Home » jAlbum forums » Tips


Permlink Replies: 12 - Pages: 1 - Last Post: 20-Apr-2007 01:44 Last Post By: alan927 Threads: [ Previous | Next ]
davidekholm

Posts: 18,960
Registered: 10/18/02
Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 26-Jan-2006 20:20
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
The people at Excelsior have developed a really interresting application - a Java precompiler called JET. JET makes a native code (plain .exe files) out of Java programs. This is done by precompiling the Java code. By precompiling Excelsior claims that they can deliver better performance than with the "just-in-time" compilation that Java programs normally go through. The "just-in-time" compilation scheme cannot spend too much time on optimisations, that would make Java programs start too slow for instance. You can read all about it here: http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jet.html

I post this cause I have been offered to use their JET precompiler for JAlbum. I'd like to see what the JAlbum community feel about it. Here is a download link:
http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jetgallery.html

With this package, there is no need to install Java first, it contains all that is needed to run JAlbum. It is JAlbum v6.1.6 by the way. I haven't played much with it myself, but I noticed far better startup time.
nakaminow

Posts: 174
Registered: 11/10/03
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 27-Jan-2006 14:26   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
I didn't see a Big difference in starting time.. and,in all cases, can wait 4" insteed of 3".. :-)
That JAlbum can be start without JRE can be an advantage for some users but not for user like me, that have 5 or 6 versions of JAlbum on the HD. The added files are almost as big in size as the JRE kit. (Installed size of JAlbum-native is now 68 Mo, was only 30 Mo for V6.2 ) That's a lot of drive space.
Don't see other major problem with this version, everything seem to work the same way as usually.

nakaminow
djwright

Posts: 13
Registered: 10/05/04
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 02-Feb-2006 01:26   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
No problems that I have noticed, and any speed-up is always a good thing IMO :)

Does it handle memory differently to JAlbum normally does? Looking at Task Manager, it seems to handle it more "dynamically" than JAlbum normally would - ie. it takes memory, then releases it, and repeats, rather than steadily increasing which is what JAlbum appears to do normally (in my eyes anyway)

So I personally would happily trade the larger file size for the increase in speed :)
davidekholm

Posts: 18,960
Registered: 10/18/02
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 04-Feb-2006 00:15   in response to: djwright in response to: djwright
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Actually I don't know. Check their site.
dleskov

Posts: 2
Registered: 02/04/06
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 04-Feb-2006 10:11   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
By default, the Sun JRE sets maximum heap size to 64MB, whereas the default setting in the Excelsior JET runtime is "Adaptive", which means the application may use all available physical memory before triggering the garbage collector.

Dmitry Leskov
Excelsior LLC
josephgan

Posts: 84
Registered: 08/15/03
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 14-Apr-2006 12:54   in response to: dleskov in response to: dleskov
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
David,

How does the speed compare to the -server option? I'm using that right now, because I generate fairly large albums and on fairly slow hardware, so any speed increases are always appreciated.

Regards,
Joseph
davidekholm

Posts: 18,960
Registered: 10/18/02
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 14-Apr-2006 13:03   in response to: josephgan in response to: josephgan
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
It's hard to say anything really general about it. I suggest you try it with the images you have.
SerJ

Posts: 14
Registered: 08/04/05
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 18-Jul-2006 00:31   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Would be great if there were 2 versions precomiled one and normal one for download! =)
My personal opinion.
The speed isn't that huge of a trouble I guess...few seconds don't make difference...more would.
dleskov

Posts: 2
Registered: 02/04/06
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 12-Oct-2006 10:52   in response to: SerJ in response to: SerJ
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
Would be great if there were 2 versions precomiled
one and normal one for download! =)

It seems there are now.
MarkE

Posts: 4,571
Registered: 04/24/06
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 12-Oct-2006 20:01   in response to: dleskov in response to: dleskov
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
David,

What's the difference is overall performance?

Cheers,

Mark

Message was edited by:
Mark E
davidekholm

Posts: 18,960
Registered: 10/18/02
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 13-Oct-2006 10:48   in response to: MarkE in response to: MarkE
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
There is not a significant performance difference. Some things (like startup) seems faster, but album builds are not always faster.
Kev

Posts: 7
Registered: 10/28/06
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 01-Nov-2006 16:45   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
It would seem to me that any increases in speed are a secondary issue and of minor value, the primary advantage would be the elimination of hundreds and hundreds of install problem threads in this forum by java illiterates such as myself. Deployment would be a no-brainer for the millions of windows users who simply want to make an album and Jet is a direct enhancement to Jalbums founding principle "ease of use". For those that haven't read it, this advantage could not be more clearly stated then by this sub link of David's: http://www.excelsior-usa.com/articles/java-to-exe.html

Their arguments are irefutable but a java purist would take strong exception to them and rightly so. To make an exe out of a jar is an affront to what Java is all about, but you "well learned" Java folk must keep in mind the millions that still think Java is coffee. Such being the case, it would seem to me that there is a strong arguement for both. This would be a straight jalbum zip file with no installer for Java savy users, and the windows exe version packaged with a "bug proof - legacy minded" installer for us millions stupefied by Bill Gates.

Just some uneducated thoughts from one of the masses.

Cheers
alan927

Posts: 2,882
Registered: 06/18/05
Re: Precompiled version of JAlbum to try
Posted: 02-Nov-2006 01:37   in response to: Kev in response to: Kev
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
David has the "native windows" current version of JAlbum available on the downloads page. (Out of testing, into production. You can get the native of Java version now.)
Legend
Forum admins
Helpful Answer
Correct Answer

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in all forums