Microsoft Ordered to Carry Java 831
An anonymous reader was the 17,232th person to submit that "Microsoft has been ordered to include Sun's Java runtime in Windows. Coverage from AP (via Yahoo), Reuters (via news.com), and, let's say, the BBC."
What about other VMs? (Score:1, Interesting)
The ruling is screwed.
Appropriate coercion? (Score:5, Interesting)
Coercion: the power to require Microsoft to include Java is the same that allows the gov't, or any successful antitrust plaintiff, to force them to do anything different. Because of their market power, which puts them on nearly every desktop in America, their default config has a lot of promotional influence. Up to now, that influence has entirely favored Microsoft, which sounds appropriate
Whether THIS particular coercion is a good idea, we'll see. Whether coercion is never the right thing, well that's much broader.
A partial analogy would be Microsoft owning the default Yellow Pages distributed to everyone's door and selecting who can be in it -- say, virtually everyone but "Sun." Now, anyone can go get one of the other free directories, but will they? Advantage: Microsoft.
Also, Java isn't exactly a competitor's product; it's also an attempt at an industry-wide open standard that Microsoft wants to subvert, dominate, and exploit. Hey, they already tried.
It's a difficult problem to set things right in the wake of antitrust problems. Market forces generally do a decent job of figuring these things out (the "invisible hand"). But when some clever party makes the market its own, and then abuses it, the rules have to change, and gov't regulation, or a breakup, are the most common remedies.
If you don't think MS should have been sued in the first place, you will not believe any of these rationales, and probably not that antitrust is necessary in the first place. Many think some market failures need correction, but not everyone.
Hello people? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is *exactly* what MS did to Netscape a few years back, and a court found them guilty. They bundled their own technology and made it inconvienient to use competing products. *cough*
It seems to me that this judge is basically just upholding that ruling and *not* allowing MS to do the same thing to Sun.
Keep it in perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
It's IBM who's probably tipping the bubbly right now. And, a lot of Java developers.
Re:Hello people? (Score:3, Interesting)
Ummm.....Slashdot is at it again (Score:2, Interesting)
ZDNews is claiming that all products from MS that include
That broad ranging declaration by the judge is key to getting this thrown out.
On to the next item......everyone claims MS shafted Java. Lets see:
1) MS signs Java agreement
2) MS produces better runtime
3) MS adds extensions for Windows only development, which are optional to developers depending on their target market (HINT: Apple has Cocoa extensions in Java......samething......they are optional)
4) Sun sues Microsoft
5) Sun offers settlement...terminate future licenses, puts a deadline on distributing the old java
6) Microsoft removes old Java well before deadline
7) Sun complains, puts large advertisements out showing disgruntlement with Microsoft
8) Microsoft decides
9) Sun cries fowl. Demands MS includes Sun's java because they limited MS's license to an old, obsolete version.
10) Judge grants sun's wish......for now.
This will be overturned. You can't sign an agreement which you wrote, which specifically states what you can and cannot do regarding terminating a license, and say hey, this didn't work out how we wanted.
And the fact is, most of the average users, including myself, don't run into client side java all that often........and the only ActiveX control I ever see is Flash.
On the client side Java is becoming irrelivent.....and I for one do not want to be forced to see the Java icon flashing me from my tray. This is not furthering choice what-so-ever. I think if this settlement would take effect, Microsoft should counter Sun needs to carry
Slow down... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Unfair (Score:2, Interesting)
Besides, as a DELL technician, I'm sure you didn't get phones ringing off the hook asking for Linux. I would venture to guess that most of the people that want to install other OS's on their machines fall into this category of build it yourself. Linux and other similar OS's are fantastic but are so far a niche market (for consumer PC sales). Hobbyists and enthusiasts will enjoy them while others probably will ask what the big deal is... "You mean I can't install my screensaver I've used for the last 3 years?"
In fact, most people I know that buy computers build their own and see some of the all-integrated component PC's that DELL (no offense), and Gateway, and HP-Compaq mainly sell as somewhat inferior and outdated to what they can build on their own (for less, in most cases). Or, in other cases, they own lots of components already and just upgraded a few pieces at a time (new Motherboard, CPU, and memory every few years (cause how often do you need to upgrade your CPU case, or CRT, or keyboard, or mouse, or printer, speakers, or CD drive? I'm not a gaming enthusiast and upgrading my MB, CPU, and memory typically gives the necessary extra punch to do the job) recycling the ones that don't need upgrading.
Re:That's ludicrous (Score:5, Interesting)
In a word yes! That is if Microsoft shipped with Windows say a 5 year old version of Netscape and modified it only work for websites running IIS. (Not the best analogy but the best I could think of right now
This is what essentially Microsoft has done with its bastardized version of the Java VM. Microsoft's VM is an old version of 1.1 modified with it's extensions which enabled developers to lock themselves to the Windows platform. Now of course most developers learned this early on and avoided the lock-in, plus most of Java development is done on the server now, but Mircosoft continues to provide their old VM. This alone has pretty much killed off most client side Java.
I believe Sun made the first big mistake years ago by not providing the definitive Windows VM. You didn't see Macromedia giving Microsoft the right to implement Flash anyway they saw fit way back when.
I don't necessarily agree with this ruling either, I actually would have been happy if the ruling was to force Microsoft to eliminate their old VM from existence.
Re:Unfair (Score:3, Interesting)
People think that rich companies are good for the economy. If Big Blue had killed the PC somehow would our economy be better now? IBM was rich, still is, so why not kill the PC? Or how about the Bell system. Got their asses kicked, and good thing. Otherwise do you seriously think your silly cell phone technology would have ever taken off? The Bell system was rich, but that didn't make for a great economy and fabulous options in personal communications. Did it.
You like M$, you can have them. You want to Be Like Bill, have at it. It's just money, it's not progress. Some of us still know the difference.
Re:A very fair remedy (Score:2, Interesting)
I am not sure what rock you are living under but MS has still not done anything to help this. AFAIK the PC maker (dell, gateway...) are still bowing under Microsoft's thumb. Though I do remember where one of them shipped FreeDOS with PC's to satisfy MS unfair contracts.
And even more importantly the problem is not with Java but MS screwed up half witted implementation. The security problems with the MS VM are long and well documented.
The damage has already been done. Your post is proof. You believe the crap that MS is feeding you. Java on the server is fine and Java on the client is fine too.
I do think you are right about the fact that you will not see that much changes over this. Your average web developer who already is competent with flash will not change. I wouldn't.
It does help people like me who have to work with the VM from MS and their really BAD OLD version of Java.
At least the ruling will help some.
Re:Ummm.....Slashdot is at it again (Score:3, Interesting)
If you had a higher UID, I'd accuse you of being a Microsoft astroturfer...
all products from MS that include .NET runtime must supply Sun Java.......this is ass-backwards. .NET is a runtime enviroment (as is java of course).....if an application uses .NET at its core, for example Visual Studio .NET, they need to include the runtime
Are you being deliberately obtuse? Nobody is talking about applications - if MS wants to ship the .NET runtime with their O/S (future versions of XP, etc.) then they also have to ship the Java runtime.
MS adds extensions for Windows only development, which are optional to developers depending on their target market (HINT: Apple has Cocoa extensions in Java......samething......they are optional)
Another poster has pointed out how misleading this is. Java has a method that you can use to add extensions to the language - MS deliberaely chose not to use it, thus creating an incompatible Java implementation. This is not the "same thing" at all.
Microsoft should counter Sun needs to carry .NET with Solaris and StarOffice, as they both include Java. (And MS has a BSD runtime now...for developers, not fully completed libraries yet)
First, I don't see Microsoft shipping a .NET implementation for Solaris now or any time in the future. Second, even if they did, Sun is not a convicted monopolist, which means that they don't have to play by the same rules as MS. When will you MS apologists get this through your thick heads?
Injecting a little accuracy (Score:3, Interesting)
Sun is #1 in UNIX sales [com.com], Sun sells a huge array of software [sun.com], all of which runs on their hardware. I have to say you are completely wrong on this point unless you can point us to something besides your statement. Where do you get the %65 figure?
So the more mature technology can be squashed just by just playing the waiting game? I agree with the judge: Motz wrote that if Microsoft's system was to remain dominant, "it should be because of
So weird of an idea that it scared the crap out of MS, the whole make the OS irrelevant thing you may have missed. Hmmm.. I have seen Java applets and full applications on many sites. Please point us to something supporting your 'very few sites' contention. If you think that Flash is the main competitor for Java, then, well, your opinion weighs very little.
Most rabid MS supporters want to ignore that MS was found to be a monopoly [internetnews.com] in Jude Jackson's findings of fact. MS appealed the judges decision for break up based upon those findings of fact, but the FoF stand as does the monopoly declaration. That means that MS has a different set of rules they must adhere to now because of their dominance in several different markets.