it embedded in the browser.
  • otis12, on 03/09/2008, -8/+40cool, but where is the flash?
    • bradspry, on 03/09/2008, -2/+35Ask Adobe.
    • lovekudu, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1The GNash developers need an OS X coder to help it run as a Safari plugin. Otherwise it should run perfectly.
  • gizzymo, on 03/09/2008, -19/+10I for one wont use this, with some good memories, and some bad, its time to leave Java behind....
    • mgromer, on 03/09/2008, -0/+16Can you please explain some of your reasoning behind leaving Java behind? I'm a .Net developer and really dislike developing Java, but it no doubt has it's place and is a very widely used language.
    • sodoh, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Leave Java behind? It is quite possibly the biggest platform on Mobile phones for games (J2ME).
  • Dagreenman, on 03/09/2008, -11/+4uh huh, yeah great whatever, now where's my flash? don't make me wait till June for someone to use SDK (if it's possible, which it should be) to make Flash work on IPhone/Ipod touch.
    • gizzymo, on 03/09/2008, -2/+5I kinda respect apple for this, they are going to end up forcing adobe to start writing efficient code again, most of their products have got way too bloated in the last few years, I would not let Adobe near my device unless they had done some serious code overhauls...
    • colincornaby, on 03/09/2008, -6/+7I'm sure Steve Jobs will just snap his fingers and the code for Flash on the iPhone will magically come into being. : rolls eyes : C'mon now, Apple doesn't even write the copy of Flash for OS X, why is it suddenly Apple's job to write Flash for the iPhone?
      • Joeyp363, on 03/09/2008, -4/+1who is steve jobs
      • gizzymo, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1ask yourself why osx's built in PDF support is more reliable and less bulky than any other official adobe pdf reader....
        • macplenty, on 03/09/2008, -0/+0It may be because PDF is an open format. Anyone can write a reader/manipulate app for it (apparently a lot better than Adobe can). I may be wrong, but I'm guessing that writing a Flash plugin independent of Adobe is much tougher. Although Gnash, GameSWF, Aflax, and Ming are examples of non-Adobe support, I cannot attest to how closely they resemble true Flash 9 support (or even 8 for that matter). Not to mention these are desktop plugins, not mobile.
          • cthellis, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1That may be, but he was pretty much implying not-too-friendly things about the quality of coding done in Adobe itself, not the prospects of a non-Adobe Flash module.
          • macplenty, on 03/09/2008, -0/+0I thought he was trying to say that because Apple made a fantastic light and fast PDF reader (Preview) that they could do the same for a Flash plugin for the iPhone. I cannot argue the fact that Adobe is terrible at creating small and efficient applications. To that we most certainly agree.
          • cthellis, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Could be. Hard to follow conversational threads in here. ;-)
  • trghpy, on 03/09/2008, -14/+96Sounds like a fitting pair. Java's execution speeds should pair well with that blazing fast edge network.
    • ORBAT, on 03/09/2008, -0/+9Zing.
    • kr0n0s82, on 03/09/2008, -4/+11Not to sound like a fanboy, but Java is not slow. During the early versions, java was a fully interpreted language and ran from byte-code, it was slow. But since version 1.3, it passes through the JIT and turned into machine code. Though cross platform JIT compilers may not all be equal, relatively speaking, the execution of Java vs C is similar. With that being said, I think any perceived slowness in Java applications is a result of poor code and not the language itself.
      • futuretheory, on 03/09/2008, -8/+2So...what you're saying is that it's slow? We knew that.
      • tian2992, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2Java it's slower than C, but its acceptable. The thing is that Java swallows ram...
        • Terr01, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1I was under the impression that the JVM was greedy but would yield RAM if it appeared to be under contention on a system.
          • execute85, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2Your impression is incorrect. The JVM is greedy (but configurable), it will only give up RAM if it no longer needs it, the needs of the system don't matter to the JVM.
      • samby, on 03/09/2008, -2/+2The problem with Java is not the execution speed but how long it takes the virtual machine to load, especially on a 400 MHz processor like the iPhone. Even on a desktop I'm often clicking on the icon multiple times before the application pops up.
        • Terr01, on 03/09/2008, -1/+4Is this from the same brilliant minds that brought us the secret of "click refresh really fast to make it load faster" for web-pages?

          Dude, every time you click (depending on whether it's a JAR or custom launcher code), it could be starting a separate JVM for the application code, and the app code is responsible for refusing to start more than one active process. In this rather-plausible scenario, clicking multiple times does not make it faster, but also makes it slower!

          That said, the JVM does have a startup cost, and that's the reasonable downside of a system which provides upsides like sandboxed code, dynamic optimization, and decently-seamless cross-platform portability. Anyone writing a short-running program that needs a super-fast startup time (e.g. unix "cat") is just using the wrong tools anyway.
        • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3Pick up a SonyEricsson phone and launch a java (mobile) app. It takes a second to launch the vm.
      • forrondur, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2So java itself is not slow, but java apps are? Now THAT's a difference! Oh, and the execution speed of Java vs C is not similar, maybe in some synthetic benchmarks that have nothing to do with real-world scenarios...
    • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1I stream 3.4 Mbps to my Nokia E65 (a business phone!) at home network while testing Youtube J2ME Application. Max bandwidth is already 4Mbps. Youtube J2ME Application does VPC-6 and h264 decoding realtime.
      As Sun will code J2ME with ZERO hardware vendor support, their J2ME may really suck BTW. It took Nokia years to hit the top spot on J2ME benchmarks with Symbian S60 phones.
  • NathanCH, on 03/09/2008, -5/+7Sounds good to me. But, Apple, bring the iPhone to Canada ffs!
  • Joeyp363, on 03/09/2008, -23/+4java is for dudes who like other dudes in the butt. Who cares?
  • Dekey, on 03/09/2008, -14/+2This is craptastic news! Think of teh possibilities!!!
  • santasing, on 03/09/2008, -4/+10I am glad that Java is finally coming to the iPhone, which is a nice phone. It would be interesting to see JavaFX apps run on it.
  • centerblack, on 03/09/2008, -24/+11Java sucks.
    • centerblack, on 03/09/2008, -10/+11Go ahead, bury me because people made you learn it in your college programming 101.

      If you're going to write software for this platform, do it using C and the Cocoa libraries. Java. Sucks.
      • joebaloney, on 03/09/2008, -5/+6Absolutely, then write another version for Zaurus, one for Palm, Don't forget pocketPC and your friendly cellphone, whatever that happens to be. Lazy damn developers.

        Oh, one more thing centerblack. You suck.
        • centerblack, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1What is cool about the iPhone?

          THE UI.

          Apple already dropped the Cocoa-Java bridge on OS X- they're not going to have a change of heart and resurrect it for the iPhone. Go ahead and write a bunch of applications using swing if you want to. I won't be using them.
      • TomFrost, on 03/09/2008, -3/+9"Go ahead, bury me because people made you learn it..."

        I learned it on my own when I was in sixth grade 12 years ago. Why? Because even then, using both Windows and Linux, it was the easiest way to write a program that would work on both. Today, it's still the most streamlined and powerful multiplatform language available, and one I will continue using whenever I need to write something that I'll have to be able to carry anywhere with me.

        I would bet you and every last one of the other anti-java elitists here have not once used Java 1.6. You probably back up your arguments with qualms about speed or RAM use, which became nonissues as soon as Sun released 1.6. Its benchmarks have been spectacular, and its uses multiplied tenfold. It's now possible to write full 3D OpenGL games in Java that perform just as well as some of their C brethren.

        Time to get off your horse and realize that Java does, in fact, have some very pointed strengths over C. C is a powerful and versatile language, but this is about picking the best tool for the task at hand.
        • ORBAT, on 03/09/2008, -4/+2Sure, you can make Java run as fast as C code. If the C was written by a retarded greyhound on crack, that is.
        • sodoh, on 03/09/2008, -2/+1Your comment would of made sense many years ago. Now Java has a JIT compiler which turns the bytecode into actual assembly and refactors it while running in memory to make it faster. Something a C program can't do. (.NET stuff can though)

          Btw here is a doc written in 2003 that pointed out that JVMs were not slow at all.
          http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmar ...

          Most of the bad rep is people who think applets = java or haven't used anything compiled in a recent JVM.

          So people who go on about Java being slow have no fricken clue what they are talking about.
        • centerblack, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1UI.
    • mkppk, on 03/09/2008, -3/+2AMEN.
  • jerrylin, on 03/09/2008, -4/+36More apps for the iPhone = Huge win. Non-Mac based developers will have something easier to develop on.
    • mkppk, on 03/09/2008, -3/+5From my experience, its better/easier to learn/use Cocoa for Mac dev, than to try to force use of Java.
      • caketank, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1That's true on the Mac, where Apple maintains (or doesn't) the JDK, and Java is at best a second-class citizen. This is different, though-- this is Sun talking about developing a JDK for the iPhone. Drop in a thin JNI wrapper for the native iPhone SDK, and you could really have something worthwhile there.
    • roguewriter, on 03/09/2008, -3/+8Cocoa isn't hard to develop in at all. Unless of course your entire programming background is .net and visual basic. Then you're screwed.
      • ORBAT, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3Dugg down for truth, apparently. Objective C 2.0 (which the iPhone seems to support) is pretty easy to code in. Sure, it looks strange at first, but that's just because it was inspired by Smalltalk instead of Simula.
    • thefinger, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2yeah, and something slower too
      sorry, Java just sucks
  • Pinkertinkle, on 03/09/2008, -0/+13I'm glad to see the iPhone maturing. These new apps are going to take it to a whole new level of functionality.
  • idiopathogen, on 03/09/2008, -15/+9And why not just use the iPhone hardware natively like everyone else does, Java? Newsflash: No one wants your bloated virtual machine.
    • dualityim, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2Because the iPhone doesn't have 100% market share...yet...
    • Scaryclouds, on 03/09/2008, -1/+7You obviously don't understand the nature of Java.
  • jojo1224, on 03/09/2008, -1/+6So that means that it will be easier to port skype to the iphone?
    • piwy, on 03/09/2008, -0/+8Skype will probably write a native version. There's no excuse not to.
      • Scaryclouds, on 03/09/2008, -3/+2Money, that's always a good excuse.
        • supermanred, on 03/09/2008, -0/+4Money is an excuse TO DO it. I dont understand your response. millions of iPod Touches, plus Skype APP from the app store and a SKYPE addon mic = skype goodness on iPhone AND iPod.
    • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1It's probably easier to port the OSX or Windows Mobile version of skype than to write a java one.
    • groverblue, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Won't you just do the same thing with an iPod Touch, then? Cheaper.
    • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1For Skype, you need Trolltech Qt Toolkit. I am sure Skype guys already finished coding the ASM parts for ARM (WinCE release).
      Thing is, no sane SDK/Framework vendor will attempt to release anything on iPhone unless they get special agreement from Apple. The current SDK agreement is only suitable to write ordinary applications. As Trolltech (now owned by Nokia) won't suggest people to "hack" their devices, it is no go.
  • rr525356, on 03/09/2008, -18/+12I can't wait to not use it. Java is what has made other phones bad.
    • TomFrost, on 03/09/2008, -1/+6The one language that allowed cell phone application standardization and facilitated the ability to code a game or application for nearly all phones at once rather than individually for each *made the phones bad*!?

      Research, my friend. Come back when you realize that there was no other alternative, and that Java is what made mobile coding on large ranges of devices possible.
      • rr525356, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2Some research could do you well. Flash Lite doesn't require compiling for EVERY single phone model. Most carriers that distribute java apps maintain hundreds of gigabytes of apps. Once you upgrade your phone, everything you bought is incompatible, or runs like crap. Flash has taken off as a platform in Asia, and it's doing quite well. http://www.adobe.com/products/flashlite/
  • rockstar1o9, on 03/09/2008, -8/+2Forget just Java. I want my Firefox native app with Java + Flash.
  • piwy, on 03/09/2008, -6/+1yah... i wonder how they are gonna get around the limitations on SDK developed software. As in only one app can run at a time, and no app shall run in the background. Are they gonna capsulate each app in a vm or something? Sounds like huge files.

    Seriously tho, a lot of these java apps are not made with touch in mind. Having tested a couple of java games on an LG Viewty i know first hand that its a mayor pain in the ass.
    • RobotBuddha, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Heck, for that matter the whole "You're not allowed to create binaries that execute other binaries" thing. Seems to make any VM forbidden.
      • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1That would make emulators forbidden too. I don't think that's what they have in mind. It's probably more about aggressive sofware.
      • sodoh, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Can only one app run at a time in iPhone? That is retarded!

        As for executing other binaries this is possible in J2ME although you have to edit the security policy. Seems like the iPhone is somewhat limited (although the UI is nice).
        • piwy, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1It's not the iPhone that's limited. Apple put that restriction in there. AFAIK most apps (if none) don't run in the background, but some have helper instances that do. Mail comes to mind here.
  • mkppk, on 03/09/2008, -13/+2bleh, Java is ghey. No interest in using Java for OSX/iPhone dev.. and I'm a full time Java developer.
    • Scaryclouds, on 03/09/2008, -0/+5If the apps are well written what's the difference? Surely as a developer you know it comes down more to how the app is written opposed to what the app is written in. I'm a full time Java developer also.
    • TomFrost, on 03/09/2008, -0/+7Kindof weird that you chose to focus your life's work on a framework that you deem homosexual.
  • micklerlop, on 03/09/2008, -10/+4Sun please stay on server side
    • sodoh, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1Your a few years too late. J2ME has been around for ages and PersonalJava before that.
  • radius7, on 03/09/2008, -4/+11Thats exciting news .... Cant wait to program in Java for the iPhone
  • JBmtk, on 03/09/2008, -8/+3Now I'll own a sloooowww iphone
  • dustinmacdonald, on 03/09/2008, -7/+13Why Java? So we get ports of other phone apps? The iPhone is a very different platform and deserves better than half-assed ports.
    • ganlet, on 03/09/2008, -2/+3There is more to having a universal language than just ports. It allows people who arent professional programmers to tinker around and create their own apps without the fear of causing any harm to the phone (java has no direct access to memory)
      • Smoozle, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2Really? I think for anyone who is not a professional Java developer, picking up Objective-C + Cocoa would be a much, much easier thing to do. Also, Objective-C is a fairly high level programming language. Even without Objective-C 2.0's garbage collector (and, just to be clear, my impression is that you can *only* use Objective-C 2.0 for iPhone development), you almost never have to go into the nitty-gritty details of memory management when writing Cocoa apps.
        • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Apple's target (which they missed) was 10 million phones.
          There are 1 BILLION phones on planet which supports Java somehow, at least J2ME 1.1. J2ME and Java could manage to prove their security on the security hell named Windows while the vendor (MS) trying to kill them.
          I like goodly coded Symbian S60 Applications better than J2ME applications. As there are more than 140 million Symbian devices on market, I wish there were lot more Applications but I understand why developers pick J2ME instead of Symbian C++. Even Youtube went J2ME for shipping their application recently.
    • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2YES. That's so we can get ports. If my bank releases some software that runs on J2ME I'll be glad to be able to run it, even if it doesn't look right.

      Having java won't hurt native apps at all. It will only make them look better. Hey, I pay for Transmit on my mac while Cyberduck is free and has similar functionality. The reason? The native program (Transmit) launches slightly faster.
    • sodoh, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2The phone gaming industry is huge and the majority of apps for it are written in J2ME as it is the easiest to port to multiple phones.
    • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1(Lets say it actually ships)
      MIDP/CLDC standards defines your phones "specs" such as screen, number of keys, colours supported and even the network specs. J2ME applications ask those standards from the virtual machine and change their behaviour based on them. Wonder how come there are only 2 versions of Opera Mini while there are thousands of different phones supporting java? That is how. Opera mini, same executable works on my Nokia E65 (with ordinary screen) and Nokia 9300 (completely weird, widescreen) all fine. It doesn't put a small ,ugly rectangle on that wide screen, it just scales.
  • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/09/2008, -14/+3Wow, this is horrible news. I hate Java with a passion. I have a feeling a lot of people started rolling their eyes when Sun announced this.
  • gweedoz, on 03/09/2008, -8/+12I've been playing around with the iPhone SDK the last few days, and it is very nice. I know Java very well, and I like it, but I can honestly say there is really not much motivation to doing Java on this platform. Java on the iPhone will land with a dull thud, and no serious iPhone apps will use it. Yes, some developers who are too lazy to learn something new will throw together a few lame apps... but none will get much attention or go anywhere. Sorry to burst your limited coding skillz bubble.
    • mesomorphicman, on 03/09/2008, -5/+1"Sorry to burst your limited coding skillz bubble"

      Wow, aren't you the superior egotist looking down your snooty nose at all us ignorant illegitimate surfs, talk about a code-bully!! glad you know more about Java and life in general than everyone else, no reason for any more comments - god has spoken, the only qualified Java dvlpr on earth. What a f'n tool!!!!!
    • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Banks using pseudo random password generators on phishing age uses J2ME applications.
      You don't know Java very well or never figured how important it is for mobile devices. My bank happily shipping J2ME Application to their 30 million customers won't sit and code a C++ Cocoa Application and test it for 6 months just because couple of rich guys bought a iPhone. J2ME gives the perfect, sandboxed environment to them and it is all open standards.
  • apersaud, on 03/09/2008, -6/+8Writing beautiful user interfaces in Java is like grinding coffee with a spoon. GridBag anyone? I prefer Cocoa or Flash (Actionscript)
    • supermanred, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2Agreed.
    • Terr01, on 03/09/2008, -2/+2Obviously you've never tried to develop a GUI with NetBeans, or at least not any time recently.

      Seriously, give it a whirl. Or even look at the flash videos on their site.
    • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2Have you seen java games? You can do whatever you want with the interface, just start with a clean canvas and draw manually. J2ME apps that look like crap are the ones for which the developers used the built-in forms which are inconstent from one phone to another.

      Just get Opera Mini 4.0 on your phone and check for yourself: nothing in the interface is provided by the java mobile standard UI elements. That's how you make apps that look good.

      Also in terms of support it's a big win to draw your own interface. You don't want a hundred people calling each having the application appear or behave differently. Our company only uses it's own interface in full screen mode, this way we have the exact same app running on any phones, not matter the brand or the VM used.
      • Smoozle, on 03/09/2008, -2/+2 You can do whatever you want with the interface, just start with a clean canvas and draw manually.

        See, here is the problem, I do not want to have to draw my interface manually (unless I really, really have to). Instead of having to spend a couple of weeks writing a few thousand lines of drawing code, I'd much rather get the beautiful UI with the spiffy effects and transitions for free (or nearly free). Besides, your selling point for the draw-it-yourself approach is not all that good. Experience have thought me that drawing the UI yourself doesn't make things look great everywhere, but rather it makes them look out of place and usually like crap everywhere.
  • YodaJones, on 03/09/2008, -8/+6I don't know about this. Java is a pig. Safari works quite well and I am not sure I see any extra value in adding more fat libraries to the iPhone.
    • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3Then don't add them.
    • sodoh, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3People need to stop thinking of Java for the PC being the same as Java for mobile devices. It isn't. There isn't "fat libraries", the JVM is rewritten for mobile devices. For example there is no SWT, AWT, Swing in the UI libraries. You just draw directly to the screen.
  • StinkBait, on 03/09/2008, -9/+4Wow, the iPhone, now with twice the crap!
  • Archimboldo, on 03/09/2008, -1/+11No answer so far to the following from comments in TFA. Either Sun didn't do its homework or Apple will make an exception for Sun ...

    Apple iPhone SDK Agreement: “No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple’s Published APIs and builtin interpreter(s)… An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise.”

    • Focher, on 03/09/2008, -3/+5Wow. Just because they wrote it doesn't mean they can enforce it. I would love that language to be tested in a court.
      • colincornaby, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2Hold up in court how? It's a legal binding agreement for developers writing software. Apple can put any conditions they want on the licensing of their SDK.
    • willynilly, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2WTF is "builtin"? Is it seriously spelled that way in the Apple docs?
    • blackjack75, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2If Microsoft had written a piece like that Remond would be on fire now.

      That said I guess they are rather trying to protect the device from malicious attacks. If you allow your apps to download some scripts that can access the system it could open the way to trojans or virii.

      In the case of a java virtual machine though this isn't the case. By definition a java app is sandboxed and cannot do anything else than call the functions provided by java. Every memory access is checked. You basically can't do anything harmful.

      In that sense a java application isn't different from a photoshop action. It just calls what it's allowed to call.
  • nickpl34, on 03/09/2008, -3/+3what exactly will java do for the iphone? i see mixed responses on whether people want it or not and also will it be available for the ipod touch as well?
    • Atomic1fire, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3one probably support for crossplatform apps since cellphone devs might want to make a program usable for the iphone and several other phones
      of course the whole ui differences might be a problem
  • LightSpeed4, on 03/09/2008, -9/+2 rather see silverlight on it
  • chkdg8, on 03/09/2008, -5/+2Don't tease me with a good time.
  • Unr3a1, on 03/09/2008, -4/+20xCAFEBABE
  • wesw02, on 03/09/2008, -4/+3why?
    • adrien, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Sun are lost puppies who are following the crowd.
  • Schelske, on 03/09/2008, -11/+9Yuck. Java is horrible. Not on my iPhone.
  • austinnowlin, on 03/09/2008, -7/+1***** you
    i submitteed this m=bbut you get ;on the front page
    ficl tath
    • austinnowlin, on 03/09/2008, -3/+1haha
      you submitted it before be
      im drunk
      anyway i dugg you4 submission
      and digg me down i dont give a flying *****
    • cthellis, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2You + win = 0
  • moneyswears, on 03/09/2008, -7/+2I'm posting this comment using a Java based browser on my iPhone. Only took 8 minutes!
    • supermanred, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1I can type almost as fast on the iPhone keyboard as I can on my laptop, and as far as surfing the web there is NO mobile capable of better web surfing experience. And by mobile I mean fit in your pocket, not 12" laptop.

      Typing on my iPod by the way, didn't take a minute.
      • virtualball, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1Calm down. He was saying Java has slow speeds....
      • moneyswears, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1Defensive much?

        SPOILER ALERT: The iPhone is still just an (overpriced) phone.
  • buu700, on 08/26/2008, -7/+2printn("Thats gana be awesome")
  • taizoshiozaki, on 03/09/2008, -5/+6Please, not on my iPhone. Those JVMs are going to killl the entire Apple user experience like it did to other platforms.
    • supermanred, on 03/09/2008, -0/+3That would more than likely be an optional install. YOU select what apps you want from the app store.
      • Atomic1fire, on 03/09/2008, -1/+1And Im sure you can Do iMenus with iJava and dont forget the iButtons
    • adrien, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1I agree with you. Sun sucks at designing user interaction. I don't think they are going to be relevant on the iPhone.
  • thefinger, on 03/09/2008, -7/+6should read "Java slowing iPhone to a crawl"
    as per tradition with Java
  • iChopPryde, on 03/09/2008, -3/+5Time to play Runescape on my iphone :D
  • gregorypierce, on 03/09/2008, -1/+13Guys nobody is FORCING you to use Java on your iPhone just like nobody will be forcing you to use Flash. Having a platform with a lot of choice is excellent. Let the developers decide how they want to build their apps. If they build useful apps in Java, so be it. If you don't want to use them - don't use them. I've never seen so many people complain about having additional choices! Hell last week you didn't have ANY choices.
    • mesomorphicman, on 03/09/2008, -0/+1a voice of reason, wow, how rare on Digg - thank you! my thoughts exactly, it's like complaining about the clothes you wear, no one made you buy them, don't like - don't buy. don't want Java - don't d/l any apps that use it. stop your f'n crying you fools. can't satisfy some people, complain - complain, AAPL is making leaps & bounds here and the offerings will continue to grow. don't complain for having too more options. i guarantee if/when Adobe puts out a Flash iPhone Player, some people will complain for that, too. all SDKs are user chosen. no one forces you to d/l Java on your desk/laptop, same of the iPhone/touch.. d/l at your own risk.
    • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -1/+1Apple and Smart Phone (with real definition) doesn't work. They want the Apple II or first Macintosh. A completely closed device with user-class applications on front. Even the multi tasking idea (no background apps) is similar.
      If a vendor does decide something like that, you will never, ever comfortably use that device as other smart phones.
      iPhone won't have a decent flash, java, root level running security software, themes unless you don't hack it. $600 is way too expensive for my time to hack with third party.
      I was running 8 applications even including a firewall on my not so classy looking Nokia E65 Symbian phone today at a cafe transferring money, messaging, copying and pasting and talking. That is an "Enterprise" device. iPhone is not, will never be.
      Enterprise concluded to stay on Unix for large servers, pay millions of dollars to J2EE applications for a single, simple reason: Not to get tied to single vendor. Anyway, leave iPhone fans alone, there has been thousands of insightful comments like yours on various places. Nothing changed. They bought the locked device, hacked it and whined about bricking.
  • sfacets, on 03/09/2008, -1/+5Yuck. This is going to open the floodgates for all the little developers and their crappy low-res games.
    • ganlet, on 03/09/2008, -0/+2and why do you care, its Your phone dont add low res games if you dont want them.
  • edwford, on 03/09/2008, -1/+2A well needed improvement for an evolving modern device.
  • webmaniac, on 03/09/2008, -1/+4Probably not going to happen. As someone mentioned above the iPhone SDK license won't allow interpreted code (java bytecode). And with good reasons too. Write once run anywhere just means developers won't spend any time to make the application look good like native applications.
    • ilgaz, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Well, Sun will code it and when they are not allowed to release it, they will sue Apple for abusing their monopoly on device/OS.
      It worked in Microsoft case and MS was only "OS Vendor". On iPhone, Apple is BOTH OS and Hardware vendor. Sun is not a company to joke with, it is not some poor, single developer which you can mute via DMCA notice.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.