Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #4691 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-05-29 12:48 +1200 |
| Last post | 2011-06-02 03:43 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 213 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-29 12:48 +1200
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-28 21:28 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-29 16:56 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-28 23:17 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-29 09:32 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 09:55 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 12:45 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 19:49 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 16:21 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 22:37 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:12 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 01:03 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 22:13 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 03:58 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 23:20 +1200
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-29 19:52 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 16:20 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-30 01:14 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 00:33 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:54 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 03:26 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 11:24 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 13:09 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 13:43 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 15:55 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 16:32 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 18:10 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:56 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-31 11:10 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 07:13 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 12:43 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 08:00 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 13:33 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 09:29 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 17:13 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 22:03 +0000
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 16:08 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 21:09 +0000
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 09:27 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 22:25 +0000
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 15:20 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 12:11 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 07:59 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 15:01 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 15:05 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-01 00:58 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-01 03:21 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:40 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 12:17 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:06 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 16:04 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 11:42 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-02 11:54 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-01 17:43 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-01 17:43 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-03 15:08 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-02 20:50 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-03 17:34 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-02 23:20 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-03 18:43 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-03 08:27 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 16:02 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-03 22:24 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:29 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-06 14:15 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-07 13:59 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-08 12:55 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-08 06:18 -0300
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-08 07:06 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:25 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-08 10:56 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-08 14:11 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-08 14:09 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:46 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 16:08 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:40 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 15:46 +1200
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:26 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-07 10:23 +1200
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-07 13:55 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-08 12:55 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "H.J. Sander Bruggink" <sander.bruggink@uni-due.de> - 2011-06-06 11:21 +0200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-07 13:40 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "H.J. Sander Bruggink" <sander.bruggink@uni-due.de> - 2011-06-07 10:16 +0200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-07 01:30 -0700
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2011-06-02 10:35 +0100
Re: Android�Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 03:32 -0700
Re: Android�Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-02 11:07 -0400
Re: Android�Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 10:07 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:38 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:21 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 11:48 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 09:31 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 12:45 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:14 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:23 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 19:01 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 11:59 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:44 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 11:11 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:10 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-08 20:38 -0300
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-08 17:28 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-08 23:41 -0300
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-11 13:38 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-12 16:59 -0300
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-15 14:01 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-08 22:46 -0700
Re: Android---Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-11 13:39 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-06-03 22:38 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 22:12 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:54 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-05-31 14:25 +0000
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 08:02 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 14:26 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 11:33 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-31 19:43 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-01 15:03 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-31 20:15 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-01 01:04 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-01 03:30 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 10:05 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-03 11:16 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:36 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:14 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:47 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 15:40 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 12:09 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-09 07:55 -0300
Re: Swing versus Windows.Forms Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-12 17:11 -0300
Re: Android---Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-11 13:43 -0400
Re: Android---Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-11 14:57 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 13:05 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:13 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-03 21:52 -0300
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-04 02:52 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-05 15:45 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-05 01:04 -0300
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-06 18:52 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-06-06 01:35 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-06 23:05 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-06-06 06:32 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-06 11:19 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-07 10:21 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:30 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-06-07 06:53 -0300
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:37 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-07 12:26 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 19:12 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 21:58 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-03 17:42 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-03 18:48 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:28 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-06-08 10:51 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 12:10 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 18:47 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-04 16:00 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 22:01 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-05 23:28 +0530
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-05 12:15 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-06 06:25 +0530
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 01:45 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-08 21:46 +0530
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-08 12:08 -0700
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:16 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 13:32 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Tobias Blass <tobiasblass@gmx.net> - 2011-06-05 20:08 +0000
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-06-05 14:55 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-05 14:53 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-06 18:50 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> - 2011-06-11 23:56 +0530
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-06 13:14 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 13:38 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-06-07 13:34 +0000
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-06-07 13:56 +0000
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-06-07 16:47 +0000
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:53 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 19:14 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 22:26 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 18:45 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-30 15:25 -0400
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 12:46 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 11:50 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-05-30 20:16 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:50 +1200
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-30 11:22 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 09:35 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 12:44 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 19:38 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 17:26 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 00:04 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:11 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 00:30 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 19:53 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-05-30 01:28 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 22:12 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 02:35 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-05-30 11:26 -0400
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 13:17 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 11:48 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 17:16 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-31 13:48 +1200
Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? David Segall <david@address.invalid> - 2011-06-01 00:54 +1000
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-05-31 08:05 -0700
Re: Android?Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-31 11:41 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 01:57 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 22:30 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-30 13:23 -0700
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2011-05-31 09:42 +0100
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:17 +0200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Michal Kleczek <kleku75@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:21 +0200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-06-02 19:34 +1200
Re: Android—Why Dalvik? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 03:43 -0700
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
| From | Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 06:25 +0530 |
| Message-ID | <ish8i7$9tj$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4993 |
On 6/6/2011 12:45 AM, BGB wrote: > On 6/5/2011 10:58 AM, Abu Yahya wrote: >> On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: >>> On 6/3/2011 9:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>> In message<isc312$dps$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB wrote: >>>> >>>>> OSX has an ARM variant, namely, iOS, used on the iPhone and iPad. >>>> >>>> Can it run OSX apps? >>>> >>> >>> it depends... >>> >>> AFAIK, the Xcode system produces binaries in the MachO format, which can >>> generally target multiple architectures at the same time, so it is not >>> entirely implausible that dual-target (OSX and iOS) binaries could be be >>> possible to produce (realistically, dunno, depends partly on how Xcode >>> works, which I have not really investigated, and I don't have a Mac >>> either...). >>> >>> however, as-is, plain OSX apps will probably not work on iOS. >>> >>> also, iOS generally needs to be "jailbreaked" to run custom apps anyways >>> (IIRC, prior to uploading to AppStore people run/debug their apps in an >>> emulator...). >> >> >> Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a >> real device before you upload it to the AppStore. > > > as noted, I am not an iOS developer, so most of what I know comes from > what I had read about and heard from others. I was not aware of there > being such a provisioning profile. > > > actually... sadly much of what I know of the topic came from an older > smoking lady in one of the classes I was taking and who happened to > develop apps for iOS and OSX and was rather vocal about the whole matter. > > > meanwhile, I just recently proceeded to build my 3D engine project on > Linux via VMware, but it performs terribly as apparently there is no HW > accel, and so Mesa3D is running in software mode... > > but, it is still more convenient than having to reboot into Linux (my > main OS is Windows...). > > so, in any case, emulators are probably not that terrible, either way... > Emulators for hardware devices are a different matter, at least in the case of iOS. Things may sometimes work differently, and you don't get access to the camera or GPS from your emulator (even if you can simulate it somehow, you'd really want to test it live before uploading it to the AppStore).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 01:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isi48f$e5j$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #4999 |
On 6/5/2011 5:55 PM, Abu Yahya wrote: > On 6/6/2011 12:45 AM, BGB wrote: >> On 6/5/2011 10:58 AM, Abu Yahya wrote: >>> On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: >>>> On 6/3/2011 9:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>> In message<isc312$dps$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> OSX has an ARM variant, namely, iOS, used on the iPhone and iPad. >>>>> >>>>> Can it run OSX apps? >>>>> >>>> >>>> it depends... >>>> >>>> AFAIK, the Xcode system produces binaries in the MachO format, which >>>> can >>>> generally target multiple architectures at the same time, so it is not >>>> entirely implausible that dual-target (OSX and iOS) binaries could >>>> be be >>>> possible to produce (realistically, dunno, depends partly on how Xcode >>>> works, which I have not really investigated, and I don't have a Mac >>>> either...). >>>> >>>> however, as-is, plain OSX apps will probably not work on iOS. >>>> >>>> also, iOS generally needs to be "jailbreaked" to run custom apps >>>> anyways >>>> (IIRC, prior to uploading to AppStore people run/debug their apps in an >>>> emulator...). >>> >>> >>> Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a >>> real device before you upload it to the AppStore. >> >> >> as noted, I am not an iOS developer, so most of what I know comes from >> what I had read about and heard from others. I was not aware of there >> being such a provisioning profile. >> >> >> actually... sadly much of what I know of the topic came from an older >> smoking lady in one of the classes I was taking and who happened to >> develop apps for iOS and OSX and was rather vocal about the whole matter. >> >> >> meanwhile, I just recently proceeded to build my 3D engine project on >> Linux via VMware, but it performs terribly as apparently there is no HW >> accel, and so Mesa3D is running in software mode... >> >> but, it is still more convenient than having to reboot into Linux (my >> main OS is Windows...). >> >> so, in any case, emulators are probably not that terrible, either way... >> > Emulators for hardware devices are a different matter, at least in the > case of iOS. Things may sometimes work differently, and you don't get > access to the camera or GPS from your emulator (even if you can simulate > it somehow, you'd really want to test it live before uploading it to the > AppStore). fair enough... I was curious earlier, and downloaded the Android SDK, and made an inconvenient observation: the emulator is slow... emulating an older version of Android, it is ok, but trying to emulate a newer version, performance is unusably slow. maybe a similar issue might apply to iOS, meaning that maybe the emulated version is not an adequate representation of how it will behave on real HW... dunno...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 21:46 +0530 |
| Message-ID | <iso79s$797$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #5006 |
On 6/6/2011 2:15 PM, BGB wrote: > I was curious earlier, and downloaded the Android SDK, and made an > inconvenient observation: > the emulator is slow... > > emulating an older version of Android, it is ok, but trying to emulate a > newer version, performance is unusably slow. > > > maybe a similar issue might apply to iOS, meaning that maybe the > emulated version is not an adequate representation of how it will behave > on real HW... > I must mention that it's not the case with the iOS simulator. I've been using it for sometime now, and it always starts in a snap and responds amazingly well. It's the envy of my colleagues who code for the Android and Blackberry platforms using Eclipse, where the emulators take forever to load. > > dunno...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-08 12:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isohgk$28e$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #5111 |
On 6/8/2011 9:16 AM, Abu Yahya wrote: > On 6/6/2011 2:15 PM, BGB wrote: >> I was curious earlier, and downloaded the Android SDK, and made an >> inconvenient observation: >> the emulator is slow... >> >> emulating an older version of Android, it is ok, but trying to emulate a >> newer version, performance is unusably slow. >> >> >> maybe a similar issue might apply to iOS, meaning that maybe the >> emulated version is not an adequate representation of how it will behave >> on real HW... >> > > I must mention that it's not the case with the iOS simulator. I've been > using it for sometime now, and it always starts in a snap and responds > amazingly well. It's the envy of my colleagues who code for the Android > and Blackberry platforms using Eclipse, where the emulators take forever > to load. > maybe Apple knows more what they are doing?... I tried simulating Android 3.1, but the emulated OS was generally very unreponsive, like basically "click, hold, wait several seconds, something happens, ..." eventually got a lock image on the screen, and it would no longer do anything past this point... Android 2.x is a bit more responsive though, but still not really an example of raw speed either (turning off some graphical effects though, like menu-transition and scrolling effects, did make it a bit faster though). I also observed that they have a shell, but the shell sort of sucks (not nearly as good as Bash...). I am wondering it this is more a matter with fundamental limitations (say, Android takes too much processing power or requires simulating a GPU or similar), QEMU (not simulating ARM efficiently, ...), or with Google (say, they wrote inefficient HW emulation code, ...). in total, I am not terribly impressed either with the emulator or with the NDK tools (strange build setup, ...). since I don't have a smartphone either, there is not a whole lot of real reason for me to bother with all this. or such...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 13:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <gbdqu6ltc4vuec0kontfbhdk4av1odd0bk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #4993 |
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 12:15:47 -0700, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>actually... sadly much of what I know of the topic came from an older
>smoking lady in one of the classes I was taking and who happened to
^^^^^^^
>develop apps for iOS and OSX and was rather vocal about the whole matter.
Tobacco or beauty?
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 13:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isjdmk$gv8$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #5029 |
On 6/6/2011 1:16 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 12:15:47 -0700, BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote: > > [snip] > >> actually... sadly much of what I know of the topic came from an older >> smoking lady in one of the classes I was taking and who happened to > ^^^^^^^ >> develop apps for iOS and OSX and was rather vocal about the whole matter. > > Tobacco or beauty? > errm... tobacco... she usually had to take at least 1 cigarette break each class (class goes on, after a while she heads on outside for a smoke). so, she was like 40-something and had smoker voice... but, also talked a lot, and loudly... not really attractive either, but generally I don't really take much interest in females who are in a similar age range as my parents... or such...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tobias Blass <tobiasblass@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-05 20:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <isgnnt$ieu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4992 |
On 2011-06-05, Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> wrote: > On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: > [snip] > > Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a > real device before you upload it to the AppStore. You should have mentioned that this provisioning profile is at least $99 per year while you can develop on Android for free (If you want to distribute your program over the market you pay $25 or so). The difference is that you can't test your iOS program without this account while you can load your app on Android for free. I know that these fees don't really hurt companies, but they prevent hobbyists from developing on iOS
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-05 14:55 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.28558cfa620ac5b9989782@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #4994 |
In article <isgnnt$ieu$1@dont-email.me>, Tobias Blass says... > > On 2011-06-05, Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> wrote: > > On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: > > [snip] > > > > Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a > > real device before you upload it to the AppStore. > You should have mentioned that this provisioning profile is at least $99 per > year while you can develop on Android for free (If you want to distribute your > program over the market you pay $25 or so). The difference is that you can't > test your iOS program without this account while you can load your app on > Android for free. > > I know that these fees don't really hurt companies, but they prevent hobbyists > from developing on iOS $99 per year is not a big deal. It's barely more than $8 per month. However, I do agree with your point about hobbyists. The most casual hobbyists probably aren't going to want to pay the $99 (and I can't blame them). -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-05 14:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isgu35$j8h$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #4994 |
On 6/5/2011 1:08 PM, Tobias Blass wrote: > On 2011-06-05, Abu Yahya<abu_yahya@invalid.com> wrote: >> On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: >> [snip] >> >> Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a >> real device before you upload it to the AppStore. > You should have mentioned that this provisioning profile is at least $99 per > year while you can develop on Android for free (If you want to distribute your > program over the market you pay $25 or so). The difference is that you can't > test your iOS program without this account while you can load your app on > Android for free. > > I know that these fees don't really hurt companies, but they prevent hobbyists > from developing on iOS yeah... spending money is a bit of an issue, which is a decent part of why I don't currently target OSX... after all, one would have to spend the teh-huge amounts of money to get an OSX-based development system, which is just not worthwhile (unless there is some free and legal way to get a copy of OSX to use in VMware or similar, which I doubt...). I am feeling tempted to look into the Android SDK mostly so that I can test my stuff against a low-resources non-x86 environment (currently my stuff works with Windows and Linux on PCs with x86 or x86-64...). or such...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 18:50 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <ishtap$t08$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4994 |
In message <isgnnt$ieu$1@dont-email.me>, Tobias Blass wrote: > On 2011-06-05, Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> wrote: > >> On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: >> >> Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a >> real device before you upload it to the AppStore. > > You should have mentioned that this provisioning profile is at least $99 > per year while you can develop on Android for free ... This “provisioning profile” is basically just a means to keep Apple’s devices locked down so you can’t use this channel as a back door to bypass Apple’s App Store. It’s not designed for the convenience of the developer at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Abu Yahya <abu_yahya@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-11 23:56 +0530 |
| Message-ID | <it0bvq$s3t$3@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #4994 |
On 6/6/2011 1:38 AM, Tobias Blass wrote: > On 2011-06-05, Abu Yahya<abu_yahya@invalid.com> wrote: >> On 6/4/2011 10:31 AM, BGB wrote: >> [snip] >> >> Incorrect. You can use a provisioning profile to test out your app on a >> real device before you upload it to the AppStore. > You should have mentioned that this provisioning profile is at least $99 per > year[snip] That's true, but you'd anyway need to pay that amount to upload it to the AppStore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 13:14 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <71dqu6phe1ra5p9hdqn699k3hit7v999u9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #4972 |
On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 22:01:22 -0700, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
>but, the point of the above comment was not x86 vs ARM, but rather
>peoples' persistent use of "Intel" to describe all x86 chips, which is
>not really the case if people are running chips from another manufacturer...
I am sure that Intel's marketing department loves the mindshare.
>it is much like if one used the term "Windows" to describe every OS,
>including Linux and MacOSX, rather than a more generic term, like OS...
Yes, and I bet that happens, too.
Macs have windows, and if running the right -- or wrong depending
on your preference -- software, Windows.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-06 13:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <isje27$hqt$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #5028 |
On 6/6/2011 1:14 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 22:01:22 -0700, BGB<cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote: > > [snip] > >> but, the point of the above comment was not x86 vs ARM, but rather >> peoples' persistent use of "Intel" to describe all x86 chips, which is >> not really the case if people are running chips from another manufacturer... > > I am sure that Intel's marketing department loves the mindshare. > >> it is much like if one used the term "Windows" to describe every OS, >> including Linux and MacOSX, rather than a more generic term, like OS... > > Yes, and I bet that happens, too. > > Macs have windows, and if running the right -- or wrong depending > on your preference -- software, Windows. > this kind of thing is annoying though... if one is running Linux on an AMD chip, they are running Linux on an AMD. as is BSD on a VIA... > [snip] > > Sincerely, > > Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 13:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <isl9dr$bfr$1@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #5028 |
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 13:14:31 -0700, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 22:01:22 -0700, BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote: >>it is much like if one used the term "Windows" to describe every OS, >>including Linux and MacOSX, rather than a more generic term, like OS... > > Yes, and I bet that happens, too. > Too right. I remember some boob on the UK Y2K newsgroup who refused to believe that there were any computers still in use in 1999 that weren't PCs. I don't think we ever convinced him that mainframes and UNIX servers, let alone Macs, were in daily use, but at least he finally shut up and vanished. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 13:56 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: AndroidWhy Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <slrniusbg2.phi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #5068 |
Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote: > I don't think we ever convinced him that mainframes and UNIX > servers, let alone Macs, were in daily use, but at least he > finally shut up and vanished. Maybe you finally just stopped feeding him?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-07 16:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <islkm6$ej4$1@localhost.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #5069 |
On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:56:18 +0000, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: > Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote: >> I don't think we ever convinced him that mainframes and UNIX servers, >> let alone Macs, were in daily use, but at least he finally shut up and >> vanished. > > Maybe you finally just stopped feeding him? > Oddly, he didn't seem trollish and I don't remember anybody calling him one. He came across as ignorant of anything but PCs and profoundly unwilling to learn that he might be wrong. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-31 13:53 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <is1hm3$dmh$3@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4740 |
In message <MPG.284d80d0fd1becca98976b@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote: > In article <irvris$orf$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB says... > >> "well, this is a Windows' app, of course it doesn't work on Mac or >> Linux...", despite that all 3 versions will likely build from the same >> source. > > I'd bet, these days, that the root cause of that situation is the fact > that the three operating systems have *completely* different GUI's. So, has anybody come up with a worthwhile “universal” GUI that fits every form factor and platform? > And actually, Linux alone has *two* (more than two, technically, but > only two popular ones) This is why, you’ll notice, developers of Free Software like to decouple the GUI from the underlying functionality. The main functionality is often made available through command-line tools, while the GUI is just a front-end to these. This also gives you the instant advantage of very powerful workflow automation, which tends to be clumsy with a GUI.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-30 19:14 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <MPG.284deed25329369898976d@news.justthe.net> |
| In reply to | #4782 |
In article <is1hm3$dmh$3@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says... > > In message <MPG.284d80d0fd1becca98976b@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote: > > > In article <irvris$orf$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB says... > > > >> "well, this is a Windows' app, of course it doesn't work on Mac or > >> Linux...", despite that all 3 versions will likely build from the same > >> source. > > > > I'd bet, these days, that the root cause of that situation is the fact > > that the three operating systems have *completely* different GUI's. > > So, has anybody come up with a worthwhile ?universal? GUI that fits every > form factor and platform? Java's Swing, Nokia's Qt, wxWindows and gtk are about as close as it gets. > This is why, you?ll notice, developers of Free Software like to decouple the > GUI from the underlying functionality. The main functionality is often made > available through command-line tools, while the GUI is just a front-end to > these. > > This also gives you the instant advantage of very powerful workflow > automation, which tends to be clumsy with a GUI. Yup :) -- Steve Sobol - Programming/WebDev/IT Support sjsobol@JustThe.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-30 22:26 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Android?Why Dalvik? |
| Message-ID | <is1ucg$n6p$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #4787 |
On 5/30/2011 7:14 PM, Steve Sobol wrote: > In article<is1hm3$dmh$3@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says... >> >> In message<MPG.284d80d0fd1becca98976b@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote: >> >>> In article<irvris$orf$1@news.albasani.net>, BGB says... >>> >>>> "well, this is a Windows' app, of course it doesn't work on Mac or >>>> Linux...", despite that all 3 versions will likely build from the same >>>> source. >>> >>> I'd bet, these days, that the root cause of that situation is the fact >>> that the three operating systems have *completely* different GUI's. >> >> So, has anybody come up with a worthwhile ?universal? GUI that fits every >> form factor and platform? > > Java's Swing, Nokia's Qt, wxWindows and gtk are about as close as it > gets. > which is in a way sort of sad really... mostly in my case, I just sort of take the lazy route, and do most GUIs via custom UI widget code and OpenGL. granted, this doesn't allow native widgets (although one can do a fairly "generic" style along the Lines of GTK meets Windows Classic), and requires the app to drag around its own fonts, but, good enough... in any case, since I often use OpenGL already, it makes a lot more sense to use GL for the GUI as well, rather than have to deal with multiple system-specific GUI backends (yes, the GTK people will claim lots that their stuff is portable and so on, but generally its functionality on non-Linux systems has been, not very impressive...). granted, yes, there are possible drawbacks with the OpenGL route as well (screen resolution issues, needing a GPU, ...). but, no ideal solutions exist AFAICT... > >> This is why, you?ll notice, developers of Free Software like to > decouple the >> GUI from the underlying functionality. The main functionality is often made >> available through command-line tools, while the GUI is just a front-end to >> these. >> >> This also gives you the instant advantage of very powerful workflow >> automation, which tends to be clumsy with a GUI. > > Yup :) > yeah... generally it makes a lot more sense IMO to build the apps' core logic and machinery and build the UI on top than it does to try to build the app starting with the UI.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-31 18:45 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <is22qd$nda$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> |
| In reply to | #4787 |
In message <MPG.284deed25329369898976d@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol wrote: > In article <is1hm3$dmh$3@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro says... >> >> So, has anybody come up with a worthwhile “universal” GUI that fits every >> form factor and platform? > > Java's Swing ... HAHAHAHAHA! > ... Nokia's Qt ... Possible, though Nokia’s embrace of Windows Phone 7 leaves it with a question mark in the mobile space, unless someone else shows enthusiasm for it. > ... wxWindows ... Which is just a compatibility layer over platform-specific GUIs, not a GUI in itself. > and gtk ... Never heard of that being used on mobile platforms, unlike Qt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web