Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Nasser M. Abbasi" Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 13:43:36 -0700 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 44 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: nma@12000.org NNTP-Posting-Host: TUXTYYqX1yG7hs3zxUg7ng.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4766 On 5/30/2011 1:09 PM, BGB wrote: > > for source compatibility, yes, cross-platform GUI is a big issue. > > > for binary compatibility, the much bigger issue is the lack of a common > set of binary formats, as well as different CPU architectures and > operating modes. > > a VM could address this. > > The funny thing, is that Java when it came out, was supposed to solve all these differences by putting a virtual OS between the application and the OS, this way one writes to this one common virtual OS (the VM) and not have to worry about the different OS's below it. But now it seems we have different virtual OS's also coming out. So, I have an brilliant solution I'd like to suggest: we need is a SUPER VM A super virtual OS, is a virtual OS which runs on top of a virtual OS. i.e. the super VM, hides which VM it is running under, so it runs on top of all the other VM's: SUPER VM Java VM, Google VM, Windows NET VM, etc.. WINDOWS, LINUX, Mac, VMS, etc.. This offourse, until one comes up with a different version of the SUPER VM, then we go and make a SUPER SUPPER VM. So we need to make sure this time, that we have provisions in place to prevent someone from making a different SUPER VM. I would like to go patent this now. --Nasser