Actually, there is no compelling business rationale, i.e. bottom line, for doing so. In other words, it would not make their stock go up significantly. I can find plenty of reasons for Java on the iPad, but they won't convince the bean counters.
There was a time when Apple eagerly supported Java. Many developers went along. Apple has abandoned those people today for profit reasons.
However, Apple does not even have to put Java on the iPad. The user community can do it but cannot deploy it due to Apple's tight control over what they allow to run on the device.
As a web developer with over 15 years experience, all I can say is THANK YOU APPLE. Someone needed to step up and start the process of putting a stake through Java's heart as a client run-time for web apps. Its crap and needs to be put out of its (and our) misery. I stopped using any sites requiring Java regardless of client platform quite a while ago - and haven't missed it a bit. Good riddance.
As a software developer with over 50 years of experience, all I can say is that each person is entitled to his or her own opinion. However, I'm amazed at the vitriol aimed at Java. Sun's move to make a platform-agnostic, object-oriented language based loosely on C and designed for the Internet as a free resource for the world opened up new possibilities. The decades of refinements, including the JIT compiler, made it a great development platform.
In my opinion (I get to have one too), it's the tablets that are crap. Java was and remains a landmark in software. If Oracle continues with its development plans for Java, you'll see a trimmer language that will work for even more applications.
Have you looked at your Blu-Ray player lately. Chances are that it says "Powered by Java" on it. If Java works for them, why would it be a bad choice for tablets? It's all because the major players are upset with each other AND because each would have developers write software that runs only on their platform.
If you leave Java, what is your best platform-agnostic language? Does it have anywhere near the power of Java? (Don't even begin to suggest HTML5. It's not anywhere near ready for prime time and isn't even finalized yet.)
Certainly you are entitled to your opinion, adn to tout your expereince (and I do not mean that sarcastically). Java as a client run time was a fine idea, 15 years ago. It has outlived its usefulness and frankly is simkply no longer necessary and presents far to many security and version control issues for client side processing. Its done.
Every language has version issues. Every Internet option of any real power will have some sort of security issues. Even browsers do. Clearly, you judge those associated with Java as being more important than its benefits. We disagree. That's fine. I expect those problems to be resolved.
I think that having a powerful platform-agnostic language is a good thing. Not everyone agrees. Certainly, Apple and Google don't.
Active development of new releases of Java is underway, and plenty of worldwide developers still work with Java. You'll find plenty of help-wanted notices for Java programmers. For these reasons, at least, your final remark is just a wishful opinion.
It's abundantly clear that you desire that Java be done. You should not state your wishes as though they were fact. I understand your opinions regarding version control and security and respect them. Many agree. I just view them as challenges.
So, I say again, until Java has a truly powerful and platform-agnostic replacement, it will remain in use. Try to write and maintain a 20,000-line program for all platforms in some other language. When you can do that, I'll cheerfully abandon Java (as long as there's a reasonable conversion path available). Java is old by Internet standards, after all. A replacement is due.
Some one with a true view of reality has responded. I see I am having a hard time responding so I will make This short. Java does live on as SAP has made most of every initiative they have based on a Java stack.
I would have been more explanatory but this apparent virus has crept me from typing what I
This is what gets me...everyone here who are defending Apple..wants to talk about JAVA security..
I don't care about Java security...I am not creating a stack or a website or anything else...I want to have jre on my IOS device so I can get to and access sites that are using Java....
We have java on our MACs....we can disable or enable it at will in almost every browser you can find for windows or OSX.
So the security argument goes out the window...I am not worried that someone is going to hack my ipad or iphone using feaking java security holes...
IT DOESN'T PERTAIN TO WHY WE WANT JAVA on your IPONES AND IPADS...
if any developer wants to compile java on an ipad or iphone please let us know please...you obviously have the hands of 3 year old to comfortably work the virtual keyboard.
I find it amusing how some folk characterise Apple not supporting certain things on their platform, as "dictating what you can and can't run" on your device. It is nothing of the sort! A vendor has simply taken a decision not to support said thing, in this case it has been IMHO very well justified. A vendor is right to take decisions that will enable them to preserve the user experience, and keeping a security+performance nightmare OFF the platform seems like the right thing to do. To me, anyway.
If all the original reasons for choosing to omit Java from iOs are still valid, why do people still argue? Get something that works for you; why waste energy on complaining, and on choosing to deliberately mischaracterising something!
What is the reason....I like to play yahoo spades...wold love to sit in a coffee and kill time playing yahoo spades with my friends and family on my Ipad...
I can't, why..because apple didn't and wont allow jre on the device..why.. why please elitten me and don't give the bs answer, the security risk is for those who those using java on their WEB PAGES WEB SERVERS AND IN THEIR LOCAL BUSINESS APPLICATIONS...not to us going to sites like yahoo games...Apple kept it out of iOS because Apple and Oracle couldn't come to an agreement...Apple even went to try and not support it in OSX...and for a very short time java was not on new MACs but it cut into their bottom line, many people will shrug and live with out it on their ipad an Iphone..but cut java off to their computers and a lot of folks would go right back to windows. And don't think I am talking about the average joe home user...I work at a School...that is all Apple, we have issued out over 3000 macbooks, IMACS, and Airs so far this year an have another 3k on order but if they didn't support java we would drop them like a bad habbit....why, because we have Powerschool, Black Baud, and many other cloud solutions that have java embedded in them.
So you want to keep your head in the clouds and think their is some holy Grail reason that apple is right..fine
But it was about dollars and a ******* contest between apple and oracle
OH AND APPLE IS NOT A VENDER, they are not selling other peoples products.......And everyone was up in arms when microsoft bundled IE with windows and was going down the road to not let windows support any other browser....if we want Java on our device and Oracle is willing to write the package then why not....every other tom dick and harrett can write and give away/sell their app and or plug in on apples itunes and app stores....so why not...If I want to use java at my risk...why NOT
Singaporejames, I concur completely. Besides, every security hole that appears has been quickly plugged and rarely exploited -- unlike email clients and browsers. This security hole issue wrt Java has been blown out of proportion and broadcast by a group of Java haters. Wish I knew what it is about Java that angers them so.
@Ralph, Apple has long taken a view that it would like to control COMPLETELY the user experience on its computers. The original IBM PC succeeded mostly because IBM took the opposite view and even published the electronics and ROM code.
Apple does indeed dictate what you run on your Apple devices. Read the Steve Jobs biography to see just how blatant and unapologetic they are about it. Apple does not pretend otherwise. Why anyone should suggest that they don't makes no sense to me.
Until Apple came along, the concept of taking "decisions that will enable them to preserve the user experience" was uheard of. Everyone was used to the idea that you buy a piece of "iron" and put whatever software you choose on it. Apple is not concerned about preserving the user experience but in preserving their profits.
No Java on iPad was a Jobs decision. Just as with his decision not to have surgery, it was made for personal and emotional reasons. It cut off large segments of available software, especially in education. It was not done for the users in any way.
One big thing about Apple that you're missing, and that has always been the case long before the iPad etc. is that they don't really care about gaining "large segments" of software, or market share, or whatever. They simply aim to produce what they consider to be the "best" products, and if consumers agree, then they will buy them, (and obviously, they do and are) and software and market share will come along naturally. Apple, technically, could include every feature available on rivals products, but they choose not to. Apple deliberately leaves out certain features for long after others have included them, until they feel they can do it better, or will never include it if they feel there is a better alternative, or it simply doesn't work well enough for them.
Java (and Flash) are those types of technologies where you never get to do the "best" possible on every device it runs on. Every platform-agnostic technology naturally becomes limited by the lowest common denominator. If Apple allowed Java on iOS, you'd never get half of the "best in class" software products that Apple device users enjoy, because (lazy) developers who only want to write once, deploy everywhere, would write their apps so they run on the lowest spec hardware not taking advantage of any of the exclusive or specific capabilities of the Apple hardware or OS. It already happens on Android, where fragmentation is a real problem. How is that good for Apple's aim to be the "best"? Apple wants coders to be writing apps using native APIs that take advantage of the latest hardware instantly - not months or years later when Java eventually (if ever) gets updated to include support for these new features.
Until Apple came along, the concept of taking "decisions that will enable them to preserve the user experience" was uheard of.
Until Apple came along, computers were difficult to use for non tech-heads. Until Apple released the first iMac, computer designs were boring - how quick were rivals to try to copy them? Until Apple released the iPhone, phone designs and phone UIs had stagnated. Now look at them. Until Apple released the iPad, tablet computers were big bulky, clunky, things, trying to run desktop OSs with a stylus, that nobody wanted.
Of course, Apple didn't invent any of these things, nor were they first on the market with any of them. But they did refine and enhance things by controlling the whole user experience from hardware to software to the point where people wanted to buy them, and competitors needed to copy them. You don't get to do that using platform-agnostic solutions - I don't see how you can say pushing stagnating product categories ahead doesn't benefit the users in any way.
Wow, that's pretty strong. How about companies that would just like to stay in business?
The reason for platform-agnostic development is to save on maintenance costs. You have to employ experts on each platform (with some handiing more than one) and update each and every platform whenever you make a change.
Creating and maintaining 20,000 lines of client code along with 20,000 lines of server code plus the database structure, over 3,000 quiz questions and answers, over 1,500 videos, and much more is difficult enough without having those 20,000 lines of client code written separately for each platform.
We're not after the snazziest user experience here, just a good solid easy-to-use user experience. You can call that the "lowest common denominator" if you wish, but I call it common sense and staying in business.
Java is not a "feature." It's a language in which to create software. I'm not interested in Flash because it's a mess that uses a scripting language and encourages poor development habits.
BTW, what do you think of HTML5 if you dislike platform-agnostic technologies. It's allowed on the iPad, after all.
I am really sick of the Apple apologists and Apple chauvinists, like you Mrs. Miggins, telling me how my business should be run. I was doing software before you were born and have been involved in every major innovation in the business. Allowing Java on the iPad would in no way compromise the ability of Apple to innovate. Oracle has already demonstrated Java on the iPad, but Apple won't let them deploy it. It's that simple.
I really hope that Apple stubs their toes on this one and that other tablets emerge (the advanced version of the Surface is the first I've seen) that allow Java. Java is central to a great deal of excellent Internet software. Excluding it just for spite is stupid. I look forward to seeing that Apple has "cut off its nose to spite its face."
I get it that you all are in love with Apple. Love is blind.
<Edited by Host>