I want to make a program that would be able to manipulate the desktop based on user input commands (Preferably by voice, but... baby steps). Similar to Windows Speech Recognition, or Cortana.
I would like to make this as easy as possible to use and set up etc. For this reason I had planned on writing it in Java so that it would be cross-platform, and as simple as possible for users.
After looking further into how I would go about this, I saw mentioned here (Manipulating windows from other applications in Java) that I should use JNI.
I'm now wondering if (as mentioned in the top comment) it would be easier if I were to switch to C++ as using JNI might negate the cross-platform capability benefits of Java?
Or if possible, would it be possible to have the program select the appropriate JNI classes automatically based on the operating system?
In short: Does JNI negate the benefits of Java cross-platform compatibility?
Sorry if this post is a bit confusing. I've quite a few questions so this may seem a bit all over the place.
Many Operating System specific tasks cannot be done platform independent. But what Java already does a lot and JNI allows you to do too is that you can have different native binaries for different platforms - and possibly a single Java API to use all of them platform-independent.
Going C++ has the disadvantage that you need to have multiple executables. With Java you could have just 1 that loads different native code.
Although if you need a lot of different native code to implement your idea, maybe it's easier to just implement it for just 1 platform directly in a language that has bindings to all the required native APIs. Like maybe C# for Windows and something else for other platforms?
We want to use existing C# sources within our Java project. So far, this would not be a great problem since using e.g. Java Native Interface (JNI) is quite straight forward.
The problem is that the software shall also run on non-windows OS. So, we can compile the C# sources with Mono in order to make them executable on e.g. Linux. But how about the integration within Java? JNI or any COM-based solutions for C# <-> Java interoperability are OS-dependent and only work e.g. on Windows.
One possible solution would be the implementation of webservices. Has anybody another idea of how to solve this problem? I would be very thankful for alternative suggestions!
Thanks very much!
Regards
This is maybe not an "answer" as such, more a bit of discussion of how I viewed a similar (I think) situation.
I had a major investment in a C#/.Net-based client-server style system. So when I decided that I also wanted to support an Android "client" app I looked into various options. To me the most important factor was to maintain my C# classes as the defining classes for the object interchange between the existing system and the to-be-written Java Android app.
What I eventually settled on, and tweaked to my liking, was a system where Google Protocol Buffers is the interchange media. (If you're not familiar with them they are a sort of JSON-like interchange format.)
https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/
At the .Net end I use ProtoBuf-Net, written by Marc Gravell (he works here at SO, I believe). It includes the ability to take .Net objects and generate .proto files, the defining file for Protocol Buffers.
https://code.google.com/p/protobuf-net/
At the Android end I use ProtoStuff, written by David Yu. There is a part of his code that takes a .proto file and generates the corresponding Java classes.
https://code.google.com/p/protostuff/
One problem I encountered was that this didn't work well for my .Net classes that are derived classes, which was most of them. I created a workaround that is described in my comment to the answer here:
How to get protobuf-net to flatten and unflatten inherited classes in .Net?
This is now working to my satisfaction.
Note that I haven't talked at all about how the Android app connects to the Windows-based system and how the communications is performed. That was secondary for me - my primary consideration was making the C# class definitions the definitive definitions and having Java classes created from them automatically, and then the object-to-object interchange. (In the event I'm using a home-made TCP/IP communications link, but the actual communications could be anything, probably also web services.)
Hope this helps.
So I did a lot of research on this topic and want to share my findings with you:
One (from a technical point very attractive) option is to use commercial bridges between Java and .Net. For sure, the most popular products are JNBridge and Javonet. Both products seem to be quite easy-to-use, have good support and seem to be very sophisticated. Especially JNBridge already supports bridging between Java and Mono too, which allows the portation to also non-Windows OS, which is one of our main requirements as stated above. Javonet also wants to integrate Mono and is going to release this feature soon. However, both solutions are commercial and one needs to weigh their features against the respective costs. Nevertheless, from a pure technical point of view, they look great and also state to enable very fast communication between Java and .Net (faster than with web services).
Another option is to connect Java and .NET via COM. Since COM is generelly defined platform-independently, this could work on multiple OS. There are lots of open source projects that could be used for such an implementation, such as EZJCOM, J-Interop, JACOB or JCOM. The main restriction (expecially for our project) is that Mono only supports COM-interoperability under Windows (yet). So, this is not really an option for us. But if you want to create Java-.NET interoperability on Windows only, this is a good way.
The straighforward way of integrating Java and C# is to use Java Native Interface (JNI). You can also find manifold implementations that make JNI more easy to use, the most popular one is probably jni4net which seems to be a very active and frequently used project. But there are also others with specific pros and cons, such as Caffeine, Espresso or csjni. Finally, JNI is not 100% platform independet. It is applicable on different platforms, but you have to generate platform-specific code which makes it clearly less usable for our purposes. If you limit your application to Windows, jni4net seems to be a very good choice.
The third option could be to run both the Java and the .Net part within a Common Language Runtime. Ikvm.net is one possible and very popular solution therefore (as mentioned above by Samuel Audet). The drawback of this option is the loss of features and efficiency of the JDK.
The last and surely most generic alternative is to set up webservices between the Java and the .Net world. For this solution, one needs to find appropriate ways for serializing/deserializing objects from/to Java and .Net. There are manifold possible solutions for that available. RenniePet mentioned a sophisticated solution based on Protocol Buffers. Others exist as well such as http://java-cs-bridge.sourceforge.net/. This option might have a potential drawback when considering communication runtime, but may be the way to go for us.
Hope this may help anyone in the future that is confronted with the same problem.
All java libraries are not present within android e.g. javax.script, java.awt.* etc. It makes it very difficult to use a lot of useful libraries written in java (e.g. libraries for java script evaluation, image processing, etc.).
I am just curious, would anyone have an idea as to why android team has decided to keep these out of android sdk?
This article might provide some basic explanation:
Google’s mobile phone platform, Android, supports a relatively large
subset of the Java Standard Edition 5.0 library. Some things were left
out because they simply didn’t make sense (like printing), and others
because better APIs are available that are specific to Android (like
user interfaces).
I think that other reasons might include the fact that the mobile platform does not have the computational resources that other devices such as laptops and desktops might have (even though this seems to be changing with the introduction of high end mobile phones).
Edit: I think that the concept of 'usefulness' varies, so what yourself find useful might not be so for other people. If you want specific reasons why this specific package was left out, it is of my opinion that you are asking it in the wrong place. With regards to this specific package, the javax.script, you might want to consider taking a look at this previous SO post which proposes an alternative.
Edit: My bad, I meant objective-c, not c#. Some reason I got it into my head it was c# the iphone used. So the answers for c# were great, thanks, but theyre a bit irrelevant, sorry about that.
I've had a look but can't find anything that answers this, though a few have shortened the question by answering parts of it. Between a small group, we were planning on doing some work on iPhone and Android, the 2 seperate for the most part but helping each other out, and with some guys doing graphics work split between them.
But we were thinking about the possibilities of moving things between the two, not necessarily apps, maybe just useful classes or something. Looking at objective-c and Java, they seem to have about the same features that the biggest obstacle would be system interface stuff, so we were wondering whether, if we created an abstraction over these on each system so they could be given the same input (which unless I'm wrong wouldn't put too much strain on the system?), would there be any problems in writing something to convert between objective-c and Java, worse than the locations of methods in the sdks? Or are there key features or something in one language that the other doesn't have which we've missed that would mean the only way to do it would be rewriting from scratch.
I wouldn't waste time trying to find commonality between iOS and Android.
Cross-platform is almost always a waste of time and resources unless the cross-platform capability is central to the apps functioning. That is especially true for platforms such as iPhone and Android which have custom OS and work very tightly with the hardware.
Cross-platform development environments add rather than reduce complexity long term. Yeah, it sounds neat but usually you get 90% what you want easily and then you hit a roadblock that destroys all the savings you made and then starts putting you in the hole. There are simply to many compromises and square pegs jammed into round holes.
Unless your app could in theory work from a generic web page, cross-platform is not for you.
In the specific case of Objective-C and Java, although Java is descended from Objective-C they have no modern interoperability. You can't use code from one on the other.
You should spend the time to learn each platform's specific API. There are no shortcuts.
Tools like XMLVM, Codename One and iSpectrum tell us that you can actually cross-compile Java code (from an Android app or creating one from scratch) to Objective-C code that is running on an iPhone without having to install any virtual machine on the Apple side of things.
I suggest watching Developing iPhone Applications using Java
Unfortunately Apple's license
agreement for the iPhone SDK prohibits
the porting of the Java virtual
machine to the iPhone. In this
presentation we introduce an Open
Source Java-to-Objective-C
cross-compiler as well as a Java-based
implementation of the Cocoa library.
With the help of these tools, iPhone
applications can be written in pure
Java. Using the Java version of Cocoa,
it is possible to run a Java-based
iPhone application as a Java
desktop/applet application that can be
cross-compiled to run natively on the
iPhone. The talk will discuss the
challenges of the Java-to-Objective-C
cross-compiler as well as the
Java-based version of Cocoa. Details
are available at http://www.xmlvm.org/
and for more insight a more recent talk about Cross-Compiling Android applications to the iPhone from Frebruary 2010 is available here, which is documented at http://www.xmlvm.org/android/ :
Android is an Open Source platform for mobile devices. Initiated by Google, Android has received much attention. Android applications are developed using Java, although a special compiler converts class files to a proprietary, register-based virtual machine that is used on Android devices to execute applications. Android defines its own API for writing mobile applications. With the help of XMLVM it is possible to cross-compile Java-based Android applications to native iPhone applications.
The Android application is written in
Java and makes use of an Android
specific API. XMLVM offers a
compatibility library, written in
Java, that offers the same API as
Android, but only makes use of the
Java-based API for Cocoa Touch. During
the cross-compilation process, both
the application and the Android
compatibility library are
cross-compiled from Java to
Objective-C and linked with the Cocoa
Touch compatibility library to yield a
native iPhone application.
From the 2008 talk about building Java applications for the iPhone http://www.xmlvm.org/iphone/ :
Apple's iPhone has generated huge
interest amongst users and developers
alike. Like MacOS X, the iPhone
development environment is based on
Objective-C as the development
language and Cocoa for the GUI
library. The iPhone SDK license
agreement does not permit the
development of a virtual machine.
Using XMLVM, we circumvent this
problem by cross-compiling Java to the
iPhone. Just like a Java application
can be cross-compiled to AJAX, XMLVM
can be used to cross-compile a Java
application to Objective-C. The
cross-compilation is also accomplished
by mimicking a stack-based machine in
Objective-C.
If you focus on abstracting away things like system interactions, and stick to the common subset of the languages, you can probably build classes that would require little or no modification to move from one language to the other.
C# does have a better implementation of generics than Java, in that C#'s generics retain strong typing at run-time.
C# also has LINQ, which as far as I know has no equivalent (yet) in Java. LINQ provides a SQL-like query capability, built into the language and fully supported by the .NET frameowrk, that lets you query object collections, and does so in a very functional-language style. LINQ can be extended by query providers to work with other data formats, such as XML and SQL, once the query provider provides an object model that translates to the other format. LINQ also makes parallelization very easy for multi-core work. It's a huge extension to language capability.
This topic is often filled with the dogma of technology jihadis, so I shall try and steer clear of that in my answer.
In my experience, I would largely agree with people saying that trying to share code between the two platforms would be difficult. However, there are some important exceptions:
I would consider cross-platform development where your business logic:
is non-trivial;
should be standardized across platforms; and
has well defined interactions with the outside world (e.g. network stack or UI).
(bonus) is written already.
Apple is the rate determining step here, given the now infamous 3.3.1 restrictions on source code languages. You can write code in Javascript according to the bundled Webkit, C, C++ and Objective C.
If you don't want to install extra languages on a 'droid, you can use the Java that compiles down to dalvik code, the Javascript as per the slightly different build of webkit or something from the NDK. Then you'll be looking at C/C++. You could cross-compile Objective-C, but I haven't had any experience of that.
The clean separation of business logic from UI and networking is important, as you'll be looking to write adapters for the networking layer, something else for the UI.
I would not attempt to write cross platform UI code in C/C++, and would either write something that used HTML/CSS/JS, or more likely write something completely custom to take advantage of the different UI metaphors on each platforms - e.g. there is no analogue to the notification bar on the iPhone. Animation on the iPhone is orders of magnitude simpler to implement than on Android.
If you don't need the UI to be massively integrated with the OS, then a webview and some HTML5 may be sufficient. Titanium is a good option here, and my colleagues in the know tell me it is better (i.e. compiles, not interpreted) than PhoneGap. Again I don't know.
Going the other way in complexity, Open GLES is available on both platforms.
It should also be noted that SVG is not available on the current crop of Android OSes.
If you actually want to do cross phone development, as long as it is not something really computationally expensive, I would probably go with PhoneGap.
PhoneGap is an open source development framework for building cross-platform mobile apps. Build apps in HTML and JavaScript and still take advantage of core features in iPhone/iTouch, iPad, Google Android, Palm, Symbian and Blackberry SDKs.
As far as I can tell, it's pretty much the only cross platform toolkit that is allowed in the iPhone app store.
If you're dead set on native development, I think you'll find that unless you're making a game and targeting c, it will be a lot of work to port. The frameworks are very different and the way of building UI is very different. That said, to answer you're direct question of objective-c vs. java, it's not that bad. It is different enough, though, that an abstraction tool would not be that easy - not like Java vs C#. Objective-c does not have garbage collection (on the iPhone anyway), for example, and the syntax is very different. Objective-c is more loosely typed in the way that it does method calls (messages in objective-c). That said, they aren't wildly different in terms of programming paradigms. They are both object oriented imperative languages. They both have classes and methods, public and private. If you wanted to port the code by hand, it wouldn't be the end of the world, I just think you might wind up spending a lot more time trying to build an abstraction layer.
If you're thinking about doing Android development my best advice is to go for java. There is no benefit at all of writing a complete abstraction (assuming you can) layer to convert from C# to Java. As for the IPhone development dont doubt about using Objective-C for the same purpose.
You can't develop for the iPhone in the same language as for Android. For the iPhone, you can only program in Objective C, it's developed by Apple. You can't use it for android, and the only way to do iPhone development is with that language (it's in the user agreement).
As for C# vs. Java, the whole principle is different. Java is one language for every platform, .Net is one platform for every language. They are not compatible. You can use Java on Android, but I'm not sure if you can use C# (.Net) as well.
Anyway, you'll have to build two different apps for these two mobile operating systems.
JMF is old, and doesn't support a lot of codecs properly. I get by these days by using FFMPEG in the background, but I would like to switch to a native java solution if one exists, does anyone know of a current open source Java project that has media manipulation functionality?
While not 100% native, you could also use Xuggler. It's an open-source (LGPL) wrapper that runs FFmpeg inside Java so you don't have to shell out, and is used by over 250 developers already today.
It depends what you want to do.
Since you are using ffmpeg, then I assume you are encoding videos. I am pessimistic that Java will do such work 'native' in the short or medium term--it very much goes against many Java philosophies/baggage.
That said, with Java 7, codecs in general should become easier to access, be more available and start showing up in real applications. Unfortunately, from what I've read, the emphasis seems to be on playback and GUIs.
I do allot of shelling out from Java to ffmpeg to encode videos and other media. Fact is, ffmpeg is one of the best tools out there for programmatically encoding videos, proprietary or open source. I predict that it will stay that way for the foreseeable future.
If ffmpeg is just not working for you, then you may want to investigate Quicktime for Java. I personally have not looked to deeply at it, but it seems to be 'big'. Note that it seems to have been deprecated as of the release of QuickTime X (Fall 2009).
QuickTime for Java provides a set of
cross-platform APIs which allows Java
developers to build multimedia,
including streaming audio and video,
into applications and applets.