Agree with you, simple is good. This is getting a little blown out of
proportion. My points are as follows:
1. Inprise JBuilder, sitting on top of JDK that Inprise authored.
Good brand. Not involving Blackdown as the market might perceive
that as a dilution (I know finance folks who would view the
relationship as a major liability.) That's it. It's not
specifically about the JDK, that's a component in the solution.
It's about the packaging of Java tools from Inprise and selling
those tools to (especially) corporate buyers who are still twitchy
about Linux. For the corporate tools builder (IT departments are
potential customers who stand out to me), they might want Linux if
somebody supplied all the Java tools and supported them, too. So
Inprise supplies all the tools and supports all the components,
too. I know corporations that make decisions this way and it's
not a bad thing. Integrated components, one point-of-contact.
The market assigns a lot of value to that.
2. I don't think that forking the code is a good thing. In fact, I
think it's such a bad thing, that, if I was in charge of this, I
would have flown the blackdown reps to my office (or vice-versa)
to find a way to work together with them. It would be different
if the blackdown folks didn't want to collaborate, but that's
not the sense I get from some of the postings.
3. Without a clear representation of the dialogs that took place
between Blackdown and Inprise, all the discussions about how this
came about and why are based on heresay. I read the blackdown
response to Paolo's comments about Inprise contacting them. It
sounded like there was major miscommunication there. My feeling
is that Inprise had an incentive to work closely with Blackdown
(faster releases, potentially more stable code, more mindshare.)
It suprises me, from what I've read, that it appears more wasn't
done to open communication with the Blackdown team from Inprise.
I fully recognize that they had no legal obligation to do so.
It's just something that doesn't sit well with me.
Appreciate your patience and your dialog. It sounds like I'm having
difficulty getting my point across in a clear and cogent manner.
Hopefully, this mail gets more to the point. I look forward to your
response. Points #2 and #3 are far more important to me than #1. In
fact, if people in the know (read: direct experience) from both sides
want to comment about how the communication really went down, I would
really appreciate it since I don't want to dialog with scraps (I have
big feet and don't like the taste of them, if you know what I mean.)
cheers,
Mike
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
