The battle between Sun and Microsoft over inclusion of the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) in Windows wages on. At stake, according to a U.S. District Court, is the fairness of the fight between Java and .Net. for middleware supremacy. Read the analysis at ZDNet TechUpdate.
Java in Windows: Is Sun Running Out of Time?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
As far as Java on Windows goes, when it comes to client-side applications, I don’t think .NET will affect it one way or the other, because I think most users will avoid anything written in Java like the plague until they (Sun) find a way to speed it up considerably. I know there are some people out there who don’t think Java (running desktop apps) is slow, to which I can only conclude that either they have a 3ghz P4 powerhouse with more RAM than Dodge, or else they have much more patience than do most people.
Besides the performance, I think most API of Java is inconsistency and confused.
http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321
“While the Java language provides many advantages over C and C++, its implementation on Solaris presents barriers to the delivery of reliable applications. These barriers prevent general acceptance of Java for production software within Sun.”
It is finally coming out into the light of day the deep problems that Java has. Sun’s top engineers have found that it is impossible to write high-quality software using Java.
If the folks inside Sun cannot get it to work well, think about all the hapless IT departments stuck with some Java monstrosity that some big consulting company built for them… they’re screwed.
All Microsoft has to do is hold up this internal memo (and I’m sure there are plenty more just like it that they could subpoena) to the judge and say “Sun wants to cripple our operating system”. ‘Nuff said. Sun’s claim will be thrown out of court.
I can only wonder about the strange karma at work. After doing everything in their power to get Java OFF the Microsoft platform, now Sun is fighting to get Java back ON Windows? Sounds like another broken strategy from Sun management.
Maybe Sun should be hitting the pavement, talking to customers, and solving their problems vs. worrying about the distribution of their VM? There is no cry from Windows customers “We’re missing the Sun VM! We can’t run those giant apps that hose the Solaris server! Please help us, Sun!” Somehow, I don’t think most Windows customers want Sun’s system killer software on their machine.
Maybe Sun should listen to reality before it is too late? Sun doesn’t have anything that the majority of Windows customers want. Why can’t Sun understand this?
–ms
>It is finally coming out into the light of day the deep
>problems that Java has. Sun’s top engineers have found that
>it is impossible to write high-quality software using Java.
I have seen the recent claims about this but even if they are true, you have grossly overstated this. I believe it is Sun’s JVM on Solaris that is the issue as well as some missing features such as JVM sharing that is the problem here. There are already several high-quality software packages that run written in Java that run on Solaris or any other platform for that matter.
>I can only wonder about the strange karma at work. After
>doing everything in their power to get Java OFF the
>Microsoft platform, now Sun is fighting to get Java back ON
>Windows? Sounds like another broken strategy from Sun
>management.
Sun fought to get Microsoft’s JVM off of Windows because it WASN’T FULLY JAVA!!!! They did not fight to get their own JVM or IBM’s JVM off of Windows. They want a JVM on Windows and always have.
>There is no cry from Windows customers “We’re missing the
>Sun VM! We can’t run those giant apps that hose the Solaris
>server! Please help us, Sun!” Somehow, I don’t think most
>Windows customers want Sun’s system killer software on
>their machine.
This is absolutely NOT true. There are tons of windows customers who DO want Sun’s VM (or a compliant VM) on their machines by default. These are usually companies that have a substantial number of employees who need custom software written in Java. Although it wouldn’t be hard for them to make images for installation that include a VM, they would rather it come with Windows XP instead to make life a little easier. Many companies would have preferred thick clients written in java instead of less featured web apps but because their machines do not include the JVM by default, they opt for web applications (written in java on the server).
Sun does not have what the majority of windows customers want but that’s not the point. Having the JVM on Windows XP gets Sun in the door to compete with .NET. For many companies, as stupid as the decision sounds, if they don’t have Java on their machines by default, they’ll opt to use .NET instead. In the end, I don’t think anyone but MS wants this to happen b/c if will mean that MS will again be a monopoly.
if MS gets Intel and AMD to include the CLR on the CPU so that C# will seem faster than Java…..as it is…C# is about as slow or fast as JAVA…..it is a limitation of having a sandbox development platform.
>Besides the performance, I think most API of Java
>is inconsistency and confused.
I agree to some extent but it’s not that bad. If you are comparing it to .NET’s API then it’s somewhat unfair to say this since .NET had Java to learn from.
Hopefully Sun will rework much of the API to be extremely consistent but if they do so, they will break compatibility with Java 1 and 2 and it would have to be called Java 3. Sun has recently stated that their goal is to simplify Java and I hope this falls under the simplifying category. I’m all for it and it wouldn’t be terribly difficult to do. As a matter of fact, if Java were released as Open Source, it would be done quickly but the open sourcing won’t happen any time according to Sun.
>>>>Sun does not have what the majority of windows customers want but that’s not the point. Having the JVM on Windows XP gets Sun in the door to compete with .NET.
That IS the point. You don’t see IBM and BEA ranting and raving about this and those 2 companies OWN the java market right now.
This is a play by SUN to try to win market shares against IBM/BEA — but SUN is not doing it by actually making their own java products better, they are trying to end-run IBM/BEA with a lawsuit against MSFT.
I am a developer Java/C++/C so i need java on my machine as part of my job. However i just counted how many applications installed on my work pc that need java and the number is 4:
Eclipse/AnyJ,Orion and Jedit (Not counting the JDK/JRE of which i have 2). I have no other applications on my Windows Machine that need Java. On my OSX box the count is 3 (AnyJ,JEdit,Orion) and on my FreeBsd Box JEdit,AnyJ.
My point is where are the Java applications that would make me miss java if it wasn’t part of my job. If I a Java developer don’t use any other applications that need java, which applications is my non technical mother,sister,brother,etc going to use on windows/osx.
Seems to me sun should be focusing on getting applications that mom,dad etc would want to use on their home/work pc’s. Even if microsoft installs it as part on the os install what am i going to do with it.
If there was a market for java applications on the desktop then products like quicken,photoshop,etc would have java ports or tools and would ship a jre with their products.
What are they going to do next sue quicken,adobe and other companies and force them to port their apps to java. Or will they sue m$ and have the courts tell them to port office to java. There is a reason there are so few desktop apps developed in java;
no one wants them
>>There are already several high-quality software packages that run written in Java that run on Solaris or any other platform for that matter.
At a trade show in Raleigh, NC last year Sun was one of the primary vendors. They had several nice looking machines on display running Solaris. I was at the booth getting my free Java development tools when a guy walks up and asks about the main unit on display. The rep tells him that its a dual processor model with 1GB of memory and specs it out. The guy in the audience remarks that it’s a very small footprint for a server, and the rep says “It’s not a server, its a workstation!”. When asked about the need for that much horsepower for a workstation the rep says that if you plan to run Star Office you’re gonna need that power. He was pretty straight about the overhead for Java on the desktop when we asked about it.
Servlets and browser applets maybe, but desktop software? Not happening.
I’ve used both the MS VM and the Sun VM and I can say without a doubt that the MS VM is a lot faster (This is on a 2 Ghz P4 512MB). The Sun VM may be the more proper implementation of Java but I have to believe that most people using Java apps on the Sun VM are going to be very dissatisfied with their experience. I think instead of making MS us Suns VM Microsoft should have an option to ship a compliant VM that performs at the same level their old VM does. I use some java apps fairly frequently and my only concern is to see it done right and quickly.
It is typical to knock java, but who exactly thinks that MS desktop applications written in .NET will be wanted to be used over something like native C/C++ versions? From the reports I’ve heard, .NET actually performs worse than java in terms of desktop applications. Neither really sparkles over native versions of the same apps. I don’t think either has the competitive advantage over being easier to write desktop software in, but Java definitely provides the most compatibilty across platforms. So if I had to invest my time, money, and effort, I think Java is still the best choice.
>Besides the performance, I think most API of Java
>is inconsistency and confused.
I would say just the opposite, Java has one of the most organized and easy to work API’s to date. A lot of people and especially uninitiated and inexperienced developers coming from other fields confuse Java’s richness of API with inconsistencies, etc. May be it seems so confusing to the ones making such claims because they are incompetent programmers in the first place.
> Seems to me sun should be focusing on getting applications
> that mom,dad etc would want to use on their home/work
> pc’s.
Yup. That seemed to me a while ago too before I realized that Sun just doesn’t care about client-side Java. Then I stopped using it.
If Sun really cared about Java apps on the desktop, Solaris would *revolve* around Java apps (ie. Pref apps, various common desktop apps). But it doesn’t.
Further, Sun would be supporting ahead-of-time-compiled Java binaries (a la GCJ) — but they don’t.
After I woke up and smelled the coffee, I donated my Sun Blade 100 to the cause and moved on.
Java has been done on chip several times, not with any great speed though. The penalty for just dumping extra Java or .Net support onto x86 is IMNSHO not justified, by the time its done the increase in performance would be much less than just native compile would have achieved on the faster x86 without the support. There is no way x86 will go as fast when you add another instruction set on top.
I expect though that CLI will end up on some chip the same way Java did, someones gonna try, since they are so similar it shouldn’t be too difficult. Oh I remember now that Sun did at least 2 efforts, pico Java chip and then a much faster one, but I think they are lost in the winds of time. In principle I always liked the idea of “closing the semantic gap” but thats is not a popular view.
I have to agree with consensus, no matter how good Java is relative to .Net, if MS isn’t enthusiastic about preinstalling it like they were before split, its nothing but a life jacket.
JJ
Okay, there’s some big corporate customers that need Java on the client? Although I question the sanity of these corporations, let us go along with this reckless idea for a moment.
In the memo, it shows that Sun’s own engineers say that one version of Java is not compatible with another and that each version of Java is tied to a particular version of the OS, so that an OS upgrade would necessitate a Java upgrade.
So, who is going to support those machines when Microsoft comes out with an OS patch? Is Sun going to test their VM and put out all the requisite VM patches? And who gets to support the customer whose app just stopped working? Is Sun going to do this? For free? Or maybe the Java edition of Windows XP should cost 100X the price of normal version and include Sun support?
Or maybe Sun should license Windows XP from Microsoft and put out a special Java version. I’m sure Microsoft would give Sun a really sweet deal… especially after all the Java bullshit Sun has put Microsoft through.
If whatever herd-mentality corporation that is using Java in the first place has already decided to opt-in to Java’s broken versioning and broken OS support, so maybe that corporation can build a custom installer for their application which updates their app and the VM when the OS changes, right? After all, they have to do this anyway to install their Java app.
It’s obvious from the memo (for those who read it) that Sun’s remaining engineers that care about quality have been gunned down by management. Java doesn’t meet Sun’s own standards for quality. The speed, flexibility, and reliability of Solaris itself has been threatened by Java. When it comes to being able to feel good about what they are shipping, it is clear that these engineers have been betrayed by Sun management. So I’m sure engineering morale is low at Sun. It seems that Sun is being run by the bean counters, their hordes of inexperienced MBA managers, and the lawyers. Not a good sign for a technology company.
There is one simple giant reason Microsoft wants nothing to do with Java. Because Java is NOT AN OPEN STANDARD. Java is Sun’s private MIPS-burner that is designed to sell Sun’s high-end hardware. This is the big reason that Sun’s Java implementation is BLOATED, SLOW, BUGGY, and BROKEN. On Sun’s OWN operating system, Java hogties and hamstrings it! There is no way someone can run a big Java app, even on a multi-million dollar Sun box. It just doesn’t work! It requires all sorts of expensive Sun consultants to make it work! And tons of expensive Sun upgrades.
At the end of the day, Java is a proprietary Sun standard and Sun runs Java like a spoiled little kid with a lawyer for a daddy. You think the SCO patent lawsuits are bad? Wait until Sun starts doing worse and they start their lawsuits against Linux.
Let the market decide if Sun’s problematic implementation of Java should be on Windows. Else we open the door to endless lawsuits. Should the 64 bit version of .NET ship on Solaris? After all, Sun has crowed to everyone with ears that they are the 80000 lb gorilla of 64 bit computing.
Sun is simply disgusting as a company. They need to focus on real problems, stop the whining, and start listening to their engineers, listening to their customers, and improving the quality of their products so that people want Java, including their own company!
When you eat your own dogfood and your little puppies get sick because it is poison, it is time to do something other than shaming the little puppies for getting sick.
And if Sun wants Java to succeed vs. getting crushed in the open market, Sun absolutely needs to make Java a REAL open standard. Why is it so hard for Sun to see they are killing Java themselves?
–ms
That’s the largest bunch of crap I’ve read in a while dude…
“Servlets and browser applets maybe, but desktop software? Not happening.”
Well Corel would half-way agree with you. Depends on how you define “not”.
>>”Servlets and browser applets maybe, but desktop software? Not happening.”
I’m not sure what kind of small time PC universe you guys live in, but in big enterprise space Java on the desktop is moving pretty fast and seems to be getting adopted more and more widely. If done right (which is not hard to do, whatever others say) Java shines on enterprise desktop. Look around, a good number of enterprise management and development applications are either partially or completely implemented in Java. Just to name a few I work with pretty much every day: Oracle Enterprise Manager (a whole suite of applications), Oracle JDeveloper, Borland JBuilder, NetBeans, Borland Together, Sun Forte for Java, Sun SMC, JUnit, JMeter, JEdit). Why? Because it makes tremendous sense with all nice features that Java offers. It is just people judge and associate Java with the juvenile imperfections it had 5 years ago. Just get over it, some things are not perfect but they just work.
Keep in mind that Java is a product and developer kit for a very different branch of application, that which Mom and Dad don’t see too often. Java presents a solution that is far superior to native languages in areas such as large Enterprise application development (some kind of business scheduling software, for instance), developer tools (Eclipse, JEdit, NetBeans), and larger desktop applications, especially custom ones.
The reason it is great for these branches of software is due to its large and feature rich API that is very easy to pick up and implement, due to full OOP paradigms, similarity to C++, and the fact that almost every feature, such as networking, GUI toolkits, threading, is built into the language via support from Sun. Yes there are a million external libraries you could use with Java, but the point is that very few are required for your average application from the categories listed above. This decreases developer time and eases coding for many people (not all), which is why it has become popular.
Java, for me, is the ideal language too develop, for example, the applications required by my college courses, or any other projects I would like to program to show emploryers or teachers. It is very easy to develop, and it _runs on every platform that has a JVM_, so that my teachers can run it at school in the unix labs, I can run it at home on linux or BSD, possibly on my cellphone (if I designed it that way) and my friends can run it on their boxes in MS Windows.
WAIT, WAIT, scratch that, no they can’t; for some reason I hear that my application doesn’t work because of Microsoft’s broken ghetto (and outdated) implementation of Java on their OS, and it is making my app look bad, and I have to make my friend/customer go download a custom Java VM by Sun. Do you see the difficulty, and yet the brilliance by Microsoft to make it a pain to use a developer tool they agreed to support/liscense?
The “other” comparable language, Microsoft’s .NET, is _not_ cross platform by default, and can only be run via the help of an opensource toolkit such as Mono. Once Microsoft effectively eliminates Java from their platforms, and everyone shrugs and says “just run .NET on everything, it has similar features,” people won’t realize the very real threat (it’s a threat, not a certainty) of Microsoft aggressively breaking compatibility across non-MS platforms and/or implementing features that are widely adopted and aren’t based on open standards, and therefore won’t function correctly or at all on non-MS platforms. Case in point: Internet Explorer.
This is why it’s important to have Java natively on Windows, or at least to stop Microsoft’s attempts to cripple the language. Home users can’t really relate that often to this issue, unless your favorite game online doesn’t work, but for academic or business users, this is really a thorn in the side of a useful and preferred language.
Darius:[/i]
As far as Java on Windows goes…I think most users will avoid anything written in Java like the plague until they (Sun) find a way to speed it up considerably.
We all know what you think.
Michael:
There is no cry from Windows customers “We’re missing the Sun VM! We can’t run those giant apps that hose the Solaris server!
You’re focusing on your grandma’s desktop. There are plenty of large corporations and government entities that use Java heavily and want it included with Windows so they don’t have to do it manually. You need to lift your head up a bit and take a look around.
Junkman:
if you plan to run Star Office you’re gonna need that power.
StarOffice is not written in Java. It has a couple of features that can use Java, but you don’t have to install it. Also, you don’t need the kind of power that you are talking about to run StarOffice. Somebody has been smoking too much weed.
Anonymous:
I would say just the opposite, Java has one of the most organized and easy to work API’s to date. A lot of people and especially uninitiated and inexperienced developers coming from other fields confuse Java’s richness of API with inconsistencies, etc. May be it seems so confusing to the ones making such claims because they are incompetent programmers in the first place.
Well said. People that whine about Java “inconsistant APIs” have never had to write Windows programs or use the Windows API. In fact, I suspect a majority of the Java naysayers here have absolutely no practical experience in Java.
One final comment; considering some of the “Java sucks” posts that have appeared here (and in practically every other Java or .NET related story on OSNews). Why is Java good only if certain individuals like it on the desktop? Did it ever occur to any of these pundits that without SERVER side technologies most of their computer lives would be nullified? No web. No email. No Yahoo pool. No MP3 sharing. Nothing. Java is a very useful language if your informed enough to use it correctly. If you’re not, then why not learn a thing or two instead of poking around ill-informed opinion into every nook you can find on the web?
>>>>You’re focusing on your grandma’s desktop. There are plenty of large corporations and government entities that use Java heavily and want it included with Windows so they don’t have to do it manually. You need to lift your head up a bit and take a look around.
The same large corporations and government entities are buying plenty of java software from IBM and BEA — so much so that IBM/BEA controls over 2/3 of the java market (leaving SUN with a 5% market share in 4th place behind Oracle). These enterprise customers aren’t complaining, neither are IBM and BEA.
What you have is SUN (a 4th place java player behind IBM/BEA/Oracle) trying to obtain the best distribution channel by suing Microsoft. Don’t you think that it would be unfair to IBM and BEA — who earned their market share by putting out superior products than SUN.
None: Sun fought to get Microsoft’s JVM off of Windows because it WASN’T FULLY JAVA!!!! They did not fight to get their own JVM or IBM’s JVM off of Windows. They want a JVM on Windows and always have.
Now, this is a load of bullshit. First off, if Sun was really really interested in making sure that Java on Windows is compatible with everyone else, they should have kept Microsoft on their contract in the settlement. Instead they decided to let MS go from the contract. Besides, to point out, Sun was on the winning side in the court case. They could have pretty much demanded anything they want. Sure it would have taken MS longer time to oblige when the court sides more and more with Sun, but at the end it would be better for Sun, wouldn’t it?
Now, what’s obvious (with press releases and interviews of key Sun leaders) is that Sun thought Microsoft would continue to bundle Java, only it would be from a third-party and compatible with JCP’s standards. Dead wrong they were.
None: There are tons of windows customers who DO want Sun’s VM (or a compliant VM) on their machines by default.
Any surveys, or marketing statistics? Because if that’s the case, OEMs could may as well install the JRE themselves, if that’s what the market demanded, right?
None: These are usually companies that have a substantial number of employees who need custom software written in Java
Now, let’s walk you through a company’s process in installing software. They get one machine. They install Windows (that they got via site licensing). Then they install other software they need (Office, for example, also with site licensing). Then they take something like Norton Ghost (or competitors) and make images of it and install it through out the organization.
I don’t see what’s so hard about installing Java themselves. There are some companies using Perl custom apps, I don’t see them demanding support from Microsoft.
None: but because their machines do not include the JVM by default, they opt for web applications (written in java on the server).
Just have to ask: do they opt for Wordpad over MS Office because their machines do not include the office suite by default? Anyway, most companies, especially those having custom applications, don’t use what’s on default by the OEM. For example my father laptop has the exact same thing as any other machine in the office, which is Windows 2000, Office 97 (Access) and Office 2000 (Word, PowerPoint, Excel, Visio), even though the machine originally came with Windows XP.
None: Having the JVM on Windows XP gets Sun in the door to compete with .NET.
Yes, but Microsoft haven’t even bundled .NET Framework with any version of Windows, and the whole world DON’T know when Microsoft would do that (but by the looks of it, not anything time. 5 years from now, my estimate).
So this gives Sun an unfair advantage over .NET don’t you think?
None: if they don’t have Java on their machines by default, they’ll opt to use .NET instead.
LOL. Then I wonder why companies using Java custom apps don’t use Visual Basic… or even C :-). The people who make custom apps don’t care what comes by default on the machine, as long somehow it runs on that machine (running on Windows for example).
I don’t think anyone but MS wants this to happen b/c if will mean that MS will again be a monopoly.
Trust me, if this happens (MS becoming a monopoly with .NET), it wouldn’t be because solely on Windows’ monopoly. Remember that Microsoft isn’t the dominating force in the embedded and server market, markets where Java is most strong.
Junkman: Servlets and browser applets maybe, but desktop software? Not happening.
To point out that on the desktop, Sun *still* uses Swing. IBM, the biggest player in the Java market, has SWT, which at least on Windows is heaps faster.
BR: Well Corel would half-way agree with you.
AFter loosing lots on money mainly because of following the hype, I don’t think “half-way” is correct.
Reformist: because of Microsoft’s broken ghetto (and outdated) implementation of Java on their OS
On broken, unless you are using JNI (which wouldn’t be WORA anyway), it isn’t broken. And outdated – blamed that on Sun.
Reformist: Case in point: Internet Explorer.
Microsoft hitted (IMHO) the Mosaic barrier, the same one that pushed Netscape to rewrite their browser. We’ll see about that when a rewrited version of IE comes out. Meanwhile I’d like to point out for its age, IE is rather good in its standards compliancy. Of course, it is old.
>This is a play by SUN to try to win market shares against
>IBM/BEA — but SUN is not doing it by actually making their
>own java products better, they are trying to end-run IBM/BEA
>with a lawsuit against MSFT.
No. This is not what they are trying to do here. They want java on the desktop for regular business applications that are java apps or java applets. This is a move to combat the use of java by corporate users. They are not going to win market share from IBM/BEA here since IBM/BEA are dominant on the server side.
It’s not about how many Java apps people have on their machines. Of course, developers will have the most. Home users may have 1 at most (Limewire).
There are countless of applications that WOULD have been java apps or applets had the JVM been available by default. Intead most internal business apps are written as web applications so they only depend on HTML/Javascript etc.
It will be a long time before home users have any useable java apps if ever. But part of the reason, even if it’s small, is that the JVM isn’t on the machine by default. Also, we can pose the same question of .NET. How many people have .NET applications on their machine?
FYI Star Office is written in C, not Java. It can be extended with java but the VM does not run by default. It is slow and large because the shared libraries are not a part of the OS like they are in Windows. Actually, I don’t really think it’s slow except for the startup time.
Now, if this was true that Sun doesn’t want to steal market share from IBM and BEA, they would fight for a injunction where Microsoft can load any VM they like as long it is 100% compatible with JCP’s standards paving a way for Microsoft to license VMs from third parties, not only from Sun.
And about the Java applications, there isn’t much, if any, .NET applications merely because it is completely new. In addition to that, there is no easy way of downloading the CLI without you being the geek (by comparison, Java is advertised on Sun.com’s main page and you can download it from download.com and tucows.com).
And as for Java application speeds, I think what he meant was that Swing is slow. Sun is *still* promotin Swing in its tools, and as Sun holds a dominating position in the JCP, I don’t think it would change anytime soon. But the fact remains that Swing applications are slow. If it is start-up speed that is slow, I would be using a lot of Java apps…
And on StarOffice, it uses its own libraries, and on every platform, it practically have 0 shared libraries with the OS. So it isn’t a problem on Sun itself. Plus, the author of that post also in the last sentence said the promoter also admited that Java was slow, therefore the high specs. I can’t attest to that, I never even been in Raliegh, Ca.
Besides, on web-based Java applications, most companies does that because it is most practically, not because Java isn’t installed by default (IMHO, if it is the latter, it is far easier to install Java’s JRE). It is used because, from what I know from companies that actually have web-based Java apps, is that it is actually cheaper to develop, as well as being better in productivity (read the post in Swing, and don’t even think about mentioning SWT).
> Now, this is a load of bullshit.
You don’t know the history. The recent court ruling is for damage MS did when java first came out. This would not be happening now had MS shipped a compliant version of java.
>Any surveys, or marketing statistics? Because if that’s the
>case, OEMs could may as well install the JRE themselves, if
>that’s what the market demanded, right?
Surveys? Right. Sorry that’s not my job. But I have experience with large companies in multiple industries in which I made the decision to choose web apps over java applications against the customers wishes. After analyzing their IT infrastructure, installing and maintaining the VM was not possible. I have a very good view from corporate world and that’s what I based my comments on.
None: These are usually companies that have a substantial number of employees who need custom software written in Java
> I don’t see what’s so hard about installing Java
You must not have experience with this situation. It is not hard for them to include the JVM in the image. However, convincing them to do so and having someone in IT who is knowledgeable about JVM’s is next to impossible. Especially when MS is telling them that java is violating their security. Especially when MS pushes VB on the desktop. If the JVM is installed by default BY MICROSOFT, IT will not complain.
>Just have to ask: do they opt for Wordpad over MS Office
>because their machines do not include the office suite by
>default?
You are talking about Microsoft applications. MS Office is assumed by most that is actually part of Windows! You seem to underestimate the power of Microsofts voice.
None: Having the JVM on Windows XP gets Sun in the door to compete with .NET.
>Yes, but Microsoft haven’t even bundled .NET Framework
>So this gives Sun an unfair advantage over .NET don’t you
>think?
Absolutely not. The .NET framework will be included by default. Don’t fool yourself. Also, .NET can be installed easily by checking a box in the Windows XP updates. Most people blindly accept all updates.
>LOL. Then I wonder why companies using Java custom apps
>don’t use Visual Basic… or even C 🙂
Man, what universe do you live in. THEY DO USE VB AND C for custom apps!!! Soon it will be VB.NET and C#.NET applications instead.
>The people who make custom apps don’t care what comes by
>default on the machine, as long somehow it runs on that
>machine (running on Windows for example).
Of course users don’t care! It’s not the users who are the problem but the IT infrastructure that supports them.
>Trust me, if this happens (MS becoming a monopoly with
>.NET), it wouldn’t be because solely on Windows’ monopoly.
>Remember that Microsoft isn’t the dominating force in the
>embedded and server market, markets where Java is most
>strong.
Of course it would! .NET is for Windows. I have thoughts on the embedded market where java is strong… but that’s beyond the scope of this thread.
>To point out that on the desktop, Sun *still* uses Swing.
>IBM, the biggest player in the Java market, has SWT, which
>at least on Windows is heaps faster.
Very very few apps use SWT. IBM uses it because they ‘inherited’ it when they purschased the eclipse development. Swing remains the most used and most flexible java GUI toolkit available. It has issues which unfortunately Sun is slow to fix. But SWT has way more issues in terms of writing intricate applications. IBM admits this as well.
As a MS Office and KOffice user, I think StarOffice is far slower than just start-up speed (heck, start-up speed is the only thing that is fast on StarOffice).
Well, we have at least two, and one is organisation-wide mandated. It works OK (if you don’t mind the Swingy look – I don’t).
Java on the desktop in Solaris: there are several system admin tools with the GUI written in Java and work quite fine on my Blade 100. One of the best would be Veritas VMSA.
>Now, this is a load of bullshit. First off, if Sun was >really really interested in making sure that Java on >Windows is compatible with everyone else, they should have >kept Microsoft on their contract in the settlement.
Sun expected Microsoft to honor the contract. Microsoft did not, Sun sued and Microsoft lost but weaseled out of the settlement mandated by the judge by dropping support for Java.
Soon after Microsoft produces .Net hmm.
>Instead they decided to let MS go from the contract. >Besides, to point out, Sun was on the winning side in the >court case. They could have pretty much demanded anything >they want. Sure it would have taken MS longer time to >oblige when the court sides more and more with Sun, but at >the end it would be better for Sun, wouldn’t it?
Winners of court cases do not decide on the settlement, the judge does. You only get to ask for what you think you might get. It is also helpfull if the loser acts in an honorable fashion when accepting punishment.
>Yes, but Microsoft haven’t even bundled .NET Framework
>with any version of Windows, and the whole world DON’T
>know when Microsoft would do that (but by the looks of it,
>not anything time. 5 years from now, my estimate).
So why is .NET marked as a CRITICAL update when you run windows update. Apparently my machine will not function without it. I am sure you can claim that no-one is forced to download .NET. This is typical Microsoft behaviour.
David
What I meant is: we have at least two Java APPLICATIONS, of which one is org-wide mandated.
If MS gets Intel and AMD to include the CLR on the CPU so that C# will seem faster than Java…..as it is…C# is about as slow or fast as JAVA…..it is a limitation of having a sandbox development platform.
No, with the Global Assembly Cache, applications need only be compiled from the CLR p-code to native code once. This can even happen at install time.
Compare this to Java. With HotSpot, it won’t JIT when it isn’t advantageous, but regardless, code is compiled to native code every time it runs… which is a waste of resources, considering if the native code were just cached performance would be greatly increased.
I wonder about your development experience. For instance you have wrote if you use JNI your program will not be WORA. This is not necessarily true. JNI is used to call C/C++ functions. If your C/C++ code is bound to your platform, yes, naturally, your Java program will be bound to that platform. Else, not.
Actually, as I have said before, it really doesn’t matter if MS includes Sun’s Java or not. Windows just MUST NOT contain their fucked up JVM implementation, and its all. There are many programs that installs Sun’s JVM anyways. Such as Opera, Morpheus, etc. : )
Actually, it is important to see the difference between JAVA/.NET case and IE/NETSCAPE case. In IE/NETSCAPE case, the inclusion of the IE in Windows mattered, since people would use either one or the other web browser. They automatically got used to IE, since it was provided for free, since MS was being unethical as usual.
But in Java/.NET case, it really does not matter much. Program developers do not select which platform to use according to already existing VM environment. I mean, I really would not choose to develop a product in .NET, just because I know that .NET exists on most Windows computers or not. If users would like to run the my program, I would include Sun’s JVM anyway. 
There are other criteria more important for me. For instance, Java and .NET are not in the same category even. Java offers WORA, .NET do not. Java is mature, .NET is not. etc. ; )
This discussion about IBM/BEA loosing share of the market because of XP containing by default Sun JVM is just ridiculous; Companies make money from the Java Applications and not from the JVM flavor is running on. So IBM/BEA will not in any way be harm in this case they (and every other Java Company) make money out of apps like Websphere or Weblogic and not from the JVM
There are other criteria more important for me. For instance, Java and .NET are not in the same category even. Java offers WORA, .NET do not.
Considering 95% of the world’s computers run some form of Windows, WORA is a moot point. As for GUI applications, Java/Swing is awful. Horrible redraw problems on Windows, even with Sun’s latest JRE, and of course the ugly, discontiguous UI, especially for Windows XP users, who probably aren’t using the Classic look, thus Java’s “look and feel” becomes entirely pointless.
Java is mature, .NET is not. etc. ; )
And how is this a problem? Have you actually experienced more bugs in the .NET class library than you have with the Java class library?
.NET lets you develop in the language of your choice, and allows interoperability between languages. It sports increased performance due to the GAC. C# isn’t the syntactic nightmare that Java is.
Face it, CroanoN, Java sucks.
<quote>Considering 95% of the world’s computers run some form of Windows, WORA is a moot point.</quote>
No, it is not. First of all, 95% of the CLIENT computers run Windows. Java is mainly successfull on the server side. On the server side WORA is very much important indeed. Second, 6 percent is an important number, it represents millions of computers. And that number is increasing, since Linux, BSD, Mac OSX is gaining popularity incredibly fast, especially in Europe. For instance, how many people were aware of Linux 5 years ago? So, WORA is gaining more and more importance every day. Also, consider that that 6 percent representing millions of customers, is the LOSS from your customerbase if you write it only for Windows.
<quote>As for GUI applications, Java/Swing is awful. Horrible redraw problems on Windows, even with Sun’s latest JRE, and of course the ugly, discontiguous UI, especially for Windows XP users, who probably aren’t using the Classic look, thus Java’s “look and feel” becomes entirely pointless.</quote>
First of all, you do not need to use SWING if you do not like it. There is an alternative which uses native OS widgets, developed by IBM, called SWT. Eclipse IDE for instance, uses it. : ) Second, I do not share your view with Swing. I am running couple of Swing based programs every day, and they run quite fast. I must say that one should have 256MB of mem minimum, but it basically works. : ) I actually have no problems with running Swing programs at all.
Apart from that, Java 1.4.2, which will be released in couple of months, will contain Windows XP and GTK+ look and feels integrated with Swing.
<quote>”Java is mature, .NET is not. etc. ; )
And how is this a problem? Have you actually experienced more bugs in the .NET class library than you have with the Java class library?”</quote>
No, the word mature can mean many things. For instance, Java has 8 years collection of open/closed source libraries, ready to use frameworks (for instance, it has more than 10 web application frameworks awailable.), millions of ready to hire developers, etc.
Besides, it is not particularly easy thing to create and maintain a cross platform VM environment. It took Sun’s 8 years to shape Java into a good shape on many different platforms if you consider. Now, it is quite usable, and WORA really works. Why should I RISK using Mono or MS .NET etc. Java already works. : )
<quote>.NET lets you develop in the language of your choice, and allows interoperability between languages. It sports increased performance due to the GAC. C# isn’t the syntactic nightmare that Java is.
</quote>
.NET DOES NOT lets you develop in the language of your choice. .NET languages are different syntactical sugars of the same, the only language of .NET, MSIL. They are all limited to the properties MSIL can offer. .NET languages are not same as the original ones. Many .NET languages are crippled and versions of the original languages to fit into the .NET VM. Global assembly cache does not increase performance a lot, but a neat idea actually.
The thing is many good syntactical sugars of C#, for instance, not very important, since modern IDEs with refactoring capabilities already automate creating and maintaining great part of the code. (For instance, VB.NET calamity, doesn’t even have refactoring support.) In all the cases, Java-1.5 Tiger release will encapsulate C#’s useful syntactical sugar + more.
<quote>Face it, CroanoN, Java sucks.</quote>
No Bascule, you suck. : )
Glad we finally see eye to eye on something. I have to go off now, but finally we are able to reach a agreement. I don’t agree with Microsoft changes to the JVM. This is on ethical, not technical issue. Ethical? Well, they broke a contract, that’s unethical to me. Bundling IE on the other hand is not unethical to me (I mean after all, IE caught up having all the features Netscape had, plus more, and it was faster and easier to use IMHO, plus Netscape was pretty much stagnant for 4 years with its rewrite).
The guy is a joke. The JVM that he is talking about as crappy failed the complaints tests because Sun added RMI and JNI tests to the standard test, so IE failed on those. Actually IE has nothing to do with RMI and JNI. These two APIs and technologies are completely separate from browsers, and browsers do not normally support them. So Sun made MS fail on the tests, then sued them. Beware of the troll lies.
Serge, please go and participate forums of http://www.osnewsforgreengrocers.com or something. Oh, learn how to read properly first before doing that please for the confort of the greengrocers. You are being funny as like every idiotic MS supporter with your lack of understanding skills and historical comments such as “Sun made MS fail on the tests, then sued them.”. : ))))))))
<quote>No, it is not. First of all, 95% of the CLIENT computers run Windows. Java is mainly successfull on the server side. On the server side WORA is very much important indeed.</quote>
I am interested in why you think WORA is ‘very much important’ on the server side. It’s not like you are supporting x different desktops now is it? A lot of server applications are written for a specific purpose on a specific platform.
If it is so important I am amazed the Apache guys have not re-written their HTTPD to use Java, after all they could just write it on one platform and run on any other.
I once saw it quoted that Java was actually WODA (Write once debug everywhere).
<quote>
Also, consider that that 6 percent representing millions of customers, is the LOSS from your customerbase if you write it only for Windows.
</quote>
Sensible people know that C is cross platform at the source level (with a few caveats). If Java were truly the solution to the problem people would not be still writing cross platform apps in C or C++ … would they?
Please could you let us all know how Java is more effective than a QT app (C++).
<quote>First of all, you do not need to use SWING if you do not like it. There is an alternative which uses native OS widgets, developed by IBM, called SWT. Eclipse IDE for instance, uses it. : )
</quote>
Oh IBM wrote it …. is it an add-on/extension ? Wonder why IBM bothered doing this if Swing were in any way useful.
<quote>
I must say that one should have 256MB of mem minimum, but it basically works. : ) I actually have no problems with running Swing programs at all.
</quote>
Apart from requiring 256Mb *minimum* (your quote).
<quote>
Apart from that, Java 1.4.2, which will be released in couple of months, will contain Windows XP and GTK+ look and feels integrated with Swing.
</quote>
Excellent they are getting there eventually then … how long has swing been available?
1. Speed
Look at the progress in chip design. Within few years almost everyone will have 4GHz Pentium with 1 GB RAM. So, what’s the problem with the slow speed of JVM or .NET? NONE.
2. Future
AFAIK, there shouldn’t be a problem to write a cross compiler that compiles Java to .NET VM or C# to JVM. That’s why I find the future of developers bright: just choose the platform you like (Java, .NET), write your application, compile to JVM or .NET and count money 😉
Jan
<quote>I am interested in why you think WORA is ‘very much important’ on the server side.
Because, many different OSs are being used as a server. For instance, you may change your server platform, (OS and/or HW) and keep on using your WORA web application server. And with Mac OSX and Linux etc, this variety is moving towards client side as well. So, WORA is becoming important not only on the server side, but also on client side.
<quote>It’s not like you are supporting x different desktops now is it? A lot of server applications are written for a specific purpose on a specific platform.</quote>
This is not true at all. What you are talking about is the low level server applications. Now, high level server side applications, such as web application server software etc., are not being written bound to the specific platform at all.
For instance, ALL the available web application server products for instance, (Sun’s, IBMs, Oracle’s, HP’s, Macromedia’s, etc.) are written in Java except for the one from MS. The advantage: you can change your server, your system will keep on running on your new hw or sw. You can change your web application server vendor, since all of them are J2EE based, your system will continue working.
<quote>If it is so important I am amazed the Apache guys have not re-written their HTTPD to use Java, after all they could just write it on one platform and run on any other.</quote>
Why should they? They already have a working product.
<quote>I once saw it quoted that Java was actually WODA (Write once debug everywhere).</quote>
How many years ago? 5? Now it is just a myth. I can show you 100s of programs which is written with Java, working on every Java supported platform. Actually, MS, for instance, always supported WORW. (Write once, run on windows.)
<quote>Sensible people know that C is cross platform at the source level (with a few caveats).</quote>
Thats why we will see OpenOffice.org’s Mac OSX version (Not the carbon one) after 1.5 years. C’s cross platform compatibility is minimal. But in huge projects, it is very hard. Also, VM based environments do have many advantages over C. Such as incredibly reduced bug count resulting from dangling pointers etc.
<quote>If Java were truly the solution to the problem people would not be still writing cross platform apps in C or C++ … would they?</quote>
Of course they would. There are different types of programs with different needs. It is pain in the ass to maintain a cross platform project written in C/C++. VM based environments on the other hand, are suffering from lack of speed etc. Different projects have different needs.
<quote>Please could you let us all know how Java is more effective than a QT app (C++).</quote>
With pleasure. Because, Java is much easier to maintain, Java leads significantly faster implementation time, Java leads to much bug free final products. And it is greatly embraced by the community.
For instance, who the fuck is using QT for the non-existing god’s sake? Can you compare number of projects done in QT and number of projects done in Java? For instance, as a development platform, QT is nothing when compared with Eclipse. Eclipse, is FREE AS IN BEER, much much better than QT or VS.NET (I used both.), and has a GREAT support from all the IT community. It has already near 250 plugins written by open source community, the biggest players in IT world, 3rd party firms etc. For instance, Eclipse is written with Java, and maybe you will be surprised, since you have heard that Java gives you WODA, but it runs on Winodows, Solaris, Linux, BSD, Mac OSX etc. : ) Try it. Its great! Here is the link for checking out Eclipse plugins:
http://www.eclipse-plugins.2y.net/eclipse/index.jsp
In short, this is why I think Java is much more productive than QT.
<quote>
is it an add-on/extension ? Wonder why IBM bothered doing this if Swing were in any way useful.
</quote>
It is not add on or extension. It is totally different approach to create GUIs for Java programs. IBM bothered, since there were people like you constantly chattering without knowing anything about Swing. : )))) Go and read why they are bothered and what is SWT on the Eclipse’s page. http://www.eclipse.org They have document related with it.
<quote>
Apart from that, Java 1.4.2, which will be released in couple of months, will contain Windows XP and GTK+ look and feels integrated with Swing.
</quote>
Excellent they are getting there eventually then … how long has swing been available?
For a long time. : ) So what? They are just integrating these look and feels to the Swing. GTK+ and Windows XP Java look and feels were already available as open source projects for a looooong time dear. ; )
In the end, Swing is working beautifully, and I don’t know about QT projects, but, Java projects are booming. Just check out Eclipse plugins to see how many firms are preparing Eclipse Java plugins for their own products, and check SourceForge Java foundry if you don’t believe me.
I don’t think MS should be forced to bundle Sun’s JVM. It is a competing product. I do think MS should be “punished” for their actions, however. So, the injunction should have been more of “MS can NOT ship .NET on any CDs or have their software preinstalled on any installation of MS Windows.” This way, if Joe Schmoe wants to run a .NET or Java application, he must download the VM first, for either one, making both technologies a pain in the ass for dial-up users 🙂
I agree, moreover, MS should not promote .NET runtime under “critical update” section of the the windows update page.
…is that the user does not have to know they are running a QT app. QT integrates into whatever platform it is running on so well that if you are using a commercial QT product you have no idea.
Compare with Java.
I don’t think MS should be forced to bundle Sun’s JVM. It is a competing product.
Yes it is, but Microsoft signed a contract with Sun stating that they would include Sun’s JVM. This goes way beyond your opinion.
<quote>…is that the user does not have to know they are running a QT app. QT integrates into whatever platform it is running on so well that if you are using a commercial QT product you have no idea.
Compare with Java.</quote>
You cannot compare Java with QT, in case you are talking about VM based environments. They are fundamentally different.
But…. There are native compilers for Java programs. They take the java sources, and produce executable for whatever platform it is designed for. For instance, Excelsior Jet is excellent for compiling Java into Windows executables. (There are many, open/close sourced ones, but, I find Excelsior Jet the best) It supports both SWING and SWT. Here is the link, please check it out. They have a cool demo application. You can select if you would like to generate native Windows look and feel, or whatever Java look and feel you prefer in the final product for instance: http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jet.html
On Linux etc., there is GJC, from open source community. It is also able to compile Swing and SWT. For instance, they can run 2.1 M4 version of Eclipse. Here is the link:
http://gcc.gnu.org/java/
In this way, you can create native applications which you can compare with the ones created by QT. But, the more important point is that since Java it does not have as many ways of creating bugs as C++ or C has, developing in Java is much more adventageous.
Sorry to disappoint everyone, but .NET is listed under Recommended update, not critical. Don’t let the truth rain on your parade though.
Chris Parker: …is that the user does not have to know they are running a QT app. QT integrates into whatever platform it is running on so well that if you are using a commercial QT product you have no idea.
CroanoN: You cannot compare Java with QT
You completely missed his point, which was the same one I was making. Java GUI apps stand out like a sore thumb because they’re discontiguous with the rest of the environment. Even with a look and feel loaded, the rendering of Java applications is absolutely awful… constant full screen withdraws. This doesn’t even begin to take into account the fact that Windows XP users usually stick with Luna, and Look and Feel will make a Java application look like Windows Classic, further proving that Look and Feel is just a cheap hack.
>>>I don’t think MS should be forced to bundle Sun’s JVM. It is a competing product.
<<<Yes it is, but Microsoft signed a contract with Sun stating that they would include Sun’s JVM. This goes way beyond your opinion.
That was round 1 — SUN sued and Microsoft settled for $20 million.
“CroanoN: You cannot compare Java with QT
You completely missed his point, which was the same one I was making. Java GUI apps stand out like a sore thumb because they’re discontiguous with the rest of the environment. Even with a look and feel loaded, the rendering of Java applications is absolutely awful… constant full screen withdraws. This doesn’t even begin to take into account the fact that Windows XP users usually stick with Luna, and Look and Feel will make a Java application look like Windows Classic, further proving that Look and Feel is just a cheap hack.”
No, I understood you, but you completely missed my point. I said, XP and GTK+ will be added as a standard Swing LAFs. After that, Java GUI apps will not stand out like a sore thumb they will not be discontiguous with the rest of the environment on XP or GTK+. With Luna selected, Java programs running on Windows XP, will look like any other Windows executable with Luna or whatever theme selected for XP (Or GTK).
Apart from that, QT compiles into native code executable. There are Java to native code compilers, and the executables that they compile are NOT distinguishable from the programs written for that platform, in both speed, and appearance, if you choose to use target platform’s default look and feel. And if you want, you can compile them into whatever LAF you desire.
One problem with Java, and .NET, and Python, Perl, Ruby, etc. only manifests itself on servers with multiple users.
I think this was mentioned in the Sun Memo about Sun Ray terminals against a Sun Server.
The problem is simply How Unix Works (or NT for that matter).
With regular, everyday compiled programs when a user loads up the application, it maps and pages in the CODE pages and starts running the application.
Should User 2 run the same application, the OS discovers that “Hey, all of these CODE pages are already loaded, so I’ll just use them again”.
So, if you have a program that has 100K of code and 50K of data, then the code is shared across users while the data is local to each process. So, say with 10 users, your total memory footprint (in this case) would be 100K + 50K * 10 = 600K.
With Java (et al), the code is actually “data” and is NOT shared across users. Obviously the core JVM is shared, but most of the application is in the class files.
So, for this example, your application memory jumps from 600K to 1500K.
That makes scaling a Java app on a central server a real problem with a large user base. Now, to be clear, every interpreted language suffers from this problem, not just Java. And the benefit only happens for those FEW applications that EVERYBODY loads. Many systems will have a couple hundred applications for the system, but only 3 or 4 are loaded by a majority of people. If the app isn’t being loaded by several folks, then you’re not going to get much benefit at all (save through shared libraries, perhaps).
.NET can side step this problem because its mode of operation is to take the CLR code, compile it, cache it, THEN run it. Ideally, that cached code can be shared across users as readonly pages.
You’d like to think that Java could do the same thing. mmap class and package files to readonly pages and share them, but I don’t think that it does. This would also speed up initialization and application loading.
Croanon, maybe you don’t realize but you make many people laugh at you. You came here, sweared at everybody, called everbody an idiot, proved that you didn’t know much about Java, and then still pretend to be the normal guy. You may be the troll of the year.
You don’t say anything about why IE failed in the tests, because either you don’t know, or you don’t want to say. They failed in the tests because Sun tested IE with new stuff.
Don’t lie here and confuse people. Sun lied to Microsoft and everybody. Only idiots like you buy into Sun’s arguments. Sun forced Microsoft to implement everything Sun wants, but Microsoft refused to do that, so they shipped the old Java. Then Sun sued Microsoft even not to distribute that. Sun sues Microsoft for distributing and not distributing Java. How stupid is that? As stupid as you.
Your explanation of Java is not correct. If you are running code from a central server, then you are in most cases either running it in applet form or in servlet or EJB form. In applet form, the bytecode is offloaded onto each desktop machine, so you don’t have the problems of multiple instances running at the same time. You don’t have to care.
If you are running a servlet, then your code is loaded at the server side, and a thread is launched per request. This is much more efficient than compiled executables.
If you want to talk about why Java sucks, then you should talk about swing and awt. The rest of it is pretty good.
Hi Serge,
Sure Serge,
Bye Serge.
: ))))
I disagree aroughthropher: . This is rather unfair. They made their product, whether they want to include .NET or not into the mix should be up to them. I actually heard not too many praises about Win32. It is simply because it is very old. Heck, most of Windows client problems are caused by Win32.
Now, what is obvious to many is that Microsoft wants to change Win32 for .NET. Notice how Apple tried that with the cut and dry option, and with far less developers, they are having problems? So right now, Microsoft is promoting .NET Framework as an altenative to Win32 or an extension of thereof, don’t be suprise if one day everything would be .NET instead of Win32.
Besides, CroanoN, on my Windows XP and Windows 2000 machine I run Windows Update every other week. I don’t have .NET Framework installed (I however once had MS’s JVM between SP1 and SP1a of Windows XP, and have MS JVM installed on my Win2k machine). And I normally read what’s on the “critical” section. Maybe I missed it, though… but it seems only you are saying that and no one else.
And CroanoN, the last I check, GCJ sucks. The last I tried, the “native” app was a little slower than the one running on Blackdown.. of course that’s two-three months ago.
And Serge, while I don’t really look all that highly on CroanoN, you are the one funny here.
And to Chris Parker, Sun and Microsoft agreed to a settlement freeing Microsoft from its contract and even prevent them from following their initial contract.
“Besides, CroanoN, on my Windows XP and Windows 2000 machine I run Windows Update every other week. I don’t have .NET Framework installed (I however once had MS’s JVM between SP1 and SP1a of Windows XP, and have MS JVM installed on my Win2k machine). And I normally read what’s on the “critical” section. Maybe I missed it, though… but it seems only you are saying that and no one else.”
Read the thread again. I was not the one suggesting that it was placed in the critical update section. Anyway, it is good if it isn’t. : )
“Besides, CroanoN, on my Windows XP and Windows 2000 machine I run Windows Update every other week. I don’t have .NET Framework installed (I however once had MS’s JVM between SP1 and SP1a of Windows XP, and have MS JVM installed on my Win2k machine). And I normally read what’s on the “critical” section. Maybe I missed it, though… but it seems only you are saying that and no one else.”
Read the thread again. I was not the one suggesting that it was placed in the critical update section. Anyway, it is good if it isn’t. : )
“And CroanoN, the last I check, GCJ sucks. The last I tried, the “native” app was a little slower than the one running on Blackdown.. of course that’s two-three months ago.”
Actually, I don’t think GCJ sucks. I find GCJ’s performance excellent. It is getting better and better anyway. There are always commercial options though. One of my friends here in Prague, has a sw house, developing a commercial one. Probably they will release it in 6 months or something like that. I can’t give more details though, but the demo I saw rocked. ; )
As I said Rajan, it really doesn’t matter if .NET is included in Windows or not. After this point, it is not important for Java at all. There are many programs like Morpheus, Opera, etc, installing Sun’s JVM anyway. The important thing was MS’s fucked up JVM implementation should go to hell. It is granted anyways. : )