>>>>> "CA" == Chris Abbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
CA> Sun positioned Java as a language not bound to any realworld
CA> platform; and hence as being multiplatform capable.
In the case of Java looking at the technical specs is going to be
restrictive. Sun, positioned Java, from a technical and marketing
point of view, as *the* multiplatform language. Now, the original plan
of letting third parties do the port might have been ok initially but
after about three years it's clear that there is something slowing
down the porting of the JDK. This is, IMHO, because the JDK is not
Open Source. Look at Perl, in the DOS days there where at least three
ports and there are versions of Perl for virtually any platform.
>> The reality is that they develop only two versions.
CA> They produce two _reference_implementations_, one on their own
CA> platform,
Thank you for rephrasing so nicely what I said ;).
>> That's not covering two of the most used platforms in the PC
>> arena: Linux and Macintosh.
CA> umm... ok... sure... what-ever you say... time to pass the
CA> pipe friend, you've had too much for tonight... :)
Let me say it with simpler words: Sun does not provide the JDK for
Linux or for the Macintosh. To this date there is no, for what I know,
a port of JDK 1.2 for the Macintosh. Before the JDK 1.2 was released
officially there have been several pre-releases for Windows and
Solaris. Six months after the official release we still have to have a
final release of the JDK 1.2 for Linux. Clear now ?
>> 2) In November Sun publicly announced support for Linux. The
>> announcement has not been followed, for what I can see, by
>> facts.
CA> We have seen at least indirect evidence of three things:
CA> 1. Sun provided blackdown with the JCK. 2. Sun provided
CA> blackdown with two engineers whom they could ask questions of,
CA> and who have worked with the porting team to debug problems,
CA> and who provide a mechanism for the port to get back into the
CA> "master" source tree at Javasoft. 3. Sun provided Steve with
CA> a license which is (I believe) unique. All three of these
CA> amazed me to no end at the time, and to some extent still do
CA> to this day.
They amazed me at that time but sadly the reality is that Sun is not
providing us with enough information. This thread was started because
of the uncomfortable silence aroung the JDK 1.2. I have no problems
working with the current version. I think it's pretty good. The
problem exposed by the original poster and I is that we didn't get any
news for a long time and this makes it hard to make any plan on
development on Linux+Java.
>> People are investing time and money based on what Sun says.
CA> People are putting their money on something they have no
CA> control over then. When I grew up that was called
CA> gambling... today its called investing.
Disagree completely. Gambling is when you put money on a number at the
roulette or betting on a running horse or dog. Investing is done on
completeley different ground and that's exactly why it's so hard to
get money from a venture capital firm.
>> Now, if you look at the BTS on the JDC you'll see that there
>> thousands of requests for Linux JDK. If Sun judges the need to
>> port the JDK to platform based on the number of users that want
>> it then the Linux community showed some real numbers.
CA> nice logic, but I think anyone who's been around here will
CA> recognise it as the logic that _isn't_ prevailing at Sun.
Well, it seems to me that the constant pounding the Linux drum
actually brought some good results, see the licencing and support you
mentioned before. It may not be the logic of Sun but things can change
and that's exactly why I keep writing in this forum. It's not like I
have a lot of time to spend online :)
CA> http://java.sun.com/cgi-bin/java-ports.cgi?other=true
CA> OK, so it's not in great big graphics screaming out to the
CA> world... but it's been there since, at least, December.
That's exactly what I mean. If you want to download the Solaris or
Windows JDK you just need two clicks. To get the the Linux version you
have to search a lot. That would be ok if the Linux JDK was not
supported by Sun but, as the November annoucement says, this version
of the JDk is officially supported. That is the reason of my comment.
>> lack of support *from Sun* is seriously joepardizing any
CA> ^^^^^^^^ Why does it have to be
CA> Sun?
Again, because they announced it.
It's not like they're developing Java in a total vaccuumm
CA> (how do you spell that word anyway?
Vacuum
CA> Which is always a good thing... but how many Sun managers do
CA> you think read this list?
How don't know how many but I know there are people from Sun reading
this list. Again, I have limited time, if I write here is because I
hope Sun will receive the message. See, I'm investing time based on
known facts ;)
--Paolo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
