Chrome for Android does not support JAVA

Discussion in 'Java' started by Richard Maher, Feb 15, 2012.

  1. Hi,

    Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?

    I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?

    Cheers Richard Maher
     
    Richard Maher, Feb 15, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Richard Maher

    Lew Guest

    On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:50:04 AM UTC-8, Richard Maher wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    > JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >
    > I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?


    Google is big on Java (but not "JAVA"), and Android code is often in Java (but
    not "JAVA"). That doesn't mean the browser should support applets.

    And support for Flash is up to neither Google nor Java.

    Why in the world should anyone be "gutted" (whatever the heck that means) about
    this? Write to Adobe for your Flash concern and the browser maker (who isn't
    Google, BTW), with your complaint. Whining here won't help.

    Do try to complain to the right people. Google and Oracle won't be the right
    people.

    Neither are we.

    --
    Lew
     
    Lew, Feb 15, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Richard Maher

    BGB Guest

    On 2/15/2012 10:57 AM, Lew wrote:
    > On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:50:04 AM UTC-8, Richard Maher wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    >> JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >>
    >> I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?

    >
    > Google is big on Java (but not "JAVA"), and Android code is often in Java (but
    > not "JAVA"). That doesn't mean the browser should support applets.
    >


    and maybe it wouldn't really help matters much that Android uses a
    specialized VM (rather than a more typical JVM).

    the language in use doesn't matter much for applets, if the underlying
    VM isn't using Java ByteCode. one would need a VM which also has support
    for both JBC and a class-loader, or alternatively such a VM would need
    to be available (on the system and is usable by the browser).


    > And support for Flash is up to neither Google nor Java.
    >


    well, Google may be involved, but so is Adobe.

    (checking, apparently, Flash is already available for Android).


    a bigger problem though with Flash may be the reasonably low stats of
    typical Android devices (vs say, a desktop PC, or a laptop). it is
    possible that, even if Flash does work, it wouldn't necessarily be a
    pretty experience (poor performance, steep memory use, ...).


    > Why in the world should anyone be "gutted" (whatever the heck that means) about
    > this? Write to Adobe for your Flash concern and the browser maker (who isn't
    > Google, BTW), with your complaint. Whining here won't help.
    >


    maybe he means the sensation of being physically disemboweled?... (or,
    conversely, the sensation of being kicked or kneed in the same general
    area, which is considerably less lethal, but also considerably
    unpleasant?...).


    the Browser in question is Chrome, which I am pretty sure is a Google
    product (Wikipedia seems to agree here).

    now, if it were Opera or Firefox or something, then it would make sense
    to contact them (as they are not Google).

    however, even then, it would also be up to Adobe (and others, such as
    the device manufacturers, ...) as to whether or not they wanted to make
    it available (actually, given how it works, the mobile service carriers
    may also be involved, as apparently in Android land it is the
    vendor+carrier which has most of the say regarding what system-level
    software is available).


    ultimately, it may be moot if the devices are technically underpowered
    for this (Flash doesn't perform well on an ASUS EEE either, which has
    much higher stats than most Android devices).

    what makes Android smooth and responsive is not really about having high
    stats, but rather about making the system fairly minimalist and
    streamlined. the downside though is that technologies tuned for more
    powerful systems, are not likely to work very well.

    the issue is not that typical Flash applications are particularly
    high-end or advanced, but rather that many Flash apps aren't really
    written for efficiency.


    conversely: doing impressive-looking things on a PC (delivering a
    compelling user experience, especially for real-time interactive
    software like 3D games or similar) does require some amount of concern
    for things like optimization and similar (and it would be very difficult
    to deliver a similar level of quality-of-experience on something like a
    mobile device).

    but, how much is concern is relevant and where itself may depend highly
    on the particular application and use-case (like, how and where to
    invest optimizations, and which sorts of properties to optimize for, ...).


    > Do try to complain to the right people. Google and Oracle won't be the right
    > people.
    >
    > Neither are we.
    >


    probably true enough...
     
    BGB, Feb 16, 2012
    #3
  4. Richard Maher

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 2/15/2012 7:50 AM, Richard Maher wrote:
    > Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    > JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >
    > I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?


    All the high level stuff in Android is done in Java.

    But Android does not support applets.

    Neither does any of other new mobile platforms (iOS, WP etc.).

    Flash should be available on Android but not on iOS.

    For mobile web you should use HTML5 and JavaScript.

    Arne
     
    Arne Vajhøj, Feb 16, 2012
    #4
  5. Richard Maher

    BGB Guest

    On 2/15/2012 5:21 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
    > On 2/15/2012 7:50 AM, Richard Maher wrote:
    >> Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    >> JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >>
    >> I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?

    >
    > All the high level stuff in Android is done in Java.
    >


    (yes, albeit via a different VM, namely, Dalvik).


    > But Android does not support applets.
    >
    > Neither does any of other new mobile platforms (iOS, WP etc.).
    >


    yep.
    theoretically, one "could" support applets, by supplying a JVM capable
    of applets, and having the browser be able to use it. worse yet, for
    this type of software, AFAIK, given how the system works, and absent
    vendor and carrier support, one could essentially need to "root" their
    device to install it (if it were to exist as a piece of system software,
    rather than an APK or similar). granted, it is possible I guess that a
    JVM could be supplied as an APK (AFAICT it is possible for APKs to
    behave as libraries, and be linked to by other APKs).

    whether all this would be "worthwhile" is a different issue.


    > Flash should be available on Android but not on iOS.
    >


    yep.

    for many Flash apps though, the performance and user experience would be
    debatable. things like YouTube and similar should probably work ok (I
    have an Android tablet which can access YouTube ok, albeit with the
    "mobile" layout funkiness). likewise, YouTube and similar don't do much
    processor intensive in Flash, since the main expensive parts (A/V codecs
    and playback stuff) are handled by native code.

    but, I distrust Flash some, as it is one of those things capable of
    causing lag even to a browser on a typical PC (and one ends up
    installing "Adblock Plus" and similar, not so much out of a particular
    dislike of advertising, but rather to avoid the *severe lag* often
    caused by all the Flash-based banner adds...).


    not that some of those "laggy as hell" Flash-based games give much hope
    either. some of them are barely playable as-is on a desktop PC, more so
    that my PC has a CPU 3x-4x faster with 4x as many cores, and 16x or 32x
    more RAM than a typical Android device (I have 16GB of RAM, vs 512MB or
    1GB which is AFAIK common on many newer mobile devices).

    one can avoid being deceived: a slick and responsive UI does not mean
    there is a lot of raw power behind it.


    so, I guess a question is why one wants Flash:
    for things like YouTube;
    or, for something like Newgrounds.


    > For mobile web you should use HTML5 and JavaScript.
    >


    probably a fair statement.

    granted, I haven't done much related to web-apps personally.



    mild tangent follows (ignore if not interested or if it seems irrelevant):

    ironically though, both JavaScript and ActionScript (Flash) are
    significant influences on my own scripting language (at its core, it is
    basically the same language, and also more-or-less implements ECMA-262).
    however, there are significant differences WRT library features and the
    semantics for extended features.

    the major difference is what it runs on: my 3D engine is not a
    web-browser, even if it has some similar features, makes some use of
    XML, has an HTTP client (and server), ... (trivia: I had before
    considered some possibly "interesting" uses for HTTP in relation to
    online gaming).

    I before considered the possibility of an Android port, but there were
    some non-trivial issues: getting it down to a more "sane" memory
    footprint, dealing with non-trivial UI issues (my stuff is very much
    designed for a mouse+keyboard interface, and one essentially has to
    "re-think" many aspects of UI design to make it usable on a
    touch-screen), ...

    (nevermind that it looks like building both for the PC and Android with
    the same app and the same codebase also looks non-trivial, and one is
    almost better off "starting clean" if trying to target an app to Android).

    one may take it for granted when developing PC software that one has
    around 3GB freely usable for a single 32-bit process (actually, the
    "unusable" 1GB has use as well). (by "freely usable", I mean, on modern
    HW one can use all of it without necessarily causing lag or HDD
    thrashing). yes, 64-bit is "better" (no 3GB limit), just for now I am
    still building mostly for 32-bits until 32-bit Windows is more solidly
    "dead and gone".
     
    BGB, Feb 16, 2012
    #5
  6. Richard Maher

    Rajiv Gupta Guest

    On 2012-02-15 23:50:04 +1100, Richard Maher said:

    > Hi,
    >
    > Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not
    > support JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >
    > I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?
    >
    > Cheers Richard Maher


    Android uses the Dalvik VM, ostensibly to take advantage of the CPU
    architectures of the devices commonly used in mobile devices. For
    Google it also provides a convient firewall to keep out unwanted code
    from their eco system.

    Flash is no longer necessary since HTML5. Flash is unwanted anyway as
    it offers some pernicious features for marketers (and others) to track
    users using Flash cookies. I say good riddence to Flash.

    The same goes for Java Applets. It has been a long time since applets
    have been useful. I recommend that people disable Java in their
    browsers. It is just a security risk and a way to waste memory. HTML
    canvas and websockets and JS can do anything that you could do in Java
    in a browser. Applets are a dying technology and the sooner they kick
    the bucket the better for everyone.

    As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    they can.
     
    Rajiv Gupta, Feb 16, 2012
    #6
  7. Richard Maher

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 2/15/2012 9:21 PM, Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    > On 2012-02-15 23:50:04 +1100, Richard Maher said:
    >> Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not
    >> support JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >>
    >> I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?

    >
    > Android uses the Dalvik VM, ostensibly to take advantage of the CPU
    > architectures of the devices commonly used in mobile devices. For Google
    > it also provides a convient firewall to keep out unwanted code from
    > their eco system.


    Given that they provide free tools to generate code for Dalvik, then
    they do not really keep anyone out.

    > Flash is no longer necessary since HTML5.


    If you can live with 30% of web users not seeing your stuff.

    > The same goes for Java Applets. It has been a long time since applets
    > have been useful. I recommend that people disable Java in their
    > browsers. It is just a security risk and a way to waste memory.


    ????

    On a page that does not use applets, then Java will not be running and
    therefor not e using memory.

    On a page that does use applets, then Java will consume memory but also
    be needed.

    So I do not understand that advice.

    > HTML
    > canvas and websockets and JS can do anything that you could do in Java
    > in a browser.


    For web then Java applets is still more widely supported than HTML5.

    > As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    > Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    > they can.


    That problem is solvable:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat

    Arne
     
    Arne Vajhøj, Feb 17, 2012
    #7
  8. Richard Maher

    Rajiv Gupta Guest

    On 2012-02-17 13:23:25 +1100, Arne Vajhøj said:

    > On 2/15/2012 9:21 PM, Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    >> On 2012-02-15 23:50:04 +1100, Richard Maher said:
    >>> Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not
    >>> support JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >>>
    >>> I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?

    >>
    >> Android uses the Dalvik VM, ostensibly to take advantage of the CPU
    >> architectures of the devices commonly used in mobile devices. For Google
    >> it also provides a convient firewall to keep out unwanted code from
    >> their eco system.

    >
    > Given that they provide free tools to generate code for Dalvik, then
    > they do not really keep anyone out.


    It is still a barrier.

    >
    >> Flash is no longer necessary since HTML5.

    >
    > If you can live with 30% of web users not seeing your stuff.


    The situation is rapidly changing. Adobe have acknowledged it
    themselves as they have stopped developing Flash for mobile devices.

    >
    >> The same goes for Java Applets. It has been a long time since applets
    >> have been useful. I recommend that people disable Java in their
    >> browsers. It is just a security risk and a way to waste memory.

    >
    > ????
    >
    > On a page that does not use applets, then Java will not be running and
    > therefor not e using memory.


    >
    > On a page that does use applets, then Java will consume memory but also
    > be needed.
    >
    > So I do not understand that advice.


    Are you retarded or just a pedant? By disabling Java in the browser,
    you will prevent the browser from running applets.

    >
    >> HTML
    >> canvas and websockets and JS can do anything that you could do in Java
    >> in a browser.

    >
    > For web then Java applets is still more widely supported than HTML5.


    For any new developments you would be an imbecile to choose deploying
    an applet. The browser that has the most rapidly increasing market
    share (Chrome) does not even bother to support it.


    >
    >> As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    >> Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    >> they can.

    >
    > That problem is solvable:
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat
    >
    > Arne


    Google's main business is to collect information about people in order
    to profit from it by advertising or selling the information in some
    form. This is not a paranoid delusional statement. In some
    jurisdictions their activities border on criminal. For example, forging
    emails from registered users which state that user "XXX" has invited
    you to join Google+. In fact an official complaint has been made to a
    member of parlaiment in my jurisdiction asking for the federal police
    to investigate these mass forging of emails because forging of emails
    is an offence.

    Android phones (unless rooted or registered with Google) continually
    display a full screen dialog which nags the user to create an account.
    This page interferes with the operation of the phone since it will
    appear at any time. If the hapless user eventually succumbs and creates
    an account Google will upload the user's contacts database to their
    system. You would be naive if you believed Google would not be
    building a graph from those contacts.
     
    Rajiv Gupta, Feb 17, 2012
    #8
  9. Richard Maher

    Lew Guest

    Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    > Are you retarded or just a pedant?


    You're retarded.

    You don't get to call him "retarded" just because he made a point for which you
    have no valid answer.

    Troll.

    --
    Lew
     
    Lew, Feb 17, 2012
    #9
  10. In <jhhp7k$sum$> Rajiv Gupta wrote:

    > Android uses the Dalvik VM, ostensibly to take advantage of the CPU
    > architectures of the devices commonly used in mobile devices. For
    > Google it also provides a convient firewall to keep out unwanted code
    > from their eco system.


    Dalvik a firewall? Do you mean that was a oringinal goal or more like a
    selling point after the fact?

    My interpretation is that apart from performance, the dalvik vm was a
    convenient way to work around some software patents on the JVM that Google
    or android.com wouldn't be bothered to, didn't, or couldn't manage to
    negotiate licensing for from Sun.

    Besides, today you can deploy C, C++, python, ruby, Perl, JRuby, Lua,
    BeanShell, JavaScript, Tcl, shell, scala, and Java source code in one way or
    another on Android devices. So if dalvik was intended to be a firewall, I
    wonder in what sense? The only thing I haven't heard of yet is true Java
    byte code execution on a true JVM on Android. In theory it could be done
    using the OpenJDK ARM port i guess.

    Not so sure why a "true" JVM on the Android would be a priority though? I
    find that with a rather small effort my source code can easily pass between
    my Android app projects and my Java EE projects. My experience is that
    Android in some sense is surprisingly true to the original WORA promise of
    Java.

    > As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    > Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    > they can.


    Cyanogenmod is your friend. Available for many Android devices and wont tell
    Google about your existence if you don't ask it to.

    Anyway, comparing with the popular alternatives Android is for sure the
    lesser of evils on the mobile device market.

    Oh, and on topic: I wont miss flash on my Android phone.

    --
    Fredrik Jonson
     
    Fredrik Jonson, Feb 17, 2012
    #10
  11. Richard Maher

    Jeff Higgins Guest

    On 02/17/2012 01:53 PM, Fredrik Jonson wrote:
    > In<jhhp7k$sum$> Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    >
    >> As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    >> Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    >> they can.

    >
    > Cyanogenmod is your friend. Available for many Android devices and wont tell
    > Google about your existence if you don't ask it to.
    >

    Hm. "incognito browsing mode" better than a tinfoil hat?
     
    Jeff Higgins, Feb 17, 2012
    #11
  12. Richard Maher

    Jan Burse Guest

    Fredrik Jonson schrieb:
    > Dalvik a firewall? Do you mean that was a oringinal goal or more like a
    > selling point after the fact?


    http://developer.android.com/reference/java/lang/SecurityManager.html
    Security managers do not provide a secure environment for executing
    untrusted code. Untrusted code cannot be safely isolated within the
    Dalvik VM.
     
    Jan Burse, Feb 17, 2012
    #12
  13. Richard Maher

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 2/17/2012 3:38 PM, Jeff Higgins wrote:
    > On 02/17/2012 01:53 PM, Fredrik Jonson wrote:
    >> In<jhhp7k$sum$> Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    >>
    >>> As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    >>> Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    >>> they can.

    >>
    >> Cyanogenmod is your friend. Available for many Android devices and
    >> wont tell
    >> Google about your existence if you don't ask it to.
    >>

    > Hm. "incognito browsing mode" better than a tinfoil hat?


    Probably.

    :)

    Arne
     
    Arne Vajhøj, Feb 18, 2012
    #13
  14. Richard Maher

    Arne Vajhøj Guest

    On 2/17/2012 5:52 AM, Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    > On 2012-02-17 13:23:25 +1100, Arne Vajhøj said:
    >> On 2/15/2012 9:21 PM, Rajiv Gupta wrote:
    >>> On 2012-02-15 23:50:04 +1100, Richard Maher said:
    >>>> Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not
    >>>> support JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >>>>
    >>>> I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?
    >>>
    >>> Android uses the Dalvik VM, ostensibly to take advantage of the CPU
    >>> architectures of the devices commonly used in mobile devices. For Google
    >>> it also provides a convient firewall to keep out unwanted code from
    >>> their eco system.

    >>
    >> Given that they provide free tools to generate code for Dalvik, then
    >> they do not really keep anyone out.

    >
    > It is still a barrier.


    Without any noticeable effect.

    >>> Flash is no longer necessary since HTML5.

    >>
    >> If you can live with 30% of web users not seeing your stuff.

    >
    > The situation is rapidly changing.


    Not really. A large portion of users do not update their
    browsers when a new major version come out.

    > Adobe have acknowledged it themselves
    > as they have stopped developing Flash for mobile devices.


    Adobe has acknowledged that Flash on mobile is a dead end.

    But there are still a few people left that use PC's to
    browse the web.

    >>> The same goes for Java Applets. It has been a long time since applets
    >>> have been useful. I recommend that people disable Java in their
    >>> browsers. It is just a security risk and a way to waste memory.

    >>
    >> ????
    >>
    >> On a page that does not use applets, then Java will not be running and
    >> therefor not e using memory.
    >>
    >> On a page that does use applets, then Java will consume memory but also
    >> be needed.
    >>
    >> So I do not understand that advice.

    >
    > Are you retarded or just a pedant? By disabling Java in the browser, you
    > will prevent the browser from running applets.


    If you delete the browser you will save even more memory.

    There is not much point in saving memory by disabling functionality
    that you want.

    >>> HTML
    >>> canvas and websockets and JS can do anything that you could do in Java
    >>> in a browser.

    >>
    >> For web then Java applets is still more widely supported than HTML5.

    >
    > For any new developments you would be an imbecile to choose deploying an
    > applet.


    Imbecile preferring bigger market share? I don't think so!

    > The browser that has the most rapidly increasing market share
    > (Chrome) does not even bother to support it.


    Have you considered investigating these matters a bit?

    Applets is supported in Chrome since Java 6u12.

    >>> As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    >>> Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as
    >>> they can.

    >>
    >> That problem is solvable:
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat

    >
    > Google's main business is to collect information about people in order
    > to profit from it by advertising or selling the information in some
    > form. This is not a paranoid delusional statement. In some jurisdictions
    > their activities border on criminal. For example, forging emails from
    > registered users which state that user "XXX" has invited you to join
    > Google+. In fact an official complaint has been made to a member of
    > parlaiment in my jurisdiction asking for the federal police to
    > investigate these mass forging of emails because forging of emails is an
    > offence.


    The fact that a person write the parliament and ask them to
    investigate something does not make it illegal or immoral.

    Arne
     
    Arne Vajhøj, Feb 18, 2012
    #14
  15. "Rajiv Gupta" <> wrote in message
    news:jhhp7k$sum$...
    > On 2012-02-15 23:50:04 +1100, Richard Maher said:
    >
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    >> JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >>
    >> I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?
    >>
    >> Cheers Richard Maher

    >


    >
    > Flash is no longer necessary since HTML5.


    Choice and competition are often good things, as is supporting a client base
    that isn't that keen to be on the bleading edge. Leaving video aside, I
    still haven't seen a charting tool that can match what can be achieved with
    Flex charting.

    > Flash is unwanted anyway


    Seems pretty popular to me.

    > as it
    > offers some pernicious features for marketers (and others) to track users
    > using Flash cookies.


    With iOS giving everyone access to your contacts and address book let alone
    what sites like Facebook get up to, I see no reason to highlight Flash
    cookies. Also, given that Web-Sockets have been firstly removed from HTML5
    then disabled everywhere (except maybe Chrome) due to security flaws, I
    believe your smugness to be unjustified.

    > I say good riddence to Flash.


    With the cartel of Apple, Google, and Microsoft ganging up to destroy it,
    there doesn't appear to be any other course of action.

    >
    > The same goes for Java Applets. It has been a long time since applets
    > have been useful.


    Bollocks!

    While the pixel footprint of modern Applets may be reduced to zero, their
    usefulness continues unabated. Nothing else on the planet can provide the
    awesome, yet sandboxed, power of an unsigned Java Applet! Multi-tab,
    multi-threaded power and functionality only dreamt of by today's
    long-polling, Javascript, hacks. (I note you diddn't mention HTML5
    "worker-threads"; too embarassing for even you to gloat over?)

    > I recommend that people disable Java in their browsers.


    I'm sure your blog is just clocking up those clicks as we speak.

    > It is just a security risk and a way to waste memory.


    Yet I'm willing to wager that in the same breath you're a big jQuery
    cargo-cult fan.

    > HTML canvas and
    > websockets and JS can do anything that you could do in Java in a browser.


    Anyone who thinks WebSockets implemented over HTTP can come anywhere close
    to providing the full-blown functionality of a native TCP/IP or UDP socket
    is either in denial or just plain ignorant.

    > Applets are a dying technology and the sooner they kick the bucket the
    > better for everyone.


    Certainly better for every supplier except Oracle. And all those developers
    who like more than one tool in the toolbox.
    >
    > As for Android. It is in my opinion a fiendishly clever honeypot aiding
    > Google in collecting the identities of as many people in the world as they
    > can.


    Just another Apple fanbois?

    >
    >
     
    Richard Maher, Apr 1, 2012
    #15
  16. Richard Maher

    Roedy Green Guest

    There is a trick to it. See
    http://mindprod.com/jgloss/googlechrome.html
    --
    Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
    http://mindprod.com
    When you were a child, if you did your own experiment
    to see if it was better to put to cocoa into your cup first
    or the hot milk first, then you likely have the programmer gene..
     
    Roedy Green, Apr 1, 2012
    #16
  17. On 2/15/2012 6:50 AM, Richard Maher wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > Is anyone else gutted that the Chrome browser on Android will not support
    > JAVA, Flash or any other pluggin?
    >
    > I thought Google and Android were big on JAVA?
    >
    > Cheers Richard Maher
    >
    >


    I am starting to think that this whole idea of 'running applications
    in the cloud' will never work as well as running an application
    on the desktop.

    If I see the same thing with a choice of an applet or a jar file
    that I can download first and run on the PC, I now go for the jar
    file choice.

    The speed of the internet these days makes downloading things
    not an issue any more.

    People now think HTML5/Javascript is the next big thing, where
    everyone will write their wonderful advanced 20 million lines
    applications in HTML5 and Javascript.

    May be for simple games and basic app this will work, but
    for advanced applications where good and robust performance
    is important, running things directly on the desktop/computer
    will always be better than running things inside yet another
    software application like the browser.

    Bottom line, it is not a big deal for me not being able to run Java
    inside the browser as long as I can run the same thing on the PC. It
    will run better that way.

    --Nasser
     
    Nasser M. Abbasi, Apr 1, 2012
    #17
  18. Richard Maher

    Thufir Guest

    On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 13:39:43 -0500, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:


    > People now think HTML5/Javascript is the next big thing, where everyone
    > will write their wonderful advanced 20 million lines applications in
    > HTML5 and Javascript.


    You're assuming everyone has stable, non-infected pc's. The whole point
    of the cloud, insofar as I can tell, to avoid annoying support calls
    which end in either "reboot" or "re-install".

    The beauty of AJAX, etc, is in terms of support. It's a complex way of
    getting away from Windows, to which people will go to extraordinary
    lengths.


    -Thufir
     
    Thufir, Apr 1, 2012
    #18
  19. On 4/1/2012 3:50 PM, Thufir wrote:
    > On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 13:39:43 -0500, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
    >
    >
    >> People now think HTML5/Javascript is the next big thing, where everyone
    >> will write their wonderful advanced 20 million lines applications in
    >> HTML5 and Javascript.

    >


    > You're assuming everyone has stable, non-infected pc's. The whole point
    > of the cloud,


    I guess I used the wrong word. I did not mean to run things on
    the server vs. on the desktop/pc.

    I meant to run things in a browser vs. on the desktop/pc.

    But I thought this was clear even though I used the word
    'cloud' when may be I should have used RIA (rich internet applications).
    After all, I was talking about applets and HTML5 and Javascript
    all the time? These run in the browser, not on the server.

    >insofar as I can tell, to avoid annoying support calls
    > which end in either "reboot" or "re-install".
    >


    If the PC is 'bad', then applets/HTML5/javaScript/Flash/
    pick_your_Browserplugins/ etc.. will also run bad. After all,
    the browser runs on the PC as well.

    > The beauty of AJAX, etc, is in terms of support. It's a complex way of
    > getting away from Windows, to which people will go to extraordinary
    > lengths.
    >
    > -Thufir


    So, You want to run say, photoshop application, on the server using
    AJAX so to get away from the PC? Do you think it will work as good
    as running it on the PC?

    I like my PC, and I do not want to get away from it.

    --Nasser
     
    Nasser M. Abbasi, Apr 1, 2012
    #19
  20. Richard Maher

    Thufir Guest

    On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:28:11 -0500, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:


    > But I thought this was clear even though I used the word 'cloud' when
    > may be I should have used RIA (rich internet applications). After all,
    > I was talking about applets and HTML5 and Javascript all the time?
    > These run in the browser, not on the server.


    Maybe it's semantics, or maybe I have no idea what you're talking about.
    Either is equally likely ;)

    When you say "run in the browser" does that mean you navigate to
    www.whatever.something? Pardon, I guess, yeah, the server passes the
    processing off to the browser, but the code (or applet) itself resides
    server side.

    My point was that if you call tech support they'll say "works from here"
    and tell you to re-install your OS or something. Whether the processing
    is client or server side doesn't seem that much of a big deal(?), unless
    you have a slow computer. It virtually eliminates version problems.

    I suppose the "next" step will be to cache the js/whatever. Hey, they re-
    invented JWS! Anyhow...

    Is that what you mean buy RIA? Yes, I'm too lazy to go wikipedia before
    posting this.


    -Thufir
     
    Thufir, Apr 2, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. segalsegal

    Chrome not running Java applets

    segalsegal, Dec 12, 2008, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    11,808
    segalsegal
    Dec 18, 2008
  2. Richard Maher
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    1,305
    Richard Maher
    Nov 17, 2010
  3. Stef Mientki
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    597
    Stef Mientki
    Nov 27, 2011
  4. sterta bole
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    787
    sterta bole
    Aug 27, 2012
  5. Nasser M. Abbasi
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    611
    Roedy Green
    Jan 10, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page