Microsoft Corp. said it plans to distribute an update of the Windows XP operating system within 10 days as part of an effort to comply with the terms of an antitrust agreement with the U.S. Justice Department. Also, the judge overseeing Sun Microsystems Inc.’s antitrust suit against Microsoft Corp. said he will consider ordering the world’s largest software company to include Sun’s Java programming language in its Windows operating system.
Microsoft to Release XP SP1 within 10 Days; Judge on the Java Issue
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I have read ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/26517.html ) that there might be a problem with it.
If they give you with one hand ( middleware to be default ) they (Microsoft)try to take some ( via demanding of root rights for automated dowload updates) with the other hand.
However, this might be just noise for now since nobody has proven it to be like that.
About including Java on Windows current by Judicial order … that’s strange (albeit, there’s some non-Sun’s java on the win32 CD presently ??)
Good news! Not spectacular, but still good.
About including Java on Windows current by Judicial order … that’s strange (albeit, there’s some non-Sun’s java on the win32 CD presently ??)
Maybe we ought to get the judge some blocks to play with…
Future copies of WindowsXP will ship with Microsoft Judge software since one will be required anyhow.
“Every day, every week, developers are making decisions” whether to write programs with Java or Microsoft’s new .NET language for Internet applications, he said in court.
First of all, .NET is not a language for Internet applications. You can use more than 20 different languages to use the .NET framework. .NET in itself is not a programming language at all. You could even use Java to program for the .NET framework.
Second, I haven’t seen many Java programs that would require to run on Windows, the desktop OS. Java is big on the server side. I am not sure what Java programs they are talking about.
Third, the majority of computers out there don’t have .NET installed anyway. So the difference between downloading Java or .NET is minimal.
Programs written in Java are able to run on any operating system, and Day argued that including Java in Windows would make rival operating systems more popular with consumers.
I am sure some people agree with this weird logic, but I don’t. It doesn’t make sense to me. They make it sound like Java programs don’t run on Windows.
The one thing I really liked about XP was the removal of Java, since I never use it. Guess I’ve have to live with it, and all the other middleware stuff they force on me.
Java is a separate product made by a separate company…MS is certainly a monopoly…but that doesn’t mean that they must or SHOULD include everybody else’s rival software with theirs. Java is for all intents and purposes a rival system platform to Windows…this makes no sense to me at all.
If someone could give me the LEGAL (not moral) grounds for forcing MS to bundle Java I would love to hear it
-bytes256
It is a pity because I really do not want to have Java on my computer. Java is very slow it seems that the software that Sun produces is always slow, at least in the consumer market. Java Runtime environment, Star / Open Office, and they have even contributed to Mozilla. All these projects have one thing in common they are slow and are trying but failing to displace MS.
What I don’t get is this: why should the Judge be able to force MS to ship the Java programming language, when MS doesn’t ship any *other* programming language with the platform?? It isn’t like we’ve got a competing product shipping with the platform (yet). This is akin to forcing every 12 pack of Coke to include a can of Pepsi twist!
Microsoft should not be forced to include Sun’s Java in Windows XP, simply because THEY DON’T HAVE TO, and they’re not doing ANYTHING wrong by not including it. If someone wants Java, they can get Java, it’s easy enough, it’s not some huge friggin 100MB download (At least not the Java I get).
Java is great for the web, but for applications, sure they work cross-platform, but come on, Java apps are the slowest I’ve ever seen.
This is straying though. All it boils down to is Sun trying to force some acceptance of Java by making Microsoft include it.
What I don’t get is this: why should the Judge be able to force MS to ship the Java programming language, when MS doesn’t ship any *other* programming language with the platform??
This is a mistake in the article. They are trying to force Microsoft to ship the Java Runtime Environment, not the programming language.
when MS doesn’t ship any *other* programming language with the platform?
The article is misleading. I am pretty confident they are talking about the Java Runtime environment. Java written for web applications compiles into an intermediate code not a binary like most languages. The runtime environment is required to allow the program to run on any platform without having to compile it for different platforms. It is sort of a cross between compilation and interpretation.
They are not shipping the Java SDK just the runtime environment.
What I found irritating is that the first time you come across a web page in IE under XP that includes a Java applet, you have to d/l a plug in. For a modem user this takes forever, so effectively MS is pushing its users away from Java technology…
It is a pity because I really do not want to have Java on my computer.
Why? How does it interfere with your computer in any way? The only thing it does on your computer is give you the benefit of being able to view web pages with applets in them. What’s wrong with that?
Java is very slow it seems that the software that Sun produces is always slow, at least in the consumer market. Java Runtime environment, Star / Open Office, and they have even contributed to Mozilla. All these projects have one thing in common they are slow and are trying but failing to displace MS.
What on Earth are you talking about? StarOffice starts slow, but works fine once it’s started. You would think Word started slow too if Microsoft didn’t boot most of it up when you start your computer. Also, StarOffice does have a couple of features that use Java, but it is not written in Java; and you don’t have to install those features. Mozilla is also not a Java application.
Before whining, why not go to at least some length to get your facts straight?
You would think Word started slow too if Microsoft didn’t boot most of it up when you start your computer.
It’s DOESN’T get loaded at boot time. Office is just fast because it’s written well. (Except the exploits, yeah I know)
Sun can’t figure this out it seems:
MS puts their own JVM into Windows95/98/etc… It uses the Java name and trademark. Sun tests it for compatibility and finds that it fails the suite of tests. They sue to get MS to stop pushing a derivative work and calling it “Java”. Sun wins.
Sun, it seems, expected MS to either fix their JVM or to include Sun’s. The problem is that they never pushed for that in the court case. So, MS does what is their legal right and sticks it to Sun by complying with the ruling….they remove their JVM from Windows.
Now Sun has done nothing but limit the widespread adoption of Java by forcing MS to not include a JVM with Windows. Sun cries like a baby because they screwed up and decide that the only way to fix the problem they created is to sue again.
So, now they are suing to have Java put *back* into Windows. This is *after* they sued to have it removed!
How incompetent can one company be?
Don’t forget about the hidden API calls that Microsoft uses in it’s software, that other companies don’t know about.
“You would think Word started slow too if Microsoft didn’t boot most of it up when you start your computer.
It’s DOESN’T get loaded at boot time. Office is just fast because it’s written well. (Except the exploits, yeah I know)”
It’s DOESN’T get loaded at boot time.
Check your Startup folder. When Office gets installed it puts a shortcut called “Office Startup” (or something similar) in there. That shortcut loads all of the Office *.dll files at boottime. It’s close to 13MB of DLL files that get pushed into memory. The net effect is that Office loads faster since it sees the DLLs already loaded and doesn’t have to load them at program start.
Yes, you can delete the shortcut to save 13MBs of memory and slightly lengthen the bootup of Office. But, the majority of neophyte computer users out there don’t know to do that.
And what keeps other companies from doing the same thing? Mozilla already does it. So there is no reason to complain at all.
Sun is really a whiner because they were too stupid to see that Microsoft would simply remove the JVM because Sun sued them. Now they want to force MS to add Java again. If this case goes through, what is other companies stopping from demanding the same thing? Everyone’s gonna want to ship their stuff with Windows. That’s stupid.
Hi Bill Gates,
I don’t want to use your Windows XP anymore because it comes with Java.
And what XP SP1 will do with pirate copies of XP Professional Corporate (that MANY people uses) ? Will that serialz be deactivated ?
I don’t have Office loading anything at boot (can’t remember if it did to begin with) and it still seems to load quite fast. Office XP is an impressive product.
Sun just wants to be another microsoft, they wanted it removed, so they did remove it. Now they want it back in. They are quite stupid.
With the media player 9 beta being released on September 4th, I bet the SP1 will be released on the same day.
So, now they are suing to have Java put *back* into Windows. This is *after* they sued to have it removed!
MS Java was not Java, hence why it was removed!
That is kind of the point of a company, to become a monoply so make loads and loads of money.
Yes, Some of Office IS loaded when you boot your computer.
Sun sued Microsoft originally because Microsoft added crap to the MS JVM that wasn’t compatible with everyone else’s JVM. Microsoft claimed their JVM was “Java Compatible”, which it wasn’t. This was a breach of contract, which is why Sun sued them.
The lawsuit was not to have the JVM removed, but rather to stop Microsoft from using the “Java Compatible” trademark on JVMs that proved to be a breach of contract. This is a valid lawsuit, so why bash Sun over it? Microsoft is the one that broke their licensing agreement, so why not bash them as the wrongdoers?
Now, if you’ll read the court filings instead of posting ignorantly, they have legitimate grounds for a lawsuit again. Microsoft is obviously using its monopoly to squash Java and Sun is suing them for it. Again, the wrongdoing is on Microsoft’s part, so why bash Sun.
Sun’s lawsuit is based on the exact same principles as the governments anti-trust case; in which Microsoft was found guilty. Microsoft is interweaving .NET into all its products (similar to interweaving IE into Windows) and excluding Sun’s technology. This is a valid anti-trust lawsuit against Microsoft. As part of the damages, Sun seeks to force Microsoft to bundle Sun’s “Java Compatile” JRE binary with Windows. Since Sun is the victim of the wrongdoing, why shouldn’t they at least get to request what compensation for damages they desire?
Firstly MS already paid sun for the misuse of the java compatable trademark. If you remember right part of sun’s complaint was basically that ms was trying to hijack java so to comply with that ms agreed to not ship a java vm with windows after a certain date. Sun agreed. Ms removed it sooner (xp instead of the next relase), instead of being happy about it (since ms is complying with a previous contract) they sue, claiming ms is strongarming them out of the business. It all breaks down to sun made a mistake and instead of admitting it, they sue. You mentioned earlier that having java wouldn’t interfere with someones computer it would only allow them to view web pages with applets when they came across them. My question to you is why is it ok for sun to cram java down our throats, but if ms bundles their media player, browser and im in THIER operating system its bad for one and all? Lastly you said that all the stuff office runs at boot uses 13 megs of ram, well I disabled it using a startup organizer and I tested your theory. Since I hadn’t used office this boot I was using about 100 megs. I then activated the program (its still listed in my start up manager since I just disabled it instead of deleting it) and I’m still using about 100 megs, wheres all the wasted ram ms stole from me to make word load faster? If you meant swap file well thats different, I am using an extra 2 megs or so of swap, but I don’t think anyone would call that hogging resources.
Well said Genaldar.
The “disable Java on Windows” part is hilarious because NOBODY uses java for desktop programming.
…because people, in general, don’t have a clue.
Microsoft was shipping a Java Virtual Machine that was incomptible with, surprise surprise, EVERY OTHER JVM in existence. Now, this JVM, made by Microsoft, was supplied by MS in MS products. The IBM VM, the Sun VM, the Blackdown VM, all three compatible. Sun CREATED Java as an open standard. That’s O – P – E – N. Open. Microsoft, using it’s legally documented monopoly powers, faced with something that terrified it (Java itself) took one of its time-tested attack vectors: embrace and extend.
Microsoft couldn’t STOP Java, so it decided to OWN Java. Just as Netscape was a horrible threat, leaving Microsoft to scramble for months without a competing product (until they slapped “Internet Explorer” onto some NCSA Mosaic code), Java was a threat that must be eliminated. There was no antitrust trial during the Netscape wrongdoings (don’t argue, it’s a matter of legal fact that MS acted reprehensibly), so it was allowed to proceed and, for all intents and purposes, Netscape was destroyed. I mention this only to put into perspective what MS has done in the past (as a finding of legal fact) and what it was TRYING to do to Sun/Java.
So, MS creates its own “compatible” JVM. And it is compatible, mostly. But over time, it drifts. Finally, there are whole applets that, when targeted at the MS JVM, will break on the OFFICIAL Sun JVM, the IBM JVM, and the Blackdown JVM. Why does this matter? Because 95% of computers have Windows on them by DEFAULT (again, because of legally documented wrongdoing on the part of MS) and because, upon viewing a Java-enabled webpage on the DEFAULT (again, legally documented wrongdoing) Windows internet browser, the browser would offer to install … you guessed it, the “compatible … more or less” MS version of the JVM.
Embrace. Extend. Extinguish. What Microsoft refers to publicly as “innovation”.
Points to consider, all documented legal fact so PLEAS don’t flame me to death with, “They didn’t do nuffin wrong!” According to the United States government and even the most liberal of moral codes of conduct, oh yeah, they most certainly DID do something wrong. A LOT of somethings …:
1) Microsoft is on 95% of computers because it acted illegally.
2) Microsoft’s browser reigns supreme for the same reason.
3) Microsoft’s browser/OS used MS’ own proprietary, broken (yes, broken — it was incompatible with the official java standards, thus it was broken) JVM. But since MOST people had the MS JVM “shoved down their throats” as one “astute” poster up there mentioned in another context, the “broken” JVM became the one that webmasters were forced to code for. Even more incentive for users NOT to use the alternative, truly compatible (read as: real) JVMs. This was (yet another) illegal act.
4) Because of this illegal act, Sun sued to have the DEFECTIVE JVM removed from Windows. If MS wanted to create a truly compatible JVM, I’m sure Sun would happily agree, but Sun simply could not sit by while MS literally stole (yes, literally) java from them.
5) By removing the broken JVM from Windows and not replacing it with a new, compatible one, Microsoft hopes to effectively destroy java. Java enables code to be written once and then ported (or simply run without modification, in some cases) to many OTHER OPERATING SYSTEMS. This is why MS wanted to destroy java in the first place. Java, if properly implemented, could go a long way toward making Windows much less relevant. The thought of ISVs being able to produce programs that run with equal ease on Macs, Linux, BeOS, Windows, and any other system with a COMPATIBLE virtual machine scares MS silly.
Embrace, extend, extinguish. Again, THIS is what MS calls innovation. Thus, when MS execs are heard to whine, “We aren’t being allowed to innovate,” well, according to the MS definition of innovation, I suppose they aren’t.
So Sun did NOT make a “mistake” by having MS’ incompatible virtual machine removed from Windows. Sun saved java from being “innovated” out of existence by Microsoft. Now Sun wants a real JVM, not some broken MS hack that’s compatible in name only, to be bundled with Windows. MS has acted illegally over and over. It is legally documented fact. Period. Microsoft was doing its very best to destroy java and would like nothing better than to destory Sun itself. No matter what your personal feelings, Microsoft is, as an entity, a convicted criminal. What use in bothering to have laws and a court system if victims (Sun, in this case, many others in the past and most likely the future) are thought of poorly simply for seeking compensation for the illegal and hurtful acts wrought upon them by a hardened criminal?
If Microsoft bundles the .Net runtime environment then they should also bundle the Java runtime, otherwise they are leveraging their O.S. monopoly to push .Net and kill Java.
If Microsoft don’t bundle the .Net runtime, then I don’t see why they would have to bundle Java.
Do you seriously think that Microsoft is not going to bundle the .Net runtime environment?
Sun and Microsoft makes a deal, Microsoft bundles it’s own version of Java.
Microsoft adds Win32 optional capablities to java, but Sun sees it as something that goes against the deal.
Sun sues Microsoft.
Sun almost winning, makes remedy with MS.
Sun makes MS pay, makes sure MS don’t bundle it’s own version of JVM with Windows after a period of time, and don’t release non-security related release for Java.
Sun declares victory.
Sun thought Microsoft would bundle it’s own version of Java, thought that Microsoft can’t lived without it.
MS announces .NET Framework, sends it to EMCA to become a standard.
Sun shocked, Sun sues.
Conclusion? Sun = sour grape.
Camel: StarOffice starts slow, but works fine once it’s started.
Not really. i find the start up least painful, cause there is an option to allow the program to load while boot time. But the real slowness is when you try to place in tables for example, it is so slow. Don’t tell me I don’t have enough RAM, cause using OpenOffice.org only on my computer, it doesn’t use swap at all.
Camel: You would think Word started slow too if Microsoft didn’t boot most of it up when you start your computer.
Microsoft doesn’t boots up Word when Windows is starting. Sure, it loads standard Win32 APIs, but it is Sun’s fault, not Microsoft’s, that OpenOffice.org chooses to use it’s own rather than Win32.
Anonymous: It’s DOESN’T get loaded at boot time. Office is just fast because it’s written well. (Except the exploits, yeah I know)
It isn’t written well. Let’s just have a competition using pure standard Win32, and maybe we would have a proper benchmark.
J: MS puts their own JVM into Windows95/98/etc… It uses the Java name and trademark. Sun tests it for compatibility and finds that it fails the suite of tests. They sue to get MS to stop pushing a derivative work and calling it “Java”.
Actually, JVM 1.1.x actually complies with Sun’s standards, but Sun refuse to recognize it because it allows developers to use Win32 APIs via the VM.
DoctorPepper: Don’t forget about the hidden API calls that Microsoft uses in it’s software, that other companies don’t know about.
The people who are complaining about hidden APIs are the people who don’t fully use Win32 as much as possible. Take Real for example, it isn’t a COM+ app, it uses a non-standard API for its UI etc. Mozilla uses XPCOM, XUL etc. OpenOffice.org, the worst written app ever, uses its own API, like UNO.
No one is denying that there are some hidden APIs used by Windows components…. but saying Office is faster than Staroffice because of it is unfounded.
J: Check your Startup folder. When Office gets installed it puts a shortcut called “Office Startup” (or something similar) in there. […]
StarOffice 6.0 and OpenOffice.org uses the same method, and frankly, it is the only way I live with them. (I use Openoffice.org mainly to save in PDF files).
Also, in the installation, there is an option to turn this off…. well, at least in Office XP.
arggg….: MS Java was not Java, hence why it was removed!
Like I said, it is compliant with Java. It allowed developers to use Win32 in their Java apps, but this isn’t forced upon their developers.
Rob: Microsoft was shipping a Java Virtual Machine that was incomptible with, surprise surprise, EVERY OTHER JVM in existence.
Even Sun didn’t claim that. They said because of the options to developers provided by MS Java, developers choose to mix Java and Win32.
Rob: 1) Microsoft is on 95% of computers because it acted illegally.
Wrong. Microsoft maintains it’s monopoly by illegal means, which is only illegal under fascist laws (e.g. Antitrust laws). Microsoft got its market share because of the price of Windows. It used the same method as what Linux is using now.
there is no legal proof whatsoever that Microsoft got it’s monopoly because of illegal behaviour. Besides, a nice thing to note that the DOJ considers Microsoft to have close to 100% market share because they don’t see Apple as a competitor.
Rob: Java, if properly implemented, could go a long way toward making Windows much less relevant.
Sun says Java is fastest on the desktop on OS X. And it is god damn slow. Frankly, I don’t see much future in Java.
Rob, you really need to take off that blinds from your eyes and see facts. Sun is angry at Microsoft because it allows Java developers to use Win32 calls via MS JVM. Developers could still write cross platform standard Java apps if they liked to, only they can’t take advantage of Win32. And this is what most Java developers did – I haven’t used one Java applet that couldn’t run on Linux. There are some apps in Java written for Win32, but that’s their problem.
If Apple allows Java developers access Cocoa calls, you can bet your ass that they would be in court in no time.
Dululu: If Microsoft bundles the .Net runtime environment then they should also bundle the Java runtime, otherwise they are leveraging their O.S. monopoly to push .Net and kill Java.
Then Sun should bundle .NET along with Java on their Solaris OE because it is pushing Java and killing .NET in the UNIX market. Make sense? nope.
Just like Sun isn’t entitled to bundle .NET, the same way it should be for java. Java isn’t that much successful on desktops, because it is slower than native applications. It suites the enterprise community, and apparently suites the embeded community, mainly because the enterprise community don’t need Swing, and the embedded ones are normally simple apps with simple UIs.
KLAMATH:
“Well said Genaldar.
The “disable Java on Windows” part is hilarious because NOBODY uses java for desktop programming.”
No, you are the hilarious one! – just because YOU don’t use Java (for desktop programming), doesn’t mean that others don’t. There is a LARGE market for deskop Java stuff. The difference between you and me, just happens to be that I AM a Java developer – I know the inside of market!
So, by your ranting NOBODY uses QNX, because I don’t know anybody that uses it! QNX is a thriving buisnees, and has been so for MANY years
—
FFS people! – there are so many trolls in this thread! – Please think before you write something, I just don’t want to scroll past all these:
“Java sux, cuz it ain’t as fast as these other apps I have…”
This isn’t the point of this thread. The point is to discuss the implications of whatever is written in the teaser. In this case NOT how Java runs on your box or whatever void stuff people are throwing in to the debate.
On a related note, how the f*ck does OOo/SO speed relate to including Java in windows??
And a last thing:
Microsoft is a monopoly. There are many disadvantages to being a monopoly, one of them being that a monopoly has got to comply with many many stupid rules, that a smaller company hasn’t got to comply with. One of them being to help further a competitors product. I agree that it SOUNDS stupid, however if you actually sit down, and think hard about it, it makes sense!
Microsoft doesn’t want to include Java for a lot of reasons, but one of them being paramount, is the fact that Java (both as a language and platform) is a competing product. If Microsoft included Java it would compete against .NET. Ignoring all reasons for NOT including Java, what harm is done to the consumer? – no harm at all. The fact of the matter remains: Microsoft is using it’s monopoly to further a lot of it products in an unfair way.
Do YOU think .NET would be successfull if the consumer had to download the 20MB+ .NET runtime?
I for one don’t think so. Therefore adding it to the Windows distribution makes sense for Microsoft, however it will create a unfair advantage. Which is the at the base of the matter.
By forcing Java (and even Netscape!) onto a windows distribution, the consumer will benefit – since she will have more CHOICES!
For the record: I also had a icky feeling about Java being pushed into the Windows distribution, untill I thought it through…
The reason why I didn’t mention Opera (insert other software piece here) is that they aren’t free (no, viewing commercials doesn’t make it 100% free).
You actually mentioned it earlier:
“because it allows developers to use Win32 APIs via the VM”
but now your saying something else:
“If Apple allows Java developers access Cocoa calls, you can bet your ass that they would be in court in no time.”
Sun couldn’t care less if Apple exposed the Cocoa calls – the important tidbit is HOW they’re exposed. MS did it by *extending* the VM to allow some non-standard stuff. If they had chosen (and indeed if apple choose) to expose their relevant platform using JNI – Sun would NEVER have complained – nor could they have.
Brian Matzon: No, you are the hilarious one! – just because YOU don’t use Java (for desktop programming), doesn’t mean that others don’t.
How much pure Java (e.g. no requirement saying “Windows”) applications are there on the desktop market? I could only think of one Limewire (and Freewire and other forks).
Applets is a different story. Once upon a time, it was hard surfing without using a Java VM. Right now, a lot of web sites prefer Flash. Yes, they are very different, but most of the people using Java applets are doing some Flash-like capablities. Sure, I could go out as find web sites using java applets, but a lot of those sites that once used Java applets probably aren’t using them anymore.
Brian Matzon: Do YOU think .NET would be successfull if the consumer had to download the 20MB+ .NET runtime?
Uhmm, you still have to download .NET if you want to use it. Besides, I doubt bundling it or not would make it successful or not. For a long time Microsoft bundled an “unpoluted” version of Java VM, how much Java apps were there?
It is possible for something not bundled to be successful. Take Flash for example. It is not included with Windows – at least the last time I checked.
Brian Matzon: By forcing Java (and even Netscape!) onto a windows distribution, the consumer will benefit – since she will have more CHOICES!
Why place a competiting product into Windows? Especially for free?
Let’s see, Netscape dropped the ball, so Microsoft must help them? (Face it, Netscape would be in Real’s position if they didn’t needed to do a 4 year rewrite). For the past few weeks, I have been running Windows. guess what? i’m using Opera. Guess what? I got and play Yahoo! games often.
Forcing Microsoft to bundle Netscape and Java makes as much sense to me as Sun bundling IE and .NET with their Solaris OE. If consumers want choices, they could get Netscape or Opera from the Net. They could download Java. Heck, AOL could use its budget filling the landfills with AOL CDs to distribute Netscape CDs. Heck, for the Windows version, AOL still doesn’t use Netscape’s Gecko.
Brian Matzon: For the record: I also had a icky feeling about Java being pushed into the Windows distribution, untill I thought it through…
I had supported this. For a very long time at that. If you read back the archives of osOpinion from about a year ago, you would see me agreeing with this.
Now you see me not agreeing with this. Why? Because I put a lot of thought into it. Java doesn’t benefit *Windows* users, it benefits Sun mostly. The consumers who would benefit out of this mostly would already have Java installed. It isn’t like Microsoft placed some code blocking the installation of Java. Heck for a long long time, Microsoft had Windows Update to download Java from Sun (until some internal problems between them, and the Windows Update thingy dissapeared).
Brian Matzon: Sun couldn’t care less if Apple exposed the Cocoa calls – the important tidbit is HOW they’re exposed. MS did it by *extending* the VM to allow some non-standard stuff. If they had chosen (and indeed if apple choose) to expose their relevant platform using JNI – Sun would NEVER have complained – nor could they have.
JNI is very limiting. Majority of the Java applications (not web applets) built for Windows couldn’t care less about cross platform. They use Java because it was the best for the job. For example, Autodesk, IIRC, used Java in some of their apps. JNI is very limiting in this sense.
However, Sun failed to give any proof that MS’s JVM breaks some standard apps. None of all. The same with you. Yes, people could make standard Java applications without fearing that it wouldn’t run on some platforms. MS’s VM supports all apps made for VM 1.1.
For example, Limewire (which I don’t use anymore) is able to run on Windows and Linux without being modified. (Never tested it on the Mac because I don’t own one).
Forcing Microsoft to include Java is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. This is simply not possible, and sooner or later a later Judge will reverse this ruling, otherwise anybody can force any company to include its software because that company is a monopoly in its field.
I like Java, but I think Sun tries to take advantage of a situation against Microsoft here.
If they do include Java, then they have to include many other competing technologies too, otherwise this will be anti-competitive too.
Maybe the Judge will force Microsoft to include java. Then another Java-like programming creator will sue Microsoft because of this, and then another Judge will fine Microsoft for including Java.
))))))
Just imagine the creators of Python suing microsoft to include Pyhton. 🙂
I like Java too. If I needed to work on something enterprise level, I would choose java over .NET because it is more mature. Camel would agree with me there 🙂
Hmmm … I was going to post a rebuttal … really, I was … but I’m laughing too hard …
Sun did not sue Microsoft because their JVM had Win32 capabilities. They sued them because their JVM was not Java compliant. For instance the Java Native Interface which is an important part of the standart did not exist in the MS JVM, they rather used their own properitary API. It would have been quite easy to create a JNI wrapper on top of their properitary API (I could probably do this in a week) and to fix the other (relatively minor) incompartabilities but Microsoft prefered not to do this.
Everybody would be happy if Microsoft just included Sun’s JRE as an option in Windows. Because it is much faster and more compatible than MS own JRE and people that do not want a JRE at all would have an option not to install it.
About Microsoft Office loading at boot time. The versions of Microsoft Office I used always put an icon called MS Office Fast start in my start-up folder, which loaded the MS Office at boot-up. Later version had this replaced with an icon just called Microsoft Office.
M$ must be force to include the REAL spec of JRE in Windows, not the one M$ actually ‘packs’ !! That runtime is an outdated one (and not a compliant one too!) that make all applets misbehave. This is a good thing for everyone, not just Sun since they don’t make a dime out of it!
When someone uses/borrows the technologies from M$, they must use the spec from M$, or not include the techno at all, right? Then why M$ don’t do the same? Because M$ cheats as they always have. And if that promote Java a bit, for the better: it’s time M$ pays for all their unpunished crimes.
Pot/kettle?
And, just to name an applet off the top of my head that runs fine on the MS JVM but will die a very ugly death on (and, yeah, I tested it) the various REAL JVMs: Volano Chat.
It’s a fairly popular applet, I believe. And it is pretty unusable using a non-MS VM. And I’m wearing the blinders, huh? =)
And, yes, there is legal proof that MS gained its monopoly through illegal tactics, else why did it have to pay a huge settlement to Caldera (who bought DR-DOS from Novell who acquired it from Digital Research) over the way it destroyed DR DOS by intentionally building a FUD machine into betas of Windows. This was well over a decade ago.
Did you actually read the findings of fact? There’s a PDF floating around somewhere of the actual findings of the court, as well as the recommendations the 9 remaining states (one is Florida, of which I’m quite proud) that Judge KK is deliberating on now. So, yes, there is legal proof that Microsoft acquired its monopoly through shady, immoral, illegal tactics.
Microsoft had US$40 billion in the bank. They can, and have, hired professional apologists. They do not need you to do it for them, too. Please, just do a bit of research, gather the facts (facts are facts, right?). Read the findings of the court.
I remember, all those years ago, thinking it was shady the way Windows would complain if you ran it under DR-DOS (which was, in my opinion, much better than MS/PC-DOS — it was soooo configurable). See, when you launched it from DR-DOS, a message box would pop up saying something like, “You are not using MS-DOS … Windows is designed to run only under MS-DOS and horrible, horrible things will happen if you do this …” When, in fact, Windows ran QUITE well under DR-DOS. It has been legally proven that MS actually researched ways to break DR-DOS with Windows running on top of it. It has been legally proven that that message Windows delivered all those years ago, which destroyed DR-DOS, was utterly unnecessary, an outright lie, FUD of the highest order.
After DR-DOS went under, I missed it. But what the heck, right? I kept right on using Windows. I was practically a kid. Then 95 came out, and I flocked to that. Then 98. Then, finally, the anti-trust trial began, things started to come to light, and I felt personally cheated and disgusted with the way MS had conducted itself, and was continuing to conduct itself. Silly me, I actually liked Netscape, since for quite some time it was way ahead of MS in terms of functionality. Then, Microsoft used (proven, documented, read the findings of the court) illegal tactics to destroy yet another product I enjoyed, only to replace it with what was then an inferior product of its own. Is IE better than Netscape now? I’d have to say … it depends on what you call better, I guess. Netscape is certainly more standards compliant, but websites are written to MS standards as opposed to the real ones, so it hardly matters. Of course, if MS hadn’t acted illegally to destroy Netscape, and (maybe) Netscape had prospered, I’m sure the competition would have been fierce and the state of browsers today would be quite a bit more advanced that it is.
I mean, pretty much everyone can admit that if AMD had never released the Athlon current processor speeds wouldn’t be anywhere near what they currently are (with Intel about to leap to THREE Gigahertz!). That’s what competition is about. The Athlon for the first time made Intel sit up and take notice. When the Athlon hit 1Ghz before Intel, the war was TRULY on, and it hasn’t let up since. As a result, CPUs are faster and cheaper than would have been possible withOUT AMD in the fray.
3dfx owned the gaming market. ATI didn’t care. It was content with it’s gigantic market share in the OEM market, where 3dfx had almost no impact. ATI chips were … adequate, and that was good enough for them. Then nVidia came along and shook things up. 3dfx had real competition for the first time, and they dropped the ball. Not only did nVidia come to market with a superior product and compete with 3dfx, they wholly consumed 3dfx and now, for the first time, ATI had to sit up and take notice. For once, ATI had to innovate or die. Even ATI’s precious Mac market began to fall away. Thus, the Radeon. And a counter-move by nVidia, followed by a faster, more feature-rich, cheaper Radeon. Followed by a faster, more feature-rich, cheaper Geforce … and so it goes. It’s a great fight, between two competitors that are both DAMNED good at what they do. Even Trident is about to enter the low-end fray with a “low-end Geforce killer” … and good luck to them. It’ll keep the two giants even more on their toes! THAT is what competition is all about.
AMD fights Intel by offering up a PRODUCT that can compete with Intel’s wares. Where there is little performance difference in the wares, price wars ensue. Bad for Intel and AMD? Maybe, but great for consumers, and I notice they’re both still happily in business.
The same obtains with nVidia and ATI. With the new Radeons coming out (and being damned impressive), the war is about to heat up all over again. And this is *ATI* we’re talkin about, the same ATI who slept thru the birth of the gaming phenomenon and came to market a day late and a dollar short for ages before finally unveiling the Radeon, the SAME ATI that was long considered a joke by “serious” gamers.
Now, arguably, ATI — the former “joke” — has come to market with the fastest consumer GPU on the planet. THAT is what competition is about. And THAT is why nVidia’s next product will be phenomenal — because it HAS to be, or else it will die. Can you say that about ANYthing MS releases? Or is it that MS can release any piece of crap they please? And, why, I wonder, is that?
Microsoft is reprehensible. To defend them is to defend a convicted criminal that has done a great deal of damage and fully intends to do as much more as it can get away with. So, take off your blinders. Read. Learn. *Think*.
//Embrace, extend, extinguish. Again, THIS is what MS calls innovation. //
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!
Shaddup. Resistance is futile, and Linux *BLOWS* on the desktop.
The way I see it is that Sun and Microsoft had a license agreement. As with any agreement, it is open for interpretation. Microsoft thought it could do what it did. Sun didn’t think so. That’s why they sued. Maybe next time they will be clearer about their wording.
Sun forcing MS (via courts) to include Java is just ridiculous. Any company that competes with some MS product could ask for the same. So MS should include AIM, Yahoo Messenger, ICQ, Real Player, Sonique, QuickTime, and a ton of other products just because MS is a monopoly? Why don’t we through all software in a pot and create a mega-Windows distribution that people have to install either on a 500 terabyte hard disk or by spending five days deselecting all the stuff they don’t need or want.
On the other hand, Sun’s grip on the SPARC platform could be used to include .NET on Solaris 10. I am sure Microsoft wouldn’t mind.
As for Netscape. I have been browsing the Internet since 1993, when Mosaic came out. In 1994 we see Netscape. And by 1995 they own 80% of the browser market. As we know Microsoft included IE with the launch of Windows 95. In all those years I have never ever paid for any web browser. That’s why I don’t understand how Netscape could say that Microsoft forced them to give the browser away for free. I have used Mosaic and Netscape, but never paid for it, even before there was any IE. But to me that’s not even an issue because Netscape just went downhill. It used to be my favourite browser but it became less stable and useful.
Anyway, people like to bash Microsoft because of what they did. I am not saying MS didn’t do anything wrong, but their competition was just brain dead who could not come out with competing products. MS took advantage of that situation.
From how Rob writes one could think that the Findings of Fact are the gospel. They are just findings, opinions of a judge. Making/applying law is certainly not an objective thing, never has been. Just because something is in the Findings of Fact doesn’t mean it is necessarily true or correct. You can argue a lot about what has been said in those findings. People sue all the time. Rulings get overthrown. Nobody is perfect.
Did you even read the lawsuit? No.
Firstly MS already paid sun for the misuse of the java compatable trademark. If you remember right part of sun’s complaint was basically that ms was trying to hijack java so to comply with that ms agreed to not ship a java vm with windows after a certain date. Sun agreed.
Your mostly right to this point.
Ms removed it sooner (xp instead of the next relase), instead of being happy about it (since ms is complying with a previous contract) they sue, claiming ms is strongarming them out of the business.
Their new lawsuit is not because Microsoft removed the JVM from XP, but rather because Microsoft is intertwining .NET, IIS, and some other things into its OS. It is EXACTLY the same as the lawsuit brought against Microsoft in their anti-trust case (only that one was regarding the browser).
It all breaks down to sun made a mistake and instead of admitting it, they sue.
Here you are absolutely incorrect. Microsoft is doing to Sun exactly what it did to Netscape and exactly the same kind of thing that they were found guilty of in their anti-trust suit. Sun’s mistakes, if any were made, are irrelevant. Why not read before spouting off a bunch of nonsense.
You mentioned earlier that having java wouldn’t interfere with someones computer it would only allow them to view web pages with applets when they came across them. My question to you is why is it ok for sun to cram java down our throats, but if ms bundles their media player, browser and im in THIER operating system its bad for one and all?
Does it really have to be spelled out? The reason is that Microsoft is not bundling products with their OS, they are intertwining products into their OS with the intent of putting other companies out of business. Since they are a monopoly, this is against the law. Why is this bad for everyone? Outside of the detriment caused by allowing powerful people to break the law while enforcing it for everyone else, when Microsoft puts every competitor out of business, they will jack up their prices, spy on you, etc. and there wont be a damn thing you can do about it. Competition is good for everyone, so the antithesis of compitition must by its very nature be bad for everyone.
Lastly you said that all the stuff office runs at boot uses 13 megs of ram
No I didn’t. That was somebody else. All I said was that Microsoft loads parts of Office during boot; which they do. I worked there so I should know. If you don’t believe me, I really don’t care. Go on paying homage to Bill, it makes no difference to me.
Well said Genaldar.
Well, it would have been well said if it would have been remotely correct; which it wasn’t.
The “disable Java on Windows” part is hilarious because NOBODY uses java for desktop programming.
You need it to view pages with applets, of which there are still quite a few. And yes, there are programs out there that are desktop apps that are written in Java. NetBeans, Forte, LimeWire, JBuilder, ThinkFree Office, etc. are just a few that come to mind.
Not really. i find [Staroffice] start up least painful…
I don’t use StarOffice under Windows so I can only say that my experience with it under a real operating system is fine (except for the startup and some of the templates).
I really don’t know why everyone keeps bringing StarOffice, etc. up since this is a post about a lawsuit between Sun and Microsoft. StarOffice is completely irrelevant.
Microsoft doesn’t boots up Word when Windows is starting.
For the last damn time, parts of Office ARE started when you boot your machine. Now please, since this also is irrelevant (I’m sorry I even responded to the first troll about this) to the discussion, let it drop.
It isn’t written well. Let’s just have a competition using pure standard Win32, and maybe we would have a proper benchmark.
I agree with you on this point.
Actually, JVM 1.1.x actually complies with Sun’s standards, but Sun refuse to recognize it because it allows developers to use Win32 APIs via the VM.
Which is exactly why it doesn’t agree with Sun’s standards. To legally use the “Java Compatible” trademark Micrsoft couldn’t extend Java is the way it did. It was a breach of contract; which is exactly what Sun sued them for.
Like I said, it is compliant with Java. It allowed developers to use Win32 in their Java apps, but this isn’t forced upon their developers.
And as I have said, it was a trademark infringement and a breach of contract and that is exactly why they were sued. Quit trying to make the wrong doers look good and the people who were wronged look like the bad guys here. It’s Sun’s technology and by contract Microsoft had no right to futz with it.
Even Sun didn’t claim that. They said because of the options to developers provided by MS Java, developers choose to mix Java and Win32.
Which would break Java. Ironically, this is exactly what will break .NET, but nobody seems to see it.
Wrong. Microsoft maintains it’s monopoly by illegal means…
No, Microsoft gained its monopoly by underhanded business means. That may have been legal when they weren’t a monopoly, but now that they are, it is illegal. Microsoft hasn’t changed, they just moved into a realm where their actions are not only immoral, but also illegal.
[/i]there is no legal proof whatsoever that Microsoft got it’s monopoly because of illegal behaviour.[/i]
Yes there is. Look at the case Caldera won against them.
Sun says Java is fastest on the desktop on OS X. And it is god damn slow. Frankly, I don’t see much future in Java.
I didn’t know diety damned things to slowness. Interesting. Anyway, that just goes to show you don’t know what you’re talking about doesn’t it.
Rob, you really need to take off that blinds from your eyes and see facts…
No Rajan r, you need to actually go read the court documents and educate yourself on what is really going on instead of being a sycophant to Bill Gates.
Sun is angry at Microsoft because it allows Java developers to use Win32 calls via MS JVM. Developers could still write cross platform standard Java apps if they liked to, only they can’t take advantage of Win32.
And what would that do to Java on other platforms if retarded Windows programmers started doing that? UTTERLY BREAK IT! No wonder Sun was upset.
And this is what most Java developers did – I haven’t used one Java applet that couldn’t run on Linux.
That doesn’t mean much. We’ve all witnessed the vast Java knowledge and experience you’ve demonstrated today. Besides, why should Microsoft’s breach of contract verdict hinge on whether or not you’ve seen MSJava apps on Linux? They still broke the contract regardless of your personal experiences.
Then Sun should bundle .NET along with Java on their Solaris OE because it is pushing Java and killing .NET in the UNIX market. Make sense? nope.
Sun is not suing Micrsoft because they removed their JVM from Windows XP (which is actually a blessing to users since Sun’s JVM is a lot better), they are suing them for same reasons the government sued them. Illegally using their monopoly to squash compitition.
Placing Sun’s JVM on Windows is a good resolution to the anti-trust behavior. What Microsoft is doing is illegal. The federal government has determined that. Sun’s suggested resolution is actually a sound one if the point is to stop the illegal business practices.
Now will everyone please go read the court documents so we can stop these ill-informed troll posts?
How much pure Java…applications are there on the desktop market?
I mentioned in another post that there is ThinkFree Office, JEdit and several others that are well known. I make custom Desktop Java apps all the time for people using Swing. They work fine. Another example would be Fidelity’s investment tools, in Utah the Highway Patrol uses desktop Java applications. I saw Java desktop apps in several POS systems in Washington and elsewhere. It’s all over. Microsoft doesn’t make any though, perhaps that’s why you don’t see them.
Uhmm, you still have to download .NET if you want to use it.
No, it will be included in service packs and all future versions of Windows.
Besides, I doubt bundling it or not would make it successful or not.
Microsoft will not bundle it. They will entangle Windows with it and you won’t have a choice as to whether you want it or not. That is why Sun is suing Microsoft again.
It is possible for something not bundled to be successful. Take Flash for example. It is not included with Windows – at least the last time I checked.
The plugin for it is included with IE (at least it was on my XP box at work).
Why place a competiting product into Windows? Especially for free?
Because Microsoft is a monopoly and is illegally using their OS to squash out the competition. What Sun is suggesting is actually the only remedy that makes sense.
Forcing Microsoft to bundle Netscape and Java makes as much sense to me as Sun bundling IE and .NET with their Solaris OE. If consumers want choices, they could get Netscape or Opera from the Net. They could download Java. Heck, AOL could use its budget filling the landfills with AOL CDs to distribute Netscape CDs. Heck, for the Windows version, AOL still doesn’t use Netscape’s Gecko.
And how is this relevant to the fact that Microsoft is using its monopoly illegally?
Now you see me not agreeing with this. Why? Because I put a lot of thought into it. Java doesn’t benefit *Windows* users, it benefits Sun mostly.
A more accurate statement would be that you don’t understand how Java benefits you. There are many out there , including me, who like it and use it all the time and want it to be included into Windows.
I’ve invested a lot into Java and find it quite useful. If Microsoft illegally uses their monopoly to squash Java, thus invalidating my investment. I am going to be suing them too.
The consumers who would benefit out of this mostly would already have Java installed.
Yes, I remember when I installed XP that it read my thoughts, knew that I wanted Java and automagically installed it for me.
However, Sun failed to give any proof that MS’s JVM breaks some standard apps. None of all. The same with you. Yes, people could make standard Java applications without fearing that it wouldn’t run on some platforms. MS’s VM supports all apps made for VM 1.1.
But do all platforms support Java apps written to MS JVM? NO. That is what the problem is. Don’t be so Windows centric.
For example, Limewire (which I don’t use anymore) is able to run on Windows and Linux without being modified. (Never tested it on the Mac because I don’t own one).
Once again I have to ask, what relevance does this have to the fact that Microsoft breached their contract with Sun and is now illegally using their monopoly to squash Sun? It’s like saying, “sure, I stole that money from the bank, but I never spent any of it so it isn’t wrong.”
I like Java too. If I needed to work on something enterprise level, I would choose java over .NET because it is more mature. Camel would agree with me there 🙂
You bet I would.
I am now officially out of breath.
I want to thank Rajan r for always providing me with a good read at OSNews. Sorry if I knocked on you a little hard, but your posts were the only ones worth responding to and I enjoyed the discussion. I’m afraid I let my frustration with trolls posting nonsense without reading the court papers, and without understanding what’s really going on, get to me. Therefore, I ask that you not take offense at anything I wrote; and if you do that you will soon forgive me. I sometimes let my sarcasm get away from me, so I apologize.
Thanks again.
Why the hell this earth is full of idiots ? Why the hell people talk about thing that they don’t know NOTHING about. Did ever John think WHY is Java slow ? Did ever Mystic TaCo realise that JRE (Java Runtime Environment) is just something that lets you see pages containing Java Applets, not the programming language itslef (the compiler and all?). Did everybody here ever program in Java (among those who say it’s bad)? Java is almost wonderful conceived and I liked it since the first day I saw a source file. Of course is slow, but better try to find out why. don’t scream is slow. All the Windowses are slow compared to the platform existing when they were released. but, of course, nobody said anything about it. why not? and by the way, the Java programming language shouldn’t be included in Windows, but JRE should, because it’s like a standard for Internet already (for applets at least) and Microsoft shouldn’t take advantage of its leading role in the operating system market to take out the “competitors”. And Java doesn’t do anything to your computer, whoever said this. And this really shows your incompetency level.
Camel: I don’t use StarOffice under Windows so I can only say that my experience with it under a real operating system is fine (except for the startup and some of the templates).
99% of the time I load OOo is on Linux. It is slow. Which is why when I want to do something basic, I use KOffice. When i want something advance, I use Windows and Office.
Camel: I really don’t know why everyone keeps bringing StarOffice, etc. up since this is a post about a lawsuit between Sun and Microsoft. StarOffice is completely irrelevant.
One person brought it up, you made an incorrect statement, I rebutt that. Personally, i don’t see the connection between StarOffice and Java.
Camel: Which is exactly why it doesn’t agree with Sun’s standards. To legally use the “Java Compatible” trademark Micrsoft couldn’t extend Java is the way it did. It was a breach of contract; which is exactly what Sun sued them for.
Which is exactly my point. What you guys are claiming is that Microsoft *broke* Java. What really happen is Microsoft *extended* java in a way that broke the contract between the two companies.
Camel: Which would break Java. Ironically, this is exactly what will break .NET, but nobody seems to see it.
How would that break Java? People who want to make pure Java apps could still make pure Java apps. People who mix Win32 and Java shouldn’t expect their apps to be cross platform.
Camel: there is no legal proof whatsoever that Microsoft got it’s monopoly because of illegal behaviour.
My point exactly 🙂 Wow, we are agreeing a lot here.
Camel: I didn’t know diety damned things to slowness. Interesting. Anyway, that just goes to show you don’t know what you’re talking about doesn’t it.
I’m saying that every Java app, and I mean EVERY, is slower during startup and after start up compared to their native counterpart. Take ThinkFree Office for example…. well, not the best example (not cross platform). Take LimeWire as another example – there are hundreds of Gnutella clients out there that are faster than Limewire.
Java may be fast for you, because from what i read, you are more to server based apps, using J2EE.
Camel: No Rajan r, you need to actually go read the court documents and educate yourself on what is really going on instead of being a sycophant to Bill Gates.
Zimbabwe courts say that the current land reforms are legal. Do I agree with it? Nope. Pakistani Syariah court stones a women that was rape, on basis on adultery – even with DNA test. It is legal, but do I agree with it? nope. I don’t form my opinion based on the courts, and my arguments aren’t based on whether it is legal with that facist laws called anti trust or not.
Besides, I’m not a personal fan of Bill gates, I don’t care about what his opinion is.
Camel: And what would that do to Java on other platforms if retarded Windows programmers started doing that? UTTERLY BREAK IT! No wonder Sun was upset.
Let’s see, The retarded Windows developers who are retarded enough to mix Win32 and Java aren’t making Java apps to run on every god damn OS out there.
While those who are willing to sacrifice features for portablity could infact make pure Java apps that would run on MS’s VM.
Camel: Besides, why should Microsoft’s breach of contract verdict hinge on whether or not you’ve seen MSJava apps on Linux?
I never disagree with Sun’s suing Microsoft to remove the VM because it breach contract. heck, I enevr said it didn’t breach contract. You are twisting my words.
Besides, my point is that developers CAN still use pure Java apps, as long it is compatible with VM 1.1.
Camel: Sun is not suing Micrsoft because they removed their JVM from Windows XP (which is actually a blessing to users since Sun’s JVM is a lot better)
I found Java apps, especially LimeWire, running on Microsoft’s VM faster than on Sun’s VM.
they are suing them for same reasons the government sued them. Illegally using their monopoly to squash compitition.
Next what? Sue Microsoft to remove Win32? Sue Microsoft to remove standard printer drivers?
It is Sun that crushed it’s own self.
Sun and MS makes contract.
MS makes VM.
Sun found VM breaks contract, sues
Sun makes a sloppy settlement that cause the first contract to be null and void.
Sun cried victory, though Microsoft would have to bundle its own VM.
Sun cried waa waaa waa to the courts when they were wrong.
Camel: Placing Sun’s JVM on Windows is a good resolution to the anti-trust behavior.
Same with bundling RealONE, Netscape, Mozilla, opera, Quicktime, AIM, Yahoo! Messenger etc.
Why should Microsoft be forced to bundle a competiting product? The most I would agree with is making .NET optional. (Which is now, if you mean .NET Framework).
If MS is forced to bundle a JVM, Sun should also bundle a .NET CLR.
Camel: I mentioned in another post that there is ThinkFree Office…
Hrmmm, why did the Windows version came out first, then the Mac OS and Linux version next for ThinkFree?
ThinkFree in my opinion is the biggest waste of money.
Camel: Microsoft will not bundle it. They will entangle Windows with it and you won’t have a choice as to whether you want it or not. That is why Sun is suing Microsoft again.
You have a choice whether to use Windows or not. It is the same as Microsoft integration Win32 (heck Windows is based on Win32) in Win32. Why didn’t anyone sue?
Camel: The plugin for it is included with IE (at least it was on my XP box at work).
When I got my XP Laptop, I had to download it. I remember it because I had to redo it 3 times because my connection droped.
Camel: There are many out there , including me, who like it and use it all the time and want it to be included into Windows.
How many Windows users actually use Java? There is a minority of users that needs Java, and all of them would already have Java installed. Just like I have Python installed to use my Python scripts.
just because YOU use it, doesn’t mean everyone uses it. Your job involves Java after all.
But do all platforms support Java apps written to MS JVM?
Do all platforms run Win32 apps writen for Windows?
Camel: Therefore, I ask that you not take offense at anything
If I take personal offence with ANYTHING posted here, heck, I wouldn’t be having private correpondance with CattBeMac.
You and I have different opinions, let’s respect that 🙂
So, no offence taken.
Did everybody here ever program in Java (among those who say it’s bad)?
I had a flint with Java, it is quite nice, quite easy to understand. Should it be included in Windows? If I say yes, I would also have to agree with forcing Windows to bundle Python and Ruby 🙂
Camel: there is no legal proof whatsoever that Microsoft got it’s monopoly because of illegal behaviour.
I didn’t say this. I said that there was legal proof that Microsoft gained its monopoly illegally; and I referred to the suit Caldera waged against them regarding the good old DOS days, and won.
Hrmmm, why did the Windows version came out first, then the Mac OS and Linux version next for ThinkFree?
Of course, I don’t have access to the code, so I couldn’t tell you. But, it may have more to do with the installer. You could ask them, I’ve talked with them before and they are very responsive.
You have a choice whether to use Windows or not. It is the same as Microsoft integration Win32 (heck Windows is based on Win32) in Win32. Why didn’t anyone sue?
I realize I have a choice, which is why I’m typing this from a Linux box.
However, Enterprises don’t have a choice; and they are the ones being targeted. Win32 does not compete with Java, but .NET does. You will also notice that Microsoft didn’t remove their JVM until .NET was released. It’s pretty obvious that they are once again illegally using their monopoly to squash a competing technology.
How many Windows users actually use Java? There is a minority of users that needs Java, and all of them would already have Java installed. Just like I have Python installed to use my Python scripts.
Well, last time I checked, about a month ago, there were over 7 million web sites with Java applets on them. However, It’s not really about that; nor do home computer users matter much to Microsoft or Sun. Java programming is much more common in large businesses than home apps. I think because Java is such an excellent platform for enterprise applications (and that’s where the money is) that is where developers focus; not end user applications. If Microsoft pushes Java out of the enterprise and forces .NET down everyones throat (which they will) it is anti-competitive and against the law. What better remedy to that illegal action than to force Microsoft to ship Sun’s JVM? Microsoft is not after your mom’s computer, they are after the enterprise and developers. When Microsoft has an illegal monopoly, drastic measures must be taken by competitors to stay alive.
By the way, you have brought up Python several times. I am all for forcing Microsoft to bundle Python with Windows, however, it is updated often enough that doing so probably isn’t very practical.
If MS is forced to bundle a JVM, Sun should also bundle a .NET CLR.
Why would Sun want to do that? Java is an anticeptic environment. There haven’t been any Java viruses; it’s a secure platform. Solaris is also a secure platform. Microsoft is notorious for releasing insecure “technology”, such as ActiveX (Microsoft’s answer to Java applets), which in no time is riddled with security breaches and viruses. Why would Sun want to potentially degrade their system by adding .NET before it is proven secure? If it is proven secure, then I’m all for Sun including a .NET runtime (not that I will ever use it).
Camel: I didn’t say this. I said that there was legal proof that Microsoft gained its monopoly illegally; and I referred to the suit Caldera waged against them regarding the good old DOS days, and won.
You didn’t mention this earlier. Besides, I don’t know anything about this suit, care to fill me in? An URL maybe?
Camel: However, Enterprises don’t have a choice; and they are the ones being targeted. Win32 does not compete with Java, but .NET does. You will also notice that Microsoft didn’t remove their JVM until .NET was released. It’s pretty obvious that they are once again illegally using their monopoly to squash a competing technology.
Microsoft have less and less power in the enterprise. Which is why now they are trying to squeze out every cent possible before they loose the market.
Also, most Java apps in the enterprise uses Java because of portablity. A lot of corps uses different systems for different jobs. Right now, if you are interested in .NET you have two choices, Windows or FreeBSD.
Camel: If Microsoft pushes Java out of the enterprise and forces .NET down everyones throat (which they will) it is anti-competitive and against the law.
Microsoft bundles IIS with Windows. Heck, it *integrates* it with Windows. Why don’t I see its market share going up? If Java is all that good, the *enterprise* would pick it over .NET. And currently, Java is much more mature than .NET.
Forcing a company bundling an competiting standard – heck, it isn’t a standard in the first place, just because that company makes something different, owns a monopoly and happens to submit most of the technical aspect to the EMCA is just plain stupid.
You want Java on Windows? Sure, go ahead and download it. Microsoft is pushing .NET to be the next Win32. It can’t kill Win32 quickly without causing a backslash. Microsoft also knows it’s monopoly is coming to an end, so making everything platform agnostic could keep itself up.
Camel: Why would Sun want to do that? Java is an anticeptic environment. There haven’t been any Java viruses; it’s a secure platform.
There have been viruses targeting Microsoft JVM. My point? if it is widespread among average Joes, there would be viruses. Besides, the security problems with Microsoft is normally caused by their implementation only. Sun coudl in fact make a secure .NET implementation.
Camel: Microsoft is notorious for releasing insecure “technology”, such as ActiveX (Microsoft’s answer to Java applets)
The problem with ActiveX is not the flaws with ActiveX itself, but its implementation. There were many security holes in its implementation allowing crackers to use it in their ActiveX script to cause havoc.