And so expensive too. If they only support Intel regarding the 64Bits, I guess that means that PPC (PowerMac) 64Bits will never really find any useful 64b applications from the Apple (or Java from Apple at least) point of view...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Adds Java SE 6 to Leopard
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And so expensive too. If they only support Intel regarding the 64Bits, I guess that means that PPC (PowerMac) 64Bits will never really find any useful 64b applications from the Apple (or Java from Apple at least) point of view...
Though Linux and OSX can use .NET (sorta), through Mono.....
It's slow from the fact that Java is platform independent; code has to be run in a virtual machine, hence why it will be slower. Java 6 did bring some performance increases, and some tweaks in GUI libraries (don't recall exactly what..).
I help develop BibleDesktop (http://www.crosswire.org/bibledesktop) in Java. Currently all development is Java 1.4.2 which allows it to run on MacOSX 10.3. We briefly went to Java 1.5, but there was too much of an outcry from Tiger users. So we reverted.
Our policy is to support the current OS and the prior OS level and perhaps earlier.
But, Java 6 is different as it is not available for my Intel Mac Core Duo, which is barely 2 years old. And it is not available for the entire base of Leopard users. So this complicates when we can move to Java 6.
Of course, we could use reflection to make enhanced features available to Java 6 users. But that doesn't seem quite fair.
It is precisely the extra features that Apple added that I'd like to use:
Our policy is to support the current OS and the prior OS level and perhaps earlier.
But, Java 6 is different as it is not available for my Intel Mac Core Duo, which is barely 2 years old. And it is not available for the entire base of Leopard users. So this complicates when we can move to Java 6.
Of course, we could use reflection to make enhanced features available to Java 6 users. But that doesn't seem quite fair.
It is precisely the extra features that Apple added that I'd like to use:
- better dock integration
- applescript to hide instead of close the app
- applescript to speak a selection of text
I remember in the 90s when Apple abandoned their flavor of the week OpenDoc and said they would follow Sun Java three months behind (and who knows what failed OS of the month they were on at the time). That quickly became 2 years behind, 5 years behind, etc. Apple and their developer program became such a mess that I abandoned Mac altogether around '97 or so, (after having been with it since Mac OS 3, and in the developer program for 5-6 years). I switched to the Solaris and Windows platforms.
I only came back to the Mac last year when I bought my MBP and started developing on it again earlier this year (when the camera-enabled device restriction was relaxed and I was finally able to bring it to work).
I have yet to embrace any development that is specifically Mac-centric (i.e. Obj-C, Carbon, AppleScript, etc) and will think hard before I do.
I only came back to the Mac last year when I bought my MBP and started developing on it again earlier this year (when the camera-enabled device restriction was relaxed and I was finally able to bring it to work).
I have yet to embrace any development that is specifically Mac-centric (i.e. Obj-C, Carbon, AppleScript, etc) and will think hard before I do.
1. We are in a 85-90% MS world when it comes to large business platforms, so .NET is a good fit over some other language.
2. Even the owners of JavaLobby (and advocasy group for Java) admits they also user .NET because it is powerful.
3. Many companies are jumping on the C# (C-sharp) bandwagon due to its power over C++ in the Visual Studio world.
Speaking of which, they are ready for me to headback to my VBS and SQL training.
In this case, it does. You don't have to make any changes to your word documents if you use a 32 bit or 64 bit version of Word, and you don't have to make changes to Photoshop files if you use a 32 bit or 64 bit version of Photoshop. You don't make changes to a Java application whether the VM uses PowerPC or Intel code, and you don't make changes whether it uses 32 bit or 64 bit code.
The only time where you have to make changes if you added code written in C or C++ to your Java application; in that case you obviously have to provide 64 bit code to work together with a 64 bit virtual machine.
Sure from that perspective it makes sense, however it seems .NET is an utterly flawed framework (source), so why are people using it?
EDIT: So you don't have to read through the whole thread here's my favourite comment:
Metasyntactic@Arstechnica said:
Basically a collection is an array with faster access to the elements in it. And that .NET's support for collections is so poor that the .NET developers making other parts of the API make their own versions of them.
Can you provide a source/example of C#/.NET's "power" which isn't accessible in Java and C++?
I downloaded it last night. But, my computer would not let me select it to install it. Any word on anyone having that same issue? I have a new MacBook.
This is the one exception that proves the rule.
Given the set of tools I use for development (Eclipse, Ant, JBoss) I find the turnaround from code to deploy/test much faster on Mac OS X than on Linux. Plus little thing (like the console tool) add to my productivity. Your mileage may vary, but it works great for me and apparently many other Java developers. I am not trying to convince anyone to use a Mac as a development platform. My only point is that anyone who doesn't like it has alternatives, and should stop whining and just use those alternatives.
I didn't say nobody is using Java 6. I said the vast majority of Java developers aren't. The vast majority of Java developers work in larger organizations which tend to be much more conservative about moving over to newer platforms. Hell, Java 1.5 is considered new in many of these places.
As for those worrying about Java disappearing: the fact is that the smartest move Sun ever did was to make Java open source. Java still overwhelms .NET in corporate development despite the corporate love affair with Microsoft (which is now more like a bad marriage - CIO's feel stuck with Microsoft, not happy about it). Many people forget that IBM still dominates the corporate world, and IBM is a bigger Java shop than Sun.
By making Java open source, Sun is creating an even larger pool of developers. Remember, until now (and even now) installing Java on Linux is a bit of a pain, particularly in the Debian derivate distributions, including Ubuntu, because of the license issues. This goes away in Java 7 and you will be able to apt-get the Sun sdk from the regular repositories. So Java will become even more ubiquitous in Linux.
Finally, for those who say Java is slow, you obviously are still thinking about Java browser applets not Java applications, and certainly not server side applications.
Be that as it may, my point is that where this policy might create a lot of free hype among consumers, it does Apple no good in the business market.
Why is that? All of those tools are available on Linux.
I'm guessing the console tool is something OS X specific, that I've never heard of. Could you be a bit more specific?
Which is exactly what people do, but I for one have a hard time understanding Apple's policy when it comes to communicating with it's customers.
I do Java development in Windows, OS X, and Linux on a regular basis. And I use Eclipse. I haven't found anything really that makes Java development faster on any one particular platform. Could you elaborate on what it is that you find faster?
Which console tool are you talking about? Is it only available for the Mac? Or has features on the Mac that the other platforms don't?
For development, I personally prefer to have a UNIX environment than a Windows environment, but between the OS X and Linux there isn't that much of a difference with regards to Java as far as I know.
Really, so you develop Bible Desktop - cool
I tried an earlier version of it, and found it a little slow. I think I will try it again, now that I got my mac which runs fastor.
Uh...did you read the rest of my post...I was trying to be slightly sarcastic on that mark...Java is #1 programming language used (at least as mentioned on one site).
I think that Apple needs to hand developing Java back to SUN. cause isnt Java needed for the internet for allot of sites. Java should be on a constant rollout in updates and Apple has just NOW released it.
OS X tiger AND Leopard should get this java update also with PPC and intel support. if Apple cant add PPC support to something that is needed by so many web sites then SUN should step in and do something about it or take back development of java for OS X from Apple and do it themselfs.
if you look at it java that is being developed by SUN and not Apple is way more allong then this outdated (but needed) update that the PC world has already had for a wile now and are far more allong.
this update is rediculos and something needs to be done about it. come on this update should be intel and PPC. this dont require a 64bit CPU to run, it will run just as happily on a G4 as it does a intel CPU.
OS X tiger AND Leopard should get this java update also with PPC and intel support. if Apple cant add PPC support to something that is needed by so many web sites then SUN should step in and do something about it or take back development of java for OS X from Apple and do it themselfs.
if you look at it java that is being developed by SUN and not Apple is way more allong then this outdated (but needed) update that the PC world has already had for a wile now and are far more allong.
this update is rediculos and something needs to be done about it. come on this update should be intel and PPC. this dont require a 64bit CPU to run, it will run just as happily on a G4 as it does a intel CPU.
Yeah, and I'm sure everyone with a mac mini will cut their wrists due to lack of java 1.6 (ok, maybe there are three java developers which own a mac mini which cares, but that's about it probably.)
I guess 1.6 may be faster in some cases but I would only care for Azureus(spelling..)/bittyrant in that case anyway..
It doesn't HAVE to be slower because it runs on a virtual machine. If for example the virtual machine evaluates and optimize the code if produce while the application is running it may even be faster.
But then all the modern toolkits and layers of layers of software adds a lot of extra load in the end, so yes, with assembly written code which did only what you wanted things would run much faster.
I will tell a very basic thing without going into Technical details or joking/sarcasm.
Windows 2000 users, users of OS which Microsoft abandoned official support, users of 8 years old OS on respective hardware (sometimes) have been running Java 6 for 18 months.
I think it sums up.
Windows 2000 users, users of OS which Microsoft abandoned official support, users of 8 years old OS on respective hardware (sometimes) have been running Java 6 for 18 months.
I think it sums up.
For web development, I can't imagine developers requiring Java 6 for applets. Applet writers need to develop for cross platform and need to consider the least common denominator and who their audience may include.
As was stated earlier, many companies are conservative in their approach to upgrades. Many users, also, may not have the money to upgrade.
Looking at the scenario:
MacOSX 10.3 has Java 1.4, but not Java 5
MacOSX 10.4 has Java 5, but not Java 6
MacOSX 10.5.2, for 64 bit Intel only has Java 6.
On Win98/WinNT, one can run Java 5, but not Java 6
Linux and later versions of Win can run Java 6.
So the least common denominator is Java 1.4.
If one has any hope of a J2ME implementation, they'll stick with 1.3 or earlier.
Really, so you develop Bible Desktop - cool
I found that it was unbearably slow on a 10.3 PPC. The problem seemed to be when opening new windows. And was reasonably fast enough elsewhere. My guess was that the Java to native was poorly written.
I have a Mac Mini, core duo 1.66Mhz, 2G ram and under both Tiger and now Leopard, I find that Java performs very well. The program is quite fast.
On the whole "Java is slow" because it is "an interpretive" language argument, I don't buy it. For two reasons: First, I find that the problem is generally in how the program is written. To get good Java performance, one has to put more thought into designing good algorithms. The obvious approach is almost always the slowest. For example, it used to take upwards of 40 minutes to index a Bible, now it is typically less than a minute. And the index is more comprehensive now.
Second, for an interactive program a user's perception and acceptance of slowness changes over time. Generally as they experience faster computers. If the user perceives that the computer is doing something complex, then the user will most likely tolerate slowness. Conversely, simple things should be near instantaneous. A friend of mine uses the phrase "between the keystrokes" to define fast enough. As hardware improves, the slowness argument becomes moot.
On today's hardware, interpreted languages, such as Java, PHP, Perl, ..., can be used for fast programs and even faster program development.
I remember a lot of people claiming that they were using Mac Minis for software development.
They're a cheap way for new/porting developers to get into the Mac platform.
Short answer - NO it is NOT dying out. Java has a huge developer base, and many enterprise level applications are written in it. It drives pretty much the entire insurance industry, is a huge part of IBM, and has educational institutions behind it. Apple just dropped the ball, and wants people to upgrade. Personally, I use my quad G5 for everything EXCEPT Java...for which I have a Windows machine for.