« JFXtras 0.2 Released: Featuring Extra Shapes for JavaFX | Main | Can JavaFX be used to Develop Real-World Applications? »

January 25, 2009



Hello James,

Thank you for the lecture today, and thank you for your reply to my question about JavaFX on mobile phones.
Hard to get a question in at the right time, would like to hear more about the work on +MobileFx+ or +JavaFX for Mobile+.

now to my subject *s*

Probably the only Icelander in your audience today.
So I just have to comment on Leif - or on Leifur.

Leif Eriksson.
His name is Leifur Eiriksson ( often called Leifur Heppni, or "Leifur the Lucky one" ) born around the year 980 in Iceland. His father was Eiríkur rauði Þorvaldsson, or short Eiríkur rauði ( Eirikur the Red ) born in Norway.
Eiríkur was the first European to settle on Greenland, he took his family with him to the Viking settlement in Greenland.
Leifurs mother, Þjóðhildar, and his two brothers came with him.
Leifur is said to have sailed around the year 1000 to North America and the rest is history.
The source to his travel is found in the " Grænlendingasögu " or the Greenland-sagas.
The sagas can ofcourse be bought on Amazon ( Graenlendinga Saga )

Bestu kveðjur, Ing

Dean Iverson


Considering that JavaFX is partially targeted at mobile and embedded applications, I'm sure the guys at Sun are hard at work on optimization.

Even so, your numbers seem extremely anomalous. On my Mac and on Windows XP running in VMWare on my Mac, I get far more than .5 frames per second. The effect is nice and smooth in both cases. The Java Console tells me that the app is taking about 24MB of memory.

I think there might be something else going wrong on your computer other than a 1.0 version of JavaFX.


Adam Malter

I want to love JavaFX. I really really do. Maybe it is just version 1.0 hiccups, but your top example (with the adorable puppies) runs at what looks like maybe a half a frame/sec and uses 25% of my CPU. (Mind you I have a Core 2 WinXP machine with 4gigs of memory)

It looks mostly like nasty GC pauses. Perhaps moving the Xms in the jnlp file will help. But, looking at the process size, it is already taking up 50m. This is the kind of stuff that gives me heartburn over the future of a rich client java. A neat, but exceedingly simple effect, requires hand tuning and more memory than any other application except my web browser.


The comments to this entry are closed.