| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Sun: Free Java for Windows XP | |
|
||
| Time: 12:59 EST/17:59 GMT | News Source: ZDNet | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Sun Microsystems announced plans Monday to make its new Java Virtual Machine for Microsoft's Windows XP available as a free download. The new Java Virtual Machine (JVM) allows Java applications--from games to collaboration software--to run on Windows XP. Sun says the new JVM will also offer new multimedia and animation support as well as enhanced performance, among other things. "We're committed to delivering the best interactive user experience on the Web through Java technology," said Rich Green, vice president of Java and XML software at Sun, in a statement. Sun expects Web publishers, developers and enthusiasts to preview the new JVM. It can be found on the company's Java Web site. Sun sued Microsoft for $35 million in 1997, saying Microsoft breached its contract by trying to extend Java so it would work differently, and presumably better, on Windows computers. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 249 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:41:01 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 11/5/2001 1:16:37 PM |
|
This sun website is non-responsive.
|
| #2 By 1845 (207.173.73.201) at 11/5/2001 1:45:39 PM |
| Um, hasn't Sun always freely distributed the JVM? |
| #3 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 11/5/2001 5:07:57 PM |
|
#13. Actually Java is really slow even compared to C# and .Net.
Here is one such example: http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/compare/petshopperf.aspx It's a more interesting comparison as it shows the full benefits of the entire .Net framework not just some specific language features. |
| #4 By 116 (129.116.86.41) at 11/5/2001 5:14:31 PM |
|
Just because something is free doesn't automatically make it the best thing since sliced bread. I can also get a "free" java vm from microsoft.
Big Deal. If you like Java thats great use it. I personally always want more speed out of my apps and I could care less about cross platform applications. I want speed. |
| #5 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 11/5/2001 5:33:37 PM |
|
Ok, I've seen a LOT of misinformation spread in this nice little thread, and it's time to put a stop to it.
#4 - Free and open are two different things. #11 - Your list is simplistic. Managed code (like C# or even Java) can run FASTER than unmanaged code, like normal C/C++. It depends on the situation. Of course, for the most part, your list is accurate, although it doesn't show the scale... the difference between Java and .NET is massive, but they are right next to each other on your list. On average, .NET CLR apps are about 95% the speed of C/C++ applications. #12 - you know what's up. :-) #13 - Buncha stuff... 1.) About Sun licensing... yes, they can revoke it at anytime. Would they, probably not. 2.) Since when did betting your company's future rely on logic? Those companies would do anything to get away from Microsoft, so Java was a great choice - it's not Microsoft. There are plenty of other examples where that comes from... Linux and Sun for instances. They embrace Linux, when it's Linux that's destroying Sun's market share, not Microsoft. 3.) No, you're incorrect. Java is slow. The whole byte-code methodology is slow. Their language design isn't all that great either... forcing users to pick between a unified object base, or primitive data types. There are many reasons why Java is slow... the UI lag is merely a symptom. 4.) You are VERY incorrect. Java and C# (.NET CLR based languages in general) do NOT work the same way and DO NOT use a virtual machine. They are COMPILED. C# (and any only CLR language) are first translated into highly optimized MSIL, then, depending on what the developer wants, the MSIL is compiled into NATIVE CODE. The only overhead that CLR languages have that C/C++ doesn't is the fact the code is managed, and that can sometimes result in faster applications, and most of the time results in about a 5% performance drop. You can also write unmanaged code in .NET - something you can't do in Java. 5.) Again, you miss the point of .NET entirely. Go read up on it at www.gotdotnet.com. #15 (sodablue) - That petshop comparison isn't all that fair. I've had long discussions about this in the .NET newsgroups and mailing lists, and the only part I can't get passed is the fact the database backends are 100% different. The .NET version used SQL Server 2000, and the Sun version used Oracle 8i. The difference in speed there is MASSIVE, and if you're comparing the 1st/2nd tier technologies (ASP.NET versus JSP/EJB) it's not fair to have different backends. In my own tests, my ASP.NET apps, accessing the SAME data store, were about 3 to 7 times as fast as the exact same JSP based apps. (JSP is typically faster than EJB, in case you're wondering.) Just trying to be fair... This post was edited by RMD on Monday, November 05, 2001 at 17:35. |
| #6 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 11/5/2001 5:39:55 PM |
|
#19 - You are right the comparison isn't fair, but you are wrong on the reason it isn't fair. The PetShop example is the blueprint Sun says to use when building enterprise applications, if it's not written for speed, then Sun is NOT a company you should be looking to for solutions.
Also, you are incorrect about the way C# (.NET CLR apps) run. Java is NOT compiled, it is only pseudo compiled - which is the part that turns what you write into byte code. That byte code is interpreted by the JVM... and that is what makes Java so slow. .NET CLR apps, on the other hand, are truly compiled. You are right about the code being turning into an Intermediate Language, but before that language is run (when "before" is determined by the developer) the IL is turned into NATIVE MACHINE CODE automatically. This is truly compiled code, unlike Java. While it is true that you can truly compile Java with the gcc compiler you mentioned, it is no longer "Java" after that. You can no longer run it on other machines without recompiling it. You can also not guarantee it will even compile properly with gcc, and almost always will require significant changes to get it to work right. This is not a limitation you have with .NET. This post was edited by RMD on Monday, November 05, 2001 at 17:43. |
| #7 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 11/5/2001 5:46:07 PM |
|
#23, The byte code is interpreted at RUN time - every time. That's not the case with .NET. Here is an excerpt from a paper I'm writing on .NET, maybe this well help:
Compilation Methods Install-Time Code Generation Install-time code generation will compile an entire assembly into CPU-specific binary code, just as a C++ compiler does. An assembly is the code package that's sent to the compiler. This compilation is done at install time, when the end user is least likely to notice that the assembly is being JIT-compiled. The advantage of install-time code generation is that it allows you to compile the entire assembly just once before you run it. Because the entire assembly is compiled, you don't have to worry about intermittent performance issues every time a method in your code is executed the first time. It's like a time-share vacation plan in which you pay for everything up front. While paying for the vacation plan is painful, the advantage is that you never have to worry about paying for accommodations again. When and if you use this utility depends on the size of your specific system and your deployment environment. Typically, if you're going to create an installation application for your system, you should go ahead and use this JITter so that the user has a fully optimized version of the system "out of the box." JIT The default JITter is called at run time—in the manner I described in the preceding numbered list—each time a method is invoked for the first time. This is akin to a "pay-as-you-go" plan and is the default if you don't explicitly run the PreJIT compiler. EconoJIT Another run-time JITter, the EconoJIT is specifically designed for systems that have limited resources—for example, handheld devices with small amounts of memory. The major difference between this JITter and the regular JITter is the incorporation of something called code pitching. Code pitching allows the EconoJIT to discard the generated, or compiled, code if the system begins to run out of memory. The benefit is that the memory is reclaimed. However, the disadvantage is that if the code being pitched is invoked again, it must be compiled again as though it had never been called. Actually, the above stuff is a quote from a C# book... but it's in my paper. :-) |
| #8 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 11/5/2001 5:51:55 PM |
|
#25 - Again, your missing the point. Java is *interpreted* by the JVM, which then executes native machine code. Each JVM is written for each platform - COMPILED for each platform - and that's why it's able to output machine code for that platform.
.NET works a completely different way. The code you write gets turned into IL by your "compiler", and then, before your code is run on the target platform, it is *compiled* into the native machine instructions and executed. There is no virtual machine to deal with. .NET is managed, yes, but that doesn't require a virtual machine. |
| #9 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 11/5/2001 6:31:15 PM |
|
#27 - if the Java "compilation" process is so similar to the .NET process, why would the .NET version yeild applications several *times* faster?
I, and many others, have done benchmarks of lots of different applications written for the .NET CLR, and on average, the application is 95% the speed of unmanaged C++. Java typically runs at around 50% the speed of unmanaged C++... including your cached compilations in J2EE. I don't know about you, but I would consider a 45% increase in speed anything but minimal. |
| #10 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 11/5/2001 9:04:30 PM |
|
It most certainly is faster than both DB2 and Oracle, and MUCH cheaper. The only advantage Oracle has over SQL Server is it's truly distributed database abilities... SQL Server still requires manual distrobution of the database between servers... chunks, per sais.
Other than that, SQL Server is faster (and a lot cheaper) than any other database server on the market. Check out www.tpc.org for proof. :-) |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 249 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:41:01 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
