Post #2,201
7/18/01 11:51:35 AM
|
Monopoly fallout - No Java in WinXP
Microsoft will ship Widows XP without a java virtual machine. One can be downloaded automatically the first time a user browses a site that requires Java.
The reason is obvious. Microsoft fears Sun could get an injunction blocking delivery of XP in October if Java was included.
Reported in LA Times today.
[link|www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #2,223
7/18/01 1:53:58 PM
8/21/07 6:36:47 AM
|
Online story link
[link|http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2790355,00.html?chkpt=zdnn_tp_|Another writeup online].
I'm not too surpised. I was always actually rather surprised that they ever provided any support for Java at all. After all, its a technology designed to hurt MS.
|
Post #2,231
7/18/01 2:39:54 PM
|
Not so.
"After all, its a technology designed to hurt MS."
Java is a technology designed to be widely useful. The fact that it hurts Microsoft is strictly incidental. Further, it wouldn't hurt Microsoft either if they were not an abusive monopoly.
The ZDNet article is written from Microsoft press releases and does not bring up the monopoly problem. It's pretty certain Sun will jump on any anti-trust charges they can find and getting an injunction on XP would really give them a thrill.
[link|www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #2,233
7/18/01 2:53:13 PM
|
actually, I'd say
The fact that it hurts Microsoft is an added bonus :-)
Darrell Spice, Jr.
[link|http://home.houston.rr.com/spiceware/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #2,260
7/18/01 6:01:15 PM
|
The Java Jive
Java was not designed to hurt anybody, it is just a side-effect that it hurts Microsoft because it allows programs to be run on any platform that supports Java and the JVM.
I wonder if Microsoft put C# into XP if it would do anything? They cannot put in Java, and C# isn't Java, but can compete with it. Remember when BASIC was part of the OS (or ROM as the case may or may not have been?) and almost everyone who was into Microcomputers knew some form of BASIC?
Ah now, if only Microsoft could make IE optional to XP, and have it so that if you try to access a web page, it asks you if you want to download it? :) Or better still, it asks you if you want to download another browser instead? Netscape, Mozilla, Opera, etc. ;)
| "I can see if I want anything done right around here, I'll have to do it myself!" | Moe Howard |
|
Post #2,307
7/19/01 10:48:19 AM
|
This move will propel Java like never before.
IMO, Microsoft is making a major blunder by not including an old and clunky version of Java, like they have been doing. Sun can now show off the latest improvements without hindrance. AOL/TW didn't need MSFT, why should Sun?
(and I think the main reason Sun is disappointed is because they no longer have the chance to interfere with the release date of XP.)
[link|http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-6606742.html?tag=mn_hd|
Microsoft's Java decision a mixed bag ]
By Joe Wilcox and Stephen Shankland
Staff Writers, CNET News.com
July 18, 2001, 4:40 p.m. PT
Sun Microsystems said it is "disappointed" by Microsoft's decision to not include Java software in its Windows XP and Internet Explorer products, although analysts said the move could help Sun in the long run.
On the surface, removing Java from Windows XP looks like a blow to Sun, cutting off an important distribution channel for Java. But Microsoft's practice of shipping outdated copies of the software has slowed the distribution of more recent and faster versions of Java, analysts said, and has hurt the software's reputation.
Java allows programs to run on many different computer systems--such as those running the Apple operating systems and the Windows OS--without having to be adjusted for each one. However, the PC must have a copy of the Java virtual machine (JVM) installed to run the program. Microsoft, a longtime foe of Sun, acknowledged this week that it will not pre-install the JVM with its upcoming OS upgrade, Windows XP, and its new browser, Internet Explorer 6.0.
While that would appear to be entirely bad news for Sun, it could also solve a major headache for the company: Microsoft currently includes outdated JVM copies included with Windows, Internet Explorer and other software that can cause problems for people using Java.
"Microsoft is doing Sun a big favor," said Peter O'Kelly, an analyst with Patricia Seybold Group. "If you were Sun, you could go to Dell, IBM or Compaq and ask them to put copies of the virtual machine on their systems. They could download future JVMs from Sun, cutting Microsoft completely out of the picture."
|
Post #2,317
7/19/01 12:06:29 PM
|
Way, way overly optomistic.
The first time you view a Java enabled Web page, Internet Explorer will ask if you wish to download Java. If the user answers "Yes", it will automatically download the JVM from Microsoft's site. This will be the same creaky old version they would have distributed with XP.
There will also probably be some incompatibility between XP and Sun's JVM. Sun will be able to fix this, but by then their JVM will have a reputation among Windows users for not working.
Now if I were Microsoft, I'd design this incompatibility so that it actually damages Windows, or at least causes an error message to pop up, even after you uninstall the JVM. This will make the reputation of Sun's JVM much worse.
Won't it be obvious to users that Microsoft is doing this deliberately? Yes, but that doesn't matter one bit. I have explained such deliberate acts to users many times, and the answer is always the same, "So what? The Microsoft version works better with Windows - that's all I need to know".
[link|www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #2,320
7/19/01 12:24:55 PM
|
Won't site administrators be able to warn IE users of this?
... and provide them with a link to an appropriate JVM?
This could actually cause consumers to become irritated that MSFT would force them to download such a piece of junk.
And more Windows problems (even if Java related) may force more people to try alternative OSes, say Linux for instance.
But yes, I am being a bit optimistic, but not blindly optimistic. (:
|
Post #2,334
7/19/01 2:04:33 PM
|
Already possible
... and provide them with a link to an appropriate JVM?
If you embed your applet properly, you can force the browser to download a JVM for that applet from a particular location before it executes the applet
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #2,335
7/19/01 2:04:34 PM
|
Already possible
... and provide them with a link to an appropriate JVM?
If you embed your applet properly, you can force the browser to download a JVM for that applet from a particular location before it executes the applet
Jay O'Connor
"Going places unmapped
to do things unplanned
to people unsuspecting"
|
Post #2,340
7/19/01 2:19:55 PM
|
I might stand corrected, then.
Next question would be: can you have multiple JVM plugins?
Addison
|
Post #2,336
7/19/01 2:04:55 PM
|
Not really.
The browser will say "I don't have this plugin".
For each site to redesign their page, and some code to try and trap that, or to have a "go get this here" page, with the associated headaches of making sure that it works (and remember, if that doesn't work, they'll complain to the site telling them how to do it).....
This could actually cause consumers to become irritated that MSFT would force them to download such a piece of junk.
I don't think I need to comment on the unlikeliness of that.
And more Windows problems (even if Java related) may force more people to try alternative OSes, say Linux for instance.
This isn't a Windows problem. Its a Java/browser problem. To their minds.
And it will be the burden of the site, probably, that bears the brunt.
But it might stop a lot of Java web development. (Not the backend, but pieces to run in the browser, like Hushmail).
Addison
|
Post #2,331
7/19/01 1:43:20 PM
|
One comment.
I can say that as of RC1, the Sun JVM 1.3.1 works with Windows XP.
No guarantees about the final release, though. I'll let you know.
|
Post #2,380
7/19/01 6:21:23 PM
|
ZD Net's take on the Java news
... and it aint too favorable.
[link|http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010719/tc/microsoft_the_tonya_harding_of_technology_1.html|
Microsoft: The Tonya Harding of technology]
By Michael C. Daconta, Enterprise
What do you do if you can't win a fair competition? Club your opponent in the knees. That seems to be Microsoft's tactic against Java, a programming standard Microsoft doesn't control.
....
Microsoft's intent here is clearly to blunt Java's momentum. The company hopes IT managers will now perceive Java as having one more obstacle for deployment on a client PC, and developers will perceive Java as losing a place on the desktop, which may diminish the demand for Java programmers. This is an attempt to retard Java while Microsoft completes its .Net implementation. Microsoft is desperately trying to turn back the clock and erase Java's six-year advantage. Can it do that? Only if anti-trust laws are meaningless.
Microsoft's act may kill the casual use of applets for advertisements, navigation, and Web animations. But Sun Microsystems has been pulling away from applets ever since they were launched and is pushing alternatives like Web-deployable applications (Web Start), Java plug-ins, and dynamically generated HTML interfaces via Java Server Pages, as in the Java Server Faces graphical toolkit.
Microsoft is using every trick in the book to persuade developers that their rightful home is Windows. They appeal to greed (make more money with us), to capitalist principles (the GPL is communism), to the vanity of widespread application deployment (we're number one), to the ease of development (wizards will do everything), and finally to uncertainty (better to stick with the safe horse).
|
Post #2,391
7/19/01 8:39:27 PM
|
Re: Another view on MS's actions
Without doubt (in my mind) MS are yet again trying to harm Java & are taking a calculated gamble that Sun will be negatively impacted by the effort.
But does anyone here recall the early days of UNIX. Back in the early 1980s there were in reality two UNIXs. There was Version 7 from Western Electric (licencing arm for Bell Labs) and there was the same UNIX but with what was known as 'The Berkely Enhancements'.
*All* (yes all) commecially used variants of UNIX, in those early days were UNIX ver 7 with the BE. Noone in the commercial side of business would have entertained delivering a computer with UNIX and without BE - some companies did but they were not target at the commercial market - just experimenters & educational institutes.
BE included Curses, Termcap VI and a whole swap of innovations that lifted UNIX out of the pure acadamia market & into business.
As regards Windows & Java - anyone serious about business will simply either add on a Java feature pack from one of the big Java backers (IBM Sun Oracle Intel etc:) or the companies distributing Windows PCs will add the feature pack on. Java and .NET don't really mean much to john citizen wanting to play games or use office products.
Most Java software comes with Java built in as JRE - of late I have installed a screed of software & it all comes with some form of Java (jdk or jre).
In a sense the action MS are taking is possibly too little to late. So what if a few 'burning logo' applets don't work.
Also who here believes that after WinNT-Win95-Win98-WinMe-Win2000Pro-Win2000Svr that MS can set the world on fire with yet another batch of OSes that are incompatible with earlier ones - read my lips ...
even with a fanfare of propaganda about how wonderful MS was to have invented XML & Web Services "IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN".
MS will continue to be sidelined in the business world by all the enemies they have made - especillay those they added to the list since the DOJ action began.
Cheers
Doug Marker
|
Post #2,456
7/20/01 12:20:31 PM
|
Not if Sun plays it's card right
Don't assume WinXP will break Java. It won't, and if MS were to make such plans, it would have a bigger problem in court. MS can no longer depend on the AC court to bail them out, and they know it now.
I agree with the "Microsoft's Java decision a mixed bag" article. If Sun approaches Dell, Compaq, etc, and arranges to have the JVM preinstalled, everyone except MS will come out ahead, and Java will still prevail, and there will not be much JVM download headaches. Actually, those vendors can preinstall Sun's JVM even if Sun doesn't approach them. I suspect users will ask them to do it and the vendors will comply.
Also, IT departments can for sure preinstall it, so this is not an issue for corporate users.
So I don't think the problem is as big as some people are making it out to be.
-Don
|
Post #2,550
7/21/01 11:44:03 AM
|
2 new articles. A call to arms goes out.
Here's a thought. Would you want to be the only PC OEM that ships their machines without Java installed? What kind of pressure can MSFT put on PC makers in order to get them not to "promote" Java?
[link|http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-07-20-013-20-NW-MS|Three on Java and Microsoft: From Open Letters to an Unpleasant Tonya Harding Analogy]
Jul 20, 2001, 18 :52 UTC
Microsoft has announced that Java won't be shipping as part of Windows XP (unless newly "liberated" OEM's choose to put there) which raises some questions regarding the meaning of this move. Here are three articles addressing the issue from different angles, including mention of a grassroots organization of developers protesting the decision, an open letter to OEM's asking them to make sure Java is included with the machines they sell, and an item that says a Java-less WinXP is roughly analagous to Tonya Harding clouting the competition on the knee:
|
