Home arrow static arrow Java Programming [Archive] - One Man's Opinion
Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /www/htdocs/w008deb8/wiki/components/com_staticxt/staticxt.php on line 51
Java Programming [Archive] - One Man's Opinion
This topic has 41 replies on 3 pages.    1 | 2 | 3 | Next »

Posts:8
Registered: 7/14/04
One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:18 AM



 
I think the fact that Sun refuses to release compilers that compile java source into native executables is the Achilles heel of java. Funny, because Sun thinks the interpreted aspect of java is what makes it great. Java is great because it is a powerful, programmer friendly language. The fact that it's interpreted is a pain.

Our (small) company has been producing software for several years now using java and we all too often have deployment problems because of the JVM. Getting the correct version of the JVM on customers' machines just seems to be a roll of the dice. The whole setup of your application is more complicated than it needs to be and lends to trouble.

I realize that there are commercially available (not too cheap) native compilers like Excelsior JET, but I think that Sun really needs to get onboard with this to ensure the long-term success of java.
 

Posts:13,769
Registered: 00-11-29
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:30 AM (reply 1 of 41)



 
Our (small) company has been producing software for
several years now using java and we all too often have
deployment problems because of the JVM. Getting the
correct version of the JVM on customers' machines just
seems to be a roll of the dice. The whole setup of
your application is more complicated than it needs to
be and lends to trouble.

Really? I've rarely had issues with installing a JVM. Why would it be more complex to install the JVM as a opposed to another native application?
 

Posts:8
Registered: 7/14/04
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:38 AM (reply 2 of 41)



 
Case 1: Every so often we have a customer who somehow messes up their JVM and as a result our application stops working. After doing some over-the-phone troubleshooting we realize the JVM needs to be reinstalled.

Case 2: Our customers are using an older version of the JVM. When we release a newer application that relies on a newer JVM, Sun's installer sometimes gives strange errors and won't allow the new JVM to install.

It seems to me that if our applications were self-contained executables, we wouldn't have these problems.

 

Posts:7,258
Registered: 1/31/02
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:38 AM (reply 3 of 41)



 
I think the fact that Sun refuses to release compilers
that compile java source into native executables is
the Achilles heel of java. Funny, because Sun thinks
the interpreted aspect of java is what makes it great.
Java is great because it is a powerful, programmer
friendly language. The fact that it's interpreted is
a pain.

Our (small) company has been producing software for
several years now using java and we all too often have
deployment problems because of the JVM. Getting the
correct version of the JVM on customers' machines just
seems to be a roll of the dice. The whole setup of
your application is more complicated than it needs to
be and lends to trouble.

What sort of JVM version trouble are you having? Are you finding people with 1.1 JVMs? Are you writing 1.4 code and finding 1.3 JVMs? I have not, unless I am dealing with Swing issues on pre 1.2 JVMs (which has been forever ago), dealt with any versioning issues. And is it any worse than trying to figure out what version of glibc or gtk a user has? (or the MS VC or VB runtimes, or the .net framework version?)


I realize that there are commercially available (not
too cheap) native compilers like Excelsior JET, but I
think that Sun really needs to get onboard with this
to ensure the long-term success of java.

Let's see, we've add generics, and now you want to add native compilation - but what about dealing with the inevitable platform dependent details? Oh, I know - we can add conditional compilation via a pre-processor and some sort of macro, maybe something like #IFDEF, and what about native graphics toolkits? That would be handy, maybe we could come up with something like QT or Motif....
 

Posts:4,906
Registered: 23/07/02
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:39 AM (reply 4 of 41)



 
Seems to be that you don't need to run the installer - none of the registry entries seem particularly important. Just distribute the unpacked VM.
 

Posts:556
Registered: 12/16/98
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:41 AM (reply 5 of 41)



 
Even if they were executables, you would still have customers that mess up your application. Customer error will never go away. I would like to see self-contained executables, but I do not think Sun's future success depends on it in any way.
 

Posts:13,769
Registered: 00-11-29
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:42 AM (reply 6 of 41)



 
Case 1: Every so often we have a customer who somehow
messes up their JVM and as a result our application
stops working. After doing some over-the-phone
troubleshooting we realize the JVM needs to be
reinstalled.

If they mess up the JVM, might they not mess up your native application also?

Case 2: Our customers are using an older version of
the JVM. When we release a newer application that
relies on a newer JVM, Sun's installer sometimes gives
strange errors and won't allow the new JVM to install.

If that's the case, that's definitely a problem. I have never expereienced that issue though. I currently have versions of 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 installed and multiples versions 1.3. No problems. I've had about a dozen separate JVM installations on one machine in the past. Are you trying to replace the existing JVM? I just install them in separate places.
 

Posts:2,206
Registered: 8/15/02
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:46 AM (reply 7 of 41)



 
I am in the same situtation as both of dubwai and the OP. I have several JVM's installed, although only 2 are "live" (that is easily accessible through standard user paths on linux). One is a Sun installation (works good with everything), one is from a 3rd party vendor. The latter causes one of our in-house tools to barf, so need to make sure the system java appeears before the 3rd party on the path list.
 

Posts:8
Registered: 7/14/04
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:49 AM (reply 8 of 41)



 
Do a search on error 1722 in these forums.

Also see http://java.com/en/download/help/error_1722.jsp
 

Posts:8
Registered: 7/14/04
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 11:52 AM (reply 9 of 41)



 
Even if they were executables, you would still have
customers that mess up your application. Customer
error will never go away.

True. However, it always seems to be the JVM that they have messed up. It's never been our application that somehow got misconfigured, so I'm led to believe the customer errors would go down.
 

Posts:22
Registered: 3/2/00
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 12:17 PM (reply 10 of 41)



 
Java is not interpreted: javac is[/is] a compiler - just one which happens to compile to the machine code of the JVM not that of an 8086, or SPARC, or whatever.

Your issue is not with the compiled nature of Java, but with customers snarfing up their JVM installs. Do you really think that being able to compile your apps to native code will get rid of all your platform support issues? If that is the case, why does Microsoft/Oracle/Sun/*insert software company here* who produce natively compiled apps need a helpdesk? Try selling software written in C++ on Win32. Your "my JVM is screwed" support calls will simply turn into "the installer says something about a missing DLL" support calls.
 

Posts:22
Registered: 3/2/00
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 12:18 PM (reply 11 of 41)



 
edit would be nice :(
 

Posts:2,206
Registered: 8/15/02
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 12:19 PM (reply 12 of 41)



 
preview is your friend
 

Posts:21,719
Registered: 98-02-20
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 12:20 PM (reply 13 of 41)



 
Maybe you should get a tool like InstallShield to help your clients out.

%
 

Posts:7,258
Registered: 1/31/02
Re: One Man's Opinion  
Jul 14, 2004 12:25 PM (reply 14 of 41)



 
Maybe you should get a tool like InstallShield to help
your clients out.

%

But from the error code link that the OP posted:

Error 1722 is an InstallShield error code. It indicates that the installation process has failed. The exact reason for this error is not known at this time.

So it looks like they are already on that road...

 
This topic has 41 replies on 3 pages.    1 | 2 | 3 | Next »