Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government News Your Rights Online

MS Must Ship Java With Windows Within 120 Days 579

Posted by timothy from the but-at-least-it's-not-micromanagement dept.
Suppafly writes "Cnet is reporting that a federal judge on Wednesday ordered Microsoft to begin shipping Sun Microsystems' Java with the Windows operating system within 120 days, after the companies fought over implementing a ruling he made last month."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MS Must Ship Java With Windows Within 120 Days More

MS Must Ship Java With Windows Within 120 Days

Comments Filter:

  • Its about time (Score:5, Informative)

    by psycht ( 233176 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:18PM (#5097498) Homepage Journal
    Its been hell trying to suport end users with our web tool, that is java based, and having to walk them though installing/downloading java from Sun's site.
    • 1) You realize, of course, this won't help you for a long time. This only has an impact on new Windows installs. You'll be dealing with users who have older Windows installs for a long, long time.

      2) Use the Sun JavaPlugin and/or WebStart, that's what they exist for.

      • Re:Its about time (Score:5, Informative)

        by The_K4 ( 627653 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:44PM (#5097765)
        Actually it sounds like they will be required to put it into XP SP2. Now that's a download/install of it's own, but this isn't just about new installs. Here's the real fun part of this, everytime Sun releases a new JAVA MS will be REQUIRED to include it in the next SP. SO if you don't use java at all, you will still be required to download and in stall it if you want the latest security patches in the newest SP.

        • Re:Its about time (Score:4, Interesting)

          by suicidal ( 111181 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:25PM (#5098068)
          I don't know, while I didn't read the article....the headline blurb said they'd be required to "ship" it. Knowing Microsoft, that could mean it is in one of those 'extras' folders buried somewhere on the disc. Never installed unless the user digs around to find it!

          We'll see...

          • Re:Its about time (Score:4, Informative)

            by catbutt ( 469582 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @07:33PM (#5098528)
            A couple days ago they supposedly negotiated all the details of this with each other and the judge:

            http://news.com.com/2100-1001-980631.html

            "Both Sun and Microsoft submitted written proposals Monday, suggesting exactly which of Microsoft's software titles would have to carry or support Java, in what timeframe the order would be carried out and other details."

            Apparently all we really know yet is the time frame, not yet the specifics of how it will be installed.

    • No, this is a bad thing. I (unfortunately) support a program that only works on the bastardized version of Java that Microsoft ships. If they start shipping the "proper" Sun JVM, I'm going to have no end of problems.

      • Re:Its about time (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Narcissus ( 310552 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:15PM (#5098008) Homepage
        No, this is a good thing. Just because the product you (unfortunately) support was not written to use the "real" Java, why should everyone else suffer? What was going on with development there, anyway? I'd take a stab and say that someone called out another buzz-word ("Yeah, I like it, but let's write it in Java!") at the time of design...

        If you're going to write a Java program, then you should write it to run in Java. Not MS' "Java". You should know that by not writing to the standard, you'll end up in trouble. It would be like me writing an app to use undocumented APIs, and then whinging when they're changed. If I'd have used what I was given properly, I would not have gotten into the mess, and I would have no-one to blame but myself.

        The fact that you have to support a program that was not written correctly is not our fault or problem. Don't get me wrong, I feel for you, but that doesn't change anything.
        • The problem with MS'Java is not that it isn't real Java, but that it's woefully outdated. Therefore, users can only run old-style Java software, which is severely limited compared to what can be done with Java today.

          A good analogy would be some imaginary operating system promising Windows compatibility, but when you actually try it, you find it only supports Windows up to 3.1. Well Windows has changed an awful lot since then, and Java has changed similarly between 1.1 and 1.3/1.4.

      • Re:Its about time (Score:3, Insightful)

        by DunbarTheInept ( 764 )
        You're right - it is a bad thing that the program you have to support was developed for Microsoft's broken implementation only. But don't make the world pay for this mistake by asking for that broken implementation the standard.

    • Odd... (Score:3, Informative)

      by somethingwicked ( 260651 )
      I just installed the Windows version of Opera on a computer this weekend and I am pretty damn sure it gave me the option to install the latest version of Java at that time...

      Am I wrong?

      And if I'm right, is your company just not willing or unable to do the same thing?

      Or are you whining because its not preinstalled by M$? Are there not other platforms that do NOT have Java installed by default?

      I would guess that there are but M$ is the most common OS used by your end users so you run into this most often.

      • Re:Odd... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Hezaurus ( 632539 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:03PM (#5097916)
        It's not about preinstall. It's about the fact that M$ deliberately includes an outdated & mangled (something like 5 years now) version of Java to make it look bad.
        Java and Linux are threat to microsoft, so it's good for M$ when another frustrated users curses 'that fu**ing java' again when it crashes on microsoft's ancient runtime.

        Think it like this: how would you feel if all the games would preinstall some buggy old beta version of the display driver for the hardware that your company is manufacturing. If you do this, you should at least inform the users that something better is available.

        Funny, if I click to open a pdf-document (without acroreader installed) my XP offers to search the right tool from the internet. I think it should behave the same way if double click on that *.jar - package.
        • ...where Southwest forced Orbitz (a coalition of most airlines except Southwest) to stop listing its prices. Why? Because they thought that Orbitz was intentionally listing Southwest's less-than-best prices, with the intention of making Southwest look uncompetitive. And like you say, if enough consumers keep seeing your company looking bad, they will go with a competitor, not realizing that the company was hosed.

          Same with Sun - they had to either get MS to completely abandon any fake Java implemetation, or to ship theirs, which is what happened.

  • Has anyone actually tried the sun JVM? It slows every computer I've seen down to a 486. Luckily I have the M$ jvm from a while ago. My friends have ben asking for it ever since MS took out the JVM.

    • Re:Sun likes to shoot themselves in the foot? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous CowWord ( 635850 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:30PM (#5098122)
      Have you ever given thought to maybe that MS is purposely doing it to make people not use it?

      As for the person that said he would rather have the bastardized version, that is exactly what MS would want people to think. 5 years down the road then, you have half the www sites using the "bastardized" java with stupid calls that cannot be understood by a VM that complies with standards. Sure, its great if you are a windows user, not so great if you are working with *nix like me though.

      Once MS is forced to bundle Sun JVM, they will also have to think about coding windows to make it run at a decent speed, else customers will start whining.

  • Units??? (Score:5, Funny)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:22PM (#5097533)
    120 days? how long is that in fortnights?
    • Well, lets see.

      120 days = 4 months

      since there are (roughly) 4 weeks to a month, that means that

      4 months = 16 weeks

      Since a fortnight is two weeks, you divide the 16 weeks by 2. Ergo

      16 weeks = 8 fortnights.

      Whew!

    • Find out yourself [csgnetwork.com].

      And remember, only 17.15 vinals left until Christmas folks!

    • Re:Units??? (Score:3, Funny)

      by RetroGeek ( 206522 )
      120 days? how long is that in fortnights?

      I would like to help you, but the DCMA forbids me to decipher 120.

    • Re:Units??? (Score:3, Funny)

      by Xtifr ( 1323 )
      If you had a decent system with decent tools installed, your subject field would contain the answer to your question. :)
      ~ $ units
      2084 units, 71 prefixes, 32 nonlinear units

      You have: 120 days
      You want: fortnights
      * 8.5714286
      / 0.11666667
      You have: ^D

  • This is good news... (Score:5, Informative)

    by vwpau227 ( 462957 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:22PM (#5097538) Homepage
    This is good news for Sun, and it will help to ensure that Java remains a competitive alternative to other languages for cross-platform development. It also is good news for those of us who write Java code, since we don't have to try to make changes based on the differences between the Sun and Microsoft VM (Virtual Machines).

    • Good news... but kinda irrelevant too... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jbuilder ( 81344 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {nisefukindave}> on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:26PM (#5098082)
      The whole reason MS postured like they did, created the VM variants like they did, etc was to cause Java to fail as a competitor in the marketplace. Especially in the enterprise marketplace.

      They failed.

      Java is more popular than ever. For server-side deployment it's really come into it's own as a cross-platform (dare I say "write once run anywhere") technology. Client level apps (word processors, etc) still have to gain some market acceptance, but overall Java has won acceptance as a viable development and technology platform. Of course, this means to Microsoft that they lost. Now, did MS actually *lose*? Well, in some ways they did, but that's probably best left for another discussion...

      Bottom line -- if a Sun-compliant JVM is included with Windows or not, Java solutions will *still* be deployed to Windows systems. Which has continued to be the case for a few years now. It's just going to be a little easier to do the deployment now than before. It doesn't change my job or make it any easier tho...

  • Not so fast (Score:5, Interesting)

    by core plexus ( 599119 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:23PM (#5097543) Homepage
    While this is good news, it's not gone through the appeal yet; ""If my order doesn't get stayed or reversed (on appeal), it's going to get done," Motz said. Well, that's stating the obvious.

    Microsoft lawyers may be able to either stall it, get it reviewed, or even get it overturned. That's the way the law works. Likewise, there may be other avenues outside of the Courts that Microsoft may take.

    This little penguin doesn't forget favors [xnewswire.com]

    • Microsoft lawyers may be able to either stall it, get it reviewed, or even get it overturned. That's the way the law works. Likewise, there may be other avenues outside of the Courts that Microsoft may take.

      Such as guerilla commando raids?

      Or gorilla [ntk.net] commando raids (Monkey-boy Ballmer leads attack on Sun)?

      Or maybe just gorilla Komando [komando.com] raids?

      GF.
  • I have to side with Microsoft on this one. I don't think the government should have the power to say you must include X in your product. It's like the government mandating that Ford must use Bosch break systems in their vehicles even though Ford can make their own cheaper (purely hypothetical situation). How would everyone like it if the court forced Debian to include Sun's Java as part of the standard install instead of the user having the option to install gcj for instance?

    • Re:I feel bad for Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sabalon ( 1684 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:30PM (#5097619)
      I agree they shouldn't be able to say you must include x.

      However, from what I read earlier on in ths case it is not as simple. What I read was that MS had signed a contract with Sun that they would include Java and then backed out, so I guess this comes down to being the punishment for breach of contract, not just because Sun is whining.
    • Don't waste any tears on them. Microsoft is a monopoly, so they hane to operate under a different set of rules. If there was a "GM" to Microsoft's "Ford" out there, then your brakes argument would be more compelling. But there ain't.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:I feel bad for Microsoft (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Microsoft is a monopoly. They don't face the same market pressures that most companies face, and so have to play by a different set of rules. The government is trying to increase competition on the desktop. This can only be good for consumers.

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:35PM (#5097666)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:I feel bad for Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RevMike ( 632002 ) <revMike@@@gmail...com> on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:38PM (#5097695) Journal
      Don't feel bad for M$. They did violate the law.

      A major point of law in the area of monopolies is that a company that has a monopoly in one area can't use that monopoly to build a second monopoly in another area.

      M$ was using Java, then dropped Java entirely in order to promote their .Net product. By excluding Java in favor of their own product, they are trying to leverage their desktop monopoly into another area.

      By your example, Ford does not need to use Bosch brakes because Ford is an oligopoly, not a monopoly. If Ford, GM, VW, Toyota, etc. decided to start a joint venture to make their own brakes and exclude Bosch, the analogy would be more apt.

      The Debian analogy also isn't valid. There are many viable commercial and non-commercial distros. And Debian also doesn't own a competing product.

    • Re:I feel bad for Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)

      by KDan ( 90353 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:40PM (#5097716) Homepage
      I don't think that analogy works very well in this case. If you look at the history of the case, you'll see that the whole point of Java was to have a write-once, run-anywhere platform. Java published the specs to that, and Microsoft, having identified this as a great danger to its OS monopoly, hurried to try to break it as much as possible. Hence their coming out with a Microsoft VM which is, on purpose, incompatible with the Sun VM. As Sun owns the Java language and virtual machine specs, that's not only unfair but also illegal.

      The fact that Microsoft, after bashing Sun's "Network Computers" initiative a few years back, is now coming out with its very own .NET (which is basically a repackaging of Java + network computers), should clue you in to the dishonesty with which they have been acting. Given all that bad behaviour, it's only fair to give Sun a few brownie points and a chance to get back on top with their excellent Java language, especially now that Micro$oft has had all the time they needed to come out with their competing version (.NET).

      Oh, and by the way, we're not talking about the Java compiler (which would be comparable to gcj which you mentioned), but about the Java Virtual Machine, which allows Java programs compiled elsewhere to run on your machine.

      Daniel
      • Hence their coming out with a Microsoft VM which is, on purpose, incompatible with the Sun VM.
        This is simply not true. The MS VM ran 100% Java Compliant code just fine. The thing MS did as add extensions that were specific to its VM. The Visual J++ tool defaulted to using this extensions. Developers who weren't cafeful could end up writting software that would only run on Windows. But to say that software that was written in pure Java might not work on MS VM is a fallacy.

    • Monopolies have different rules (Score:5, Insightful)

      by semios ( 146723 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:43PM (#5097745) Homepage
      What microsoft is doing is more akin to the phone company, a legally acknowledged monopoly, that blocks you from calling a competitor of theirs. Except in microsoft's case, they reroute the call to a mock phone company which provides different rates and services intentionally meant to dissaude people from switching to that competitor.

      It's anti-competive. It's illegal. And this is a fair punishment.
    • I have to side with Microsoft on this one. I don't think the government should have the power to say you must include X in your product.

      As I understand it, the issue in this case is that Microsoft signed a contract with Sun some years ago requiring that it implement Java according to Sun specificiations. If this is true (and I can't determine from the CNET story whether it is or not -- it has very few specifics), then the feds are simply ordering Microsoft to live up to the terms of the contract.

      I definitely want courts to have the power to make a company (of any size) deliver on the contracts it signs. Otherwise contracts can't be enforced.

    • Re:I feel bad for Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)

      by silas_moeckel ( 234313 ) <silas@dsminQUOTEc-corp.com minus punct> on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:03PM (#5097917) Homepage
      This is because MS has a monopoly position and they are calling something that realy isn't fully Java Java.

  • Questions.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Lord_Slepnir ( 585350 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:26PM (#5097578) Journal
    Will this mean that MS must fully integrate java into it's operating system? Or can they get away with just shipping either the free download off of the sun site or even just including a link to download it off it the sun website. Will they have to provide support for it over windows update, or do they only have to provide the initial download?

    • Re:Questions.... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ZoneGray ( 168419 )
      I remember back when this suit first got started, and Sun complained that Microsoft hadn't included rmi in their Java distribution. Microsoft's position was that the agreeement only required that Microsoft make it available for download. Which, apparently, was true.

      But, when you went to fetch the file from Microsoft, their web site contained an abscure reference to rmi, and directed you to their ftp site. I went to the ftp directory, and looked, and looked, and I couldn't find rmi.

      Finally, I found the file. Every file in that directory was listed in uppercase, except for rmi.zip, which was lower-case. This made it extrememly easy to overlook when scanning a directory listing.

      I have to admit, I kind of enjoyed the cleverness of the whole thing.

  • I don't like MS, BUT ..... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mustangdavis ( 583344 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:26PM (#5097581) Homepage Journal
    ... I don't agree with the ruling ...

    It is like telling AOL to ship MSN8 with their latest distro ....

    Sun and Microsoft are competitors. MS developes Visual Studio and should promot their programming distro.

    If MS has to include Java, wh don't the have to include Perl, Python, PHP, and interpreters for other languages ... or why don't they have to include the Macromedia plug-in?

    Everyone has to download the pluins and interpreters for other products, why should Java and Sun be so special?

    BTW: My favorite programming language is Java, so I am definately not biased here ... this is my opinion in regards to fair competition

    • Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It's not the same thing. Microsoft makes the OS and the languages that run on them. They're anti-competitive because they make the OS, provide a language to program for the OS AND use this fact to keep other languages from being used to program the OS.
    • I'd mod you up, but I don't participate in moderation. Nothing against the principle of it, just I don't have time for it.

      I have to agree, this ruling is complete and utter bullshit.

      Microsoft had an agreement with Sun to ship a Java implementation (AFAIK), and they broke this agreement by shipping an incompatibile implementation.

      The worst that should have happened is that Microsoft be forced to pay Sun money in damages and possibly have to update the old JVM via Windows Update or something, to make it compatable with the Sun specs.

      I disagree with what Microsoft did, but they should not be forced to include Java in new Windows releases if they choose not to.
      • I'd mod you up, but I don't participate in moderation. Nothing against the principle of it, just I don't have time for it


        I'd mod you up funny, but I don't have any mod points, nor can you mod a topic that ou've posted on .... so I'll just add you to my friends list ...

    • Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by powerlinekid ( 442532 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:42PM (#5097741)
      Yes they are competitors but once Microsoft started leveraging its monopoly through illegal business practices its a whole new ballgame. I'm not too upset about this ruling for that reason. Now if Microsoft had never screwed over sun or anything else for that matter, this ruling would definitly be unfair.

    • The difference (Score:3, Informative)

      by mindstrm ( 20013 )
      Is that they had a contract with sun, which they broke, several ways. They USED to ship java, people use it, depend on it, and it's a PAIN IN THE ASS not having it included.
      They were under contract to keep java in windows... and they broke it.

      If they had a contract with macromedia, and then broke it, they could be made to stick to it as well.

      • Re:The difference (Score:2, Informative)

        by CVaneg ( 521492 )
        For those of you who are interested, a press release linking the contract and other relevant documents can be found at Sun's site here [sun.com]

        For those of you more interested in blurbs and sound bites from the article:

        Sun, based in Santa Clara, Calif., claims Microsoft views Sun's Java software as a threat because it can run on a variety of operating systems, not just on Microsoft's Windows.

        Among tactics cited in the lawsuit, Sun alleges Microsoft promoted an incompatible form of Java that worked best on Windows and, most recently, dropped it from Windows XP, which was introduced in 2001.

    • Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by legLess ( 127550 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:49PM (#5097803) Journal
      Have you been reading the news? You're asking why a convicted child molester shouldn't be allowed to run a daycare center: "All sorts of other people can - what's so special about Mr. Child Molester?" It's special becuase the drastic anti-social behavior for which they've been publically tried and convicted is directly tied to this remedy.
      this is my opinion in regards to fair competition
      The point appears to elude you. Microsoft has been convicted in federal court specifically for trying to crush Java by illegally extending their monopoly power - this is a remedy. Any company can have a monopoly in any market; what's illegal is using your power in one market (operating systems) to take over another market (e.g. web browsers, office suites).
      It is like telling AOL to ship MSN8 with their latest distro
      Not at all. If AOL had 95% of the country dialing into their servers, they used their position to try to kill MSN8, were successful in damaging it, were tried and convicted by the federal government, then were ordered to include MSN8 as part of the remedy for their illegal actions ... then you'd have a valid analogy.
      If MS has to include Java, wh [sic] don't the [sic] have to include Perl, Python, PHP
      Because Perl, Python and PHP weren't the targets of Microsoft's illegal monopoly behavior.

      Have people already forgotten that Microsoft has been convicted of the most anti-competitive and anti-free-market behavior possible? That the U.S government has been trying for a decade to rein in their behavior and bring some semblence of competition to the PC market?
    • Not quite, for a couple reasons. The obvious, is that MS has been declared a monopoly, you have to play by different rules as a monopoly. MS has a history of crowding out competing products on their platform, when they cannot compete they either give the software away "free" and raise the price of windows (see IE). The other method they use is embrace and extend, as they did with java.

      With java they licensed java from Sun, then broke the rules of the contract. Because of their breaking the rules they have intentionally hurt Sun's product (dilution of trademark idea here), which is why when you start a new "java" project with j++ you get a little message about using MS specific extentions makes it incompatible with other java implimentations. Basically there needs to be a penalty for breaking the contract and the harm done to Sun's java product. To remedy this, the courts (judge here) is saying that they must ship Sun's JRE with windows.

      So, while fair competition is an admirable goal, MS is anything but admirable in this case. They broke the contract with Sun, used bad tactics to harm Sun's java environment, and then finally tried to sweep it away and hide the fact of what they have done. Then looking at MS's .NET with it's supposed CLI timing-wise with their dropping their "java" implementation you see basically they are not interested in fair competition, they are interested in the elimination of competition.

      And as a counter to BTW above, though I use java everyday (infact we are now in the process of migrating from msjava to java) I have no great love for the language. It has some very nice features, one being the base libraries, I would still prefer coding in C.
    • In a perfect world, product and businesses live or die based on their own merits. The anti-monopoly laws are an attempt to (among other things) bring reality closer to this hypothetical perfect system. Microsoft has been found to hold a monopoly, and the judge has decided that Microsoft is using its OS monopoly to help .net against java, so instead of .net or java competing on equal footing, .net will have a huge advantage just because it is backed by a company that happens to also have an OS monopoly. The judge's ruling is an attempt to correct for this. It seems pretty fair to me.

      PS - I wasn't quite right when I said that "The judge has decided..."; the trail has barely even started, the judge has officially decided nothing. This ruling is because the judge thinks that Sun will probably win, but Microsoft could use delaying tactics to put off an official ruling until irreparable damage to Sun/Java has been done, so until a ruling comes this will make such delaying tactics less successful.

    • Because... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mobiGeek ( 201274 )
      Bad analogy. All analogies are bad...it's just like, say, pork.
      1. AOL has not been found guilty in a U.S. federal court of law of illegally using their monopoly to quash competitors.
      2. Perl, Python, PHP (or the entities responsible thereof) have not taken Microsoft to court to argue that they have been stifled by illegal monopolistic practices.
      3. Sun is the plaintif; the ruling is in favour of Sun.
      4. fair competition is what started this whole case (or a lack thereof).
    • It's not so simple.

      You say that Sun's Java and Microsofts .NET should both enter the ring and duke it out, then let consumers pick the winner!

      The problem is, Microsoft cheats. Microsoft is trying to guarentee their win before Sun even enters the ring. Microsoft has gone to court, and the courts have ruled that Microsoft has illegally used their monopoly to their advantage.

      Once Java was created, Microsoft realized that if it took off, many programs would no longer require Windows anymore to run. Microsoft then attempted to hijack Java by creating their own incompatible Java VM. Microsoft was using their monopoly to force this incompatible VM onto consumers. Microsoft was trying to use their monopoly to beat out Sun's Java.

      It is like telling AOL to ship MSN8 with their latest distro ....
      Well, AOL didn't try to ship their own version of MSN, try to pass it off as the real MSN, when in reality it wasn't approved by Microsoft. Microsoft tried to ship their own version of Java, pass it off as Java, when in reality it's not truely Java.

      Microsoft only forced their incompatible Java VM long enough until they could get .NET developed, and now they want to use .NET to take over what's left of the computer industry, and to kill off any chance that Sun's Java ever had of surviving.

      Sun just wants a fair fight. Microsoft wants to kill them before consumers can pick the winner for themselves. Microsoft's trying to set themselves up as the winner before the fight even starts. The justice system was right in saying that Microsoft cannot use their power to force Sun out of the marketplace.

      What Microsoft is trying to do is illegal, unethical, unfair and bad for consumers. It's why using a monopoly unfairly is illegal. The government is supposed to help the people and be run BY the people. Microsoft isn't supposed to make choices for us, and it definately isn't run by the people.

  • How hard is it? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gwernol ( 167574 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:27PM (#5097592)
    Microsoft, which told Motz on Thursday that shipping Java with Windows was not a simple matter and could harm large corporate users of Windows, is almost certain to appeal--a move the judge anticipated.

    Does anyone have details of what Microsoft claims was so hard about installing Java with Windows? Given that Sun already provide a complete Windows installer [sun.com] why can't they do this in 120 days? How could this "harm large corporate users". I know Microsoft are just stalling, but what argument did they put forward to the judge? Clearly it wasn't that convincing...
    • Our company just implemented Siebel for defect/case tracking, etc. Siebel is a MSJAVA web based app. Siebel won't run on my machine if I'm using Sun's Java.

      While I completly blame Siebel for writing to a lame Java API (Siebel is known to be very _very_ pro Microsoft), it would harm anyone who has implemented Siebel.

    • Re:How hard is it? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by javahacker ( 469605 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:14PM (#5097998)
      Installing Java is not the issue. They provided tools to their customers that rely on their VM being present for their corporate web pages to function. I know this because the company I am currently doing contract work for has a web application they purchased for content management of their shared project/business documents. It is written using Microsoft tools, and won't work if you have the Sun VM activated for your browser.

      Their argument is valid, that this will cause problems for their corporate clients. It will cause problems whenever it comes out, because some of their corporate clients (or their customers) will not be able to view their web pages properly.

      Delaying this rollout is not really going to help much, because most web application get updated when the application changes, not when the client changes. Their corporate customers are going to be very angry with them about this kind of problem.

      I don't feel sorry for Microsoft, because they got themselves into this mess by trying to spin Java out of Suns control, and make it into a Microsoft specific version. Now they have been told to live up to their contract with Sun, and must pay the price for their behavior. I do feel sorry for their corporate customers who bought into systems designed around the Microsoft VM, because they were dumb, not culpable. They will end up paying part of the price for Microsoft's past errors.

      Most corporate clients will have control of their desktops, and can make their internal users use the Microsoft VM until they can fix things. They can't make joe user on the internet do that, which is where things will break down.
  • So when is the Microsoft CLR shipping with Solaris?

  • "If my order doesn't get stayed or reversed (on appeal), it's going to get done," Motz said.

    Anyone else read this and get the impression that Motz isn't particularly confident that it will happen? I read that line and my brain converted it to: "If Microsoft doesn't mind and decides not to take their money and lawyers to a more friendly court farther up stream then it's going to get done, but don't count on it."

  • It will only matter if... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Eric_Cartman_South_P ( 594330 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:31PM (#5097632)
    It will only matter if it is the real, pure, clean and true JRE from Sun that is running. If Microsoft gets to put there own M$-Java in the install, it will make things much worse.

    http://java.sun.com/getjava/index.html

  • Which version of Java? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by stefanlasiewski ( 63134 ) <{moc.ocnafets} {ta} {todhsals}> on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:31PM (#5097635) Homepage Journal
    One thing I can't find out from any of these stories [google.com] is the Java version?

    Is MS shipping Java1.4? 1.1? 1.2? Some truncated version of one of the above?

  • Too little, too late (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Teckla ( 630646 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:33PM (#5097645)
    Bundling Java with Windows won't hurt, but it won't seriously help, either.

    The web community has overwhelmingly chosen JavaScript for advanced web-based functionality. Java applets are a niche these days, and will most likely remain that way.

    Java on the desktop is in sorry shape. You can choose AWT (which is too limited) and Swing (which is too big, slow, and some people think, ugly). It won't be able to compete with the nice native GUIs you get with .NET.

    I can't think of very many developers who think writing their desktop applications in Java is a good idea. And I can't think of very many JavaScript developers who will switch to Java once Microsoft bundles Java with Windows.

    Besides, we're talking about Microsoft. Who here DOESN'T think Microsoft won't taint Java in some way? Raise your hands. I've got a bridge to sell you.

    -Teckla
    • Javascript and Java have *nothing* to do with each other.. nothing at all. This is like comparing Javascript to TCL. Or C.

      Applets? It's about more than applets. Java applets are a niche? I use some daily in my work, and I *need* them, and it's a pain in the ass when microsoft made using java difficult. It USED to be easy.

      Javascript developers? Who are you kidding? Javascript is a joke.

      Don't compare them. Don't contrast them. That's like comparing Apples to Moonrocks.

    • Re:Too little, too late (Score:3, Informative)

      by enjo13 ( 444114 )
      Java applets are in widespread distribution on almost every corporate network I've seen.

      AWT is basically deprecated (as the primary GUI system, parts of it are integrated into Swing), and Swing is not 'ugly.' The native look and feel is a bit distateful to a lot of people, but all of my Swing applications look suspiciously like the platform that they run on... So if the default MS Windows look is 'ugly', then yes Swing on Windows is ugly. If the default Aqua look is 'ugly', the same applies.

      You seem to be caught in a circa '97 approach to Java on the network. Applets are not about animating icons or handling the form work that Javascript does well. They are about delivering complex programs that do complex things above and beyond what Javascript can do. In many ways they are very complimentary technologies. There is a definite place for Java on the web (and on the Desktop for that matter)... For example, we've managed to support many platforms by our choice of going with a Swing Java desktop application as support for our Palm apps... With minimal effort.

    • Your post is so full of misinformation I don't know where to start.

      JavaScript is a client side SCRIPTING language, which has nothing to do with Java. (JavaScript's author, Netscape, decided to cash in on Java's rising popularity by hikacking its name) It does very SIMPLE things through your browser. It has NOT been "overwhelmingly chosen [...] for advanced web-based functionality". Where do you get this stuff?

      There are no such thing as "JavaScript developers" anymore than there are "Logo developers". There are web developers who have some scripting skills, and there are real coders who use JavaScript for basic, limited stuff. Advanced client side tasks require something like a Java applet. These are everywhere. Nobody "switches" from JavaScript to Java, the very concept is absurd. They are not designed for the same tasks.

      There is huge demand for Java development [slashdot.org] right now. It is not a niche, it is at the forefront of the mainstream. For desktop apps, AWT is dead and has been for quite a while. Swing 1.3+ is very lightweight and fast, if you know how to code it efficiently. Our company has written many Java desktop apps. Way faster to write than C++ and far less bug prone. And the compiled code will run identically everywhere.

      One thing you don't mention at all is Server side apps. Java is kicking ass in this arena and has been for years.

      If you read the article, you'd notice it said that Microsoft has been ordered "to begin shipping Sun Microsystems' Java". Not implement their own version. So they won't be tainting it... although they will likely add as much hassle as they can to using it, like not installing it by default.

  • Do your Homework (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:35PM (#5097667)
    All of you that "feel bad" for Microsoft need to remember that this is happening because MS broke a binding agreement with Sun.
  • ... that Microsoft and Sun will stay locked in this battle long enough for other technology to grow around the whole issue. While Microsoft is dealing with Java, they won't be able to push C#/.NET effectively, and with luck, by the time they've dealt with it (and given the current pro-Microsoft government slant, I have to assume they will deal with it) it won't matter that much.

    I used to be a big Java fan, but it's become so bloated, and there are so many better alternatives out there, that I'm no longer as interested in its fate as I used to be. Almost anything you want to do with Java, you can now do faster and more efficiently in some other language. Once Parrot is up and running, the OSS world will finally have a full-fledged VM that can beat the hell out of both Java and anything Microsoft is likely to come up with. Web services are already falling to PHP, Python, and mod_perl. The efforts of Zend (PHP) and the Parrot (Perl and Python) team will accelerate this trend. And depending on how well Parrot can be integrated into native API's, we may well be seeing real "write once, run anywhere" apps written in Python or Perl within a couple of years. It's funny to think that something that started as an April Fool's joke may be the actual Next Big Thing.
  • A warehouse in Siberia recieves 3 million coppies of Windows 3.11 (all running java). A Microsoft spokesman is over heard saying "OH! you meant ship it _to_ someone?!"

  • Can they force MS to carry Netscape Navigator, Mozilla, Opera, or any other third-party application that competes/conflicts with already installed materials? Can MS produce their own JVM to compete and let the market duke it out, or do we get stuck with just one?

    We shall see...we shall see...
  • I wonder what Vegas odds on this actually happening are? I would take 5-1 against if anybody were that stupid.
  • Here's the big question.

    Which Java VM will Microsoft use? Will it be Sun's current 1.4.1 (which works best in Windows 2000 and XP)? Or will it be one that is supposed Sun-compatible from the likes of HP, IBM, and so on?
  • I want to make an appeal to all developpers, to let this not be a starting point of making Java applets for the web again!
    The web is actually a lot better now developpers know that ActiveX, Java and full Flash sites have a lot of problems attached. Finally there is some knownledge about (and government pressure for use of) the W3.org principles. Portability and accessibility are beginning to become standards for the web. Furthermore, if you really need more action in your site, Javascript can do a lot.

    Everyone, whatever disabilities or browser they have, should have the right to use the web. (and Java is still not standard in say Lynx, and electronica for blind people will fail seeing the information).

    Java server side is fine, Java for applications is ok, if the application is fast enough or people are willing to wait for it, please please never make applets again...

    So actually if everyone listens to me :-), Java on Windows is not such a big deal...
  • Now if only Sun would start shipping Java with Windows. No wait...that wouldn't work, nevermind.
  • what a lot of ignorant prattle I'm seeing about this somehow being "unfair" to poor, poor Microsoft.

    Of course, anyone with half a brain realizes that if Java hadn't been torpedoed by Microsoft the monopolist early on it would be the premier method for delivering interactive web content like forms and 98% of the other things Flash (truly a crappy alternative IMO) is used for now.

    So, WOOHOO for Java winning a round or two - its a nice trend that I hope helps it pick up big momentum. Java is quickly becoming the best choice for most modern, industrial strength software development. :-)

  • So what happens if this happens:

    1. MSFT still haven't shipped after that deadline, what will *really* happen.

    2. Its so broken people will hate Java and then MS comes back to court and states that it had to remove Java as it did not jive with its components, so was removed in the best interests of the company.

    StarTux

  • In what ways did it not meet standards? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by josephgrossberg ( 67732 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @05:59PM (#5097878) Homepage Journal
    Can someone provide a list, or at least a link, describing how the MS implementation of Java was broken?

    • Re:In what ways did it not meet standards? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by CustomDesigned ( 250089 ) <stuart@gathman.org> on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:52PM (#5098281) Homepage Journal
      A partial list [sun.com] was provided with the initial lawsuit (which was posted online). However, the two problems were naming and completeness.

      As part of their contract, MS was forbidden to add public names to system packages (e.g. java.lang, java.net, etc). Nevertheless, they did so. There were some stretchers on both sides.

      Microsoft PR claimed that Sun was forbidding them to add Windows specific extensions. This was silly - there was no problem with any number of packages named com.ms.* or whatever (except that the ms.com domain belongs to Morgan Stanley, and thus didn't follow the 3rd party naming convention - but that wasn't in the contract). There were some very nice extensions with proper names - like JDirect which let you call Microsoft DLL's without writing JNI glue. The problem was that Microsoft wanted to name some extensions java.*. This would of course cause the unwary programmer to inadvertantly create Java programs which only run on Windows - despite not knowingly using any MS specific packages. Exactly what MS wanted.

      On Sun's part, the contract included a list of packages which Microsoft could not touch the public name space of. More system packages were added to Java 1.1. Sun claimed that Microsoft couldn't touch those either - reasonable, but they weren't in the specific list in the contract.

      The completeness problem was along the same lines. Microsoft provided a complete 1.0 API. However, they left out components of the 1.1 API that competed with their own offerings. For instance, they left out RMI and offered DCOM support instead. Sun said that it was understood that the same restrictions regarding system name space pollution and completeness would apply to the packages of subsequent API versions. But this was not spelled out in the contract. It would not be in the ruthless spirit of Microsoft for them to follow the spirit of a contract if they could find a loophole.

      Regardless of quibbling over whether the system package list under contract should expand to match new API versions, Microsoft polluted even core packages from 1.0 with handy additions sure to entice the unwary. So they were guilty even by the letter of the law.

  • This is a load of smelly poop... isn't it? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xmutex ( 191032 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:01PM (#5097892) Homepage
    Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Sun start out suing MS to _remove_ Java from Windows, then sue to get it back in, and so on? A few times back and forth?

    That's sort of obnoxious, like having a little brother with ADD and a mean streak.

  • As a developer (Score:3, Insightful)

    by captainclever ( 568610 ) <rj@@@audioscrobbler...com> on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:03PM (#5097913) Homepage
    I think this is excellent news; as a developer, the fact that java is not shipped with windows makes it a pain in the ass to write java apps for windows users.
    if i write a c++ app, no problem, a user can simply download and run it. If i write a java app, and say distribute it as a JAR file, your average user isnt gonna want to download the Java runtime or sdk, then launch the jar file calling java -jar or javaw.exe or whatever.
    Java pre installed on windows means i can easily write pure java apps that will work easily on all windows boxes. Bring it on :)
    RJ

  • What about product updates? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by exceed ( 518714 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @06:57PM (#5098309)
    Does 'shipping with Java' also apply to including Java on the online Windows Update? If that isn't the case alot of Windows users will still be Java-less by default.

  • The Bigger Microsoft News Today (Score:4, Informative)

    by telstar ( 236404 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @07:00PM (#5098331)
    I know this may get modded as Offtopic, but it's the bigger news story for both Microsoft and the tech industry today:

    "Microsoft sets dividend, stock split"

    Microsoft is the last of the Dow 30 to start paying a dividend, and paves the way for other tech companies that have held out paying dividends. Should be an interesting morning in trading for MSFT [yahoo.com].

  • What was Sun thinking? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spells ( 203251 ) on Thursday January 16, 2003 @07:03PM (#5098345)
    I can't believe people think that this is good for Java! As an enterprise developer, this absolutely sucks.

    Java has become one of the primary tools for enterprise development, mostly on the server, but also on enterprise clients, where downloading an applet or java app is typically not time consuming for the client because they are on a LAN.

    What takes so long in software development? TESTING, and in java testing different versions of the VM. Up until this point, enterprises have been able to enforce a VM version on enterprise clients, and the developers can count on that version being on the client desktops. Now what? If the enterprise wants to stick with its 1.2.2 or 1.3.1 VM, they can't install WinXP SP2? What happens with the next SP and a new java VM? All enterprise java apps will need to be thoroughly tested with each new service pack, since Sun's VMs are not all backwards compatible.

    In addition, if anyone is still righting java applets for the internet, how does this help? What percentage of users are going to have XP SP2 in the next 12-24 months?

    This solves none of the Java VM version issues. This was Sun saying "wah wah" in court and getting a sympathetic judge.

    Sun needs to hand over Java to the JCP and stop using it as a weapon in its fight against MS.

  • Get a clue! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 16, 2003 @07:37PM (#5098553)
    It's clear that so many of you have NO idea what this is about.

    Sun and MS (sorry, M$) had an agreement where Microsoft would include a Java runtime with Windows. Only M$ made their own VM/runtime that was 'tweaked' and extended with extra functionality that ONLY worked under Windows.

    Sun complained that this implementation was NOT Java, because it didn't match the Java specs. So they got a court to make MS remove their non-standard non-Java Java VM from Windows. But they didn't replace it with a fully-functionaly VM - they replaced it with nothing, contrary to their agreement with Sun.

    So all Sun is doing is getting their agreement with MS enforced by a court. This has NOTHING to do with MS being a monopoly or Sun wanting their VM on Windows or anything like that. It comes down to MS creatively breaking a contract in order to kill Java (by nullifying it's main goal of platform-independence) and replace it with C#.

    So please, no more posts about "But they wanted MS to remove IE, now they're adding Java?!?" or "This is okay because MS is a monopoly". Go start a thread elsewhere if you want to bitch about it, instead of crapping on about MS abusing their position as monopoly in every Slashdot article. Fuck off.

Slashdot Top Deals

All your files have been destroyed (sorry). Paul.

Close