Java on NewtonOS Rumor
Arnold Kim
MacTheKnife has the following tidbit, in his usual (curious) style of
writing.... it's linked from www.macweek.com
----------------------
I NC as you NC
Speaking of dark-horse candidacies and the specter of Larry Ellison's
Network Computer fetish: Apple may have garnered snickers when it
first tried to palm off its MessagePad and eMate PDAs as NCs, but now
Sun Microsystems is reportedly working on making the message a bit
more credible. According to the Knife's coffee klatch, the Java giant
is hard at work on an implementation of the Webby language for Apple's
Newton line. Kick out the jams, Scott McNealy!
----------------------
arnold
bse...@physix.com
> Speaking of dark-horse candidacies and the specter of Larry Ellison's
> Network Computer fetish: Apple may have garnered snickers when it
> first tried to palm off its MessagePad and eMate PDAs as NCs, but now
> Sun Microsystems is reportedly working on making the message a bit
> more credible. According to the Knife's coffee klatch, the Java giant
> is hard at work on an implementation of the Webby language for Apple's
> Newton line. Kick out the jams, Scott McNealy!
Excuse me, but why the heck would anyone want Java on a Newton? Let's
consider this: Java was originally created for a handheld device (that Sun
never built) and was modeled off of NewtonScript. The idea of a "virtual
machine" exists in NewtonScript in a similar was as Java. If Apple wanted
to sell NewtonScript as a web language, they certainly could do it, they
simply would have to develop a Newton virtual machine for other platforms
besides ARM. Originally, the Newton virtual machine was created so that
Newton Script code could be made as compact as possible (remember the OMP
only had 640k). The fact that compact stack based code written for the
Newton virtual machine could be interpreted on the fly into ARM RISC based
assembly instructions had two main advantages: it uses less memory and
makes a processor independent platform so as to not be totally reliant on
the ARM chips.
So, when the Newton first came out and was really popular (before the bad
press about the Handwriting recognition), several companies (AT&T, Sun,
Microsoft, etc.) wanted to jump on the bandwagon and develop PDAs. When the
Newton started getting bad press (as did the Magic Cap), AT&T, Microsoft,
and Sun all canceled their projects. Later, the web came along and some
people at Sun found a cool use for the Java language they had developed.
Recently when the CE came out, Sun made some rumblings about a Java PDA.
When the CE turned out to be not quite as hot as some had predicted (I
won't go so far as to say "total failure", but I've heard return rates as
high as 40% on hardware -- ouch!), they dropped the idea. Now that the
Newton looks hot again at the moment, Sun wants to try to take over the
Newton's OS? Come on! I could see it if they were going to add some type of
Java support onto NetHopper,but this would be no different than Java
support in Netscape under Windows or Mac (or Solaris) -- so what's the big
deal?
Most Newton programmers (including myself) will say that NewtonScript
blows Java away anyway. If I wanted to develop for Java, I certainly could,
but I don't -- I develop software for the Newton because it is the neatest,
grooviest platform I've ever worked with. Period. (IMNSHO)
Brant Sears
bse...@physix.com
F. Todd Wilson
Hello,
I don't know much about programming, and I don't know much about Java.
But when was the last time you went to the programming section of your
local book store? Notice that there's now a whole section dedicated to
Java?
The point is that everyone, for better or for worse, is jumping on the
Java train. If it even pans out a _little_, there will be TONs of little
Java applets floating around cyberspace, _some_ of them even doing useful
things.
Now, imagine being able to justify to a potential customer the cost of
buying a few thousand MP2Ks by being able to say that EVERY JAVA APP THAT
THEY WRITE/PURCHASE FOR USE ON THEIR DESKTOPS WILL RUN ON A NEWT (within
certain limits, I suspect). Database access, calendar synchronization,
communications, etc, etc.
Suddenly, the Newt looks like a really attractive mobile platform for
enabling employees on the go to do their work at least as efficiently as
if they were at their office, or lugging a PB. AND, programmers only have
to code ONCE (and maybe revise a bit for screen real-estate).
The idea of Java on Newt isn't targeted at NewtonScript programmers.
It's targeted at MIS and Java programmers.
Well, off my soap box. I'm a big fan of Newton and NewtonScript, and I
plan to spend my summer learning how to program in NewtonScript. This is
just my take on the swirl.
Later,
Todd
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Todd Wilson, Doctoral Candidate Go Tigers! P90
Harvard University Department of Government
Center for European Studies
Web: <http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wilson3/index.html>
Mail: <wil...@fas.harvard.edu>
Blair MacIntyre
bse...@physix.com writes:
> Excuse me, but why the heck would anyone want Java on a Newton?
Oh my, you've gone and confused yourself with everyone again. You
really must make sure to take your medication regularly.
> Let's consider this: Java was originally created for a handheld
> device (that Sun never built)
BZZT. Wrong. Java was created as a language for any small-scale
(usually embedded) device. It has been redirectly toward a few
projects internally, one of which may have been used in a handheld
device that was never built, but that's not it's origin. Unless
you're talking about a smart, handheld toaster.
> and was modeled off of NewtonScript.
BZZT. Wrong. Java was modelled on a number of languages, most
importantly Modula-3 and C++. Undoubtably, other languages (including
NewtonScript) probably influenced Gossling (he freely admits building
the language by copying features he like from other languages, and
then making it look like C++ so people wouldn't turn their noses up at
it).
Java was modelled off NewtonScript as much as it was modelled of
Fortran77.
Hey, I like NewtonScript and the programming environment, but trying
to convince people of bogus "parentage" chains like that is rediculous.
If you don't have sufficent imagination that you can't envision what
anyone would want Java on a Newton, keep your diatribes to yourself.
> .... Later, the web came along and some
> people at Sun found a cool use for the Java language they had developed.
> Recently when the CE came out, Sun made some rumblings about a Java PDA.
Oh no, you meant Sun had the nerve to use a language they had spent
time and money developing for something that might generate income.
Imagine.
The nerve!
> Now that the
> Newton looks hot again at the moment, Sun wants to try to take over the
> Newton's OS? Come on!
The nerve. Could you imagine, releasing a second OS (persumably we
are both assuming a JavaOS for Newton hardware that would make Newton
hardware into a handheld NC) for a wonderfully designed piece of
hardware. Imagine, giving people would have a Newton, or are thinking of
buying one, another OS option.
The nerve!
> Most Newton programmers (including myself) will say that NewtonScript
> blows Java away anyway.
Well, at least you've stopped thinking you _are_ everyone, now at
least you only speak for most of a large group of people. But, you
really need to take all the medicine, not just some of it.
Here let me try this approach out. Most C/C++ programmers (not
including myself, since I've mostly broke that habit) will say that
C/C++ blows Java away anyway.
Thus, by the transitive property of the Law of Unsupported-Gross-
Generalization[tm], C blows NewtonScript away anyway. QED.
--
Blair MacIntyre (b...@cs.columbia.edu,bl...@acm.org), Gradual Student, CUCS
smail: Dept. of Computer Science, 1214 Amsterdam Ave, Mail Code 0401
Columbia University, New York, NY 10027-7003
James Uther
This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
--------------ms5A417B0D932912058E300448
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------6FBC58576B03527CF673C0DC"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------6FBC58576B03527CF673C0DC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
bse...@physix.com wrote:
> Excuse me, but why the heck would anyone want Java on a Newton?
> Let's
> consider this: Java was originally created for a handheld device
> (that Sun
> never built) and was modeled off of NewtonScript. The idea of a
> "virtual
> machine" exists in NewtonScript in a similar was as Java. If Apple
> wanted
> to sell NewtonScript as a web language, they certainly could do it,
i just can't let this crap pass me by..
I'll agree that newtonscript is nice to write and easy on memory. But
this bollocks about
apple selling newtonscript as a web language is laughable.
1) Apple couldn't sell gold at a discount.
2) NewtonScript is not and will never be a web language, just like
c++ will never be a web language. Platform independence has nothing to
do with it. It's security that matters. The sandbox. NewtonScript
doesn't have it. Java Does.
3) So Where is the remote object support, standard component model
(not just for newtos - STANDARD!!), security API's etc etc etc for
NewtonScript?
4) How about development environments? Sure NTK is good, but so is
the netscape constructor (looks like the NeXT interface builder), and
it's only one of the good (and sometimes free) java dev tools.
5) I forget. need my medication i suppose.
go for it sun. the MP2K is great hardware. The NSG has some really good
people (the newtos was way ahead of it's time). Just get it a safe
distance away from apple, make it THE handheld java platform, and it'll
fly.
--
James Uther
Artifex, University of Sydney
http://www.gmp.usyd.edu.au/people/hemul/
--------------6FBC58576B03527CF673C0DC
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for James Uther
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
begin:vcard
fn:James Uther
n:Uther;James
org:University of Sydney
adr:;;220/A27 University of Sydney;Sydney;NSW;2006;
email;internet:he...@gmp.usyd.edu.au
title:Mr
tel;work:+61 2 9351 7325
tel;fax:+61 2 9351 7778
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
end:vcard
--------------6FBC58576B03527CF673C0DC--
--------------ms5A417B0D932912058E300448
Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
<encoded_portion_removed>
R3OP3RSRNSIvlZUrocI/Eia/IBCGCrQLSGS7iJYRTGSSog==
--------------ms5A417B0D932912058E300448--
Jim Bailey
I don't see anything inherent in the Java security model that couldn't be
added to NewtonScript. Checking for unchanged code is no big deal, adding
socket support that has the Java security limitations would be no problem
either. NewtonScript is also an interpreted virtual machine, so putting a
sandbox around the NewtonScript tasks is trival. Unfortunately, I also
agree with the gold comment so the point is moot anyway.
On Thu, Apr 10, 1997 10:50 PM, James Uther <mailto:he...@gmp.usyd.edu.au>
wrote:
->i just can't let this crap pass me by..
->I'll agree that newtonscript is nice to write and easy on memory. But
->this bollocks about
->apple selling newtonscript as a web language is laughable.
-> 1) Apple couldn't sell gold at a discount.
-> 2) NewtonScript is not and will never be a web language, just like
->c++ will never be a web language. Platform independence has nothing to
->do with it. It's security that matters. The sandbox. NewtonScript
->doesn't have it. Java Does.
->
--
Jim Bailey Fetch Software, Inc.
j...@shore.net <http://www.tiac.net/users/jdb>
Robert A. Decker
On Thu, Apr 10, 1997 12:47 AM, bse...@physix.com <mailto:bse...@physix.com>
wrote:
> Most Newton programmers (including myself) will say that NewtonScript
>blows Java away anyway.
Well, except for its lack of threads...
rob
--
<mailto: "Robert A. Decker" com...@umich.edu>
<http://hmrl.cancer.med.umich.edu/Rob/index.ssi>
Programmer Analyst - Health Media Research Lab
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center
"Get A Life" quote #15: "I feel like Cinderella in more ways than I care to
go into."
-Chris Elliott
Andrew Plumb
bse...@physix.com wrote in article <AF72215...@208.194.255.60>...
[original message deletia]
> Excuse me, but why the heck would anyone want Java on a Newton? Let's
> support in Netscape under Windows or Mac (or Solaris) -- so what's the
big
> deal?
The big deal is market penetration. Would you rather your application run
only on a Newton or on every blasted device in the world that "has Java"?
I personally prefer the latter. Not only that, because of the nature of
the Newton (low power, limited resources) a Java App I write for the Newton
platform, that runs well on the Newton platform, should turbo on a desktop.
That's one reason why I'd like it on a Newton, and I know I'm not alone. I
prefer to take the inclusive approach.
> Most Newton programmers (including myself) will say that NewtonScript
> blows Java away anyway. If I wanted to develop for Java, I certainly
could,
> but I don't -- I develop software for the Newton because it is the
neatest,
> grooviest platform I've ever worked with. Period. (IMNSHO)
Why not have Java on a Newton as well as NewtonScript? I plan on learning
NewtonScript over the summer anyway. Not everyone has the time we do to
learn this platform-specific language. Hopefully someone will get that C++
for Newton released some time too. :-)
Andrew.
--
Andrew Plumb, VE3SLG
E-mail: Tek...@io.com
3a...@qlink.queensu.ca
ve3...@amsat.org
WWW: http://www.io.com/~tekmage/
Surfing digital oceans astride an analog dolphin...
Marton Carungay
I think the problem here is that folks on this thread take sides to the
extreme.
One side says "Yeah, Java is so cool, it's the wave of the future,
everybody's doing it so let's not get left behind. So let's forget about
Newton OS and replace it with Java OS right away! Yippee!"
The opposing camp says, "Who cares about Java, it's got this and that
weakness, it still needs polishing, and this and that blah blah blah blah.
Give me NewtonScript any day and Java can go to hell!"
Maybe the best solution might be to encourage (either from Apple or Sun or
whomever) the creation of a robust Java VM running inside the already
highly-regarded Newton OS environment. Frankly, I see no reason why we
cannot continue the excellent handheld interface and architecture of the
Newton OS while finding a way to integarate Java within that environment.
Why are people here making it look like "Java OS versus Newton OS"? Does
it HAVE to be that way?
Rainer Joswig
In article <martonx-1204...@accs-as07-dp16.lax.grid.net>,
mar...@macconnect.com (Marton Carungay) wrote:
> Why are people here making it look like "Java OS versus Newton OS"? Does
> it HAVE to be that way?
The Newton OS is already an excellent solution for a PDA.
Adding Java just adds fat and you lose elegance and small
foot print.
Benjamin Smith
On Sun, Apr 13, 1997 5:30 AM, Rainer Joswig <mailto:jos...@lavielle.com>
wrote:
Isn't the reason for Java compatibility? Developers will write in Java and
the software will run on Psion, Zaurus, Newton and WinCE?
Ben S.
Scotty1024
Java OS vs Newton OS
The major advantage I see to Newton OS is: FLASH. To my knowledge no other
platform works execute in place as smoothly with FLASH as does the Newton
OS.
I personally don't want to see Newton OS tossed aside for Java OS. I'd
rather see the ability to execute Java byte code added to the Newton OS.
Like it or not, the ability to execute Java Apps, Applets, beans, CORBA 2,
and net agents is going to become a deal breaker in the not too distant
future.
Scotty
Timothy Sherburne
In article <AF769A2...@199.183.41.214>, "Benjamin Smith"
<be...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
You've got the right idea, Ben. Java wouldn't add fat, but actually another
layer of elegance in the form of compatibility and extendability. As for a
small footprint, that's already been lost. When looking at other embedded
systems, who considers 8MB/5MB small? Maybe WinCE developers... ;)
I think for Rainer's nightmare to be realized, Apple would need to add a
WinCE support layer! Uggh!
t
--
| Timothy Sherburne | Creative Chaos |
| Software Developer | 503.281.7999 |
| Macintosh & Java | cch...@northwest.com |
jsm...@alum.mit.edu
In following this thread, let me provide some perspective of one who does
not own a Newton, but likes the concept:
1) Java is becoming the programming language of the Web. (Like it or
not) 2) If Apple or anyone wants the Newton to become a handheld web
device (which they probably do), it needs to be able to understand Java.
3) Therefore, I for one would not be surprised to see someone developing
a JVM for the Newton.
This in no way denigrates NewtonScript. Its simply a recognition of
REALITY.
Jeffry J. Smith
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
mathew
F. Todd Wilson <wil...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
> Now, imagine being able to justify to a potential customer the cost of
> buying a few thousand MP2Ks by being able to say that EVERY JAVA APP THAT
> THEY WRITE/PURCHASE FOR USE ON THEIR DESKTOPS WILL RUN ON A NEWT (within
> certain limits, I suspect). Database access, calendar synchronization,
> communications, etc, etc.
A hopeless dream. The Newton's pen-based interface is too different to
a mouse-and-keyboard-based interface. If you want desktop applications
to run 'usably' on a handheld, you have to take the WinCE approach and
make the handheld UI very similar to the desktop.
Now, if Sun based their handheld/NC Java OS on the Newton, and gave it
UI class libraries based on the Newton UI... Then it would be worth
doing. Let's hope that's what Apple and Sun are chatting about.
mathew
Andre Meyer
Scotty1024 wrote:
>
> I personally don't want to see Newton OS tossed aside for Java OS. I'd
> rather see the ability to execute Java byte code added to the Newton OS.
> Like it or not, the ability to execute Java Apps, Applets, beans, CORBA 2,
> and net agents is going to become a deal breaker in the not too distant
> future.
I totally agree with you. The Newton OS is a far better thing than Java
or the Java OS will ever be. But, in order to cooperate with other
people on various platforms, as I am doing in my PhD thesis, Java is an
absolute requirement. There is no reason why Java could not be
integrated into the Newton OS as smoothly as in other OSs, because NOS
is such a good OS. And the user interface is far superior to that of
JavaOS.
If Apple had promoted NewtonScript more aggressively in 1993 Java still
would be cold coffee... what a shame.
What about converting Java byte code to NewtonScript byte code?
Andre
--
=======================================================================
Andre Meyer MultiMedia Lab "The Pen is Mightier than the Sword"
Department of Computer Science University of Zurich Switzerland
<mailto:me...@acm.org> <http://www.ifi.unizh.ch/staff/ameyer.html>
=======================================================================
darren wilson
In article <martonx-1204...@accs-as07-dp16.lax.grid.net>,
mar...@macconnect.com (Marton Carungay) wrote:
> Why are people here making it look like "Java OS versus Newton OS"? Does
> it HAVE to be that way?
Well stated, Marton
When i read or hear people discussing "Java on the Newton" i think of
exactly that... Java _ON_ the Newton OS, not Java _INSTEAD OF_ the Newton
OS. A Java VM running on top of the Newton OS would, in my opinion,
potentially be an excellent way to greatly extend the capabilities of the
hardware and software available to Newton users, just as Java has the
potential to enhance the Mac OS, Windows, whatever.
In my opinion, I don't think that Java (what little i know about it) is
mature enough to function as a standalone OS on any platform, but is useful
in its current state as a universal "application environment".
darren.
_________________________________________________
R E A C T O R A R T + D E S I G N L T D .
Toronto, Canada
*Return address has been altered to prevent junk e-mail.
*Delete ".X" from address to reply.
Robert A. Decker
On Tue, Apr 15, 1997 4:52 AM, Andre Meyer <mailto:me...@acm.org> wrote:
>What about converting Java byte code to NewtonScript byte code?
You'd probably have to have Java at a lower level than that. I'm not sure
how you would model threads in Newtonscript.
That's the only problem I can think of. They both have similar exception
handling. I'm sure it will also be easy to fake Java's io classes and awt
classes.
rob
--
<mailto: "Robert A. Decker" com...@umich.edu>
<http://hmrl.cancer.med.umich.edu/Rob/index.ssi>
Programmer Analyst - Health Media Research Lab
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center
"Get A Life" quote #5: "In my heart I know you're right, but my perfectly
functioning brain says you're a horse's ass." -Bob Elliott
Sean Luke
Blair MacIntyre (b...@renoir.cs.columbia.edu) wrote:
>BZZT. Wrong. Java was created as a language for any small-scale
>(usually embedded) device. It has been redirectly toward a few
>projects internally, one of which may have been used in a handheld
>device that was never built, but that's not it's origin. Unless
>you're talking about a smart, handheld toaster.
Blair, you might want to re-read that Javasoft history.
Oak (Java's direct ancestor) was created specifically for a project
involved in developing a handheld device.
>> and was modeled off of NewtonScript.
>BZZT. Wrong. Java was modelled on a number of languages, most
>importantly Modula-3 and C++.
Of course, it's nonsense that Java was modelled off of NewtonScript,
but it's even goofier to say that Java was based on Modula-3 and C++.
Java's *syntax* may resemble C++, but it has no similarity to C++
as a language. Java's chief *semantics* are dynamically-bound and
use single inheritance, class objects, and an extensive runtime system.
C++ and Modula-3 are as far away from this model as any object-oriented
language can be.
Java is clearly semantically derivative of Smalltalk and other
languages related to it. Most notably, NeXT's
Objective-C is almost uncannily similar to Java: single inheritance,
dynamic binding, dynamic loading, "class" objects, interfaces,
and now methods stored as data (a-la Java's "reflection" library),
all-virtual functions, you name it. It's almost weird.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Sean Luke "I've discovered that P==NP, but the proof is too
U Maryland at College Park large to fit in the margins of this signature."
se...@cs.umd.edu URL: http://www.cs.umd.edu/~seanl/
Keven Boyett
jsm...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
>
> In following this thread, let me provide some perspective of one who does
> not own a Newton, but likes the concept:
Add to this the perspective of a Newton software developer... not a
programmer but a sales and marketing person.
> 1) Java is becoming the programming language of the Web. (Like it or
> not)
Absolutely true
> 2) If Apple or anyone wants the Newton to become a handheld web
> device (which they probably do), it needs to be able to understand Java.
Could be a Java/JavaScript enabled browser, could be that you boot the
Newton in a Java mode, or simply replace the ROMS so the hardware (MP2K,
strongarm) runs JavaOS or Embedded Java. Any of these would potentially
turn the Newton into a "Mobile Network Computer", add wireless and
you've got a machine that's 12 months ahead of the competition. There
is a major market for this device... with the proper applications...
But then I'm in the application software business.
> 3) Therefore, I for one would not be surprised to see someone developing
> a JVM for the Newton.
Hmmm...
> This in no way denigrates NewtonScript. Its simply a recognition of
> REALITY.
And you can still deliver apps in NewtonScript now, get into the markets
where "Handheld Wireless Transactions" are important, then migrate to
Java over time, and have access to other Java-enabled portable devices
when they appear.
-Keven
--
Keven Boyett - Gaia Software, Inc.
email: ke...@gaia.com voice: (503) 226-8580 fax: (503) 221-4242
web: http://www.gaia.com
Rainer Joswig
In article <19970414033...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
scott...@aol.com (Scotty1024) wrote:
> Java OS vs Newton OS
>
> The major advantage I see to Newton OS is: FLASH. To my knowledge no other
> platform works execute in place as smoothly with FLASH as does the Newton
> OS.
>
> I personally don't want to see Newton OS tossed aside for Java OS. I'd
> rather see the ability to execute Java byte code added to the Newton OS.
> Like it or not, the ability to execute Java Apps, Applets, beans, CORBA 2,
> and net agents is going to become a deal breaker in the not too distant
> future.
>
> Scotty
Tell me when it will happen. Right now there is more hype than
reality.
Andrew Plumb
Jim Bailey <j...@shore.net> wrote in article
<AF7333A...@204.167.101.242>...
> I don't see anything inherent in the Java security model that couldn't be
> added to NewtonScript. Checking for unchanged code is no big deal,
adding
> socket support that has the Java security limitations would be no problem
> either. NewtonScript is also an interpreted virtual machine, so putting
a
> sandbox around the NewtonScript tasks is trival. Unfortunately, I also
> agree with the gold comment so the point is moot anyway.
True, but it still has to be added. And then tested. And then debugged.
And then hacked. ;-) Java has had the maturation process in much the same
way as the Newton has in the PDA/<insert_trendy_name> market. Trial by
fire, and Java's been in a bigger fire than the Newton.
Enough of the metaphors...
Tom Gall
Sean Luke wrote:
>
> Java is clearly semantically derivative of Smalltalk and other
> languages related to it. Most notably, NeXT's
> Objective-C is almost uncannily similar to Java: single inheritance,
> dynamic binding, dynamic loading, "class" objects, interfaces,
> and now methods stored as data (a-la Java's "reflection" library),
> all-virtual functions, you name it. It's almost weird.
>
Hardly weird it was by design actually. As I remember my Java history
Patrick Naughton the gentleman who got the ball rolling was about to
quit Sun and join up with NeXT. He happened to be on the same
intermural hockey team as Scott McNealy. Scott told him to hold off,
write what he thought was wrong with Sun before he left. Patrick
didn't leave and was one of the original Oak people. I would like
to think his affinity for NeXTSTEP showed up in Java, with it
having an close look and feel to that of Objective-C. (The main
language on NeXTSTEP)
Now back to the Java on NewtonOS debate...
Actually I can see it being done. The problem lies in that putting
the actual class library onto the Newton adds weight. Probably a good
4-8 megs worth.
I don't know how the Newton's innerds work but if it's already threaded
that's part of the battle. Next would be either porting all that Sun
C code over to the newton or rewritting it into C++. Not particularily
difficult actually.
In addition it would be interesting to see if Apple can just
incorperate Java bytecodes into the Newton bytecode instruction
set or perhaps maybe do an on the fly retranslation from Java bytecodes
into newtonscript bytecodes. Time will tell I suppose! (What
I wouldn't give to be working on this at Apple o what fun that
would be!)
I think we will see Java on the Newton in the not to distant future.
I do however think it will require a new piece of hard however or
for current newton owners a large ram card. But such is the price of
progress. As a new MP2K owner it's one certainly I am willing to pay!
--
Tom Gall
Java Guy |||| "Where's the ka-boom? There was supposed
\ /\ to be an earth shattering ka-boom!"
H) tg...@ibm.net \__/_/ Marvin Martian
James Uther
This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format.
--------------ms06798AA7C72153E6202FAEA3
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------0D7575634F3CA233486DF840"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------0D7575634F3CA233486DF840
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
how about NewtonOS _ ON _ Java. ie have the salient bits of newton
functionality (soups, class library, assist etc) written in java. WHY i
here you ask? Well, because then not only do you get the benefits of
java on your newton, but *you get the benefits of NewtonOS anywhere
there IS Java!*.
Why not have the newton notebook running on my pc? (as a signed applet
so it can persist in a little bit of disk that emulates a newton soup).
All you need is to have the newton classes downloadable with the applet.
Any newton application you wrote would run on any java platform! (of
course on the newton itself, these classes would be native and in rom
already)
Netscape are taking that road already with the IFC. A java class library
that coexists with the standard java.* libraries. IFC ships with
navigator, or can be sent with the applet that uses them if the client
doesn't have them locally. Anyone using these classes gets the netscape
look'nfeel and functionality. Why not do the same with the newton?
think of it - all that expertise with hand held devices and interfaces,
all given market relevance and momentum. - and all running best on
newton hardware!
of course i could be talking out of my bum. i'm not that experienced at
newton hacking....
oh, and you'd have to program in something that compiles to java
bytecode.
--
James Uther
Artifex, University of Sydney
http://www.gmp.usyd.edu.au/people/hemul/
--------------0D7575634F3CA233486DF840
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for James Uther
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
begin:vcard
fn:James Uther
n:Uther;James
org:University of Sydney
adr:;;220/A27 University of Sydney;Sydney;NSW;2006;
email;internet:he...@gmp.usyd.edu.au
title:Mr
tel;work:+61 2 9351 7325
tel;fax:+61 2 9351 7778
x-mozilla-cpt:;0
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
end:vcard
--------------0D7575634F3CA233486DF840--
--------------ms06798AA7C72153E6202FAEA3
Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
<encoded_portion_removed>
L9RIihuHi/Tmf0ppcdCZrQM7yD9zt6SeJQso5WgG+GRm+A==
--------------ms06798AA7C72153E6202FAEA3--
Garry Trigger
A number of people in this group have given the same response
regarding Java. If this were Apple's published view I would be very
worried.
Think about it this way. MS thought they were going to buck the Java
trend and got a shock. That battle is over, Java is here to stay - for
a while at least. Now the MS approach is to trick the Java community
into making Java a run-in-the-wintel-environment-only language. This
battle is still being fought and I think the odds are against MS. But
MS can be very seductive, the developer community very gullible and
JavaSoft very arrogant. MS might just pull it off yet.
Java is a given. The future of Apple Macs, Newtons, and anything that
does not run Windows or a windows derivative is definitely not a safe
bet.
>
>--
>http://www.lavielle.com/~joswig/
Garry
email:GarryT at ix.netcom.com
Garry Trigger
>jsm...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
>>
>> In following this thread, let me provide some perspective of one who does
>> not own a Newton, but likes the concept:
>
>Add to this the perspective of a Newton software developer... not a
>programmer but a sales and marketing person.
>
>> 1) Java is becoming the programming language of the Web. (Like it or
>> not)
>
>Absolutely true
>
>> 2) If Apple or anyone wants the Newton to become a handheld web
>> device (which they probably do), it needs to be able to understand Java.
>
>Could be a Java/JavaScript enabled browser, could be that you boot the
>Newton in a Java mode, or simply replace the ROMS so the hardware (MP2K,
>strongarm) runs JavaOS or Embedded Java. Any of these would potentially
>turn the Newton into a "Mobile Network Computer", add wireless and
>you've got a machine that's 12 months ahead of the competition. There
Actually if it had been done 12 months ago then it would 12 months
ahead, as it is. Toshiba have already done it. They had both the
Libretto with modified inards running as a NC, and they had an
A4/Legal(?) flat scribe pad runnning as an NC. Both running java and
both running quite fast. Mitsubishi also had a similar machine but I
didn't look at that very closely,
>is a major market for this device... with the proper applications...
>But then I'm in the application software business.
>
>> 3) Therefore, I for one would not be surprised to see someone developing
>> a JVM for the Newton.
>
>Hmmm...
>
>> This in no way denigrates NewtonScript. Its simply a recognition of
>> REALITY.
>
>And you can still deliver apps in NewtonScript now, get into the markets
>where "Handheld Wireless Transactions" are important, then migrate to
>Java over time, and have access to other Java-enabled portable devices
>when they appear.
>
>-Keven
>--
>Keven Boyett - Gaia Software, Inc.
>
>email: ke...@gaia.com voice: (503) 226-8580 fax: (503) 221-4242
>web: http://www.gaia.com
Randolph Q. Sill
>> Most Newton programmers (including myself) will say that NewtonScript
>>blows Java away anyway. If I wanted to develop for Java, I certainly could,
>>but I don't -- I develop software for the Newton because it is the neatest,
>>grooviest platform I've ever worked with. Period. (IMNSHO)
Excuse me, but isn't Java a platform-independant and rather
popular language, whereas NewtonScript is not either? I've never heard
of NewtonScript until I read *this* message. Shit -- Even my Mom is
writing Java applets.
Randolph Q. Sill
>In article <martonx-1204...@accs-as07-dp16.lax.grid.net>,
>mar...@macconnect.com (Marton Carungay) wrote:
>
>> Why are people here making it look like "Java OS versus Newton OS"? Does
>> it HAVE to be that way?
>
>The Newton OS is already an excellent solution for a PDA.
>Adding Java just adds fat and you lose elegance and small
>foot print.
In another thread in this group, some people were discussing a
small chunk of empty space in the design of the NMP2K. One mentioned a
Java Chip. Perhaps PCMCIA hardware JavaVM? I'm not a computer
engineer, no flames please.
Would it make sense to have the Java stuff in
hardware? The machine wouldn't need to have insane ammounts of RAM to
run simple little Java applications. Has anyone tried to replace
Newtos with something else? I guess the machines not being made by
clone manufacturers limit the availability of them. So far it seems
that few people have them, and it's kindof a niche market.
Randolph Q. Sill
ple in this group have given the same response
>regarding Java. If this were Apple's published view I would be very
>worried.
>
>Think about it this way. MS thought they were going to buck the Java
>trend and got a shock. That battle is over, Java is here to stay - for
>a while at least. Now the MS approach is to trick the Java community
>into making Java a run-in-the-wintel-environment-only language. This
>battle is still being fought and I think the odds are against MS. But
>MS can be very seductive, the developer community very gullible and
>JavaSoft very arrogant. MS might just pull it off yet.
>
>Java is a given. The future of Apple Macs, Newtons, and anything that
>does not run Windows or a windows derivative is definitely not a safe
>bet.
I don't aggree. Unix is here to stay. It's been here since the
'60s, and it's not going anywhere. Given the limited resources that a
PDA has, it makes sense to use smaller applications, smaller operating
system -- really make the most out of each byte. Isn't that what Java
is supposed to do?
Randolph Q. Sill
On Tue, 15 Apr 1997 00:15:38 -0400, me...@pobox.com (mathew) wrote:
>F. Todd Wilson <wil...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> Now, imagine being able to justify to a potential customer the cost of
>> buying a few thousand MP2Ks by being able to say that EVERY JAVA APP THAT
>> THEY WRITE/PURCHASE FOR USE ON THEIR DESKTOPS WILL RUN ON A NEWT (within
>> certain limits, I suspect). Database access, calendar synchronization,
>> communications, etc, etc.
>
>A hopeless dream. The Newton's pen-based interface is too different to
>a mouse-and-keyboard-based interface. If you want desktop applications
>to run 'usably' on a handheld, you have to take the WinCE approach and
>make the handheld UI very similar to the desktop.
Mouse-and-keyboard interface is to pen-based interface as
command-line is to mouse-and-keyboard.
I'm not at all stating that any of these three
interface types is better, more functional, easier to use or more
powerful, they're just different.
Under unix, we can type a whole command-line to (for instance)
FTP a file, and put it where we want the file. We can do the same
thing with a M-and-K in probably much the same time (Provided you can
remember all the command-line switches). I'm sure if the FTP
application was writen for a stylus interface, it would be just as
convenient (you wouldn't make the operator of a pen-based application
type full pathnames, or whatever).
My two cents.
Rainer Joswig
> I don't aggree. Unix is here to stay. It's been here since the
> '60s, and it's not going anywhere. Given the limited resources that a
> PDA has, it makes sense to use smaller applications, smaller operating
> system -- really make the most out of each byte. Isn't that what Java
> is supposed to do?
The Newton OS is less memory hungry than Java+Libs (or even + OS).
Smittie
On Thu, Apr 17, 1997 09:47, Randolph Q. Sill <mailto:si...@zhrodague.net>
wrote:
>Excuse me, but isn't Java a platform-independant and rather
>popular language, whereas NewtonScript is not either?
Datum - there are far more applications today written in NewtonScript than
there are written in Java.
Smittie <mailto:smi...@enfour.com>
(CyberDog 2.0 Mail accepted)
Garry Trigger
On 18 Apr 97 14:37:08 -0500, "Smittie" <smi...@enfour.com> wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 17, 1997 09:47, Randolph Q. Sill <mailto:si...@zhrodague.net>
>wrote:
>>Excuse me, but isn't Java a platform-independant and rather
>>popular language, whereas NewtonScript is not either?
>
>Datum - there are far more applications today written in NewtonScript than
>there are written in Java.
Source of this is?
>
>Smittie <mailto:smi...@enfour.com>
>
> http://www.enfour.com/
>
>(CyberDog 2.0 Mail accepted)
>
>
Garry
email:GarryT at ix.netcom.com
Garry Trigger
On Tue, 15 Apr 1997 00:15:38 -0400, me...@pobox.com (mathew) wrote:
>F. Todd Wilson <wil...@fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> Now, imagine being able to justify to a potential customer the cost of
>> buying a few thousand MP2Ks by being able to say that EVERY JAVA APP THAT
>> THEY WRITE/PURCHASE FOR USE ON THEIR DESKTOPS WILL RUN ON A NEWT (within
>> certain limits, I suspect). Database access, calendar synchronization,
>> communications, etc, etc.
>
>A hopeless dream. The Newton's pen-based interface is too different to
>a mouse-and-keyboard-based interface. If you want desktop applications
>to run 'usably' on a handheld, you have to take the WinCE approach and
>make the handheld UI very similar to the desktop.
I'm missing something. Please list those differences, beyond the
obvious. I know the entry fields on a Newton allow for typing and
writing.
>
>Now, if Sun based their handheld/NC Java OS on the Newton, and gave it
>UI class libraries based on the Newton UI... Then it would be worth
>doing. Let's hope that's what Apple and Sun are chatting about.
>
>
>mathew
Garry
email:GarryT at ix.netcom.com
PeterW att clark .net
In <335a013d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Gar...@noSpam.COM (Garry Trigger) writes:
>On Tue, 15 Apr 1997 00:15:38 -0400, me...@pobox.com (mathew) wrote:
>>A hopeless dream. The Newton's pen-based interface is too different to
>>a mouse-and-keyboard-based interface. If you want desktop applications
>>to run 'usably' on a handheld, you have to take the WinCE approach and
>>make the handheld UI very similar to the desktop.
>
>I'm missing something. Please list those differences, beyond the
>obvious.
Well, for starters no color and many mouse events (Mouse_Enter,
Mouse_Exit) don't map well. A mouse system is like a pen system
where you have the stylus in constant contact with the screen... any
app that depends heavily on these events will be strange.
----------------------------------------------------------------
- OS/2 Warp 4 - peterw*clark.net - Linux/X-Windows -
- Technology is only as good as the good it does. -
----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Cohen
PeterW att clark .net wrote:
>
> In <335a013d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Gar...@noSpam.COM (Garry Trigger) writes:
> >On Tue, 15 Apr 1997 00:15:38 -0400, me...@pobox.com (mathew) wrote:
>
> >>A hopeless dream. The Newton's pen-based interface is too different to
> >>a mouse-and-keyboard-based interface. If you want desktop applications
> Well, for starters no color and many mouse events (Mouse_Enter,
> Mouse_Exit) don't map well. A mouse system is like a pen system
> where you have the stylus in constant contact with the screen... any
> app that depends heavily on these events will be strange.
Please, this is ridiculous. There are far more difficult
problems with getting java to run on the newton than
this 'pen based' vs 'mouse/keyboard' based argument.
Its a solveable problem... Look at things like glidepoint mouses
on the PC, which have become quite popular. Gee that acts like
a pen based input device to me..
As for the lack of a keyboard, I see 2 options:
1) newton has a keyboard. Its optional yes, but its an option
to increase functionality, one which might be necessary to
get full functionality out of java or the newton itself.
2) I argue that java makes it easier to cope w/o a keyboard.
Since all text areas are expressed as object classes, they
will have a standard text object, which in the newton implementation
would accept text from the pen/hwr. no big deal.
As for the mouse enter issues, that could really be mapped to
'has focus' type events. ( ie window on top )..
Most apps that use mouse_enter seem to be to start graphics
animations or something ( not all that useful anyway),
that should be good enough with has focus.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Cohen Netscape Communications Corp.
Netscape Fire Department "Mighty Morphin' Proxy Ranger"
Server Engineering
jo...@netscape.com
http://home.netscape.com/people/josh/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Naughton
In article ,
Tom Gall wrote:
>
> Sean Luke wrote:
> >
> > Objective-C ... It's almost weird.
> >
>
> Hardly weird it was by design actually. As I remember my Java history
> Patrick Naughton the gentleman who got the ball rolling was about to
> quit Sun and join up with NeXT. He happened to be on the same
> intermural hockey team as Scott McNealy. Scott told him to hold off,
> write what he thought was wrong with Sun before he left. Patrick
> didn't leave and was one of the original Oak people. I would like
> to think his affinity for NeXTSTEP showed up in Java, with it
> having an close look and feel to that of Objective-C. (The main
> language on NeXTSTEP)
>
> Now back to the Java on NewtonOS debate...
>
I don't generally read usenet any more (not since the good old days of
comp.graphics in the 80's...), but I happened across this article while I
was messing around with Excite Live... (a pretty cool service in
itself)...
As it turns out, Sean and Tom are both absolutely correct. Usually, this
kind of urban legend stuff turns out to be completely inaccurate, but in
this case, they are right on. When I left Sun to go to NeXT, I thought
Objective-C was the coolest thing since sliced bread, and I hated C++.
So, naturally when I stayed to start the (eventually) Java project, Obj-C
had a big influence. James Gosling, being much older than I was, he had
lots of experience with SmallTalk and Simula68, which we also borrowed
from liberally.
The other influence, was that we had lots of friends working at NeXT at
the time, whose faith in the black cube was flagging. Bruce Martin was
working on the NeXTStep 486 port, Peter King, Mike Demoney, and John
Seamons were working on the mysterious (and never shipped) NRW (NeXT RISC
Workstation, 88110???). They all joined us in late '92 - early '93 after
we had written the first version of Oak. I'm pretty sure that Java's
'interface' is a direct rip-off of Obj-C's 'protocol' which was largely
designed by these ex-NeXT'ers... Many of those strange primitive wrapper
classes, like Integer and Number came from Lee Boynton, one of the early
NeXT Obj-C class library guys who hated 'int' and 'float' types.
Another interesting side-note, (so as not to break any rules on my first
[and last]-ever posting to comp.sys.newton), John Seamons, (who happened
to be Andy Bechtolsheim's roommate at Stanford and largely reponsible for
the first ever port of Unix to the SUN-0) once did a port of Oak (Java)
to the Newton. We were in the midst of trying to do a deal with 3DO to
run as their OS/API, and we didn't have any 3DO dev systems on hand, so
John took apart an Apple Newton 100 and wired it up to a bunch of logic
analyzers, reverse engineered the interfaces and actually got some of the
original Star7 demo to run on this machine. After the 3DO deal tubed, I
think most of the code was lost to history... last I heard, John was out
in Aspen working for wnj, so you never know.
Sigh... we sure knew how to have fun in those days...
-Patrick
-------------
Patrick Naughton
President and CTO
Starwave Corporation
http://www.starwave.com/people/naughton