cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robin Green" <>
Subject Re: [wanna laught?] Microsoft invented XML
Date Mon, 15 May 2000 10:22:51 GMT
>The point here is that no other company in the world, including
>Microsoft, has done more to *crush* Java than SUN.

??? !!!

In what ways have Sun "crushed" it? It doesn't look very "crushed" to me. 
They must have spent millions on all the products and APIs they have 
developed for it - many of which they give away free of charge.

If they had cancelled all further development - yes, that would be crushing 
it. If they had written Solaris-only APIs - yes, that might be described as 
crushing it. But they evidently have not.

>There were some very
>smart people initially involved with Java.  Then the laywers and
>marketing guys got involved and screwed things up.

Um, a technically superior product often fails without sufficient marketing 
(dare I say it, even overhyped marketing at times). Remember OS/2?

No? Exactly! ;)

Okay, word of mouth can do a lot. Sometimes marketing is unnecessary. But 
marketing doesn't necessarily "screw up" a product, either. Where is your 
evidence that marketing or lawyers have "screwed up" Java?

>The point is that with the lawsuit against MS SUN has basically said
>that they don't want anyone to innovate in the Java space.

Nonsense. They have implied no such thing. What about Pizza, what about GJ, 
GCJ, TowerJ? You can literally embrace and extend Java, AS LONG AS YOU DON'T 
opinion, that Microsoft deliberately broke RMI etc. to put a dent in Write 
Once Run Anywhere, and deliberately made their J++ documentation misleading 
to obscure the fact that J++ is designed to generate hard-to-port, 
Windows-bound code. Even if the latter is not legally actionable, the intent 
is clear, at least to me.

Kevin, this is really weird. Are you trying to claim that Microsoft was 
wonderfully "innovative" with J++? "Innovate in the Java space" - that 
sounds like marketroid speak to me.

>  This has not
>been a good thing for Java.
>The point is that if SUN were to pick a good license, maybe require the
>code to be republished, then MS would have had to release the code and
>then their embrace and extend philosophy wouldn't have worked.

Why wouldn't it have worked? Publishing the source code doesn't guarantee 

Nor does open sourcing it, either. Only enforced, non-open-source contracts 
can do that, as far as I can see, because the open source definition does 
not allow the imposition of compatibility requirements (see Clause 4), IMHO. 
[IANAL.] Sun have gone almost as far as they can with the SCSL, in my view.

> > Which OpenSource project has
> > ever gone to court over licenses, how about Sun, and how many times has
> > MS (and others) ignored licenses, to crush opponents?
>Open Source wouldn't change this fact. If SUN has an Open Source JVM and
>someone broke the license they would have the right and will to sue.

If it enforced compatibility it wouldn't be open source, technically and 

Having a mishmash of Java VMs, all with different features, would be a 
disaster. Okay, there are different versions of the platform, but with 
versions 1.0 to 1.3 at least you know where you stand, and you have 99.9% 

Getting Cocoon to work with different bad implementations of different 
Servlet APIs is bad enough - if Java was a non-standardised platform it 
could be orders of magnitude worse! Let's not regress to ugly 
implementation-specific hacks.

> > Those questions should be asked before requesting Java to become
> > OpenSource. After all, Open Source is a method to improve code, and you
> > are free to do so, and your work could be for the gain of all others.
>If you don't believe in Java and Open Source, why are you here?

Bzzt, non sequiter. "Believing in Open Source" does not equate to believing 
that everything should be open source.

I suggest we bring this discussion to a quick close; it is not very relevant 
specifically to cocoon.

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at

View raw message