On Apr 15, 3:32 pm, opinali <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that JavaME is not a "whole platform" - the platform is JavaME > + some OS (Symbian, etc.). Even JavaSE and JavaEE are not "whole > platforms", apps typically depend on even more external stuff, from > video drivers for Java2D acceleration to DBMS servers. > > So, if you want to be picky, yes, Android != Java in the sense that > Android is more comprehensive than Java (contains a whole OS with > standard kernel, GUI, browser, GSM stack, etc.). But I didn't mean to > equate the entire platforms. If we pick the subset of Android that is > comparable to Java - the programming language, VM execution model > (down to very specific details like the whole JMM from JSR-133, > AFAIK), and even core APIs - then, Android IS Java. Yeah it's not > exactly identical so we'd say Android ~= Java; anyway it's close > enough, allowing metrics tons of Java code to be reused with zero or > minimal changes. From the application developer's POV, the latter > comparison makes more sense. If I am a JavaME developer, I can move to > Android with very little effort, even carrying a lot of my code.
Fair enough. So can we agree on "Mobile cross-platform Java (JME) has failed, Mobile Java as part of Android has succeeded?". I can already hear a Sun/Oracle person saying "But JME is installed on five billion phones!"... ;-) -- 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.
