Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!novia!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news.glorb.com!news-spur2.glorb.com!homer.glorb.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Steve Sobol Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 12:43:54 -0700 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: xoAFiuXnRqdiUJrjkwExXQ.user.posting2.glorb.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@glorb.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 19:43:56 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4 X-Notice: Scanned by Mr. Bill Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4811 In article , Lawrence D'Oliveiro says... > Still better than anything Java can offer. The whole point of Java is that you are compiling to platform-neutral bytecode, and running on a virtual machine. The maintainer of the virtual machine has to worry about the OS- and architecture-specific stuff. You don't. A very similar idea exists with Mono. Now, Lawrence, since I know you are going to argue the point :) I want to point out that platform-independence is the primary *goal* that Mono and Java set out to attain. Are they 100% successful? Probably not. Are they reasonably successful? Can't speak for Mono as I haven't really used it yet, but I believe that Java is. -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net