I find some of the sun-bashing both counter-productive and
slightly embarrassing.
Personally, I *want* new versions of the jdk to be released
in synch with the Windows and Solaris releases, rather than
a year later. I want Sun to support Linux rather than
think that we're all a bunch of crazed
Mike Ajemian wrote:
>
> 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 d
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 08:50:21PM -0800, Ted Neward wrote:
> For my money, I'll download the Inprise product (I have a particular beef
> with Borland as a company--why'd you kill OWL just before my OWL books came
> out?--but that's neither here nor there)
We didn't kill it, Microsoft did :)
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 02:03:16PM -0700, Jeff Galyan wrote:
[deletia]
> Just my two cents.
Superbly exposed, Jeff.
--
Paolo Ciccone
JBuilder dev.team
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscr
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 03:07:36PM -0500, Mike Ajemian wrote:
> 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
Mike,
instead of quoting and replying I'll just address you main point, as asked
by you, about the "division" in development.
Things are really simple and Karl actually confirmed in this forum part of
this story. At Inprise we used the Blackdown JDK from march 5th, the day
Pre1 was released the
> "JK" == Juergen Kreileder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Emmanuel Papirakis writes:
>>> /usr/local/jdk117_v1a/bin [muster@192 bin]$ javac ./java:
>>> error in loading shared libraries: libjava.so: cannot open
>>> shared object file: No such file or directory
I missed the be
Like many things being offered by SUN, it may very well that the Java Platform
Debugging Architecture (JPDA) was never licensed to Blackdown. I would also
suspect ur argument would be more meritorious if it wasn't for the fact the all
platforms have to be compatable ( as far as JCK is concerned )
Jeff Galyan wrote:
> Someone suggested that Sun is trying to "fracture" the Linux Java
> community. How does that make any sense? Do you really think Sun cares
> in the least whose VM you're using? All Sun cares about is that *all*
> implementations of Java conform to the spec - otherwise compati
Jeff Galyan wrote:
I wasn't involved in the Inprise deal, and I don't
buy the argument that
Inprise wanted "brand recognition" on the JVM for Linux. Why don't
I buy
that argument? Because Sun owns the trademark and copyright on the
Java
"brand". No one else can "brand" Java. Does Inprise have the
10 matches
Mail list logo
