Take a look at this white paper on Java.
Basically they're saying that in addition to running on multiple environments (because of being interpreted within the JVM), it also runs the same regardless of environment. The former is what makes it portable, the latter is what makes it architecture-neutral. For example, the size of an int does not vary based on platform; it's established by the JVM.
Answer from Jacob Mattison on Stack OverflowTake a look at this white paper on Java.
Basically they're saying that in addition to running on multiple environments (because of being interpreted within the JVM), it also runs the same regardless of environment. The former is what makes it portable, the latter is what makes it architecture-neutral. For example, the size of an int does not vary based on platform; it's established by the JVM.
A portable C program:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("Hello, World!");
return (EXIT_SUCCESS);
}
You can take that C program and compile it on any machine with a C compiler and have it work (assuming it supports printf... I am guessing some things out there may not).
If you compile it on Windows and try to run that binary on a Mac it won't work.
The same sort of program written in Java will also compile on any machine with a Java compiler installed, but the resulting .class file will also run on any machine with a Java VM. That is the architectural neutral part.
So, portable is a source code idea, while architectural neutral is an executable idea.