> > The evaluation edition of MonoDroid is emulator-only, so you can't do any > benchmarking or even verify their benchmark results without buying a very > expensive license. I have a ton of ideas for benchmarking this, and > installed MonoDroid and did some coding, but the MonoDroid eval edition > wouldn't let me build a binary to run on an Android device. The regular > license is $999 and while there may be some cheaper academic/hobbyist > options, I'm not giving them large sums of money to verify their claims. > BTW, the regular Eclipse Android development stack is 100% free. And that's > not some limited starter edition, you get the full toolset for free. > > The benchmark results posted on the Mono blog aren't using one of the many > standard benchmarking suites, they weren't run by an impartial entity, and > they aren't even making a reasonable pretense of being fair. The Mono guys > developed their own internal custom benchmark designed to make Mono look > good and Dalvik look bad and they cherry pick the results accordingly. > Their Git repo also has the SciMark benchmark source code running on > Dalvik/Mono, but they didn't choose to publish those results. If you look > around for Android benchmarks, there are a ton of them. If I could without > buying a $999 MonoDroid license, I'd port them to C# and run them, and see > how they stack up. I'd imagine if these results were favorable to Mono, > they'd be publishing them on their blog themselves. > > Google has the Renderscript and the C/C++ NDK which I suspect are the more > high performance low level SDK options. Dalvik's design goals weren't > primarily centered around runtime performance, but memory considerations, > battery life issues, UI responsivenes, app startup/switching issues. > > Dalvik Turbo, is a drop in replacement for Dalvik that supposedly delivers > 2.8x faster runtime performance on benchmarks. What are the ups and downs, > between this, native Dalvik, the Mono VM, and others? > > Dalvik Turbo seems to have the simple goal of providing a faster VM > without any other associated agenda. Many alternate programming languages > like Scala/Kotlin/Clojure/Fantom aim to provide a variety of innovations at > the programming language level but really strive to acommodate multiple VM > ecosytems without playing a heavily partisan role. Mono isn't like that. > They have a history of evagenglizing everything Microsoft and bashing > opposing infrastructure like Java, using technical bullet points like stack > value types or reified generics as ammo fodder for that contentious debate, > and being absolutely obnoxious about the whole thing. > > Casper, you say the JDK ecosystem is uninspiring. To each his own, but I > disagree. I love the culture of innovation that has happened outside of > Sun/Oracle within the JDK community. All kinds of alternate languages > (Scala/Kotlin/etc) alternate build tools and paradigms (Maven/Gradle), web > frameworks, configuration frameworks, competing IDEs, all innovate and > suceed or fail based on largely merit. In the .NET world, the community at > large is very resistant to using anything that isn't officially Microsoft. > It's extremely rare to see a .NET shop use a non-Microsoft IDE, development > OS (there is a very small minority doing .NET/Mono on Linux/Mac), > programming language, build tool, web framework, testing framework, or > anything. Even when there are high quality alternatives out there; for > example, Scala/Clojure/Fantom have been on .NET for a while, but there is > nearly zero adoption. The .NET world is less a culture of open innovation > and more a culture of Microsoft and that isn't appealing to me. > >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/DVSfxeck1fYJ. 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.
