Sun Microsystems slapped, judge tosses out Java order for MS

[Ted Striker]

Sun is like that girlfriend that you thought was great until she left a turd in the toilet and then you got grossed out by it.

[St Leo]

MS is just accelerating it by offering better alternatives.

The only thing going for .NET is that it's bundled with Windows nowadays. Capitalizing on market share != offering better alternatives.

[Asher]

You can't be serious, Leo?

What do you dislike about .NET?

[Q Classic]

well, not quite. sun was lovely because sun had great racks--er, servers-- but then hp and the others developed nice ra--servers--too.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
Underhanded tricks?

You make it sound like Microsoft is obligated to ship competitor's products with their OS under thread of litigation.

That's not illegal (why do you think the court threw out that decision, genius ), nor is it anti-business.

The joke is on you, Glonkie. MS first tried the "embrace, extend, and extinguish" trick (Kerberos, anyone?) on Java by violating licensing agreements to include it's own incompatible JVM.

Get with the program, would you?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
Sun is killing Java through their own stupidity. MS is just accelerating it by offering better alternatives.

Oh, that's right, is that why HP and Dell decided to include Sun's JVM with their computers?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
The joke is on you, Glonkie. MS first tried the "embrace, extend, and extinguish" trick (Kerberos, anyone?) on Java by violating licensing agreements to include it's own incompatible JVM.

Get with the program, would you?

How is the joke on me, when MS is the one that doesn't have to ship Java, and C# is so obviously a shining example of "embrace, extend, and extinguish"?

C# is essentially Java++, and much faster to boot.

Sun f*cked with the wrong people, Sun spends money on litigation rather than R&D to make a competitive product, and Sun is finding itself losing billions of dollars a year because of it.

Sun is inept, that's why Java is dying.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Oh, that's right, is that why HP and Dell decided to include Sun's JVM with their computers?

HP and Dell including Sun's VM has what to do with MS' solution being faster, more flexible, and more developer-friendly, and coming on 100% of all PCs?

Incase you haven't noticed, the popularity of Java applets has fallen dramatically in the past few years. Java applications in and of themselves are fairly rare because they're so slow.

C# is like Java, only better, and developers know that. Java was a fun experiment, .NET is the real deal.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by St Leo
MS is just accelerating it by offering better alternatives.

The only thing going for .NET is that it's bundled with Windows nowadays. Capitalizing on market share != offering better alternatives.

If you're writing commercial applications (you know, that thing called "the real world" outside the temple of meaningless geekdom), .NET kicks ass over other development systems. End of story.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Asher
Incase you haven't noticed, the popularity of Java applets has fallen dramatically in the past few years. Java applications in and of themselves are fairly rare because they're so slow.

C# is like Java, only better, and developers know that. Java was a fun experiment, .NET is the real deal.

Last year, I had based my product architecture around Java on Linux boxes, because I didn't consider .NET adequately proven in the real world, and I didn't want to go the COM / DCOM route. A large part of that was former contractors and a former partner being Java cultists.

Over the last half of last year, after evaluating both options, I completely shitcanned the whole Java / Linux thing in favor of .NET. The end result is a far slicker product, with a better UI, multiple UI styles, better language and metric/English localizations, faster performance, etc.

I might still use Java for a cel-phone game, but that's about it.

[Wraith]

Asher, you'd get a lot more credibility if you didn't include words like "slapped" in your thread titles where it's completely inappropriate.

--"They called it J++, if you'll recall."

The main problem would be Sun's trademarks and the like over Java. If MS wants to call it a variation of Java, they have to follow Sun's standards. It's pretty simple. Just like if someone want to have WHQL drivers, they have to follow Microsofts rules for it.

--"MS submitted C# to the ISO"

I don't think you understand what that entails (or how much of it MS has actually submitted). They've still got full control over it.

Wraith
Don't try to engage my enthusiasm -- I haven't got one

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
If you're writing commercial applications (you know, that thing called "the real world" outside the temple of meaningless geekdom), .NET kicks ass over other development systems. End of story.

It depends. A number of my friends started their own development businesses, and they always use Java for cross-platform stuff. Some will use .NET if it's limited to Windows-only environment.

[JohnT]

"MS did not have the right to alter the language. They can invent another language and call it C#."

I thought you were in favor of open standards?

[Boris Godunov]

So MS doesn't have to include a competitor's product within their own product, and this is somehow a bad thing?

Most confused...

[St Leo]

Originally, the court recognized that Microsoft illegally and irrevocably hurt Sun's business, so it put out a temporary injunction asking Microsoft to bundle (real) Java with its programs. Now, another court has repealed that injunction before its natural expiration date for no good reason.

Sun is still fighting for just compensation, but Microsoft is just trying to draw out the suit indefinitely because they can afford to.

I am somewhat out of my depths on this issue, though the parallels with the browser massacre that I know extremely well are fairly clear.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by St Leo
Originally, the court recognized that Microsoft illegally and irrevocably hurt Sun's business, so it put out a temporary injunction asking Microsoft to bundle (real) Java with its programs. Now, another court has repealed that injunction before its natural expiration date for no good reason.

If that's the case, the court should have just slapped MS with a fine.

Forcing them to bundle a competitor's product within their own is unfair and, I would bet, unprecedented.

[Urban Ranger]

JohnT,

I am. But what does that have to do with MS behaviour?


Boris,

The court merely forces MS to follow a signed licensing agreement.

[Asher]

The court merely forces MS to follow a signed licensing agreement.

It did no such thing -- the contract MS and Sun signed did not guarantee Sun's VM distribution with Windows.

It said if MS was to distribute a VM, it'd have to be Sun's.

MS said it would ship none. So how is the court forcing MS to follow a signed licensing agreement when the court's ruling was outside the scope of the agreement?

There's a reason this case was tossed out.

[St Leo]

However, Microsoft has been violating that agreement for a number of years. Forcing them to follow a stricter version is a perfectly reasonable temporary punishment before a permanent one is enforced.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
There's a reason this case was tossed out.

Happily, the case was not tossed out.

Did you not read the article you linked?