On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Peli <[email protected]> wrote: > > Stoyan, > > It is not very polite to post messages to the public that have been > sent to you in private.
Can you point me which *exactly* message I received in private and posted in public? > > Having said this, here are some answers as I see them: > 1) Licensing: Android could not be released under the Apache 2 license > if it was relying on Sun's Java byte code. As far as I understand, > each manufacturer would potentially have to pay royalties to Sun if > they wanted to ship the Java VM on their mobile phones. Your Android > phone would be more expensive by that amount. How much more expensive would it be? Most of the phones I've had had Java support and none of them was as expensive as you sound it would be. > 2) You have not mentioned the advantages of Dalvik that are listed on > the wikipedia link you have posted: "An uncompressed .dex file is > typically a few percent smaller in size than a compressed .jar (Java > Archive) derived from the same .class files.". GIVE ME A BREAK. Oh, wait, with the 70 MB for apps perhaps that's quite an achievement, right. > And: > "Java VMs [..] are stack machines, the Dalvik VM is a register-based > architecture." > > As far as I understand, ARM architecture is also register-based. So, > Dalvik is much closer to the ARM hardware than Java is in the first > place. You can use your imagination to envision what this could mean > in the long run. Perhaps my imagination is not as big as yours. Cheers --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
