Classic Nook Teardown

[stangri]

Originally Posted by DaFlake

Many systems are running JAVA code now and running it well. As a JAVA programmer I can attest to this. Even the military is using it on... wait for it...

MISSION CRITICAL SYSTEMS! I won't even bring up all the sites that are running JSP or servlets to do their business.

Oh, of course, if military is using it, it must be blinding fast. Is Ferrari faster than HUMVEE? It is. Military is still using HUMVEEs. For different requirements there are different solutions, there're many problems where the computational speed is not an object or better achieved thru faster hardware than faster software.

You intentionally ignoring my point that those systems you're talking about (let alone servers processing jsp) don't run on a Samsung S3C6410 processors, right?

Also, how the military using java changes the fact that the objective code runs faster than the code which has to be translated into objective code in VM? But then again, if it's military, Turing's computer science does not apply to them, heck, they might even have their own pi.

PS. I felt the need to append my message -- in no way I intended to ridicule military, just the argument that if military is using something then it's fast. I know without military project there would have been no internet and I've supplied software to the very smart folks at Northrop Grumman and their clients (and have a letter of recommendation to attest to that ).

[DaFlake]

Is that Ferrari trying to forge a river? Then yes, the HUMVEE is faster. Once again you are comparing apples to oranges.

As I stated, you continue to generalize simply because you hate JAVA or don't understand it; just admit it. You never stated anything about a processor originally; you simply stated that "JAVA is slow" and then when on some tangent about VM's. I'm waiting for you to make a point in any direction. JAVA is only one tool that I use but it is a solid tool that is easy to port to many different operating systems and architectures. Two programs that do the same thing side by side one in Java and the other in C# and JAVA is just as fast as the other yet the JAVA program can be moved to different architecture where the C# has to stay Intel. It has its uses and I have used it in both the telecom/insurance and the military sector for both front-end and backend solution.

Congrats on the letter, although I'm not sure why you felt the need to put that out there. I guess you needed to pat yourself on the back for it.

JAVA did have a history of being slow, this is well known but those days are long gone now that it has been streamlined and the processors have gotten faster. I'd get used to it as I don't see it going away anytime soon.

[Jim Lester]

Originally Posted by DaFlake

Is that Ferrari trying to forge a river? Then yes, the HUMVEE is faster. Once again you are comparing apples to oranges.

I'm stilling rolling around on the floor laughing on the thought of being in full battle rattle and trying to fit into a Ferrari (let alone fitting a squad, radio gear, a .50 cal, armor plating, etc...). So yes a HMMV is very definitely faster for getting you there than walking.

[stangri]

Jim, you must have never seen the BBC show Top Gear where they used a Ford (Focus or Fiesta, can't recall) as a marine insertion vehicle.

DaFlake -- you really need to read my post in full instead of plucking words out of it. But if the car talk is too distracting, I'll summarize the point (direction) of that particular paragraph: speed is not always an objective and when it is, nowdays more often than not it's cheaper to achieve it thru faster hardware than faster software. The fact that java is used by the army doesn't mean it's as fast as objective code.

Congrats on using Java. You don't have to defend it, it's kinda doing very well on its own. Speed-wise it can't be as quick as objective code. You might not notice the difference (on a modern dual-core CPUs), but it's there -- just because it takes extra effort to translate java code to objective code in the VM.

Honestly, I'm tired of arguing over this issue with what, two programmers out of all the IT people on this board. Looks like everyone else gets it.

[DaFlake]

You confuse me to be honest. My argument with you was about your initial comment that Java was slow. This is flat out wrong. Then you said that it wasn't heavily used in the industry which is also wrong.

However, what you posted above is correct. It is not as fast as objective code but it isn't far behind and if you can't see that you need to start opening your eyes. There are many languages because there are many uses for those languages. JAVA is one of those languages and will continue to have a play in the industry.

As for the IT folks, they may not be posting because the simply don't want to get into this. Just because someone doesn't speak up does not mean that they agree with you. Just a little arrogant aren't you?

I'm done with this thread.

[m-reader]

Originally Posted by DaFlake

As for the IT folks, they may not be posting because the simply don't want to get into this. Just because someone doesn't speak up does not mean that they agree with you. Just a little arrogant aren't you?

I'm done with this thread.

Ditto. I've been around the IT block a couple of times and if there is one thing I learned then that is to know when to bail tail-chasing geek arguments

Java slow, C fast, Microsoft bad, Linux good ... Mmm'kay ...

Cheers!

[stangri]

Originally Posted by DaFlake

You confuse me to be honest. My argument with you was about your initial comment that Java was slow. This is flat out wrong. Then you said that it wasn't heavily used in the industry which is also wrong.

You seem to be easily confused. Haven't seen a single argument disproving the point that code which needs to be translated into objective code in VM (java) is slower than objective code (uhm, not java). Comparing to the objective code (which most of the programs still are) java is slow.

I've never said java wasn't heavily used in the industry. You're wrong.

[jramoyo]

Originally Posted by stangri

Well, if it's an Android then it's all java and java is slow.

uhmm... it's no longer 1995, you know?

[Baumi]

Originally Posted by stangri

Haven't seen a single argument disproving the point that code which needs to be translated into objective code in VM (java) is slower than objective code (uhm, not java). Comparing to the objective code (which most of the programs still are) java is slow.

Make that "slower" - big difference.

When it comes to extensive number-crunching, native code has a big advantage - but when we're talking about GUIs, the computer spends most of its time waiting on user input anyway.

To get back to the car analogies: A sedan can haul more than a convertible, but if you only have a small bag with you anyway, it's not going to make much of a difference. (Except when it comes to fun driving, and that's where the analogy breaks down...)

From what I've read about both Android and the Nook, well-written Java code should easily be fast enough to handle the task. Bad programming OTOH - well, that can slow down anything, no matter which language you're using. ;-)

[supermighty]

It's not a matter if Java is slower than compiled C code. It is, it always will be. It's a matter if the Java is fast enough to run an ereader. Guess what, it is. The Android OS is designed to be used for phones, and telephony requires real time fault tolerant buzzword buzzword. It requires something that works really really well, and google chose Java for that.

The slowness we are seeing in the nook is not because of Java itself but the way in which Java was used. Bugs, poor code are the culprit of the "slowness" of the nook.

But that's all mute in my opinion. The touch screen has been fast enough for me when I used it and the real bottleneck will always be the eInk screen. It is the slowest part of the nook, or any ereader that uses the same model as the nook does.

[stangri]

Originally Posted by Baumi

Make that "slower" - big difference.

If something is slower than the average median (or almost everything else), we call it slow. And the majority of the other e-ink readers do not run java apps, they use compiled code.

supermighty -- did you look at the source of the nook apps? What your statement that its slowness is based on "bugs and poor code" is based on?

[supermighty]

You know very well that I have not looked at the source code.

My statements are based on observations of fewer crashes since the 1.1 update and my understanding of how software is written.

[FatDog]

Is there any word on a Nook SDK? Since it's Java/Android, you would think we could use our PC's or Mac's to start developing Apps. I'd love a .html reader for HTML books, and something that could simply display .txt books.

But Barns & Noble probably wants the device locked down so you can only view stuff you purchase from them.

[stangri]

Well, while it's not an official SDK, there's plenty of information available on nookdevs.com. There's already a nookLauncher and the nook-specific browser, shouldn't be much longer for the other apps now, that the launcher is out.