Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Microsoft And Sun Settle 286

djradon writes: "According to this link, Microsoft and Sun have settled the Java lawsuit. Looks like Microsoft won't be supporting Java in any way, anytime soon, which is too bad because I think the ability to write COM components in Java was the best development option for IIS."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft and Sun Settle

Comments Filter:
  • As messed up as this sounds.....there goes my java implemented CS Degree. Note to self, Buy MSFT
  • I guess .NET is looking good for Microsoft now... "compile once, run anywhere" (except non-ms OS's)
  • ``This settlement will not impact our customers or current products in any way and will allow us to focus our time and resources on what we do best: developing great software.'' If thats not a big lie, I don't know what is
  • So they'll be dropping ALL Java support? As in, no more VJ++, no JVM, and no Java support in IE? What the hell am I supposed to do with the two semesters of intro programming in Java I'm taking? Java is required here!!
  • by Urban Existentialist ( 307726 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:16PM (#485816) Homepage
    The frightening thing about Windows development is how much languages need to have the support of MS, to some degree at least. There are a lot of companies that do not see a product, business practice, language or whatever as being valid unles it has MS support and can fit in easily to their existing support package and MS dominated infrastructure. There is no doubt that Java will continue as the main language on the Internet, with Perl, for some time, but this is, nonetheless, not good news for Java.

    You know exactly what to do-
    Your kiss, your fingers on my thigh-

  • I completely love Java through and through. However, I'm glad there will be a language similar to Java that embodies many of the same features, i.e. C#. This will lead to both languages competing with each other (hopefully) and in the end produce more options and better products. This lawsuit makes me wonder if C# would even exist if Sun weren't so protective of Java.
  • CS degrees aren't supposed to teach you a specific language. Hell, they're not even supposed to teach you to program; any moron can learn to do that, just look at slashcode. They're supposed to teach you how to THINK about programming, and how to solve the problems that come up while programming in an effective way. These solutions are ENTIRELY independent from language. Perhaps their are significant differences between philosophies for, say, OO languages and other languages (although this is debatable); in any case, a CS degree earned today should be usable regardless of language.

    Besides, is ANY accreditted institution giving degrees based on a single language? Where I am, you need to know C/C++, Java, CL, and MIPS assembly to even have a chance at graduating.
  • I know! Especially since no one else but Microsoft makes Java! (heavy sarcasm)
  • This Microsoft press release has an embarrasing ammount of "rah-rah" cheerleading, right up there to the same level as Steve Jobs in full blast at MacWorld. (There goes my karma; both sides will moderate me down now.)

    Sure, I expect a press release to be from the releaser's point of view, and even a bit of spin, but really, it ought to be toned down from "preaching to the faithful" levels for a general press release.
  • Mabye it's because M$ will do *their* Java version...

    Micro$oft Java.

    Oh well..

  • The original link WAS Microsoft's side. Did you see the "SOURCE: Microsoft Corp." at the bottom? Or perhaps did you notice that there were quotes from Microsoft officials but no quotes from Sun? And how likely is is that an indepenent journalist or Sun would include the following: "About Microsoft
    Founded in 1975, Microsoft is the worldwide leader in software, services and Internet technologies for personal and business computing "
  • dont forget that HP clean room chai could get there for MS .NET

    JAVA AS A ISO would rock and kill most of this wrangleing and SUN could make money from the libs to vendors


    john jones
  • If Java on the desktop was usefull it would be a threat to MS. Unfortunately Java on the desktop has been mostly hype (please note I qualified that with mostly, YOUR spinning cube is amazing).

    Given that it's relatively useless and a potential threat it's no suprise MS dumped it.

    It appears Java's future lies on the server.

    When are we going to get a good OO language that isn't hung up on this crossplatform binary compatability?
  • I think .Net will be a resounding flop. MS is trying to price itself out of the market.

    Businessmen do not like being pushed around, and MS is getting pushy with business. I don't think most business would want to trust MS with their data.


    IE can stand for Internet Explorer or Industrial espionage. Maybe both.
  • This is awesome.

    Everyday it seems like Microsoft is doing more and more to dig it's own grave. It's still acting like it's the big dog in town and can just decide which standards it will choose to use and which it wont. The only two places java really matters is on servers and in browsers. And while they may own the browser market at the moment they cant NOT support it because Sun can just make a an ActiveX control that embeds it. But the DON'T own the server market, not even close. Their avarice will lead to their own extinction. It's only a matter of time.

  • Sun's take is linked from []. Sorry, a direct link didn't work (silly session id in the URL).
  • About Microsoft

    Founded in 1975, Microsoft is the worldwide leader in software, services and Internet technologies for personal and business computing.
    The company offers a wide range of products and services designed to empower people through great software -- any time, any place and on any device.

    I realize this is a Microsoft press release, but I was half expecting an entry follow it saying something regarding Sun. Humor escapes me at the moment, but you can imagine what they would like to say..

    Humorous post without a punchline? Down, please..
  • Yeah... just to make things clear, _without_ sounding too much like a dick, the article was begotten via PR Newsiwire, which is a press release channel. It's basically Microsoft's official spin on it. Nothing more, nothing less, and having nothing to do with journalism.
  • by Alien54 ( 180860 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:28PM (#485831) Journal
    MS spin:

    ``The Microsoft .NET platform is the best way to build, deliver and aggregate Web Services, and Microsoft is committed to helping software developers build Web Services with whatever programming language is most appropriate for their particular needs.''

    Well, this seems to be the party line for the forseeable future.

    While the Technology looks promising, the big problem is their track record. Ultimately, the old saw of never buying version 1.0 of anything is very true of MS products.

    This is just my opinion, based on my experience. Even if I want to trust that vision, I find that I cannot. I have been burned too often. In each case, it as a matter of a litte less value, for a little more money. Maybe I exagerate, but that is what it seems like.

    and so I make a comment only slightly tongue in cheek when I saw that I am slightly concerned about the World Wide Web becoming Microsoft's fishing .NET

    It makes me nervous.

  • To preface: I use both Sun and Microsoft products regularly. I am not a fan of Microsoft, but I also don't care much for Sun. I still think NeXT kicks both of their asses and it's been dead neigh-on half-a-decade now.

    It's been interesting to look at how Microsoft and Sun have gone head-to-head in the open market in the past. I am talking about the competition to Microsoft's Office suite found in the form of Sun's StarOffice. A lot can be said about the advantages and disadvantages of each respective product, however Microsoft will probably always be the market leader for office products.

    In the end, I think it comes down to which company has the better marketing machine behind them. The key to seeing which platform (C# vs. Java) will rule the industry will be found in the Marketing Expense columns of each company's balance sheets.

    ::Colz Grigor


  • by tjwhaynes ( 114792 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:31PM (#485834)

    To me, this looks like a major hiccup for Microsoft. Under the terms of this agreement, MS has permanently lost the rights to the Java Compatible trademark. From the Sun press release:

    With the contract terminated, Sun and Microsoft have agreed to end the current litigation, initiated in October, 1997 before Judge Ronald M. Whyte in U.S. District Court in San Jose, under the following general terms:

    • The Court will enter a permanent injunction barring Microsoft from using the JAVA COMPATIBLE trademark. Previously, the Court found that Microsoft had distributed incompatible implementations of the Java technology, and the court entered a preliminary injunction barring Microsoft from using the JAVA COMPATIBLE trademark on these incompatible products.
    • To protect developers and consumers who have already invested in Microsofts implementations of the Java technology, Sun has agreed to grant Microsoft a limited license to continue shipping essentially as is its currently shipping implementations of the outdated 1.1.4 version of the Java technology. Those products have already been modified to comply with injunctions secured by Sun in the litigation. The license covers only the products that already contain the Java technology, and lasts only for seven years.
    Beyond that, Microsoft has no rights to distribute the Java technology, or to otherwise use any of Suns intellectual property.

    To those who believe this sounds the death knell for Java, think again. Microsoft is now in the unenviable position of not being able to use the most widely recognised java trademark, while its competitors (Sun, Netscape and others) will be able to capitalize on it. This agreement is even wider than Java, stopping MS from licensing, distributing or making use of any of Suns Intellectual Property either. That may make C#'s passage into the world a little tricky if Sun has much of the Java technology patented...

    C# doesn't cut it. It's not here now and Java is and has been for six years.C# is still months off release and even at the first release it won't get wide use until the development tools and toolkits catch up. That will hurt.


    Toby Haynes

  • by djMaxM ( 308551 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:34PM (#485838)
    MSFT wrote the best and fastest compiler for Java hands down when Sun started this stupidity. RMI was a freakin' mess, Netscape caused half of it, and then Sun comes after MSFT. There are cases where MSFT does some annoying stuff, like forcing MSN bookmarks in IE, but this one I can't fault them for. I give a big middle finger to Sun for blowing what Java could have been.
  • If Sun weren't so protective of Java, Microsoft would have already exercised its extend and embrace muscle and made a proprietary version of Java that only worked on Windows.

    That's what started this fight in the first place, Microsoft started making proprietary extensions to its version of Java which produced apps which only ran on its OS. Sun didn't want Microsoft putting the Java logo on such a mongrel.

  • by Thalia ( 42305 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:37PM (#485843)
    You can read the settlement agreement here []. The short version is that Microsoft can't use the "Java Compatible" trademark, but can continue to distribute it's version 1.1.4 of Java, for another seven years. Apparently the 1.1.4 version has been modified to pass Sun's compliance tests.

    Yet another example of intellectual property rights being used to do the right thing...


  • by Chuck Flynn ( 265247 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:38PM (#485844)
    Microsoft, I mean. They never knew how to play their hand right. Gates was moneyed from the start, with his father's fortune from the bootlegging days, and Bill's Harvard degree. But he never had the sense knocked into him, y'know?

    When I first got started in this industry, it took me thirty years for me to hear the name "Microsoft", and it wasn't because I was off on Madagascar with the lemurs or nothing. It was because Microsoft didn't even exist yet. Didn't even exist. Do you remember what that was like? Some day you kids will tell your young rascals about what it was like to walk to school up-hill both ways knee-deep in AOL cds, but there was a time when these conglomerates didn't exist. That was when IBM was all we needed, the big blue momma. Man, could IBM shine. And then they were shoved out of the PC industry by that devil Microsoft and that whore Intel. I will never forget that day when my boss came in and gave us the news. Wow.

    And here's Microsoft getting shoved around by Sun, now. And with the law on someone else's side, too. You never saw IBM make that mistake, no sir. IBM knew how to play its antitrust hand, and IBM knew how to deal with upstarts. IBM is up there next to General Motors in my book, and not just because they made me the man I am (just as GM made me the man I was in the backseat of that Chevy Sport Coupe that summer back in, well darn, it's slipped my mind). Microsoft? No one will remember them in twenty years. Heh, and I won't be around to see it happen, neither.

    Sun can keep Java. As long as they don't touch my cobol. It wasn't my first language, but man could I make that baby fly like a greased pig out of an oil can. Object oriented? Object sharing? Classes? My parents' generation taught us in primary school to share, and anything we wanted to learn about classes we learned in the streets with a switchblade. That's why Bill and Microsoft never got off the ground. No common sense. No street sense. If he'd have walked for one mile in another man's long underwear, he'd have known that you don't mess with another man's shoes. Or his Java, either.

    Good riddens, Microsoft. I spit on the mockery you've made of us all. You are not welcome at the family barbequeue in Jersey.
  • Looks like Microsoft won't be supporting Java in any way, anytime soon

    I didn't know that Microsoft actually supported Java. When you take a competitor's product, change it slightly so it's not compatible, and call it your own... well, I guess that's just par for the course at Microsoft.

  • Don't worry. It's all part of Microsoft's cunning plan to move everyone over to Unix. Oh, hang on...
  • The College Board is also switching it's AP CompSci language from C++ to Java in 2003.
    That's millions of lost dollars from schools who would have otherwise bought microsoft Java IDEs, and an enormous loss of mindshare in future programmers.

  • by donglekey ( 124433 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:45PM (#485856) Homepage
    A few points:

    1. Java has done very well without Micrsoft support. I agree that Micrsoft support would be optimal, but I think that java is good enough that it doesn't need it, even though it could benefit from it.

    2. Microsoft was not really supporting or helping Java or Sun all along. They did some shitty shit with Visual J++. They put "windows only" extensions and nullified the whole point of Java, thus screwing over programmers, themselves, and Sun to an extent, while at the same time blatantly breaking the licensing and contracts that they had with Sun for the development of a Java IDE.

    3. I love java, but where it works best right now is Windows, which is rediculous. If it is to have a bright future on other operating systems, which I completely believe it does, it will need to have everything be more syncronized and not come out with different OS versions at different times. It shows disrespect for their own cross-platform philosophy.
  • Yeah, I'm always surprised when a "news" service just reprints press releases verbatim. I shouldn't be, but I am. So why didn't they reproduce the nice letterhead it was faxed in on too? ;)
  • Do not fret.

    Java was never a language for application development anyhow. You want to develop applications under Windows? Go get a copy of Visual C++.

    As you may have noticed, applications development is on the point of being wiped out completely anyway. The ubiquitous browser (in its' various forms) needs connecting to a webserver, some business logic and database. Increasingly the only question being asked about this architecture is "do we use jsp or asp?".

    Java will continue to be supported on Windows NT. Sun will make sure of it. And IBM, curiously, seem to have the edge over Sun in this area.

    Don't fret. Nothing's changed, it's just PHB fodder.

    Dave :)

  • by Gendou ( 234091 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @05:59PM (#485874) Homepage
    We do not bash Microsoft because they deliver poor products. This is utterly untrue. Microsoft Office is the model of every other office suite out there. IE is the ideal browser. Windows has AMAZING hardware support (well, NT5+ does - the Win2000 driver model is genius). Microsoft devotes a VERY large sum of money to research.

    Microsoft has many good things about them. But, they have a few critically bad things. These things should be the reasons we bash MS:

    1. They monopolize the computer industry and stifle competition.
    2. They do not open their source so that other developers can create software on an even playing field with them.
    3. They are not responsive to fixing flaws in their systems that are discovered by the community at large.
    4. They overcharge for their software and force their clients into a nasty, anti-competetive business relationship.

    None of these are "bash Microsoft because their software sucks." Now, it's true that Windows is below par, but that's not the only thing they do.

    Calm down. Poor quality software is the *worst* reason to bash a closed-source, inflexable, monopolizing corporation. Fundamental matters of principle carry a lot more weight.

  • I dare you to find me an application that java can handle that C# cannot - TODAY.

    Three things Java technology can do that C# and .NET can't today, January 23, 2001:
    • Run as an applet in web browsers on Macintosh computers.
    • Run as an applet in web browsers on GNU/Linux or Solaris systems.
    • Run at all on Mac, Linux, or Sun systems.

    Like Tetris? Like drugs? Ever try combining them? []
  • re: logo

    MS hasn't used the "compatible" logo since 1998... Why would this be a major hiccup for MS? Sounds to me like business as usual... If MS's competitors haven't capitalized on that fact in the last 3 years, I'm not sure they quite understand that part about competition...
  • COM and COM+ are sweet distributed computing models, but a big chunk of the financial and large transactional industries (our clients) are using CORBA/EJB/C++ for their systems. I'm not saying there isn't still a big demand for COM/Visual C/VB developers out there... but the dev teams with bigtime projects seems to favor Java and CORBA. Upshot... I think MSFT is in for a very rough ride if they don't open their eyes, and I'm perfectly happy running W2k on my desktop.
  • I'd rather see an OS written in C++

    The version of IE for Macintosh computers seems to be written in C++ (I've ResEdited version 3.0 before.) The Windows version is most likely also in C++, and it's considered part of the OS (it has a Supplemental EULA just like this [] instead of the full EULA). I don't know what other parts of Windows are written in C++, but I'd say at least 25 percent.

    That's funny, is responding with HTTP Error 500 Server Too Busy.

    The KDE desktop for GNU/Linux, BSD, and UNIX systems is written almost entirely in C++.

    Like Tetris? Like drugs? Ever try combining them? []
  • In a word: Bullshit! Perhaps you mean that Microsoft had the fastest JVM for Java, although you'd have to qualify that to say that it was not Java-compatible. Hell, I've run into problems with M$'s JVM's released a few last summer because they've obviously done some "neat" stuff to make their JVM fly, which, by the way, breaks little things like object serialization. Yes, I'm talking JVM, as the code I've run into problems with (byte-code, that is) ran fine under every Sun & IBM JVM back to 1.1. RMI was a mess? Excuse me? RMI's a helluva lot more elegant, maintainable, debuggable, etc, etc, than there's a mess. Nope, given the choice I'd much rather continue developing on the Java platform. I've been in the unfortunate position of having to work with Microsoft's convoluted brain-dead band-aided API's and I'll take Java over that anyday. The platform independence is a great feature for me(maybe crucial for others), but it's the advantage of being able to crank out more robust, more secure, more maintainable software in less time (and with less gray hairs) that's Java's main attraction for me.
  • by istartedi ( 132515 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @06:22PM (#485888) Journal

    1. They monopolize the computer industry and stifle competition.

    They enforce standards and create opportunities. Making a PCI card? Write a Windows driver for it, and the job is done. BeOS? Would never have been started if it weren't for nasty closed source OS's like Windows and MacOS. Now crappy Open Source desktops are starting to steal just enough market to make BeOS a poor business, so they do the only thing they can do, which is to appease the OSS community, but it was the prospect of selling the OS for $70/per that caused them to enter the market with something new and innovative--not the opportunity to "serve the community".

    2. They do not open their source so that other developers can create software on an even playing field with them.

    And I bet the Giant's offense won't just hand the ball over to Baltimore. What a bunch of bad guys they are.

    3. They are not responsive to fixing flaws in their systems that are discovered by the community at large.

    When the problem is fixable, they usually respond in a decent ammount of time. Think Linux is better? Consider the recent Linux worm.

    4. They overcharge for their software and force their clients into a nasty, anti-competetive business relationship.

    Don't like the high price? Try to offer a similar product at a better price. That's what a free market is all about. There is nothing immoral about them charging as much as they like for an OS. You might counter that this takes money from the pockets of organizations like hospitals that offer lifesaving services. The counterpoint is that if they charged less it would reduce the quality of life of employees and stockholders, which can kill just as many people as bad health care (poverty is no better for your health than an x-ray machine that crashes, it just kills in a less dramatic fashion).

    Calm down. Poor quality software is the *worst* reason to bash a closed-source, inflexable, monopolizing corporation. Fundamental matters of principle carry a lot more weight.

    The attacks levied against companies selling proprietary software are in many cases just the same old attacks that have always come from socialists. When it comes to morality, it doesn't matter how you think things should be. It matters how things will be as the result of the outcome from your actions. History is on the side of a balance between socialism and capitalism, with the preservation of individual liberties being important. In the case of software, capitalism works better on the desktop so far, and socialism is better on the server so far. Individual liberty has been preserved in that people are allowed to create free and proprietary software, and customers are allowed to choose. Let's hope it stays this way.

  • by hooded1 ( 89250 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @06:24PM (#485889) Homepage
    As most of us know Microsoft was out to get Java from the start. Their reasons were quite simple really: they feared and hated what they could not control. Over the past 5(more/less?) years we have seen microsoft make many attempts at destroying java. Many of these attacks have been only partially successful, although they have removed Java from some areas, it is still quite strong in others. As some of you may know, Java is the most common language taught in College Comp Sci courses. In the past 2 years schools have been increasingly moving away from c++ and closer to java. I believe this recent victory of Microsoft will barely influence college's choice to use Java.
  • M$ has just compounded the C# mistake (try to do a search with 'C#', :-)

    They're going to try to ramp up C# to use the VB VM. They realize that C# doesn't quite cut it as a language (like they care about semantic and syntactic purity,) and that VB's VM is pokin' slow and its been cracked to bits.

    M$ don't care but they should.

    VMs are bitches to write and the best one is produced by the folks with the most experience (Namely the ParcPlace Smalltalk VM that's been honed and whetted by experience since 1977.) Java's second with 1996. Nineteen years difference.

    Man we Smalltalkers laugh at VB-ers, Java-ers and C# should be good for a ROTFL.
  • Actually, I'm not too convinced that Microsoft thinks it would be taking it a bit far to stop a JVM from running. Remember Win3.* that would not run under ANY DOS unless it was MS DOS? I think Microsoft has absolutely no problem shoving its clout to say "No JAVA on our OS from now on, period"

  • by alexhmit01 ( 104757 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @06:33PM (#485894)
    Microsoft settled for VERY intelligent reasons. They need to conserve their legal resources. They got embarassed in the anti-trust suit, and with the findings of fact, there was no way that they'd win this suit.

    The injuction about the logo wasn't too big a deal. MS doesn't need it. However, this goes beyond the logo.

    They can't use Sun's IP. That means that they can't produce a Java anything. They can keep their existing Java software on the market for 7 years, (very key, screwing with Visual Studio now would annoy them) but they can't make more.

    This means that the JVM plug-ins can be used preventing MSIE broken Java. With the next version, the Java VM disappears. Now, it is questionable if a third-party can write a reasonably fast Windows JVM, but who knows.

    Java is taught at MIT, it is taught at most schools. Except the "elite" CS schools that still teach whatever their developed version of LISP is, most schools are teaching Java starting from the intros. With the CS curriculum in HS switching, Java programmers will be prevalent.

    This won't change. Java is a REALLY good teaching language. Yes, there are easier ones, but schools don't like teaching strange tech. They want to be able to be "real world" enough to interest students. C++ has been a nightmare, Pascal was long dead when it was given up, Java is a nice language. It is easy to teach CS principles in it.

    Java will still run on Windows. However, it will be a Sun or IBM Java VM, not a MS one. This means that MS can't break compatibility. Sun won. MS settled because they'd lose everything in the case. Also, this is good for MS Spin because they "drop support" for Java. However, Java won't go away.

    Java IDEs are getting better. They will replace VB for "stupid apps." Meaning, I can write my DB applications in Java (possibly for JSP deployment via web browser), and run them on Solaris, Linux, and Macintosh, plus Windows. Someone will have to write a good VM for Windows, but it can be done. Also, Win2K helps here.

    Win2K makes it easy to deploy applications across the Enterprise (if you are big enough to waste the time to learn all the stuff for it). This means that big companies can deploy the new VM quickly. This will help Java.

    MacOS X is going to help Java, Mac will probably be able to build up to 10-15% of the user base. Why? With the Internet, the local platform matters less, and MacOS X is intuitive and powerful. I expect Linux to grab about 5%-10% of the userbase as it becomes more easily used.

    MS will maintain 75%-80%, but a unified front of MacOS/Linux (via Java and a shared UNIX/BSD background) will prevent the monopolization of the past as long as the anti-trust lawsuit stays around.

    Expect MacOS X.1 or whatever they call it to support X natively, that will let open source apps run on it. Microsoft isn't going away, they aren't going under, they may not even shrink (the market is still expanding, albeit slowly), but their ability to force everyone out will be gone soon, and Java may do it.

    This DOES justify Sun's keeping Java proprietary. That's why MS couldn't kill it with Embrace and Extend. Open Source can "win" in that nobody can destroy it, but it can't "win" in the legal game. Sun was able to fight off MS, even if they weren't as pure with their code as we'd like.
  • Object oriented? Object sharing? Classes?

    Well, look at it this way, since the young punks being pumped out of colledges now who think they know it all, and most don't know anything...they need everything broken down into simple terms. since they have pretty much did away with liner programming they had to try and keep the confusion down a bit or no one would be able to use it. Give it a few more years and they will have a language out for the morons which will not require any code be written.

    As for those of you out ther just getting out of colledge and you do know something the above statement probably doesn't apply to you. But if you language of choice is Visual basic then it probably does.

  • They get to carry on with current stuff for another seven years.
  • Come off it. Java is plenty fast for almost any application, especially on the server side, where it really shines (in some cases it outperforms C++). It's no longer necessary to do low-level performance optimization for most mission-critical enterprise-class applications. Today's processors and current JVMs and JITs are more than fast enought to handle the job. Besides, you get far more optimization milage when you look at it from a structural standpoint rather than from the code level.

  • by kirkb ( 158552 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @06:38PM (#485901) Homepage
    While everyone is busy rejoicing Microsoft's departure from the land of Java, I'd like to remind them of what else Java is losing:

    - Microsoft's innovations. Feel free to knock their OS'es, but their language experience is great. They built a wickedly fast (albeit nonstandard) JVM way before anyone else could.
    - Top-notch tools. Dev studio is one of the slickest IDE's out there, and puts the other clumsy, bug-ridden java tools to shame (jbuilder, cafe).
    - Exposure. Like it or not, Microsoft represents the majority. Losing MS won't make it any easier for java to gain mainstream acceptance. Wouldn't it be great if IE5 supported Java 2 right out of the box?

  • With the release of Visual Studio.NET, Microsoft has opened up the IDE to third-party language developers (the first time this has happened), and word has it that a third-party is already working on a Java language implementation. As such, this may very well be a non-issue.
  • it would be bad publicity if the next version of IE was not able to run Java at all

    Yes, very bad for Microsoft.

  • I can get drunk in the morning. You, on the other hand, will still be a fag.

    I believe that's a Winston Churchill reference (he was a bit of a drunken manic-depressive). One evening at dinner, a lady says to Churchill, "You are drunk, horribly drunk!". Churchill replies, "Madam, you are ugly, horribly ugly, but in the morning, I shall be sober."

    Now there was a great quick witted drunken bastard.

  • Your comment makes the unwritten assumption that MS is the only way Java can be developed and/or implemented on an M$ box/databse/OS.

    Borland, Metrowerks, Netscape, AOL, Whoever *CAN* produce compliant (and labeled appropriately) Java tools/apps for an M$ system. I dont see how M$, as one vendor, halts support on the entire platform. Perl and Apache run on just fine on M$, as does Java under Netscape/Mozilla (except Java on the current Linux builds, which sucks, but i digress).

    The real "win" here is that MS can no longer kill Java by embracing it and essentially polluting it until its only of use to Gates and company. Maybe now we can force them to use the *correct* version.

    Hey Bill: McNealy OWNZ you!!! :-)

    "One musn't enthone ignorance simply because there is so much of it."

  • by Gendou ( 234091 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @06:53PM (#485910) Homepage
    I'm sorry, but most of your responses here are just too poorly informed to be remarked on. Grr... But I will make a few comments.

    And I bet the Giant's offense won't just hand the ball over to Baltimore. What a bunch of bad guys they are.

    This comment is ridiculous. Microsoft has a myriad of API's in Windows that they keep to themselves. This gives them a serious upperhand over other software developers and it's unfair because they are a monopoly. Not to mention that your analogy makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If they give the ball over, they no longer have the ball. And comparing the ball to source is also silly. I am not saying Microsoft give up Windows for free, I am saying that they document their API's so that other developers can use them to make better products. Sheesh. You must not have done well on the english section of your SATs.

    Don't like the high price? Try to offer a similar product at a better price. That's what a free market is all about. There is nothing immoral about them charging as much as they like for an OS. You might counter that this takes money from the pockets of organizations like hospitals that offer lifesaving services. The counterpoint is that if they charged less it would reduce the quality of life of employees and stockholders, which can kill just as many people as bad health care (poverty is no better for your health than an x-ray machine that crashes, it just kills in a less dramatic fashion).

    First of all, have you ever read any of the reasons the DOJ was going after Microsoft? Their OEM practices are deplorable. But I'll let you mill through archives for info on that. Yes, it is a very bad thing to over charge for an OS when you're monopolizing. Try a similar product? There is much to choose from, but you still have to support the mainstream. If Dell or Compaq suddenly decided that they cannot afford Microsoft's products, and go entirely with BSD, Linux, etc., they'd quickly run out of business because of the MS monopoly. In the medical business, you go to several different companies if you want to buy equipment. They quote you prices. You make your selection based on deals. You cannot do this with MS. The information to make a competing x-ray machine is open and available to everyone. It's in science journals. Designs are public knowledge. No one said "you cannot infringe upon our rights to make x-ray machines." However, Microsoft makes their design closed and unavailable so that no one can make an alternative (instead, we use clean room tactics to get as much as we can, hence WINE), therefore, there is no choice to try a similar product at a better price. If Microsoft turned open source, they'd still have a business. People would choose Microsoft as an authority on Windows, but other companies could make Windows-compatible alternatives that would be cheaper and perhaps even better (then again, the source is a mess).

    Ugh. I should give up. People like you infuriate me so much that I can barely form a coherent arguement against your rebutal to my case of Microsoft's wrong-doings in their monopolizing, greedy, and certainly tyrannical business policies. I have nothing against capitalism, of course it's a great system. BUT, evolution cannot occur when there's only one way of doing things and no way to break out of it. And WHY must you go on with this clearly stupid view of OSS==socialism? Socialism is about everyone being equal and surviving equally regardless. OSS is about survival of the fittest! THINK!

  • Install Hotspot (Sun JDK1.3).

    (Look in the products index.)

    Problem solved.

  • by pnatural ( 59329 ) on Tuesday January 23, 2001 @06:57PM (#485914)
    because languages are becoming irrelevant. or more specifically, differences between languages are becoming irrelevant. remember 10 years ago when the only way to write a fast app was to code in C? these days, you can get almost the same performance from any number of languages. what happens when all user-land code is relegated to the same run-time sandbox? does the language matter at all?

    on the one hand, a language independent compiler or byte-code is a good thing because it provides an additional layer of abstraction, but in the specific case of Java, Sun has made a very determined effort to associate Java the language with Java the byte-code. (or if you're a half-empty kinda person, Sun has not made the effort to distinguish between the two). if the language becomes less important, so does the byte-code. enter .NET, a platform with true language independence, and Sun/Java suddenly looks much less attractive.

    i don't mean to spew off MS FUD, but what they've done with .NET and it's language independence is remarkable. i can (and have) written a class in Python, inherited from that class in VB, and debugged the two together as a Perl app. seems to me that with .NET, i'm getting my cake and eating it, too.
  • Wrong.

    Sun AND IBM both make excellent Java VMs for Win32.

    Java will continue to flourish on Win3 and other platforms. There just wont be the incomapatable, Un-java, MSVM around to confuse people.

    This is good news all around for Java.
  • Yep.

    You clearly understand it.

    Its frightening how many people don't. I was going to post to try to educate a few but you';ve posted evrything I was going to try to explain.

    This is a good day for Java. Without the threat of the MS fatal-embrace we might even see some loosening of the restrictions.
  • Hmm.. I should read the article. But if it says basically what the summary says, which is that MS won't be keeping Java around, I think MS made a Really Bad Move.

    Microsoft is still behaving as though they own the planet. Maybe they will be able to hold on, but I think they are just digging themselves into a hole. The trends I'm seeing in the tech market are toward open standards (though that might just be because of where I get my tech news). Microsoft appears to be continuing in the other direction, toward full integration of their entire software line upon proprietary standards.

    The market is turning into two camps: Microsoft and Anything But Microsoft. Lines are being drawn, and I think MS will shortly be on the retreat, rethinking these ideas...
  • Java Plug-in or Java Web Start

    Either solves your IE problem.
  • They're going to try to ramp up C# to use the VB VM. They realize that C# doesn't quite cut it as a language (like they care about semantic and syntactic purity,) and that VB's VM is pokin' slow and its been cracked to bits.

    That's rather incorrect. The Common Language Runtime (CLR, the core of .NET development) is not the VB Runtime. Totally different technologies. If anything, VB7 will target the CLR, not the other way around with C# targetting VBRUN.

    Do some research before you start spouting, or you'll look like a fool.

  • I think .NET will be a resounding success and the pricing is on purpose to encourage the growth of Application Service Providers by making owning your own servers unattractive. As we know, it seems Microsoft is headed towards renting access to applications and this pricing will limit the producers of services to those who can afford the development costs, not like in the days of VB3.

    Microsoft's problem is that there is no real reason to upgrade Microsoft Office or even Windows 98. The current versions do what 95%+ of people need. In order to ensure an on-going revenue stream they need to change their business model to a subscription service model where they charge you for the same application every month.

    They will port .NET to other platforms because it will be the services that will be important, not the platforms. Microsoft is betting on having the best services. They have already won the office suite wars and they have been steadily accumulating the raw materials for services such as the electronic rights to images.

    Without exception, all the non-technical people I know would love to have a simple on/off device that gave them access to a range of applications for a monthly fee. They hate upgrades, backups, and everything else that is not directly related to getting their work done.

    Even more in favor of this are small businesses of fewer than 50 employees (to pick a number at random) because they cannot really justify the cost of a full-time IT person.

    People will trust Microsoft with their personal data. People already trust their bank, their accountant, their doctor, their dentist, their lawyer, their realtor, etc. With careful marketing of image, an ASP can be a trusted entity.

    As to whether or not businesses will do this, they already do. I know of an insurance company who outsources their IT to a consulting company who actually does the work on a leased IBM mainframe owned and maintained by a third company.

    This will happen because it will sneak into corporations like PCs did. At first no real business would run on anything but a mainframe. Then, as PCs became accepted at home because of hobbiests and early adopters, small businesses began to use PCs because they couldn't afford "real" computers (I remember accounting packages that loaded from cassette and ran in 64K being used by small businesses). Pretty soon all companies had PCs because they couldn't afford not to, competively speaking.

    Since this new approach is what Microsoft wants (remember the constant revenue stream is desired) and Microsoft controls the vast majority of the bottom end of computers (i.e., the same place that PCs snuck in to begin with) this will happen.

    From Microsoft's perspective this has the additional benefit of defanging the accusation of leveraging their operating system to the detriment of others. They will now be able to claim that they operate on an ECMA standard platform and anyone can implement it.

    The new consulting (services) company between Microsoft and Anderson is a sign of this as well. Those consultants will advocate spreading IT costs across time periods in nice predictable amounts rather than the current spikey model where the spikes are caused by an unwanted upgrade cycle. This will be irresistably attractive to accountants and CEOs who hate surprises in the quarter's bottom line.

    I expect the XBox is the precursor of something that will become a SOHO terminal that is as hard to work as a light switch.

    The big question is not "Will .NET succeed?" it's "What can advocates of free software and open source offer that is as attractive?".

    People who haven't looked at .NET or who write it off as a lame alternative to Java/J2EE should look into it more and watch The Show at MSDN.

    To whet your appetite: one feature is the ability to browse the web from your IDE, locate a server offering a .NET service, see all the functions and parameters that are available for accessing that service, and then include that service (complete with IntelliSense prompting in the editor) as just another component.

    OpenSourcerers []
  • .NET is language independant. You can use PERL, Java, Python, C#, VB, whatever the hell you want

    Same with Java technology. It's not limited to the Java language; any language that can be preprocessed into the Java language (covers Basic, C, and COBOL), compiled into JVM bytecode (covers Java, JVM assembly language [], ML, C, Ada, Eiffel, Python, Smalltalk, and Haskell), or interpreted easily (covers Tcl/Tk, Forth, Perl, Lisp/Scheme, EcmaScript, Logo, Prolog, and Python) can be used with the Java platform. And there are many more [].

    Like Tetris? Like drugs? Ever try combining them? []
  • It should probably be noted that as it turns out, Sun concentrates on the Windows JVM for their JDK first, then on Solaris, and then on Linux. The Windows version of JDK1.3 was out before the Solaris version. The Windows JDKs from Sun are already very good.

    As long as developers can bundle the Java Runtime Environment installer for Windows, Windows Java Apps won't suffer at all.

  • That may make C#'s passage into the world a little tricky if Sun has much of the Java technology patented...

    While I think Sun Java is a good system, it is old technology. If Sun has patents on any fundamental aspect of Java or Java implementations, those patents are unlikely to be valid, and if there is any significant economic incentive for challenging them, they will be challenged.

    Sun may have legally valid patents on some peripheral aspects of Java that they can use to make it hard for others to produce compliant implementations. But trying to enforce such patents against third party implementations would be suicide for the Java platform.

  • Agreed, if you are distributing software via CD or large download, including the JRE is trivial. Indeed, if there is a standard way to verify that it is installed (trivial with the Windows Registry, there are advantages to it, even if its a pain in the ass), you can include it without a problem. It shouldn't be a much bigger deal than the MFC/VB runtimes included copies that we used to use in the past.

    Now the Sun JREs blow, they need to be improved and optimized. Unfortunately, it is harder to write a JRE without the OS Code. However, I don't know how much that matters.

    When I had a Pentium 75, I used to think that Java was unbearably slow, because it would run at half the speed of native code. With a Pentium 166, it was annoying. With my K6-3 450, I wouldn't want to run a spreadsheet in Java. With my Athlon/P3 machines at the office (and what every new computer user has), it is insignificant.

    JIT has probably gotten runtime to 80%-90% of native code for "real apps" (where you run the application for a while, so it can optimize), and the 50% hit for trivial apps doesn't matter because they're trivial. Intel/AMD compensated for Java's speed. :)
  • The Java trademark is proprietary, but Java itself isn't. That hasn't hurt Java. In fact, it's good.

    There are already several open source implementations: Intel's open runtime, GNU gcj, TransVirtual's Kaffe, and Japhar. They are incomplete and not fully compatible, but they are getting better, and they offer some useful non-100%-Java add-ons. And because they aren't called "Java", people don't get confused. Everybody is happy.

    Even Microsoft can freely implement themselves something that works like Java and runs existing Java code. They just can't try to confuse their customers about what they are getting: that's what trademarks are for.

  • Microsoft doesn't have any control over that. The IE architecture allows people to plug in whatever they want. If they don't provide support for Java in IE, Sun or someone else will, including auto download and auto install.
  • 2. They do not open their source so that other developers can create software on an even playing field with them.

    And I bet the Giant's offense won't just hand the ball over to Baltimore. What a bunch of bad guys they are.

    I also don't agree with what the originall poster said -- but consider the recent Kerebos extensions fiasco. Opening the code really is useless (or uneeded)... but opening the standard for properly interfacing with existing systems should be expected.

    3. They are not responsive to fixing flaws in their systems that are discovered by the community at large.

    When the problem is fixable, they usually respond in a decent ammount of time. Think Linux is better? Consider the recent Linux worm.

    You mean the worm that only infects RedHat systems? The same one that fixes the hole on infection? The same one thats been patched for months?... and been patched for so long that somebody made a program which can exploit and fix the problem? That's a long time if you ask me... so long that somebody automated the fixing process. When's the last time you saw an exploit for IIS that would download and install the patch for you? :)

    Justin Buist
    ...rambling as usual
  • VMs are bitches to write and the best one is produced by the folks with the most experience (Namely the ParcPlace Smalltalk VM that's been honed and whetted by experience since 1977.) Java's second with 1996. Nineteen years difference.

    I think Microsoft misrepresents the complexity and timeframe of what they are attempting, but you overestimate it. Good dynamic runtimes and dynamic compilers are non-trivial, but there have been considerably more than ParcPlace and Java. In fact, you can get about half a dozen good, mature ones in open source off the net.

    Microsoft has the resources to build a good dynamic runtime, but getting the bugs out and the tuning still requires real-world feedback. My guess is that it will probably take them 3-4 years to produce something decent. Until then, they merely need to give the appearance that they are producing something decent, something that MS marketing is quite good at.

  • I used to write Java COM components with IIS. While the Java libraries (, were pretty thin wrappers around IIS stuff, I tend to agree that Java/IIS was a pretty good match. It was amazing how little effort they put into the Java versions of their APIs... I remember having to pass in arrays with length 1 to calls in order to get return values. And I remember how it was technologically impossible to retrieve an array of HTTP request parameters (that had the same name) from Java... all you could do was get them back comma delimited (and thus mangled).

    Then I remember when we discovered a never-publicized bug in MS' jdbcodbc.dll. The JDBC-ODBC bridge used to blow up if you sent more than 32k to it trying to set a text (CLOB) column. It would bring down the JDBC-ODBC stuff, the JVM, and thus IIS (JVM was running in process). We reported it, had to fight getting charged for tech support, and it was finally fixed six months after they'd escalated it to that mythical maximum level of importance. Were it not for being able to manually copy old versions of jdbcodbc.dll from old Win95 boxes, our client's app would have been DOA. Cost us two weeks tracking the sucker down
    too. Maybe we should have written a security exploit around it and made it into a security bug. Perhaps that would have caught their attention.... but oh, wait, it was 1998 and MS didn't give half a rats rear end about security anyway.

    Eventually, we figured out that it was probably a good idea to ditch all dependence on MS and go straight J2EE.
  • With .NET applications, MS doesnt hold the data. MS sells the product that allow 3rd parties to hold data and applications. YOu arent renting from MS, you are renting from someone else who bought MS software.

    This is a good thing for big corps. and whatnot, they buy .NET servers, purchase a few boxen, and all the data in the corporation, as well as the apps, are stored in one secure location, instead of spread between dozens of workgroups and desktops.

    I think you might try reading about some of the .NET products (not the standard frontpage of MS's site mind, you the MSDN content is actually rather useful).

  • There is in the Mac OS X public beta (1.3 will ship with the final release). It works quite well, and Swing looks much less crappy than usual because it uses native Aqua widgets.
  • Three things Java technology can do that C# and .NET can't today, January 23, 2001:

    1. Run on less than 3% of all desktop machines 2. Run on less than 5% of all desktop machines 3. Run at all on Mac, Linux, or Sun systems

    Sounds like a hard knock for C# and .NET, - guess MS will have to just turn in and quit.

  • The last step that is required now is a good way to run multiple Java apps on the main platforms (Windows, Mac OSX and Linux). One of the reasons why desktop apps haven't really taken off is that each app launched takes quite a bit of memory with the VM - if you can move some of that overhead into a centralized place then it would be a lot easier to run Java desktop apps.

    Desktop Java apps can be pretty good - with a lot of optmizing, I worked with a team to get a pretty decently sized Swing based app with a lot of DB access and forms and MDI working resonably well on a P166 running W95 with 32MB of RAM, using the 1.2VM - and it was over two years ago that I completed that project. Even at the time it ran just like any other app on a P450 and given that the newer VM's are getting better and better you could probably do some pretty powerful desktop apps today. I still haven't seen many good examples, TogetherJ is impressive but still a bit slow.

    I really agree with you that OSX will help Java on the desktop, and Java is already moving up from the other end as well with Palm VM's and iMode applets.
  • They're going to try to ramp up C# to use the VB VM. They realize that C# doesn't quite cut it as a language (like they care about semantic and syntactic purity,) and that VB's VM is pokin' slow and its been cracked to bits.

    Ahem. C# uses the .NET runtime's VM (Common Language Runtime). VB.NET is a completely rewritten VB and it targets the CLR just like C# will. VB.NET is nothing like the old VB (except for syntax).

    Also, VB has been natively compiled since version 6, so it has had no need for a VM for quite a while.

    VB's VM is pokin' slow

    Compared to what? Java? LOL
  • by joss ( 1346 )
    There's nothing wrong with writing an OS in C++ as long as you use good programmers. Although, that is easier said than done. As long as they understand the implications of what they write in terms of the assembly generated by the compiler, it's a fine language for writing an OS.

    The problem with languages is that the easier it is to write, the less people think. The theory is that with higher level languages people can devote their minds to worry about their high level algorithms instead of continually worrying about low level implementation details. The reality is that they just use their brains less, and don't properly think about either the low level or the high level. The *worst* possible software is generated when people go even higher level and start generating programs using Rational Rose together with the Design Patterns book.

    This is part of the reason why Java applications are generally shit. It's only the fault of the language to the extent that people are encouraged to think less. This doesn't "let you concentrate on what's important", it just allows mental laziness, and very few people have the discipline to devote the freed mental CPU cycles to their design. Instead it just lets them churn out more shit code, which fools them into thinking they are being more "productive". Likewise, lots of C++ programs are worse than the equivalent C.

    The redeeming feature of C++, and the reason why there are several decent applications and a couple of decent OSs written in C++ is that it shoots you in the foot often enough to prevent you from forgetting about the low level details for very long. Even though in theory the language allows you to ignore implementation details, there are so many gotchas that you have to understand all the gory details in order to write tolerable code. Like, you can use multiple inheritance, but just try doing that without understanding what virtual inheritance means and you'll soon be in a world of pain. The many dangerous and complicated language features in C++ keep people on their mental toes.

    You might think I'm kidding, but I'm not.
  • As long as Farenheit? ;)
  • How is this concept new or interesting in any way?

    Why not just go out and buy a big f*ck-off UNIX machine and run apps remotely over X?

    Run Java apps remotely over X if you need a well designed OO authoring environment and GUI, and run JSP/Servlets or applets if you need web deployment. There are a plethora of other options, from elegant Python to the heavily bracketed LISP and most all of them cost you nothing, are proven and tested from years of abuse and most of them have been integrating XML since the day it was suggested by the W3C.

    And you can do it today, not at some unspecified time in the future, after applying 6 service packs, paying for n client licenses and being told to pay for an upgrade to the next version to really see it work properly.

    All the stuff that .Net offers is here, and has been for years. Like we don't have enough middleware?

    The addition of XML-wrapped messages in proprietary binary format is going to revolutionize the industry??

    I just don't get what problem they are trying to solve, unless it's 'What should we do to delay Microsoft from getting destroyed by Linux/BSD, Apache and Java in the server room?'.

    I mean, you only have to look at the NetCraft server uptime statistics to see how well Win32 stacks up against the rest.

    They must be smokin some pretty good crack up in Redmond

  • I think one thing that hurts Linux is that there is too MUCH choice when it comes to what you can do with Linux.

    The result can be an absolute nightmare, especially on large IT organizations that need ease of OS installation and maintainance. That's why Solaris and Windows NT/2000 are still doing well even in face of "cheap" competition from Linux. Even Linux that is pre-loaded on commercial systems are usually the commercial distributions from Red Hat, Mandrake, Caldera, etc.

    You can create a "homebrewed" Linux, but unless you're extremely familiar with the innards of Linux it is a major hassle to maintain--and very likely beyond the skill of the majority of computer users out there. It should be noted that the supposedly "home-brewed" versions of Linux distributed for use on college campuses are usually modified versions of commercial distributions from Red Hat, Mandrake, S.u.S.E., TurboLinux, Caldera, and so on.

  • Java NEEDS to be able to run under Windows 9x/ME/NT/2000 because that's -85 percent- of the market for desktop and small server computers out there.

    In short, if you want to make money with any commercial product based on Java, you have to be WIN32 API compatible in the first place. That's why even Sun's own work on Java have to include WIN32 API support, because despite what Sun thinks of Microsoft, they know that the vast majority of Java installations have to run under Windows, like it or not. :)
  • by RayChuang ( 10181 ) on Wednesday January 24, 2001 @03:08AM (#486014)
    Well, there is a real good reason why Sun wants the Java VM to work on the WIN32 API first: that is -85 percent- of the market for desktop computers and small servers.

    Sun may dislike Microsoft but frankly, Sun knows that for Java to be significant they -have- to be able to run on the most popular OS platform by a long, long way.

    Don't be surprised that this settlement may result in a deal for a Sun-certified Java VM to be part of Internet Explorer 6.0, or at least provide direct hooks to work under IE 6.0.

  • Look, there are a LOT of engineers that have already invested in learning Java. It makes sense and it doesn't tie you into a single platform.

    I do believe that C# will adapt, but how can it compete with a 'relatively' open and cross-platform language?

    I don't think at this point, even if Microsoft has an amazing set of development tools that are superior to Jbuilder, Visual Age, etc etc, could catch up overnight with Java.

    Java is really one of the few great enterprise server solutions (for the internet) that is both robust and scalable. (I don't consider a 4-cpu Dell running windows 2000 scalable).

    Would you like a Python based alternative to PHP/ASP/JSP?
  • You can force it to use Motif & Metal 'themes'

    Would you like a Python based alternative to PHP/ASP/JSP?
  • I know, it sounds stupid, doesn't it.

    Actually, I wish I had done more assembly, although compilers are pretty good these days. I was learning things like Lisp, prolog, pop11 and ML when in retrospect, I would have been better off learning more assembly, and understanding microcode would be even better. However, C is sufficiently low level for most tasks thanks.

    There are plenty of shit C/C++ applications, this is true. Writing such applications isn't easy, and not everybody is smart/experienced enough to do it right. Yes, when they misbehave they do so nastily. So nastily in fact, that the problem tends to get noticed and fixed. Tell me something though, where are the good applications written in high level languages. Of the actual applications you use every day, how many are written in high level languages ?

    True enough, it does take longer to write an HTML form handler in a low level language. The discipline involved wouldn't pay off until you start writing much larger and more complicated applications. That's the paradox, high level languages are supposed to help out with very big complicated programs, but the more impressive the task performed by a working program is, the less likely that it was written in a high level language. To me, impressive programs are things like: compilers, CAD/CAM applications, operating systems, space shuttle control systems, voice recognition, etc etc. The bigger the project, the more important it is to have control down to the lowest level.
  • Many people have made the point that JAVA will run almost anywhere and that C-Dull will require Windows. The counter argument is that Windows is a monopoly and has 90% of the worlds computers.
    My point is this. They have way less than 50% of the server side busienss, and it appears that they will never dominate that business. Do you want to lock yourself in to Windows on the server side when you don't have to?

    Lastly you want an application that I can write in JAVA that I cannot in "Inactive C", err C-dull... I will write an application that gets information out of a SQL database and returns it to me in an object. I will do this WITHOUT any sql code. If the database changes (i.e. adds tables ect) I will NOT have to change my code. My code will handle transaction management, messaging and state without me having to type ONE line of code... I do this in JAVA today. You cannot do this in C# today. I didn't even mention database pooling.

    Have you checked where ORACLE, IBM AOL/TW, SUN, BEA, APPLE ect are putting there development dollars. It is NOT C# it is JAVA, XML and to some extent LINUX. The evil empire is falling...
    I never thought I would say this, but thank you Reno.

    Steve Michael
  • C# is my favorite dialect of object-oriented C.
    It fixes a few flaws in Java, while emulating
    most of it.
    The chief drawback is that MicroSoft is doing
    almost nothing to promote it on non-MS platforms.
  • > They can't use Sun's IP. That means that they can't produce a Java anything.

    This disturbs me immensely that a language is being claimed as someone else's property. Even if you write a compiler from scratch, most java tools will not work without the sun.* packages. Didn't this whole flap start from MS tainting the precious sanctity of the core java packages?

    If Java were part of a standards body, MS Java would simply not have met certification. Instead, Sun sued. If I distributed a modified and possibly broken C++, there is no C++ Inc that can sue me over it.

    MS was an easy target for you to hate. If Sun turned its guns on me, I'd be out on the street.
  • > The market is turning into two camps: Microsoft and Anything But Microsoft. Lines are being drawn, and I think MS will shortly be on the retreat, rethinking these ideas...

    There's also the camp consisting of those of us who work for a living and really don't give a good god damn about these silly little treehouse wars, who develop java applications on Microsoft Windows, with Sun's JVM, to run primarily on Microsoft Internet Explorer, served by a FreeBSD server, with the network managed by Linux.

    Have fun in your awkward little monoculture.
  • Remember Win3.* that would not run under ANY DOS unless it was MS DOS?

    No. I don't. What I do remember (and I was around then) was a beta test version of Win 3.1 which would only run on a few specific versions of MS-DOS because that was what the beta was actually testing and blocked any other choices. Of course, you may find the urban legend more fun...

  • The thing that Java needs is widespread distribution ... and prior to some of the antitrust rulings, that meant that Sun needed to get Microsoft to distribute it.

    On the other hand, it seems like it'd now be practical for Dell, Compaq, Gateway, etc to bundle Sun's JVM into their distros. And of course, for "large customers", which do custom installs of Win32 based operating systems, to do the same thing ... which they were probably doing already.

  • My only concern, albeit a small one, is that of Java applets in web pages. Maybe it's not the ideal environment, but currently it's the only reasonably cross-platform, cross-browser way to deliver client-side executable content that's too complex to do in JavaScript. What will happen when Internet Exploder no longer has Java support? Webmasters will have a choice: force IE users to download a Sun Java plug-in, or write the applet in C# and only support IE7 (or whatever) users. That sounds quite forboding if you're a fan of non-Microsoft desktops.

    I truly hope that this scenario never comes to pass. It won't, if AOL gets on the ball and switches its AOLclient to use Mozilla as the browser. Let's hope this happens soon.
  • You don't need Microsoft to do anything for you. All .NET interfaces are documented extensively. Including bytecode formats. Just go to MSDN, take the docs and start coding. You have better things to do? Then why Microsoft should make your world better for their own cost?
  • Could you provide some examples of these?

    The only tool, utility, or application I have encountered recently which used Java is the Viewlet builder.

    While that util is pretty cool, I just don't see the popularity of Java being all that strong. At least not in the Windows desktop arena, and certainly not on the Windows server, where COM and ASP dominate.

  • Veritas also uses Java for it's VMSA console. Microsoft may want to piss off Sun, and they may want to piss off Oracle, but they sure as hell don't want to piss off Veritas. If MS wants to play in the High Availability server market, they sure as hell don't.
  • hm - installation of VC++ 6.0 *requires* that the MS JVM be installed in IE. . .
  • This would have been GREAT news for Java, two years ago. . .

    What was that other poster's sig about the courts running the clock out?
  • 6.001 (Intro CS), 6.034 (AI) etc., still use Scheme (MIT Lisp's derivative).

    I included MIT in the elite shcools.

    The difference, 1.00 (taught to Civil Engineers and Business Majors) is Java based (although it might be C++ one term and Java the other, it's hard to keep track off).

    6.170, the software engineering lab of Computer Science required for all CSE majors is in Java now, not CLU.

    Everyone graduating from MIT with a CS degree knows Java.

    Java is useful for teaching software engineering because you focus on design strategy instead of debugging pointers. For MIT, the real world benefit is uninteresting, we're expected to learn new languages quickly. For "lower tier" schools (not to be insulting, hence the quites), like local colleges and community colleges, Java will become increasingly used. This is important, because if you need a lot of programmers, the bulk will be people that learn pragmatic details.

    My point is, Computer Scientists will learn whatever language. Computer Programmers will use the few they were taught, and Java is likely to be one of them.
  • Don't say I didn't warn you.

    As far as "the best teaching language", I feel Python is a pretty good choice.

    Python is an extremely well-laid language, one where whitespace is significant, one line of
    source is one statement (no free form semicolon-terminated lines, with exception of triple quoted text), and indentation is significant.

    Unlike direct C derivitaves (C++, Java), variables need not be declared, and because it's semi-interpreted, it is easy to pick up.

    Unlike Perl, it's damned neat and no one's going to have an Obfuscated Python contest.

    It's a language with extreme real world exposure. Episode I was engineered with quickly brewed Python.

    Don't get me wrong. I like learning other languages. However, as a starter, Python kicks.
  • I was actually working for Sun during much of the JDK 1.2 effort, and I can assure you that Windows and Solaris development goes strictly in tandem, or at least it did when I was there. But even then Sun was fielding complaints that Solaris Java was "trailing" Windows Java. This had nothing to do with the actual software, and a lot to do with Sun's bureaucratic and baroque release and distribution channels. Rivalry and miscommunication betwen Javasoft and Sunsoft (these opcos are officially dead, but their cultures are still in place) didn't help either.

    Probably a lot of the Javasoft people would like nothing better than to concentrate on the Windows JDK, and perhaps bring the Linux JDK in-house. From their point of view it's silly to give equal effort to the Solaris JDK, which accounts for 10% of the downloads. But for better or worse, Sun's base business is hardware, and they can't afford the slightest hint that they're not fully supporting that hardware.


  • As most of us know Microsoft was out to get Java from the start.

    I've come to see Microsoft as the modern equivalent of the Borgia family. Microsoft, like the Borgias, is greedy, power-hungry, ruthless, aggressive, unprincipled, and has made a lot of enemies. So in both cases people believe every rumor and nasty inference.

    "Everybody knows" that Lucrezia Borgia slept with her father and poisoned her lovers on a weekly basis -- "facts" which have no historical basis. By the same token, everybody feels free to infer malicious motives to every strange action by Microsoft, even when they shoot themselves in the foot.

    Java is a case in point. As every Word user or COM programmer knows, MS loves to totally redesign things, and to heck with backward compatibility or predictable product behavior. MS can't even maintain consistency with its own APIs. Is it very suprising they couldn't resist redesigning the language and "improving" the API? Especially when they had just hired Anders Hejlsberg, compiler wizard and architect of the much-beloved Delphi Visual Component Library.

    A lot of MS's actions have more to do with technical bigotry, personal animosity, and plain old compulsive bit-twidling than with fiendish plans or self-interest. Which is not to say that MS lacks in these things. But the fiendish plans are often overrated, and the self-interest often takes a back seat to less mature motives.


Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon. -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982