James Gosling: on the Java Road

« Safety is Freedom | Main | Cosine redux »

20060110 Tuesday January 10, 2006


The new Macintoshes

Get the e-newsletter: Sign up now for the On Demand Business e-newsletter. On Demand Business is helping smaller companies like yours win big. Learn how. Now that the new Intel Macintoshes are officially out, it's probably safe for me to comment on my experience as a developer in their transition program: it was completely boring - as it should have been. Things just worked. Java code moved over with zero effort. Even big things like NetBeans just worked. In all the time I've had my Intel Mac box, my experience has been totally painless.

Great job!

(Tue Jan 10 11:15:36 PST 2006)
Permalink Comments [12]

Comments:

Its great to hear from you that 'Java on new intelMac?..no prob' approved :D ! Especially those of us who are considering to migrate (at last) to the Mac platform!

Posted by Paris Apostolopoulos on January 10, 2006 at 12:34 PM PST #

The more interesting question is "How did the JVM porting go"?

Posted by Greg on January 10, 2006 at 12:42 PM PST #

Oops yes..that was quite good! Do we have a new JVM port or the recent JVM versions will work over this 'Rosetta' technology? If yes ..will we have any perfomance implications?Any tips are much appreciated!

Posted by Paris Apostolopoulos on January 10, 2006 at 12:45 PM PST #

Yea I was wondering about the JVM thing, and also how the entire thing runs as a whole vs the g5/g4 systems?

Posted by Jeffrey Olson on January 10, 2006 at 02:07 PM PST #

真的可正確相容x86系統嗎?

Posted by Sean on January 11, 2006 at 01:33 AM PST #

The JVM (since J2SE 5.0 Release 3) has been a universal binary. If you type the following command in the Terminal:

lipo -info /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.5.0/Commands/java

You'll see the following:

Architectures in the fat file: /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.5.0/Commands/java are: i386 ppc

In other words, it's a native i386 application and Rosetta isn't used.

Posted by Ryan on January 11, 2006 at 06:22 AM PST #

Well, does this i386 based JVM on new Macs come with Sun's HotSpot from 1.5 or they've somehow inhertied their ppc version?

Posted by Shafirov on January 11, 2006 at 11:32 AM PST #

Hmmmm... On my dual 2.0 GHz G5: lipo -info /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/CurrentJDK/Commands/java Non-fat file: /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/CurrentJDK/Commands/java is architecture: ppc I am running the latest release 4 preview 3...

Posted by Nomadman on January 12, 2006 at 06:49 AM PST #

Performance will be an issue for me. It's the main thing that's always held me back from getting a mac, even for a laptop: the JVM performance sucked. It'll be interesting to see if it's their VM or the chip that made the difference. Could someone run the scimark benchmark on an intel mac and post the results? http://math.nist.gov/scimark2/

Posted by Greg Barton on January 12, 2006 at 11:03 AM PST #

JVM performance on the PPC macs has actually been quite good. It is the Java GUI performance that was lacking.. and it may still lag for a while. Intel Macs will use basically the same version of HotSpot (including finally the server version) that Sun provides.

Posted by swp on January 12, 2006 at 02:26 PM PST #

JVM performance on the PPC macs has actually been quite good. It is the Java GUI performance that was lacking.. and it may still lag for a while. Intel Macs will use basically the same version of HotSpot (including finally the server version) that Sun provides.

Posted by swp on January 12, 2006 at 02:26 PM PST #

Native libraries are the worst problem I can see. My work depends on eclipse, so I have to wait for the Intel Mac port o SWT ;(

Posted by satai on January 17, 2006 at 12:46 AM PST #

Post a Comment:

Comments are closed for this entry.