-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Berin Loritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Kevin A. Burton" wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Jon Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > <http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-6839693.html?tag=mn_hd>
> > <snip>
> >
> > I hate this!
> >
> > "Sun called on consumers "to demand that Microsoft include the Java platform in
> > their XP operating system." Sun also said consumers should demand "PC vendors
> > like Dell, Compaq, Gateway, IBM and HP (Hewlett-Packard) include the Java
> > platform in their applications."
>
> I don't have a problem with this at all. It means that I can have clients install
> my software without having to download anything first. Sure it helps SUN, but it
> also helps me. Kind of a win/win situation if you will.
Only a win/win until Microsoftian tactics are used. Let's not forget history ;)
> Another benefit will be a larger number of people complaining to SUN about
> certain defects or performance drops with every new release of the Java
> language (1.3 is slower than 1.2 which is slower than 1.1.x on several IO
> routines). I realize that JDK 1.4 is supposed to seriously address these
> issues, but there are other issues with JDK 1.4.
Of course this doesn't scale very well at all. I totally agree with you on the
bug/bloat issue but if Java were OSS we wouldn't have this problem.
<snip>
> It truly is a convenience. If a user is buying a PC with JRE preinstalled, they
> will use it--or explore using programs that use it. It opens up a
> lot of potential clients for our OSS projects. Let's face it, we chose to build
> a lot of projects on a proprietary "standard".
Hey... I am moving to GCC :)
<snip>
> You might think that, but there are a number of MS shops out there who
> implement things on MS technology because it was MS. Case and point, I worked
> on a project for a couple state law enforcement agencies, and my employer
> insisted on an all MS technology. When we tried to drum up more business, the
> remaining states were clamoring for Oracle and Unix--so the division folded up
> with two successful projects under it's belt. The example shows both the
> danger of dependency on MS technology, and the cycle of dependancy it forces
> you in.
I don't have a problem with that. There are a LOT of masochists in the world :)
I think the point that I was trying to make, which I belive is a truism, is that
Open technologies succeed and closed technologies usually fail. IE
TCP/SMTP/HTTP/etc.
> > - - If it were GPL/LGPL MS couldn't embrace and extend?
>
> They would find a way--or they would step up the FUD campaign. With SUN
> controlling Java, there is little that MS can do to belittle it. SUN has
> proven itself in the marketplace, and serves as that single point to blame if
> something goes wrong. That accountability keeps SUN honest in regards to
> Java.
What is the point of a "single point to blame" if the problem isn't fixed?
I think I have been able to blame SUN for a *number* of years now and that
hasn't changed anything. Java is still buggy and bloated.
<snip>
>
> > - - They don't have to spend the millions of dollars they spend on maintaining the
> > JVM.
>
> They can explore a number of options with maintaining the JVM that could potentially
> lower the amount that they spend. Basically the cost of maintaining the JVM won't
> change (it might even increase), but it will be spread accross many companies that
> maintain it.
I don't think so. I think it will be reduced. I don't think this is a point
worth arguing over (and I shouldn't have brought it up) because there are a lot
of numbers here which are internal to SUN and we don't have all the information
to make an correct hypothesis.
> > - - Universal industry acceptance of Java.
>
> Ok, you now have bitten the "OSS is the god of the software world" bug.
> OSSing Java would actually alienate a number of large IT firms.
Why? They would be alienated by open standards?
> I know personally a couple customers of my company that would not allow it on
> their servers simply because it is open source. (They don't allow Apache
> HTTPD on their servers for that reason, even if it has been proven time and
> again).
Fine... let them go! I don't want them using Java then! :)
Honestly I think that Java's biggest problem right now is the proprietary
software vendors and users. We have been contaminated by the MS crowd :(
<snip>
> Let's face it, SUN promotes Java well. By making them lose control of the platform,
> what incentive will they have? SUN will pull a MS and put together another competing
> standard.
Ah.
"The best way to control your flock is to let them roam free".
This is a Zen koan which I think is appopriate. Just because SUN Open Sources
Java doesn't mean they loose control. In fact they GAIN a lot more control.
They get industry acceptance, near 100% market penetration, solid code, etc. I
think that this directly relates to their influence over the industry.
> What I would like to see is something *better* than the JCP. I believe in
> open research. OSS fits a great many needs, but there are some key points in
> Free Software (GPL/LGPL) that I don't necessarily agree with.
I don't think that *anyone* should have problems with Free Software itself.
Apache is Free Software. I think you probably mean copyleft. Copyleft is a
controversial concept and I think it is still a number of years until it is
really appreciated.
Kevin
- --
Kevin A. Burton ( [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
Cell: 408-910-6145 URL: http://relativity.yi.org ICQ: 73488596
The worse thing in life is to fall short!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt
iD8DBQE7eAT9AwM6xb2dfE0RAl35AJ458RRfT5Yyx67MT1rfUOC19AkCOwCeI4FK
9KjHLc8vzE4jubibrDKT/jE=
=+m0m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
