An Open-Source Java Port To iPhone?

An anonymous reader writes "With the first anniversary of open-source Java coming up November 13, a Sun official believes the project could bear a fruit much sought-after in the Java community: a Java port to the Apple iPhone. Apple has not released a version of Java capable of running on the popular device. But Sun's Terrence Barr, technical evangelist for the Java mobile and embedded community, believes Apple's plans to release an SDK for iPhone in early 2008 may result in the open-source phoneME version of Java ME winding up on iPhone."

FreeBSD Java 6 on Leopard

[javacowboy]

An enterprising developer is already working to get FreeBSD's Java 6 on Leopard:

http://www.theserverside.com/blogs/thread.tss?thread_id=47500 [theserverside.com]

Re:Why?

[shutdown -p now]

I have not found any really compelling Java apps on my desktops (Linux and Mac OS), are there really any reasons for needing them on my phone?

J2ME is very different from desktop Java. It's one of the oldest APIs for handheld devices around, and there is a lot of stuff written for it already - tons of games [midlet-review.com], instant messengers [bombus-im.org], e-mail clients [movamail.com], and lots of other stuff. GMail Mobile [google.com] is a J2ME application, and so is Opera Mini [operamini.com] (granted, the latter not really needed on an iPhone or a decent smartphone, but priceless on plain Java-enabled mobiles like my Sagem my301).

So, if there are native apps, why would we want Java?

Considering the above, the short answer is: to use all the stuff already available for J2ME for other platforms.

Also, is my impression of Java outdated? Is it not slow, bloated (JRE + app), and have an ugly UI?

It is still relatively slow, of course (well, what do you expect from a language that forces everything onto the heap?), but it certainly works good enough for plain GUI apps, even on low-end phones (those not even considered smartphones). Apps are small. Tthe size of J2ME runtime is usually hard to tell since there are many different ones available, and which one your phone uses is not always obvious. UI is an interesting question: J2ME GUI toolkit is specifically designed [wikipedia.org] so that it does not enforce any specific L&F or interaction model, and a well-written J2ME application should have native L&F on any implementation, and be fully resolution-independent. For stuff like games, it still allows them to get a fullscreen canvas and draw whatever they want on it, and interact with the keypad/keyboard and touchscreen directly.

Apple may soon announce to step back for Sun

[rpp3po]

It's very questionable that they would even extend their Java efforts for the iPhone when Java support by Apple for Mac OS X might soon be over, but continued by Sun.

Main argument: Kernel APIs are stable since OS X 10.4, all major high performance graphic foundations since 10.5. The JDK could be put almost completely onto public APIs so Sun could take over development without the need for so much insider involvement anymore.

I've found the whole story here: http://javablasphemy.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] (currently overloaded)

Re:Why?

[Sillygates]

Java's default UI is still ugly

If you are running windows, swing will use your windows theme (by default).
And, as of jre 1.6.0 swing can also be set up to use gtk themes as well


I wish steve jobs made that iPhone keynote a little more dramatic, by saying:

"iPhone runs Solaris 10"
Featuring core stability, and java!

Couldn't be more wrong

[bennini]

Given that the only popular Java application on Mac OS X, Azureus, is universally regarded as being slow, bloated, and ugly, I'd say the GP's impression is not at all outdated.

Azureus is the only popular Java app on OS X???....so you mean Eclipse, NetBeans, LimeWire, and JEdit are not popular?
I think u meant to say that Swing sucks...not Java.

With regards to the lack of an official Java 1.6 on OS X...
What im wondering is how many of the people griping about this actually develop applications that leverage the features in Java 1.6 or how many of you require Java 1.6 to run an already existing Java application?

The major features introduced by Java 1.5 such as generics, annotations, and AOP, are not even popular yet. How many developers even know what AOP is? Ok from that subset, how many of them design new applications that leverage cross-cutting behaviour? Ok since there are a few of you left, let's move to Java 1.6...we've now got runtime hot-patching at the class level (not just at the class loader level! woohoo)....so those of you with personal satellites with "always-on" software can now update ur buggy classes on the fly....additionally, we can embed Ruby and Groovy script languages inside of our java application and run them directly from within the JVM. Im sure IBM is quickly porting all their applications to take advantage of that feature.

i still havent heard one real convincing argument as to why java 1.6 is so important to have RIGHT NOW. aside from being able to test your existing applications with java 1.6, i highly doubt anyone functionally necessitates the new features (and no, "because its cool to access your java objects from within ruby" is not a valid argument). if industrial companies like Mercedes are telling companies like IBM that they still arent ready to move away from 1.4.2, why on earth are basic computer users in a rush to jump to 1.6/1.7 ??