Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

OrangeBox, where are your Thanks? :P
Can't you see? Nobody here thinks like you because you're simply wrong. Go to the beginning of this thread and read few very good posts by other users, and if you don't get it, i'm really sorry for you.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

well, performance-wise, not quite.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

stupid thread like too many

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

"I thanked you for this comment. It proves my point about you. You have to update your knowledge. I'll tone down my rhetoric, and ask you to never call me a fanboy again. Its just rude regardless how you put it. I'm a fan of technology and business philosophy, not a brand or company (except BMW. I DO love them...) I really want you to know the facts, that's all."

Thanks for thanking me. See, remarks like "you have to update your knowledge" makes it hard for me to have a decent conversation with you. I have not met such an antagonistic and combative person as you are. For the fanboy statement that I made before I apologize. Hope this shows my true character. I also wouldn't mind if you apologized for calling me a liar.

"Java is an outdated technology fragmented by all the various virtual machines out there. It is resource hungry and latent as all get out. Do you really think Nokia, who has sold more mobile phones that support Java than any other company on earth, didn't embrace it? Hasn't Nokia been a longtime supporter of Java? Or maybe its limitations have been exposed?"

I couldn't disagree with you more on this one. I have been involved with Java professionally for the past 10 years, so let's not get started on this one. Java has taken over the enterprise like storm. While I admit that the UI lacks a little (although have you checked SWT lately? http://www.eclipse.org/swt/) it is anything but outdated. To simply put it Java is currently the most robust, portable and versatile language out there. Yes, Nokia have embraced it (somewhat) and others have and haven’t. What “limitations” of Java you think there are?

"We're entering a new age. Consumers want their phones to be mini computers. This means more processing power and PC functionality. The OS is moot, since it is the supported frameworks that decide if Java works or not. There is a push to have Java support on the N900, so obviously the intent to create a new OS wasn't to leave Java behind."

I believe that Java should be supported out of the box by any device manufacturer that want to get access to the collective wisdom and experience of that language/platform as well as the thousands (if not millions) of apps and apis that are ot there. Ignoring Java (or sidelining it) in favour of QT or anything else is not wise. That being said, QT could’ve been done on top of java, much like SWT was.

"Qt is alot like Java, but connects to the native code and APIs much better. It is the foundation of the KDE environment for Linux, VLC Media Player, and even Google Earth. This type of development would be impossible with Java on today's computers. The power and quality of applications made with Qt are far better than anything made with Java. "

Again I disagree. QT is a framework, Java is a language/platform. Java is not 5x slower than native code. In most typical scenarios, it is only 20% slower. With a 600Mhz CPU the speed difference should be marginal. Also, java has a much more extensive API than QT does. Java and QT serve totally different purposes: QT is for UI (mainly) and Java is for everyting and anything. Power and quality of applications are "far better" in QT than in Java? That is simply untrue and unsubstantiated claim. Care to prove your point here?

"Mobiles have limited resources, so Nokia was wise enough to buy Trolltech and take Qt mobile and provide a more nimble successor to Java capable of powering apps for mobiles as well as desktops. This will lower software development costs, allow lower priced, seemingly underpowered hardware to remain relevant longer, and allow richer content and applications to be developed for more OSes at once."

Again java is not THAT MUCH slower than QT so I don't think that the speed argument supports your claim. Plus, Moore’s law ensures that each newer CPU will run an existing code faster than before. When we’ll hit the 10ghz mark or whatever, the whole optimizations industry will be unnecessitated.

"Look at Mozilla's VP. He'd love to create a port of Firefox for Android, but as he stated, Android's third party application framework is the Dalvik VM, a customized Java virtual machine. It simply lacks the efficiency and power to run something as powerful as Firefox like the N900. If they allowed apps to be written in another language, like Qt, he'd be all over it. Blackberry users decry the quality of their apps and graphics, but RIM's OS, too, uses Java as an application framework. Too much latency for high level software production. See the trend here?"

I wouldn't draw my conclusion on a badly implemented JVM. How about looking at the ones that are faster than the stock SUN JVM? How would they work on the N900 with SWT?

"I think you'll see some cooperation with Blackberry and Nokia to upgrade its OS by porting Qt. Android could as well. They know the limitations of Java, and won't rest on their laurels. Developers are smart, and always eventually follow the economics of scale. It makes sense to write in a language that is supported by the most platforms. OS developers are as well, and try to be as attractive as possible to developers."

I don't think that there are any inherent limitations of Java. It is fast, reliable, robust, well understood and stable. Much can be said of QT as well, but QT is not a language, so obviously it can't do everything that Java can.

"Apple has excellent application frameworks, but if WinMo, Symbian, Maemo, possibly Blackberry and Android, plus Windows, Linux, and Unix all support Qt, Apple will be the odd man out, and be forced to accept marginalization or get the port as well. Sadly, they'll probably accept the former and remain as controlling as ever. If they do, They'll probably fizzle as fast as they boomed. "

I think too that QT has a bright future ahead of it I'm just said that all the great UIs could've been done long before with or without the help of QT.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

Thanks for the long desc. that's enough. there's no end for this. hahah. this man knows nothing. maybe he doesnt even know what MIDP is. I'd show some respect if he really have something good in mind. but, sorry boy.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

"OrangeBox, where are your Thanks? :P
Can't you see? Nobody here thinks like you because you're simply wrong. Go to the beginning of this thread and read few very good posts by other users, and if you don't get it, i'm really sorry for you. "

Did you just come here to post this? Thanks but I don't need your sorry. My opinions are just as worthy as anyones. Who is right an who is wrong?
I'm happy that you can decide. Not that there is such thing as ultimate truth.

Do you care to point out factual inaccuracies in any of my posts?

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

nokia embraced Java for years already, even before model 3100 . . this post has point out your inaccuracy. need not to name the others. using partial facts like market cap.
i should tell you, java sucks. because it's slow. It's not intended for mobile devices initially. it's for servers. it's also lacking the integration to the device. do you get my point?. talking about java, it's android that uses it. and you know what? it's not a standard java in android. check here

And speaking of moore's law. do you think that processors double in transistor count really translate to double performance? think again. maybe you should do some research.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

"nokia embraced Java for years already, even before model 3100 . . this post has point out your inaccuracy"

Untrue. Read how to learn. I said embrace it MORE. I never said that Nokia didn't embrace java.

"i should tell you, java sucks."

That makes you an expert in Java and related technologies.

" it's also lacking the integration to the device"

So is it Java's fault? I didn't know that Java was responsible to integrate to devices.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

Why is this still going?

Qole explained it all with his battery example.

Done.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

"Qole explained it all with his battery example. Done."

So why are you here then?