Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

>At 09 Nov 2008 21:24:09 +0000 Steve Sobol wrote:
>> > The Instinct, even if it sells in
>> > fairly good numbers, won't attract much third-party developer interest
>> > unlessthe apps can also run on a good number of other phones.
>>
>> Hm. Sprint non-smartphones run Java Mobile Edition. I'd be surprised if
>the
>> Instinct didn't.
>
>It does, but virtually any phone runs Java. Java apps tend to be written
>towards the "lowest common denominator" phone they can run on, to increase
>their potential market, and are often limited in functionality by the VM's
>"sandbox." I doubt very many robust Java apps will be written specifically
>for the Instinct, despite the availability of an SDK.
>
>
>> The only phones I can think of that wouldn't are the Palm
>> and Windows Mobile devices.
>
>
>I don't know about Sprint's, but AT&T and T-Mo's HTC-built WinMo phones
>include a Java VM. Even so, I'd only run a Java app as a last resort, if
>no "native" WinMo version is available.

The PalmOS based Treos do run a custom version of the Java VM that was
ported to the Palm OS by IBM. Unfortunately at the end of 2007 Palm's
license for Java expired and Palm did NOT renew it. If you try and
download the Java VM from the Palm web site you'll get a message
telling you it is no longer available. It is not available on IBM's
web site either, and I can find no listing of ANY Java VM for the Palm
OS on Sun's Java web site.

I ran into this issue with the 755P I got last Christmas. In early
January I wanted to run an app. that required the Java VM - with some
help from Yahoo Search I was able to find a copy of the Java VM on the
web (BTW, if any of you are in need of the Java VM for the newer Treos
that run Palm OS 5.x, drop me a line).
>
>> Apps specifically written for the Instinct? There probably were only a few
>> at first, in which case your assertion applies... but I'd be surprised if
>> there weren't plenty of J2ME apps that would run on the Instinct.

Native apps (complied binaries for the native hardware/OS) normally
run better than apps run in a VM on any platform - no need for that
extra level of interpretation. That has been true as far back as I can
remember - even true on mainframe machines {but on the other hand
you'd be amazed how well MS-DOS 6.22 will run on a IBM Z-Series
mainframe in a IBM-PC emulator). The question is "if you need the app
and a VM one is the only thing availabe, it beats the hell out of
nothing".

>
>Plenty will run, but few will take full advantage of the Instinct hardware,
>much like an XP or Vista PC can still run DOS apps if you really need it
>to, so I understand the OP's pain. He wants iPhone-caliber apps, and is
>stuck with the same stuff any RAZR or Nokia candy-bar can run.
>
I know some people look down their nose at Microsoft but the one thing
they do that I appreciate is that, for the most part, a new version of
the OS does not leave you high and dry on application software. On my
newest machine (an AMD desktop running Windows XP Pro) I can still run
(with some minor limitations) the very first piece of IBM-PC software
I bought in 1982 - IBM's Personal Editor: yeh, I know PE makes Notepad
look like a deluxe piece of softwre, but PE is my "backwards
compatibility" benchmark. Apple, on the other hand, has marooned
their users more than once - that is why I refuse to buy or use Apple
products (and BTW their Windows software {iTunes & QuickTime} is
sooooo bad it isn't even funny).

Regards,
Bill Bowen
Sacramento, CA