Alex Fern�ndez wrote:
>
> Hi Berin!
>
> Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > "Kevin A. Burton" wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> It's hard to believe. What are you selling? Applets? Kind of a support
> nightmare for you then. Otherwise, you run what you need on the server
> and don't care about client JVMs.
Full fledged Java applications. One of our suite of applications that
is impractical
to do on the server-side is one that maps a physical store layout to the
categories
of products. It requires JVM 1.2 or higher, and is somewhat of a
complex beast.
What about JBuilder, Together, and other all Java applications? They
all have extra
bulk because they all include the JVM that they run on. It is
impractical to have
5 JVMs on the machine that are in almost all points identical when 1
will do.
> > 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.
>
> Try this:
> http://conferences.oreilly.com/oscon/
> The FUD campaign against GPL is at full throttle right now.
>
> Now, as to Sun: you seem to imply that we may trust Sun or we may move
> somewhere else. This is simply not true. Nobody can own a language --
> you can develop a free alternative if you wish to, and then call it
> something else. Sun will sue you so you do not display the Java logo in
> the box -- big deal.
Sun has a certain industry respect--and like it or not it transfers onto
Java to
a certain degree. Beyond that, I don't trust any proprietary company to
control
languages or frameworks.
> This point is moot. Tomorrow I'll send Linus a patch so the next Linux
> kernel is fully SMP capable with 1024 CPUs -- I'm sure he'll happily
> apply it.
I'd like to see that kind of hardware sold.... (It's impossible with
current
Intel architecture so we would be using a RISC based approach I
presume). Last
I checked (which was a couple years ago), the best Intel could do with
its x86
line was 8-way processing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
