-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 4/14/10 17:32 , Karsten Silz wrote: > > > I think that the world has stepped forward in that sense - the mobile > space is hyper-competitive now, with some of the biggest companies in > the world trying to out-innovate each other (Apple, Google, Microsoft, > Nokia). It took Microsoft nearly ten years to ship four major client > OS versions (Windows 2000 - Windows 7) - Google shipped five major > Android versions in fifteen months. Apple will ships at least two > major iPhone OS version a year (and this year probably three). > > So if you're Adobe (or Oracle or Microsoft), and you want to put a > cross-platform framework on top of these quick moving targets and > Windows/Mac, how do you do this? You focus on the least-common > denominator, leaving aside the platform-exclusive stuff, and you try > to get one release out each year, two max. The Sun JDK has shipped > major new functionality about every two years in the recent past, the > Flash Player about every 1.5 years, and that was just on Windows/Mac/ > Linux; none of them are in "mass-production" on mobile devices. So > sure, you can build apps cheaper this way, but even if you can produce > a native look & feel, they'll probably miss a lot of the cool new API > stuff that's available to the native apps. Some platforms may allow > to build these "lesser apps" (e.g., Flash on Android), other don't > (iPhone). But it's not a black - white game. For instance, not everibody needs to use that fresh and cool feature just rolled out - otherwise we should infer that most of those HTC Android equipments, that are still pre-2.0, are useless.
Then, let's recall that the coding problem is twofold: language AND runtime. The fact that we must respect the UI or use that fresh and cool feature is 99% related to the runtime, not to the language. I mean, from this respect at least Google offers the Java language and a subset of the runtime at the core, making me save money and time. And they could do even better (but deliberately chose not do to that) if they provided API support, at least for things not related to the UI, such as Bluetooth, Location, in a compatible form as the existing APIs (JSR-82 etc). I could not object to the fact that I'm forced to rewrite the UI part of an application, for the L&F fidelity. The same holds for the idea that I could write the same stuff in Java and having it translated to ObjC, etc... - -- Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people [email protected] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvF544ACgkQeDweFqgUGxeCiwCgltP3zyVwPdf9MqiquzTk+CGD rqsAn3eZ0CnGy5+HuTfDRwsMyD5wdod3 =4Bw7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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.
