the trend is clear: http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/01/21/iphone-android-admob-81-percent/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Techcrunch+(TechCrunch)
On Jan 23, 6:05 am, Karsten Silz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jan 21, 9:31 pm, Stephen Chin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Karsten, > > > JavaFX has the potential to run on any platform where Java ME can run, > > which is a pretty large spectrum. > > I don't think mobile developers care about JavaME phones at this > point. Sorry, but with the iPhone and Android wooing developers and > RIM and Microsoft trying to keep up, that train has left the station. > I wouldn't go so far as Cringely who predicts that within three years > in the U.S. there'll be only smartphones anymore, no more feature > phones (http://www.cringely.com/2010/01/mobile-2010-predictions-apple- > google-rim-oh-my/), but they'll sure be the developer focus for the > years to come. These mythical billion phones with JavaME are so > different in every respect that most developers can't afford to create > the dozens of different versions of apps and then get it certified > with dozens of different carriers around the world. Additionally, if > I remember an interview with a JavaFX guy correctly, then existing > JavaME phones can't use graphics hardware acceleration and the JIT of > JavaFX, making them an order of magnitude slower than phones that have > JavaFX built-in. > > > There have been demos of JavaFX > > Mobile running on Android devices in the past (JavaOne 2008), > > I assume that was JavaOne 2009 since Android was only revealed at the > end of 2008. > > > and I have > > seen it working quite well on Symbian devices > > (http://steveonjava.com/2009/01/22/widgetfx-m3dd-conference/), so the > > technology is there. The real obstacle is partnerships and licensing. > > Yep. Now mobile phone vendors have three choices for a "rich > application stack": Flash, JavaFX and maybe Silverlight (only > announced for Windows Mobile and some Nokia phones so far). It seems > everybody already signed up for Flash through the Open Screen Project > (http://www.openscreenproject.org/partners/current_partners.html) - > and I can see why: Apart from nicely supporting mobile hardware, Flash > gives you something that the iPhone doesn't have as an added benefit - > running Flash in the mobile web browser. And yes, it's a free runtime > (Adobe makes money on tools). JavaME used to have a licensing fee. > So even if Oracle drops that fee (where's the revenue then coming > from?), it's still at a disadvantage to Flash since there are very few > applets out there that users care about. The JavaFX runtime is > probably faster than the upcoming 10.1 Flash Player, so maybe JavaFX > guns for mobile games? > > And please, no more app stores, ok? AT&T will have one, Nokia has > one, Sun will have one - so with a hypothetical JavaFX Nokia phone on > AT&T, you have three app stores to chose from (that's two more than > needed). > > > I am hopeful now that the Sun/Oracle merger has been approved by the EU > > that they have enough muscle to get the partnerships to make JavaFX > > Mobile a success. It will be interesting to see what Larry has to say > > about JavaFX technology in his announcement next week > > (http://www.oracle.com/webapps/events/EventsDetail.jsp?p_eventId=10848... > > <http://www.oracle.com/webapps/events/EventsDetail.jsp?p_eventId=10848...>). > > > Also, it would be great to hear back first-hand about announcements from > > Mobile World Congress while you are out there. :-) > > I'm not there, I just follow the news. :-) > > > > > smime.p7s > > 8KViewDownload -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en.
