backtop

Software Sun Shows Off Java App Store
Michael Barkoviak - June 3, 2009 9:41 AM
Print 46 comment(s) - last by noirsoft.. on Jun 11 at 3:52 AM
Sun officially announced the Java App Store during JavaOne

Sun Microsystems used its JavaOne tech conference in San Francisco to publicly launch the Java Store, a new offering for consumers looking to easily purchase Java and JavaFX mobile applications.

"Java is one of the most ubiquitous and widespread technology platforms the world has ever seen -- and its future has never been brighter," Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz said in a statement.  "The innovations that will be unveiled today, in particular the Java Store, will represent the beginning of a new era for the Java community – one defined by technical brilliance, market innovation and new business opportunities.”

The Java Store's web site, available at http://store.java.com, is currently in beta mode, though will officially open to U.S. internet users sometime in 2009.  Sun is now inviting developers to submit their JavaFX and Java Platform Standard Edition (Java SE) programs to the Java Warehouse for consideration in the store.

Java remains one of the most used pieces of software today, and users now have the ability to view large catalogs of Java-based technology available for download.  Sun said there are more than 6.5 million Java developers across the world, 2.5 million mobile Java-based devices, and 7 billion Java devices total in use today.  

As Oracle inches towards officially buying out Sun, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison made an appearance at JavaOne, promising to help increase Java use by computer users across the world.

Kickstarted by Apple with its App Store, an increasing number of companies are creating app stores targeting consumers.  Apple has an established store, Sun's store is currently in beta, and companies such as Nokia plan to sell apps directly to consumers.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/09, Rating: 0
RE: Great idea but...
By mydogfarted on 6/3/2009 10:21:19 AM , Rating: 4
.NET? Right, because the programming of .NET has been so consistent across the various releases. </sarcasm>

.NET is only useful if you're running Windows. *NIX, OS X, etc, do best with Java because you don't need to build specific versions of your application to run on each platform.


RE: Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/09, Rating: 0
RE: Great idea but...
By smackababy on 6/3/2009 10:45:11 AM , Rating: 2
So, basically, .NET is only good for 90% of the computers in the world? Completely useless then...

I am a programmer and I work in Java every day. I think it is a terrible language.


RE: Great idea but...
By omnicronx on 6/3/2009 11:39:35 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I am a programmer and I work in Java every day. I think it is a terrible language.
Because its SOOO much different than C#.. I use the two interchangeably everyday, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Java. Furthermore it all depends on what you are trying to get from the program in question.

If I want to deploy a program across a network, and the size of the program is not a problem and you do not have full control over the PC's in question, then I will choose Java. I can package a self contained JVM with the program so that it will run on any environment, without having to worry about which version of .net is installed on the clients machine.

If speed is the main goal, I will always choose .net.

Price is also an issue, I pay around 70 dollars a year to do all my Java programming (myeclipse plugin), as there are tons of open source tools available. You cannot make the same argument with Visual Studio and .net


RE: Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/2009 11:59:49 AM , Rating: 2
It's completely free to develop in .NET. Visual Studio is optional, but you could always get the free "Express" versions if you're not doing anything fancy.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?Fa...


RE: Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/2009 12:01:01 PM , Rating: 2
Also, if the user has Vista or higher, then the .NET Framework is already installed.

Otherwise, it's very simple to do a "ClickOnce" deployment that will download the framework as part of the install.


RE: Great idea but...
By omnicronx on 6/3/2009 12:18:19 PM , Rating: 2
I can also code Java in notepad, which is basically what you would be doing using the express version of VS. Its so stripped down that it is basically useless.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 1:12:55 PM , Rating: 1
You clearly haven't used them then. The Express version of C# includes just about everything. The only big features I can think of that are missing are remote debugging and mobile device development. Yes, there are others, like office plugin, Visual Studio plugin and 64-bit C++ compilers that aren't in the express editions, but for 90+% of users, express editions are all they need.


RE: Great idea but...
By omnicronx on 6/3/2009 3:40:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes, there are others, like office plugin, Visual Studio plugin and 64-bit C++ compilers that aren't in the express editions, but for 90+% of users, express editions are all they need.
First Thing on the MS FAQ:
quote:
The Visual Studio Express Editions are an expansion of the Visual Studio and SQL Server product line to include fun, simple and easy-to-learn tools for non-professional developers like hobbyists, students and novice developers who want to build dynamic Windows applications, Web sites, and Web services. The Express products consist of:
I have used it, and its not suitable for anything more than playing around with it and learning the environment. It is not suitable for 90%+ of users as you claim, as the MS provided document shows.

http://www.microsoft.com/express/support/faq/


RE: Great idea but...
By inighthawki on 6/3/2009 4:14:27 PM , Rating: 1
I disagree, i've programmed quite a few applications in VB, C#, and C++, and currently working on a rather intricate 3D engine in C++ using directx, everything works great and there are no disadvantages. I've used the professional versions at school in the labs and i see almost no need for it.

The express versions are actually rather high quality releases, and compared to the given options for something like java, they are incredible pieces of software.


RE: Great idea but...
By omnicronx on 6/3/2009 4:28:00 PM , Rating: 2
Thats still all personal use. The Express IDE does not support addons at all, which is a big problem. I could not use it solely because of this. It also does not support x64 binaries at all.

So while you may have found a use for it, my point still stands, compared to the free IDE's Java provides (and of course Visual Studio), Visual Studio express is merely a toy.


RE: Great idea but...
By boogle on 6/3/2009 5:37:14 PM , Rating: 2
Merely a toy? You sound *incredibly* eliteist. You mention Eclipse, which isn't exactly much more featured then the express editions of VS.

VS Express offers 99% of the functionality any average dev would want. In the FAQ you linked to, they mentioned hobbyist, novice programmers, etc. I should point out 'hobbyist' in this context, also means developers of apps for the X360 via Live Arcade / X360 Community. You can make a full 3D game in VS C# 2008 Express.

Either way outside of remote debugging, support for addons, multiple projects in one solution (that's a biggy if you make large apps), and the odd rare feature - Express offers it all. Including the incredible intellisense and new LINQ CRM (part of .NET 3.5 I know, but it comes alive with Visual Studio). The features left out are definitely for pro-devs only, and that's fine. The majority of apps on the iPhone for example, could be programmed in VS Express in an incredibly short amount of time. So much for it being a 'toy'.


RE: Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/2009 8:17:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah the multiple projects in a solution is huge for professional developers. I have to say that I've never had a use for remote debugging, add-ons, or 90% of the other features in VS Pro.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 8:24:35 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe I'm misreading you, but you _can_ have multiple projects in a solution in the current C# express.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 5:37:52 PM , Rating: 2
I have worked as a professional developer and never needed plugins for VS. Note that I'm not talking about C++ native development, only .NET development, which is the subject at hand. 90% of .NET developers don't need anything beyond the express editions.


RE: Great idea but...
By Leirith on 6/4/2009 9:56:47 PM , Rating: 2
I laugh at all of these random per cent figures being quoted. Are you just making it up? I'd be interested to see the studies that have shown these "90-99% of developers..." results.


RE: Great idea but...
By Etsp on 6/3/2009 6:07:33 PM , Rating: 2
It supports x64 Binaries when the project is compiled or built on an x64 platform. They simply don't let you pick with the express versions...


RE: Great idea but...
By inighthawki on 6/3/2009 7:25:12 PM , Rating: 2
Actually 64-bit support is fully supported. By default in C#, it compiles for the cpu architecture, though can be changed by going into the advanced build configuration. As for native C++, by default it is x86, but i believe installing the platform sdk allows for x64 support.


RE: Great idea but...
By Etsp on 6/3/2009 8:50:56 PM , Rating: 2
The option to pick cpu architecture for C# is not in the express editions, which is what I was referring to.


RE: Great idea but...
By inighthawki on 6/3/2009 11:54:19 PM , Rating: 2
You must either not actually be using the express edition or haven't updated, because my copy of visual C# express 2008 has the option, im doing it right now, no extras required ("out of the box" install)


RE: Great idea but...
By Etsp on 6/4/2009 9:38:30 PM , Rating: 2
It may be because I'm running it from a 32-bit host machine. It would make sense that they would allow you to pick on a 64-bit host, as the majority of systems are still 32-bit...

I'm not trying to bash the express editions. They fulfill the needs I have quite well. I was simply making a statement about the limitations I have run into.

Here's the info from my about page if you're still not convinced... only made a minor edit replacing an identifier with X's, not sure what that number did, but you can never be too careful.

Microsoft Visual Studio 2008
Version 9.0.30729.1 SP
Microsoft .NET Framework
Version 3.5 SP1

Installed Edition: C# Express

Microsoft Visual C# 2008 XXXXX-XXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXX
Microsoft Visual C# 2008

Hotfix for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU (KB945282) KB945282
This hotfix is for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU.
If you later install a more recent service pack, this hotfix will be uninstalled automatically.
For more information, visit http://support.microsoft.com/kb/945282.

Hotfix for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU (KB946040) KB946040
This hotfix is for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU.
If you later install a more recent service pack, this hotfix will be uninstalled automatically.
For more information, visit http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946040.

Hotfix for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU (KB946308) KB946308
This hotfix is for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU.
If you later install a more recent service pack, this hotfix will be uninstalled automatically.
For more information, visit http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946308.

Hotfix for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU (KB947540) KB947540
This hotfix is for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU.
If you later install a more recent service pack, this hotfix will be uninstalled automatically.
For more information, visit http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947540.

Hotfix for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU (KB947789) KB947789
This hotfix is for Microsoft Visual C# 2008 Express Edition with SP1 - ENU.
If you later install a more recent service pack, this hotfix will be uninstalled automatically.
For more information, visit http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947789.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/11/2009 3:52:47 AM , Rating: 2
It may be too late to get this noticed, but the solution is to go to tools->options click on "show all settings" then projects and solutions-> click on "show advanced build configurations"

By default, C# express hides many things, including selecting debug vs release from the toolbar and platform configuration.


RE: Great idea but...
By boogle on 6/3/2009 5:53:29 PM , Rating: 3
AFAIK C# Express with XNA can target Zune? That's kind of a mobile device :p Albeit the ONLY mobile device you can target. And without an App Store...

Ye I see your point.

MS need to get their act together and allow people to develop applications for Zune like the iPod Touch. I really do have my fingers crossed with the Zune HD. Zune HD better have an FPU too.


RE: Great idea but...
By dvinnen on 6/3/2009 12:27:39 PM , Rating: 2
Last time I checked the express versions couldn't be used for commercial products


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 1:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
Then you haven't checked in a while.

From http://www.microsoft.com/express/support/faq/

quote:

Can I use Express Editions for commercial use?
Yes, there are no licensing restrictions for applications built using Visual Studio Express Editions.


RE: Great idea but...
By phatboye on 6/3/2009 1:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
The thing s though that .Net only really works on computers atm while Java works on almost everything from computers to handheld devices. And the Mono implementation just up to par as of yet.

I'm not going to go as far as say that .Net is useless but ATM Java is the way to go.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 2:03:23 PM , Rating: 1
.NET has flavors available for PCs, WinMo phones, Xbox360 and Zune devices. Yes, all Microsoft devices, but not just traditional PCs either.


RE: Great idea but...
By omnicronx on 6/3/2009 3:49:49 PM , Rating: 3
They also differ from environment to environment. In theory one could code a Java program to work on a PC, cell phone, and console.

.NET, .NETCF and .NET XNA are not directly compatible with each other. While Java is not 100% compatible between these devices either, its still a hell of a lot easier to code. .NETCF for example only has around 30% of the .NET class library.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 5:43:44 PM , Rating: 3
In practice, I have run the same executable on Win Mobile and Windows. The .NET compact framework is largely a subset of the full .NET, so if you code for Mobile, the same executable can work on Windows just fine.

In practice, I have compiled the same code on both Windows and Xbox360 using XNA without the need for changing any lines of code. I have not yet trued the Zune version, since I don't own one.

Yes, to take full advantage of each paltform requires specialized code, but that's no different from Java.

I cannot directly compare to the current state of any Java offerings, but there simply isn't room for anything to be "a hell of a lot easier" than C# and .NET, since .NET is about as easy as it gets.


RE: Great idea but...
By boogle on 6/3/2009 5:46:26 PM , Rating: 3
The Java implementation on each device varies far more than .NET does, you can NOT take an app written for one device, and just put it on another and expect it to work. The libraries vary, the support for FPUs varies (for obvious reasons), the screen sizes vary, the libraries for the GUI varies. Only the most basic console Java app could work on all 3 devices you mention. The crazy thing is - the .NET CF is identical on all devices, unlike Java. Sure you have different versions, but they're static set-in-stone versions rather than 'bitty' differences where you're not sure if a call will work on one device but not another.

Not sure where you got the 30% from. The majority of the important functionality is present in the CF, the pieces missing don't make much sense in an embedded device. It's like saying Cocoa Touch on the iPhone isn't fully featured like on OSX (Cocoa) - but all the important stuff is there. Some stupid ommissions I'll grant you, but ultimately it's a minor problem. XNA (from the brief amount I've looked at) crosses over mostly with .NET, haven't seen any missing classes that would make sense on the Xbox. Can't see much use for most of the Windows forms controls for example.

Either way Java on cell phones is rarely (ever?) a direct copy of the desktop version, for good reason. Java is cut down on phones, .NET is cut down on phones. Same thing, no?


RE: Great idea but...
By estarkey7 on 6/3/2009 5:35:15 PM , Rating: 2
The only thing .NET does better is give me more gray hairs. They completely dropped the ball when they came out with the latest .NET envio and didn't fix the multi-threaded GUI issue.

If you think threading in .NET is easy, do in Java and you won't ever look back.


RE: Great idea but...
By boogle on 6/3/2009 5:56:50 PM , Rating: 2
What's different about Java multithreading. Never done multithreading in Java before. I do quite like OSX's multithreading in Leopard / iPhone, but they really dropped the ball with the Cocoa library and it's diabolical thread safety.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 8:22:06 PM , Rating: 2
The OP has a valid point. in .NET, only the thread that created a Forms object can update it. It is therefore trickier to properly do something such as update a progress bar in your main window to show the progress of a worker thread.

There is a pretty easy (but kinda ugly looking) workaround to get the main thread to do the updating instead. It's a lot better in VS 2008 than it was in 2003, but it's not as easy as allowing any thread to update a forms object.

I don't know how Java works in this respect, but the OP's message would imply that it does allow thread-agnostic GUI updating.


RE: Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/2009 8:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
That could be because Windows Forms (.NET's default GUI) is just a wrapper over GDI+, which I think only supports single-threaded UI updates.

Moving the UI to WPF would probably solve the issue.


RE: Great idea but...
By Spivonious on 6/3/2009 8:11:20 PM , Rating: 2
Example? I haven't done any multithreading in .NET yet, and I agree that it's extremely easy in Java.

I'll go build a simple app in .NET to see what I run into.


RE: Great idea but...
By Etsp on 6/3/2009 9:09:31 PM , Rating: 3
You pretty much have to tell the worker thread to raise an event that the GUI thread catches... I didn't think it was that difficult.

The fact that the GUI itself cannot be multi-threaded is unfortunately, absolute at this point in time. For a standard Forms application, the GUI shouldn't really have a need to be multi-threaded, since the user is usually only doing one thing at a time...(one mouse cursor, one keyboard...) but there are some uses of the GUI that would really benefit from being multithreaded.


RE: Great idea but...
By boogle on 6/3/2009 5:50:13 PM , Rating: 2
Nah, Java will always have a place for apps that need to go on many differente devices and OSes with minimal effort spent in porting.

Not sure an app store is really the ideal outlet for Java apps though. I don't know many people who go out of their way to download applications written in Java, especially given the still poor performance compared to native apps, or even .NET apps.


RE: Great idea but...
By noirsoft on 6/3/2009 8:29:15 PM , Rating: 3
The point of an app store is that users don't have to go out of their way to download the app. I can see app stores becoming more prevalent for everything but big professional applications down the road.


RE: Great idea but...
By boogle on 6/4/2009 9:25:09 AM , Rating: 2
I look forward to that tbh. Central repositories of applications with proper organisation/rating/review can only be a good thing. Although I fear for some apps which despite being very good, may end up buried.


Bad idea
By nafhan on 6/3/2009 11:15:11 AM , Rating: 2
The app store for the iPhone works because they are selling stuff for a popular locked down platform marketed towards people with extra cash with no other way to add functionality to the device.
The Java app store appears to be targeted at the PC and mobile devices. The PC is a completely open platform that is more functional to begin with and where you can get applications from just about anywhere, often for free. Unless they have some killer applications that you can't get from anywhere else (i.e. Steam + HL2), I see this dying off really quickly on the PC side. The mobile half... we'll have to wait and see.




RE: Bad idea
By reader1 on 6/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: Bad idea
By Luticus on 6/3/2009 2:11:00 PM , Rating: 2
Good luck with that, I wouldn't hold my breath.


RE: Bad idea
By amanojaku on 6/3/2009 3:15:21 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The PC will become a closed platform. The entertainment companies, media companies, and software developers will force it to happen. It will mark the beginning of the second generation of computers.
Everybody, sing it with me!

Troll, troll, troll, troll!
Troll, troll, troll, troll!
Troll, troll, troll, troll!
Dumb ass troll!


You guys missed the point
By web2dot0 on 6/4/2009 1:40:06 AM , Rating: 2
The whole discussion in the postings thus far center around client side programming and deployment. I agree that there are some merits to using .NET.

However, .NET also requires ASP backend, hence you really need the end to end support. This is where the gotcha comes into play.

It has shown time and again, that ASP does not scale as well as J2EE. Java Enterprise have proven to be a scalable entity while ASP will crash and burn.

I agree that ASP can get you up and running faster than Java and the learning curve is less steep. But, if you want to deploy a scalable end-to-end solution, J2EE is still the way to go.




RE: You guys missed the point
By boogle on 6/4/2009 9:29:57 AM , Rating: 2
.NET doesn't require IIS (ASP) to run? If you package a client-side app, then it'll only require the .NET framework.

Sure if you want to take web-based apps into account then yes... but then you need to consider the competition outside of just ASP.NET and Java. Personally I haven't seen any evidence that J2EE scales any better than ASP.NET (quite the contrary actually). In fact, all the evidence I've seen just demonstrates that it's programming of the app itself that makes all the difference. As evidenced by the number of very large ASP.NET websites out there that still work - but also of the smaller ASP.NET websites that are horrific despite being smaller. Same goes for JSP.


"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates









botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki