Verizon fires a shot accross the iphone's bow

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Slick5150
This is not just another Android phone. It's the first Android phone that has a real CPU in it. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, it has the same CPU as the iPhone and Pre. My knock on Android has always been that it feels sluggish, but that's because the phones are using CPUs that are too slow to handle what it can do. The Droid should change that.

As long as the apps are Java-based, I have no hope that Android apps will run anywhere as fast as iPhone apps.

As if I needed more evidence that you're clueless, I see you're still perpetuating the myth that Java is a slow language.

The average performance of Java programs has increased a lot over time, and Java's speed might now be comparable with C or C++. In some cases Java is significantly slower, in others, significantly faster.[34] As of March 2009, Java is 15% or more slower than C++ in performance on the Computer Language Benchmarks Game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...son_to_other_languages

Not that I believe for a second that you're actually a developer. There are some pretty stupid people out there writing code, but you're in a whole other league of dumbassery. I'm surprised you can tie your own laces.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

As much as I hate Apple, I have to admit the iPhone is such a great product. It does almost everything you need with ease and it has the support of a lot of people with apps and such. I have never bought any Apple product ever before but I think I might get an iPhone when my current contract is done.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
As if I needed more evidence that you're clueless, I see you're still perpetuating the myth that Java is a slow language.

Because it is.

Not that I believe for a second that you're actually a developer. There are some pretty stupid people out there writing code, but you're in a whole other league of dumbassery. I'm surprised you can tie your own laces.

Your link only proves Java is slower than native code in almost every case. Do you even read your own links? Just a sample:

- As of March 2009, Java is 15% or more slower than C++ in performance on the Computer Language Benchmarks Game.
- Java startup time is often much slower than for C or C++, because a lot of classes (and first of all classes from the platform Class libraries) must be loaded before being used.
- Java memory usage is heavier than for C or C++.
- The Java Native Interface has a high overhead associated with it, making it costly to cross the boundary between code running on the JVM and native code.

Not to mention wrestling with the garbage collector is a whole clusterfuck on its own.

No developer worth their salt would claim with a straight face that Java is by and large in league with native code in terms of performance. The thing with Java is that its performance is "good enough", especially for back-end tasks, that the convenience and simplicity of the language outweighs the performance drawbacks. For heavy UI applications this is not the case. There's a reason not many games or commercial desktop applications are written in Java.

I hope the Droid is 600Mhz so we can A/B iPhone 3GS apps in comparison to Droid apps, ports especially.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
As if I needed more evidence that you're clueless, I see you're still perpetuating the myth that Java is a slow language.

Because it is.

Not that I believe for a second that you're actually a developer. There are some pretty stupid people out there writing code, but you're in a whole other league of dumbassery. I'm surprised you can tie your own laces.

Your link only proves Java is slower than native code in almost every case. Do you even read your own links? Just a sample:

- As of March 2009, Java is 15% or more slower than C++ in performance on the Computer Language Benchmarks Game.
- Java startup time is often much slower than for C or C++, because a lot of classes (and first of all classes from the platform Class libraries) must be loaded before being used.
- Java memory usage is heavier than for C or C++.
- The Java Native Interface has a high overhead associated with it, making it costly to cross the boundary between code running on the JVM and native code.

Not to mention wrestling with the garbage collector is a whole clusterfuck on its own.

No developer worth their salt would claim with a straight face that Java is by and large in league with native code in terms of performance. The thing with Java is that its performance is "good enough", especially for back-end tasks, that the convenience and simplicity of the language outweighs the performance drawbacks. For heavy UI applications this is not the case. There's a reason not many games or commercial desktop applications are written in Java.

I hope the Droid is 600Mhz so we can A/B iPhone 3GS apps in comparison to Droid apps, ports especially.

Wow, you really are brainwashed...

Java is close enough to native code in terms of speed it doesn't matter for a majority of applications with modern hardware.

Is it a potential problem for a 500mhz processor? Not really but you will see some sluggishness IF the coder isn't well versed in java development and the code isn't mature. On a 1Ghz processor, it doesn't matter anymore.

As for your bitching about GUIs in Java. You are right if you are talking about only using AWT. But no one uses just AWT anymore.

I mean the GUI in eclipse is just horrible. Completely unusable. I hope you catch the sarcasm.

 

[Jack Ryan]

@Chris

A bad craftsman blames his tool. Java is perfectly fine means to an end, whether it be UI, back-end, or mobile device development. If you are a bad developer, it doesn't matter what tool you use.

Some tools are better at certain things than others, but your claim that Java is horrible (or incapable) at UI is just ignorant and, quite frankly, makes you look foolish.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
As for your bitching about GUIs in Java. You are right if you are talking about only using AWT. But no one uses just AWT anymore.

I mean the GUI in eclipse is just horrible. Completely unusable. I hope you catch the sarcasm.

SWT is just lipstick on a pig. You can render all of your view components natively but you're still at the mercy of the VM and garbage collector for everything else. You'll get the same situation with UI components on Android. But with the slow processor on smart phones and the anemic VM Android uses overall performance will most likely such, especially compared to the iPhone.

Can't wait to see some apps running on the Droid.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan
@Chris

A bad craftsman blames his tool. Java is perfectly fine means to an end, whether it be UI, back-end, or mobile device development. If you are a bad developer, it doesn't matter what tool you use.

Then all Java UI developers must be bad because I've never seen a Java UI app worth a damn.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Codewiz
As for your bitching about GUIs in Java. You are right if you are talking about only using AWT. But no one uses just AWT anymore.

I mean the GUI in eclipse is just horrible. Completely unusable. I hope you catch the sarcasm.

SWT is just lipstick on a pig. You can render all of your view components natively but you're still at the mercy of the VM and garbage collector for everything else. You'll get the same situation with UI components on Android. But with the slow processor on smart phones and the anemic VM Android uses overall performance will most likely such, especially compared to the iPhone.

Can't wait to see some apps running on the Droid.

More misdirection. The eclipse GUI is pretty darn good. You make bad assumption after bad assumption. You think the VM on android won't get better?

I really can't believe you are harping on garbage collection. I mean really? Garbage collection is the least of the worries here.

As for never seeing a good UI. I guess you are saying the eclipse UI sucks. I have seen plenty of quality java UIs so you must just not get out much.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
You think the VM on android won't get better?

I hope so. At this point Android's VM is not even up to snuff with the standard Java VM, and phones like the G1 which have Java acceleration in hardware do not accelerate the the Android Java code (hopefully not the case with the Droid).

I really can't believe you are harping on garbage collection. I mean really? Garbage collection is the least of the worries here.

It's a huge factor in regards to performance. Memory management has always been an area where Java was way behind native code, from a performance standpoint. From a convience to developers standpoint, Java wins -- but tell that to the user who is staring at a blocked app that is currently doing a GC sweep.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Codewiz
You think the VM on android won't get better?

I hope so. At this point Android's VM is not even up to snuff with the standard Java VM, and phones like the G1 which have Java acceleration in hardware do not accelerate the the Android Java code (hopefully not the case with the Droid).

I really can't believe you are harping on garbage collection. I mean really? Garbage collection is the least of the worries here.

It's a huge factor in regards to performance. Memory management has always been an area where Java was way behind native code, from a performance standpoint. From a convience to developers standpoint, Java wins -- but tell that to the user who is staring at a blocked app that is currently doing a GC sweep.

So lets see your mode of operation.

You make a retarded statement. I show why it is retarded.

You make another post with a retarded statement while ignoring that fact that I corrected your previous retarded statement.

GC is not a big deal. It uses very little CPU at this point. The advantages FAR outweigh the drawbacks.

And to drive that home, if Apple felt GC was a waste of time why did they implement GC in Objective C v2.0? Oh oh oh oh but but but but. But nothing. You are wasting everyone's time with your little charade. You add nothing to the discussion.


And to quote your overload that is Apple:

"Replacing the Objective-C 1.0 retain/release based reference counting system, the new, tuned, high-performance garbage collector works hand-in-hand with the strengths of Objective-C and all of the Cocoa libraries that ship with Mac OS X as well as Core Foundation. This brings Objective-C the same ease of memory management that programmers using other modern languages, such as Java, have enjoyed."

See one of the key words. MODERN LANGUAGE. GC is here to stay and is NOT a big deal. In most cases you will see that GC takes no more than 5% overhead.

5% is NOTHING when talking about an optimized system.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
And to drive that home, if Apple felt GC was a waste of time why did they implement GC in Objective C v2.0? Oh oh oh oh but but but but. But nothing. You are wasting everyone's time with your little charade. You add nothing to the discussion.

There's no GC mechanism on the iPhone, for a reason, genius, despite its inclusion in Objective-C 2.0. You still have to manually manage memory.

http://stackoverflow.com/quest...real-garbage-collector

Why not? Performance. So again, the ABA brigade and their petty counter arguments are invalidated. It's ok to hate the iPhone, but to make up ridiculous bullshit -- wow. To claim GC is not a performance concern on a 600Mhz phone with 256MB of RAM (and simultaneously running apps, lol) is just intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Codewiz
And to drive that home, if Apple felt GC was a waste of time why did they implement GC in Objective C v2.0? Oh oh oh oh but but but but. But nothing. You are wasting everyone's time with your little charade. You add nothing to the discussion.

There's no GC mechanism on the iPhone, for a reason, genius, despite its inclusion in Objective-C 2.0. You still have to manually manage memory.

http://stackoverflow.com/quest...real-garbage-collector

Why not? Performance. So again, the ABA brigade and their petty counter arguments are invalidated. It's ok to hate the iPhone, but to make up ridiculous bullshit -- wow. To claim GC is not a performance concern on a 600Mhz phone with 256MB of RAM (and simultaneously running apps, lol) is just intellectual dishonesty.

Wow, you really are dense. Where did I say GC was on the iphone? If I wanted to say that, I would have said it. My point is that modern languages use GC.

I said APPLE implemented GC in Objective C 2.0.

You must be a piss poor developer if you don't understand 5% overhead. 95% of the other crap is developer or baseline related. 5% is NOTHING and can be overcome easily by decent development.

I realize now that I am wasting my time talking to a 12 year old that has ZERO real world development experience.

 

[Phokus]

still can't believe the iphone doesn't have an interchangeable battery yet (at least mine doesn't)

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan
How long will this Java = slow thing go on?

As long as Java apps are slow? I've been a Java developer since 1996 and there's no denying that Java apps, UI apps especially, are slow. Even on my quad core Xeon Java apps chug compared to native apps. It's worse on a cell phone.

It's not just Java -- it's any VM based language. Compare iPhone apps to Zune HD apps as well. iPhone's calculator starts instantly where on the Zune HD it takes 10 seconds to load because it requires a runtime VM.

Let's hope Android can fix this, but I've been waiting 13 years now so I'm not really optimistic about it.

If you have been developing Java applications since 1996 and still think Java is the reason your programs are slow, I would give all the money back that people paid you because that is a crime.

Compared to native binary, java will always be slower. It's the byproduct of running universal bytecode on top of a VM (plus handling garbage collection etc.)

I'm in no way arguing that iPhone SDK is a good platform (pretty bad actually, a lot of stuff leaks memory or doesn't work as described in the docs), but the UI framework is pretty solid.


<- has done enterprise java for the last 5 years, iphone apps this year

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Jack Ryan
How long will this Java = slow thing go on?

As long as Java apps are slow? I've been a Java developer since 1996 and there's no denying that Java apps, UI apps especially, are slow. Even on my quad core Xeon Java apps chug compared to native apps. It's worse on a cell phone.

It's not just Java -- it's any VM based language. Compare iPhone apps to Zune HD apps as well. iPhone's calculator starts instantly where on the Zune HD it takes 10 seconds to load because it requires a runtime VM.

Let's hope Android can fix this, but I've been waiting 13 years now so I'm not really optimistic about it.

If you have been developing Java applications since 1996 and still think Java is the reason your programs are slow, I would give all the money back that people paid you because that is a crime.

Compared to native binary, java will always be slower. It's the byproduct of running universal bytecode on top of a VM.

Correct but to drive it home another way.....

A Ferrari Enzo is faster than a Porche Carrera GT but a Carrera is by no means slow. It is a gross misrepresentation to imply that Java is slow in this day and age.

If an application is slow, it is a function of poor programming.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Phokus
still can't believe the iphone doesn't have an interchangeable battery yet (at least mine doesn't)

I agree this would be preferable, but as long as you live in an urban area it's not a big deal, since the Apple store can swap it out for you. I have had a 3G iPhone for about 15 months and haven't noticed any real loss in battery life so far. I am admittedly not a heavy user, but I would guess it will hold up fine until I replace it at the end of my contract. Also, the Genius Bars will replace the entire phone under warranty if your battery life gets too bad - my girlfriend did this.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: Phokus
still can't believe the iphone doesn't have an interchangeable battery yet (at least mine doesn't)

I agree this would be preferable, but as long as you live in an urban area it's not a big deal, since the Apple store can swap it out for you. I have had a 3G iPhone for about 15 months and haven't noticed any real loss in battery life so far. I am admittedly not a heavy user, but I would guess it will hold up fine until I replace it at the end of my contract. Also, the Genius Bars will replace the entire phone under warranty if your battery life gets too bad - my girlfriend did this.

I agree. My wife's Iphone 2g is still holding a charge like new. My 3g is doing fine. I will admit that I throw it on a charger every night. It is a must if you are doing MS Activesync on it. It will kill a battery in no time.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Codewiz


Correct but to drive it home another way.....

A Ferrari Enzo is faster than a Porche Carrera GT but a Carrera is by no means slow. It is a gross misrepresentation to imply that Java is slow in this day and age.

If an application is slow, it is a function of poor programming.

Absolutely, when it comes to enterprise apps running on clustered/clouded architecture the performance is hit is miniscule compared to the synergies of using j2ee and jms. Your app will scale a lot better and a lot easier (not to mention easier maintenance) across all sorts of hardware.

That being said, Java is not a really that good of a solution for embedded platforms that are supposed to do a lot of computation for UI transforms and things of that sort. That inherent performance hit on a 500mhz low power processor and limited amount of memory becomes a big issue.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
I realize now that I am wasting my time talking to a 12 year old that has ZERO real world development experience.

Idiot, we are talking about performance of programming languages on smart phones in this thread. Apple *purposefully* excluded GC on the iPhone because of performance. All your distractions regarding GC in Objective-C 2.0 have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

For a guy who bills himself as "Code Wiz" you seemingly know but jack and shit about code.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
A Ferrari Enzo is faster than a Porche Carrera GT but a Carrera is by no means slow. It is a gross misrepresentation to imply that Java is slow in this day and age.

Your analogy is only correct if the Porsche had to pitstop every five miles to release what's in the exhaust headers.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Codewiz
I realize now that I am wasting my time talking to a 12 year old that has ZERO real world development experience.

Idiot, we are talking about performance of programming languages on smart phones in this thread. Apple *purposefully* excluded GC on the iPhone because of performance. All your distractions regarding GC in Objective-C 2.0 have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

For a guy who bills himself as "Code Wiz" you seemingly know but jack and shit about code.

Really? Because I am pretty sure you have run off talking about you have never seen a good Java UI. you didn't say a good smartphone java UI.

You flail about defending Apple at every turn. We all see it. I don't have a dog in the fight. I use the iphone because it is currently the best platform. I just see that in a few short months, Android will be a very viable platform when the hardware catches up.

I just find it hilarious that you think Apple left out GC because it is too inefficient.....

I bet you buy the argument from Apple that Flash is just too inefficient to be on the iphone also......

Have fun, I am done wasting my time with you.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
I just find it hilarious that you think Apple left out GC because it is too inefficient.....

Absolutely. Flash is one of the most inefficient runtimes out there. Let's hope 10.1 on smartphones changes things, but I am sure Apple had decide between killing the battery life vs having animated ads in Safari mobile and told Adobe to sod off.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Codewiz
I just find it hilarious that you think Apple left out GC because it is too inefficient.....

Absolutely. Flash is one of the most inefficient runtimes out there. Let's hope 10.1 on smartphones changes things, but I am sure Apple had decide between killing the battery life vs having animated ads in Safari mobile and told Adobe to sod off.

You do realize they could default the browser to block flash, but allow you to say click the flash if you wanted to actually load it (say a flash based game) right?

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
You do realize they could default the browser to block flash, but allow you to say click the flash if you wanted to actually load it (say a flash based game) right?

I'm sure they could but then people would complain how evil Apple was disabling their ads.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: Codewiz
I just find it hilarious that you think Apple left out GC because it is too inefficient.....

Absolutely. Flash is one of the most inefficient runtimes out there. Let's hope 10.1 on smartphones changes things, but I am sure Apple had decide between killing the battery life vs having animated ads in Safari mobile and told Adobe to sod off.

Oh, and let me guess that Cut and Paste was too inefficient to go in the original iPhone.

Oh, and I'm sure that MMS was too inefficient to be included in the first gen iPhone as well.

Tethering had to be too inefficient as well then.

Hmm, maybe you're on to something. Apple doesn't employ intelligent enough programmers to think creatively.