←back to thread

78 points pjmlp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
epistasis ◴[] No.46189804[source]
The only thing worse than launching the JVM from the command line, with it's looooooooooooong and inexplicable load time, was hitting a web page and having it lock the browser for that amount of load time.

I remember a few decades ago somebody saying the JVM was incredible technology, and as a user and programmer I still have zero clue what the hell they could have been thinking was good about the JVM.

I hear that now, decades into Java, they have figured out how to launch a program without slowing a computer down for 10+ seconds, but I'll be damned if I find out. There are still so many rough edges that they never even bothered to try to fix about launching a .jar with classpath dependencies. What a mess!

replies(9): >>46189847 #>>46189885 #>>46189898 #>>46189998 #>>46190090 #>>46190158 #>>46191314 #>>46191875 #>>46197627 #
netsharc ◴[] No.46189847[source]
I guess in the era of SSDs (vs. spinning disks) and multi-GHz cores, the startup really isn't a big issue anymore?

I wonder how long Teams or Slack would take to launch when it's on a 5400rpm disk on a 2000 era computer...

replies(1): >>46190002 #
1. nrhrjrjrjtntbt ◴[] No.46190002[source]
I remember my 2000 computer could play an mp3. But thats it. Your system is 100% utilized. No way it could even think about a modern gas guzzling app.