Hello David,
We actually see things in a similiar way ...
I asked:
>>2. What kind of time are we talking? A year?
and you replied:
> It will always get faster. If you are asking when it will be as
> fast and efficient as C, then never, unless a hardware solution is
> involved (assuming the programmer is good in both environments).
As I have slowly migrated from being an idealist to being a realist, I have made the transition to a true capitalist. I have no interest about comparing the speed of Java to C ... my question is more oriented towards "When will it be fast enough?" ... or, when will it provide acceptable performance that people will spend money for? I believe that we are getting closer to breaking that barrier.
> Why don't you go to your friendly neighborhood computerstore, and
> look at all of the java toolkits, books, and software. Then go to
> the NLM section of that same store, if there is one...
I'm not sure what you are comparing here ... I'm guessing that a parallel arguement would be that you tend to waste time with such unknown technologies such as SSA (which I too believe is technically superior) while the press, manufacturers, and the world are talking non-stop about Fibre Channel!
I don't believe that quantity of books, etc. does anything more than indicate the "hype" level of a technology ... I'm not sure that it in any way represents the success or failure of the technology. There are a lot of books on Apple out there also ... what does that mean?
> Have you checked out the UNIX-native JDK's? Not just the ones that
> run on a PC?
Yes, but I'm still not impressed when I compare it to Visual C++ or Visual Basic ... Microsoft has done a slick job with it's developer tools ...
> As others have said, JAVA is not just for I/O service routines.
I could not see writing an I/O service in Java unless I was going to use a native, static compiler ... and that would remove some of the benefits of Java.
> If NOVL keeps such an opinion on the proper place for JAVA, then it
> will be a mistake.
Please be assured that the opinions that I state are mine ... and often they are different from others at Novell.
> Like it or not, if you look at some of the java classes and applet
> libraries on the web, you will have a difficult time finding
> non-GUI JAVA applications.
I agree. I believe that Java, as a lightweight, modular, cross-platform, client-application environment has some very strong offerings ...
> In order for Netware to be successful as an operating system, it
> must run (serve) application code.
I know that this will draw fire (so don't waste the bandwidth), but NetWare *is* a successful operating system, with a very strong installed base! ;-) I had to say it ...
But I am somewhat confused by your statement ... when you say "run (serve) application code." you are talking about two completely different things ... I think. To "run" the code means execution on the NetWare platform ... to "serve" the code could be to deliver the code to a client platform for execution (as in serving a web page).
NetWare is perfectly oriented to provide high-performance, reliable services (which could be written in Java, and require no GUI ... such as a POP3 or IMAP4 server) and it can also "serve" or deliver client components to the client machines on the network ...
> With a tight, fast JVM, it can.
I agree.
> Would NT be as successful as it is today if it required WLMs?
> (Windows Loadable Modules)
It does! They are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs) and they implement, and are written to, the proprietary interfaces defined by Microsoft, also referred to as Win32 in the 32-bit environments. And they really aren't even Dynamic ... why do I have to reboot if I change my IP address?
> That's my point. The world isn't breaking down your doors to write
> NLMs. If that was the case you would see NLM sections of computer
> bookstores instead of JAVA sections. Your companies got a
> premium because there were relatively few people out there with the
> skillset to write NLMs.
And again I'm confused by the importance of hype? I'm not saying that NLMs are "better" than Java ... I *would* argue that there are specific purposes for everything.
Today NLMs can be written in C and C++ ... look at the speed of the ports that are happening at Novonyx! I was there when the first code drops happened ... and the ports to NLM are done and in Beta. There's nothing hard about it. And I can imagine that NLMs could be written in other languages in the future ... and Java could be one of them.
> Agreed -- It seems that MSFT has cornered the world in crappy
> programmers :)
My comment was more directed at the end-users ... we are all trained that several crashes and reboots a day is just ok! Amazing!
Scott C. Lemon |
