06-22-2005, 04:00 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Bitstream Adds Java 1.5 Support To Thunderhawk
"Bitstream Inc. announced today the addition of full Java support to ThunderHawk 2.1 Pocket PC Edition, the company's award-winning technology that provides enterprise clients and end users with a familiar, secure desktop browsing experience on mobile devices...While most mobile browsers provide limited Java support, ThunderHawk is the only wireless Web browser that displays full HTML pages while offering desktop-level Java 1.5.0 capabilities. Subscribers can run powerful Java applets on a Pocket PC using ThunderHawk , and the applets will behave on the mobile device just as they do on the desktop."
Thunderhawk is an unusual browsing platform since it essentially acts as a thin client to Bitstream's proxy, so I'm curious how the Java implementation works. I'm guessing Bitstream's servers are processing the applet and pushing the display. If that's the case, if someone has a chance to try it, let us know how well it works. This could be a promising step forward in mobile browsing.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 04:55 PM
|
|
5000+ Posts? I Should OWN This Site!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,067
|
|
Well, I've tested it. Unfortunately, it's what I was afraid of: it's an entirely server-side solution; it, therefore, doesn't work at all. The applet window does look up, but it's just a static image (generated on the server) sent over by the HTTP server. There is no, therefore, any kind of interaction in there.
Noone has ever produced a fully Java 1.5 JVM for the PPC, and Bitstream is no exception. Some reasons for this:
- size: the class library of JRE 1.5, rt.jar, takes 33 Mbytes (and that's JRE, not the JDK, which is 37 Mbytes). This size can't really be reduced without giving up on full Java 1.5-compliance. The required class library size alone renders providing a Java 1.5-enabled browser highly improbable.
- niche market: the folks at Bitstream don't even consider developing VGA-optimized browser (TH is QVGA-optimized only at present). Why would then Bitstream develop a client-side, fully-fledged JVM - it requires orders of magnitude more work and would even less people be interested in getting in it?
That is: Just give a try to, say, http://www.thebroadroom.net/downloads/kitty/ with your desktop browser and the new TH version and you'll see what I mean.
As a serious Java programmer, lecturer and hacker, I find it impossible to make a client-side technology (applets) two-tier (GUI created at the server and sent out as an image as there is nothing that would render the GUI by executing the applet class).
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 04:58 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Menneisyys
Well, I've tested it. Unfortunately, it's what I was afraid of: it's an entirely server-side solution; it, therefore, doesn't work at all. The applet window does look up, but it's just a static image (generated on the server) sent over by the HTTP server. There is no, therefore, any kind of interaction in there.
|
You mean it won't intercept taps and proxy them back to the server?
Quote:
|
As a serious Java programmer, lecturer and hacker, I find it impossible to make a client-side technology (applets) two-tier (GUI created at the server and sent out as an image as there is nothing that would render the GUI by executing the applet class).
|
Well, there have been some research projects done on it, but yes, I haven't seen any commercial remote-GUI solutions for Java.
--janak
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 05:07 PM
|
|
5000+ Posts? I Should OWN This Site!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,067
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Janak Parekh
You mean it won't intercept taps and proxy them back to the server?
|
It doesn't. It's just a static image, nothing else. I've installed the latest installer cab file (with filedates 13/06 inside). It is almost the same as older CAB files and is only a few bytes larger.
It's technically not impossible to create a two-tier architecture to provide full Java compatibility (even if the Remote AWT for Java project is retired), but it will really be sluggish and will require a lot of bandwidth. To avoid this, a client must be Java-enabled.
All in all, I don't really understand Bitstream. Did they announce Java 1.5-compliance just for getting some publicity? Or, did they just leave an old installer file on their server?
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 05:28 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,171
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Menneisyys
It doesn't. It's just a static image, nothing else. I've installed the latest installer cab file (with filedates 13/06 inside). It is almost the same as older CAB files and is only a few bytes larger.
|
Oh well. So much for that. 
Quote:
|
It's technically not impossible to create a two-tier architecture to provide full Java compatibility (even if the Remote AWT for Java project is retired), but it will really be sluggish and will require a lot of bandwidth. To avoid this, a client must be Java-enabled.
|
I'm not completely sure about this. After all, Swing isn't native, so it should be able to proxy the API calls.
Quote:
|
All in all, I don't really understand Bitstream. Did they announce Java 1.5-compliance just for getting some publicity? Or, did they just leave an old installer file on their server?
|
Something is indeed wrong. Check out the online help on the subject. It suggests no dragging, but it implies (although it doesn't say) tapping should work.
--janak
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 05:46 PM
|
|
5000+ Posts? I Should OWN This Site!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,067
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Menneisyys
Or, did they just leave an old installer file on their server?
|
I checked thversion.txt in the installer CAB file; it contains 2.100.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 06:10 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 797
|
|
One day, when Bitstream allows SIP's to work with Thunderhawk, I'll be interested. Up until that point, I'm so not interested it isn't even funny. :roll:
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 07:30 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 233
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by vincenzosi
One day, when Bitstream allows SIP's to work with Thunderhawk, I'll be interested. Up until that point, I'm so not interested it isn't even funny. :roll:
|
I'd like to encourage everyone that has requests like this to contact BitStream and let them know (I'm not saying you haven't, vincenzosi). BTW, I asked them for the same feature, so you're not alone in wanting it.
When they released v2.0, the biggest request they had was for real scrolling--now we have that. It's a big project, but they *do* listen to their customers' feedback. Again, send in those suggestions so they can tally up the relative importance.
I have enjoyed TH so much that I just paid for a one year subscription. Yep, it's got a few flaws, but it is improving.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-22-2005, 08:13 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 797
|
|
I definitely did (good idea, too) and I swear that the day they implement it is the day I sign up permanently. I don't even care that it's a subscription.
But alas, I have a feeling it'll be a long way off if ever.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-03-2005, 07:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
