1. Dirk van Schalkwyk Supervisor: Prof Greg Foster Co-Supervisor: Mrs Madeleine Wright Project Title: A Comparative Study of JME and Flash Lite for Mobile Data Services

2. Presentation Outline Problem Statement Project Objective Approach Analysis and Results Conclusion Questions

3. Problem Statement High investment in mobile technologies In 2006, voice calls declined by 28% for prepaid and 22% for postpay customers (UK) Mobility companies turn to mobile data services Need the right development tools to ensure the rapid and efficient creation, deployment, and management of custom content on mobile phones

4. Definitions Mobile data service:  any service on a mobile phone other than voice e.g. SMS (Short Message Service), Mobile Chats, Number Portability [Vodacom, 2007] Flash Lite  a version of Adobe Flash Player designed for mobile phones JME (formerly J2ME)  a Java Platform consisting of a set of technologies and specifications developed for mobile phones

5. Project Objective Develop a prototype incorporating selected APIs developed under Flash Lite and JME. Test effectiveness of competing standards. Conclusions drawn will enable a trade-off decision as to which platform to use for a particular mobile data service.

6. Approach JME Flash Lite Client/Server communication across a wireless network XML server response SQL commands Web Server Database

7. Demo

8. Analysis and Results Foundation Language Available IDEs Emulator platforms Dynamic XML handling GUI designing Multimedia capabilities Persistent Storage Packaging and Deploying Mobile device diversity

9. Foundation Language Comparison and Evaluation: Both languages allow platform independence. Java is more robust and secure as JME applications never escape from the confines of the JVM and therefore will not write to device memory that does not belong to the JVM. Flash LiteJME ActionScript 2.0Java

10. Available IDEs Comparison and Evaluation: Various IDE options are available for JME each providing better features for writing code whereas Flash Lite offers a powerful GUI designer not available in JME. Adobe Flash Authoring IDE is an expensive proprietary software and therefore JME is recommended if financial resources are limited. Flash LiteJME Adobe Flash Authoring IDENetBeans, SunOne Studio, Eclipse ProprietaryOpen Source Features include: code auto-complete debugging powerful GUI designer Features include: code auto-complete syntax highlighting refactoring extensive debugging obfuscator

11. Emulator Platforms Comparison and Evaluation: Key features are provided by both platforms including memory analysis, network management and monitoring, object creation (JME only) and persistent storage monitoring. JME provides a more comprehensive feedback in the form of graphs and tables allowing for better application testing. Flash LiteJME Adobe Device Central (bundled with IDE) Sun Wireless Toolkit, S60 SDE for MIDP

12. Dynamic XML handling Flash LiteJME Automatically parses the XML document Programmatically parse the XML using SAX, XmlPull or DOM Write code to access specific nodes within the XML tree Manipulates data in the XML tree using a set of API methods Required 11 lines of codeRequired 29 lines of code

13. Dynamic XML handling cont… Comparison and Evaluation: Flash Lite is recommended as it parses the XML faster and requires less coding, reducing possible errors, application size as well as the time to create the application. Time (milliseconds)

14. GUI Designing Comparison and Evaluation: Flash Lite provides fast, easy and efficient creation of rich GUIs not possible with JME. Flash Lite’s stronghold in the mobile industry. Flash LiteJME Flash Authoring toolkitNo graphical designer ‘drag and drop’ graphical components Programmatically create graphical components

15. Multimedia Capabilities Flash LiteJME Depends on the Device video player for video playback The JVM handles video playback Methods include play, pause, resume and stop Available methods control features such as volume, rotation, scaling and screen size Only streaming possible on Nokia devices Mainly http download possible though streaming also possible

16. Multimedia Capabilities cont… Comparison and Evaluation: JME allows greater portability and video control compared to Flash Lite which relies on the capability of the device. Flash Lite video streaming is recommended when dealing with large video files as play starts quicker and they do not take up a lot of device memory. Caution required when opting to stream video as it may be blocked by firewalls. Time (milliseconds)

17. Persistent Storage Comparison and Evaluation: JME is recommended if other applications are required to access stored data. Flash Lite is an advantage if considering the lines of code required and this could also reduce error occurrences and speed up application development. Flash LiteJME Storage size determined by the device Specifies a minimum of 8KB and a maximum of 30KB Does not support sharing of stored data with other applications files Other JME applications can access stored data Required 7 lines of codeRequired 27 lines of code

18. Packaging and Deploying Comparison and Evaluation: Both platforms produce small packaged file sizes and deploy them through USB, Bluetooth and OTA. Flash LiteJME.swf (Flash file),.sis (Symbian installer),.cab (Windows installer) JAD and JAR files File size of 355KB (.sis)File size of 209KB

19. Mobile device diversity Comparison and Evaluation: Both platforms provide effective features to address device diversity. Flash LiteJME Defines different versions of Adobe Flash Lite runtime engines for specific groups of mobile devices Divided into configurations, profiles and optional APIs standardized through JSR 185

20. Conclusion Analysis and tests showed various strengths and weaknesses of the JME and Flash Lite platforms enabling trade-offs to be made when developing specific mobile data services. Generally, JME provides more control and functionality through its numerous APIs whereas Flash Lite allows for the rapid creation of applications with rich GUIs.

21. Questions?