newnomad said:does this mean postitcustomnotes will finally work on a mac? I can't even run it on VPC...
Well I just tried it and I am afraid I will have to disappoint you: not working.... At least not on my system.
newnomad said:does this mean postitcustomnotes will finally work on a mac? I can't even run it on VPC...
and I really wonder why - anyone has a clue?frenetic said:Well I just tried it and I am afraid I will have to disappoint you: not working.... At least not on my system.
mozmac said:I'm not a huge Java expert, but I've heard that Apple's Java support isn't very good. What's your guys' opinion on this?
Their implementation on PPC plain sucks. Their implementation on Intel is excellent. Runtime is about 3x faster than on PPC Macs, and I can compile about 50% faster with OS X on my 1.83GHz Core Duo iMac than with Windows on my 2.26GHz P-M laptop, and my laptop blew away any PPC Mac I saw. The Eclipse and Netbeans IDEs run flawlessly and fast.eSnow said:You are partly right. Apple's adaptation of Java is top-notch when it comes to the UI. They have been very good at making Java-applications look very much like the native thing - not least because they are actually calling cocoa objects to draw the UI.
Performance-wise, however, the Apple Java just plain sucks. The sun JRE on windows is much faster. This may be due to PPC, to the Mach kernel or whatever, but I have developed on a PIII/500 on windows - and the IDE was about as fast as on my Mac Mini 1.25Ghz under OS X (OK, different IDE's, different Java-versions play into this as well).
Yes, they are late, but this is not the first Java 5 release. I'm not sure when it was released, but it was present in my Intel iMac when I bought it.esnow said:Not to mention that Apple is chronically late when it comes to updating Java. They were late with 1.4 which hurt them in the developer community and they are about a year late with Java 5.
The answer is in the MacRumors FAQ. There's a link to the FAQ at the top of each forum page.Macnoviz said:Why is this message on page 2, actually?
Isnt't that for wild speculations and non-conformed rumors?
Firefox going universal was front-page news
seashellz said:so, is there any reason to keep 1.3.1 on the system any longer?
wms121 said:..Java.com says yes:
http://java.com/en/download/faq/5000070300.xml
IBM sez...well version 1.3 was 64-bit for us a while back:
http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/1226.wss
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,2088418,00.htm
..any applications to test? ..hmmm,
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/forums/dw_thread.jsp?forum=171&thread=101019&cat=10&ca=drs-fo
http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/software/forte_v4.1/relnote41.html
..ok..jury is out..hey,
Anyone out there porting 64-bit Linux directly to Jinux or native Java..
..please post.
<---attempting to get a question answered for a client.
WW
081440 said:Why are the file sizes so different for Intel vs PPC?
Intel - 80MB
PPC - 53MB
Bob Knob said:If you have an Java app/runtime that makes calls to QuickTime you might not be too happy with this, lots of errors and pitfalls.
Verto said:I downloaded the update, and I must say I've noticed Safari is acting a little snappier now.
Bern said:I agree, can this be possible?
Marky_Mark said:Well, it can't get any bloody slower, can it?! Safari: the runt of the Apple litter.
bousozoku said:Browsers are a special problem and non-x86 browsers have a harder time because most content is stored in x86 format and has to be byte-swapped. Java for the PPC has to byte-swap as well, even though it's transparent to the developer and the end user. It takes time.
Squareball said:Seriously?
I thought when you compiled a Java app it compiled it to a java runtime which was platform agnostic and the java VM interperted the code to platform specific code on all systems.