Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!203.109.252.33.MISMATCH!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Why Do We Have ... Followup-To: comp.lang.java.programmer Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:41:19 +1200 Organization: Geek Central Lines: 34 Message-ID: References: <8uope3Ft9gU1@mid.individual.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 118-92-92-183.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: lust.ihug.co.nz 1301784080 1602 118.92.92.183 (2 Apr 2011 22:41:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@ihug.co.nz NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 22:41:20 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.4.7 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:2774 In message , Roedy Green wrote: > Android is a resource starved-environment compared with Java desktop. In fact the typical current Android smartphone has enough RAM and CPU power to run a full-featured desktop OS. That’s not the limiting factor at all. > Apps are small. You are constantly trying to shave bytes and CPU > cycles at the expense of program readability. I haven’t felt the need to go that far—yet. > You have roughly 200 ms to respond or the user will perceive you as laggy. That happens on the desktop as well. > You have 5 seconds to respond before the OS says your app has died. That kind of discipline is useful on the desktop as well. > Your user is more impatient and you have fewer resources to satisfy him. > You are doing everything you can to avoid draining the battery. The battery can be a limiting factor, but the real issue is the user interface: you simply haven’t got room for a full-size screen, a full-size keyboard, or a full-size mouse. So you have to interact through narrower- bandwidth channels. > Since apps are smaller, there is more competition. If yours is not > best of breed, you will be quickly be replaced. Since apps are free or > cheap, users have no investment is sticking with what they first try. Which puts the high-overhead corporate code-cutter approach at a severe disadvantage. :)