4 ms·
> And that whole talk about GCs sound awefully familiar. Didn't we have the very same conversation in the mid-90s when Java came out? Yes, absolutely. The obje
by revscat 13y ago
> And that whole talk about GCs sound awefully familiar. Didn't we have the very same conversation in the mid-90s when Java came out?
Yes, absolutely. The objections made by OP are not very different from those made in the 90s.
But...
Some of the core objections made then are still true today, they're just hidden from users because of advancements in both hardware and GC technology itself. In the case of mobile, however, you're much more hardware constrained, at least for now. This will likely change sooner rather than later, but for now that means that for hardware-constrained devices well designed apps written in non-GC languages will almost always outperform similarly designed apps written in GC languages.
In other words: it's going to be easier to get good performance out of Obj-C on mobile than Java, and certainly easier than JavaScript.
For the record: I like Java -- yes, even today -- and the JVM, currently use it for my day job. For webapps it's moderately neato. For mobile, though... Not as much.
- eonil 13y agoI think this is because users are changed. Unlike old days, now users basically expects realtime graphics. And in realtime fields...
- pjmlp 13y agoI think the main issue is that those environment so far insist in a VM model. Most likely if Android used native compiled Java, performance could be improved. Microsoft went this route with Windows Phone 8, as they replaced the .NET JIT with a proper native compiler when targeting Windows Phone.