Author: Mridul Muralidharan
Date: 11:41:32 03/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 22, 2004 at 11:22:37, Peter Skinner wrote: >On March 22, 2004 at 08:03:22, Mridul Muralidharan wrote: > >>Yes , this is still available from Microsoft site - but they were forced to >stop furthur development on this and shipping of non-compliant versions. > >I can not find it _anywhere_ on the MS site. I have even done a search for it. >I believe they removed it. > Hmm , I can get you the link from office - I dont have it here at home. Since one of the components of my previous product was also certified to run on m$ vm , we had a url from where to download these vm's ..... >>Sun release used to be a reference implementation - more like a proof of >>concept. Ofcourse , once the JIT versions from 1.3 came up , they are much much >>better. >> >>>Run two identical computers side by side and have one use the Sun release and >>>the other use the MS release, and the MS release wins hands down. >>> >> >>You are comparing something that is running java 1.1 and running 1.4 ??? >>What is the point of comparing different versions ? > >I am comparing the speed of the two versions. 1.4 is drastically slower. > In computer chess terms (though not exactly similar) , you are comparing the nps of fritz 5 w.r.t fritz 8. fritz 8 is going to be slower , but plays a better game. Similarly , 1.4 supports much more richer feature set and is designed to run on a diverse et of platforms. Another thing I want to mention is , the amount of time and money that can be spent on optimising the VM for a particular platform - that too a non-sun platform is going to be less. This is a reference implementation VM , which means more like a proof of concept that a VM can be implemented under the specified spec and supproting the required minimum feature set. The VM code is not going to be much optimised for a single platform since the task of supporting upwards of say 10 different platforms is non-trivial. So the vendors will be able to come up with much better and platform targetted VM's by exploiting the native platform better. Example : the old microsoft vm on windows and the ibm vm. Specialised VM's for a particular platform (like windows under x86) is going to be much more simpler task for optimisation than optimising a generic code base which works across a vast set of platforms. >>>So far I am not losing out on anything. I have Java installed, and I don't have >>>any concerns. Lawyers can file all the papers they want, I am still going to use >>>the free software I want to use.. _no one_ can tell me differently. >>> >> >>You can create viruses in your comp - and no one will tell you anything unless >>you release them too :) >>Forgetting that , you will ermain locked in to a older implementation , which is >>not compliant with any of the newer specs. >>Pretty soon , you wont have most of the available functionality available. >>Most applet developers continue to support 1.1 which is why , you still dont >>have a problem, but this is going to change prety soon ... and then you would >>not be able to run most of the newer apps ! >>It is like saying , I will use only DOS 6.0 and I also want to run win32 apps :) > >Not at all. I don't run anything that is DOS 6.0. I only run win32 applications. >I have no need for DOS. It is outdated and almost useless. > I was making an analogy. Just as you cannot run win32 apps under pure DOS , same way , you cannot run the 1.4 apps under the older M$ vm's. The vm spec , language definition and the essential base support libraries have moved on. Hence if you dont want to be locked onto a older version - you better upgrade :) Pretty soon most people are going to stop supporting 1.1 vm's - most already dont ! >Peter
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.