--- Maksim Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First off I want to say that my previous posts were
> done late on friday,
> which is probably not the best time to write
> level-headed posts so I
> apologise if my previous posts were too emotional.
I know the feeling :^)
> On the point of standardi
First off I want to say that my previous posts were done late on friday,
which is probably not the best time to write level-headed posts so I
apologise if my previous posts were too emotional.
Ken McNeil wrote:
>
> >Exactly competition is good. But I'm afraid a differ with you Ken on
> >what com
First off you have taken my intentions to an extreme. I only wish to discuss
these issues openly and in no way am I attempting to create anything. And
also you have highlighted some things in my original post that are not truly
significant to my message. I will point this out below.
> > How i
>Exactly competition is good. But I'm afraid a differ with you Ken on
>what competition, I would prefer just competing implmentations, not
>competing platforms (though even that in some ways is a good idea, eg.
>one OS is not a good idea).
You're right on both, within the Java(c) world competing
Matt Welsh wrote:
> I usually can't stand flame bait like this but I wanted to point out one
> thing.
>
> Sun has clearly recognized some of the advantages of the Open Source model,
> which is the entire reason why they have adopted the 'Sun Community Source
> License' for a large number of their
openly and in no way am I attempting
> to create anything.
You gave this thread the title "Sun Bashing 2", so I might have
read what I expected to read, instead of what you realy wrote.
Sorry for that.
> And
> also you have highlighted some things in my original post
>
Hi,
Interesting conversation. I vaguely disagree with your overall sentiment, but
the following prodded me out of lurker state. :)
Ken McNeil wrote:
>
> >Do you REALLY want to make Java into the horrible mess C++ is today?
>
> Okay, I will substantiate this...
>
> 1. In the spirit of Darwinis
For myself, as the lone alpha-linux porter, is that the new model is very different
from the non-commercial lic agreement. With that agreement I can attempt to make
the JAVA JDK work & distribute to any and all folks that are interested -
FOR NO CHARGE of course.
The New Open license appears to cu
Ken McNeil wrote:
>
> I have been programming in Java for over a year, using it mainly because of
> its technical merits but also because it seemed to be the "anti-Microsoft".
> >From the beginning I had the utmost respect for Sun and their mission to
> build Java into the greatest thing since sl
Ken McNeil wrote:
>
> >I'll second you on the bugs issue and the problem with Suns 1001 API's
> >approach. However to be fair you probably picked a bad eg. with
> >parametric types as Sun has just put up a proposal for them.
>
> I thank you for pointing this out, but they should have responded
Ken McNeil writes:
> >I usually can't stand flame bait like this but I wanted to point out one
> >thing.
>
> How is this "flaim bait"?
I can only tell you how I understood it: basically just like an
unjustified and unfair rant. Such posts are mostly seen as flame
baits, because they almost n
Matt Welsh wrote:
>
> I usually can't stand flame bait like this but I wanted to point out one
> thing.
It seemed likely to stirr up discussion but I don't think it was
inflammatory either.
> Sun has clearly recognized some of the advantages of the Open Source model,
> which is the entire reas
Ken McNeil wrote:
>
> >I usually can't stand flame bait like this but I wanted to point out one
> >thing.
>
> How is this "flaim bait"? This is a topic that has been thrown around by
> plenty, and unless you work for Sun I see no reason why this should seem
> offensive to you.
>
> >This link is
>I have mixed feelings (to say the least) about parametric/generic stuff
>in java so I will not comment further on this.
What are these mixed feelings you're referring to? At one point in the past
I thought generic programming was only necessary if you didn't have a common
base class, like in C
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I think it also worth mentioning that Java is barely 2 years old. Just because
> we are used to working with developed languages like C, C++ or whatever else
> tickles your fancy - that doesn't mean we can forcefully matriculate Java to
> suit our time frame.
I agree
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Maksim Lin wrote:
> As for a "java killer", I don't see one coming along, but then again I'm
> sure most people didn't see Java coming. But really I don't see how our
> lack of support for Sun will bring this about anymore then our support
> will prevent it. As I said before
version (thanks Blackdown team, a
> > >great job!!!)
> >
> > Well maybe, maybe not, but you must admit that the *sole* reason that
>Sun is
> > doing all this Java stuff is so that they can sell more Solaris
> > boxes.
>
>Most probably it was, at the
Maksim Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This I'm afraid makes no sense to me. How does one splinter java by
> standardising it ?
I'm not saying that I agree with this, either --- I'm only conveying what
I believe to be Sun's motivations for maintaining control over Java.
mdw
-
>I usually can't stand flame bait like this but I wanted to point out one
>thing.
How is this "flaim bait"? This is a topic that has been thrown around by
plenty, and unless you work for Sun I see no reason why this should seem
offensive to you.
>This link is the paper 'Sun Community Source Li
>I'll second you on the bugs issue and the problem with Suns 1001 API's
>approach. However to be fair you probably picked a bad eg. with
>parametric types as Sun has just put up a proposal for them.
I thank you for pointing this out, but they should have responded earlier. By not
implementing t
I usually can't stand flame bait like this but I wanted to point out one
thing.
Sun has clearly recognized some of the advantages of the Open Source model,
which is the entire reason why they have adopted the 'Sun Community Source
License' for a large number of their products -- including the JD
I think it also worth mentioning that Java is barely 2 years old. Just because
we are used to working with developed languages like C, C++ or whatever else
tickles your fancy - that doesn't mean we can forcefully matriculate Java to
suit our time frame.
I honestly believe that Sun is doing the
I have been programming in Java for over a year, using it mainly because of
its technical merits but also because it seemed to be the "anti-Microsoft".
>From the beginning I had the utmost respect for Sun and their mission to
build Java into the greatest thing since sliced bread. Yet, lately I
Paolo Ciccone wrote:
> > "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.
> "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 techn
On Apr 23, 12:09am, Chris Abbey wrote:
> Subject: Re: Sun/bashing
> At 11:24 AM 4/22/99 -0700, Paolo Ciccone wrote:
> >1) Sun pushed Java as a multiplatform language.
>
> Sun positioned Java as a language not bound to any realworld platform;
> and hence as being multiplatfor
Chris Abbey wrote:
> >lack of support *from Sun* is seriously joepardizing any
>
> Why does it have to be Sun? It's not like they're developing Java in
> a total vaccuumm (how do you spell that word anyway? :| ) there are
> several other companie
At 11:24 AM 4/22/99 -0700, Paolo Ciccone wrote:
>1) Sun pushed Java as a multiplatform language.
Sun positioned Java as a language not bound to any realworld platform;
and hence as being multiplatform capable. The only platform that's really
involved when you run Java is the Java Virtual Machine.
>>>>> "BK" == Bernd Kreimeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
BK> Paolo Ciccone writes:
>> I'm personally disappointed by Sun's reaction.
BK> While I enjoy Sun bashing as much as anybody (in my case, I
BK> have the 7+ years of
Paolo Ciccone writes:
> I'm personally disappointed by Sun's reaction.
While I enjoy Sun bashing as much as anybody (in my case,
I have the 7+ years of working with and maintaining of Sun
equipment to justify it), let's be reasonable.
a) Sun doesn't owe us anything
30 matches
Mail list logo
