Appeals Court Sides With Microsoft On Java 517
burgburgburg writes "Reuters reports that the three-member federal appeals court in Virginia ruled today the U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz erred when he ordered Microsoft to include Java with the Windows operating system.
Fortunately, Dell and HP, the top 2 PC makers, have already decided to ship Java on the PCs that they sell. Apple, Red Hat and Lindows have also agreed to include Sun's Java." The ruling is available.
actually, (Score:5, Informative)
Re:actually, (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Yes, this makes sense (Score:3, Informative)
it doesnt matter anymore (Score:3, Informative)
Re:even SCOTUS can be influenced (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Yes, this makes sense (Score:4, Informative)
At the time this was going on, Microsoft was still distributing their version. The courts response was, ship the compatible one instead.
The damage already done, Microsoft said "well, we won't ship any at all".
Fortunately, Dell and HP have already picked up the ball and will be distributing it anyway.
Re:actually, (Score:4, Informative)
Re:actually, (Score:5, Informative)
At my client's site, they had a symposium with the chief technologist from Sun, Brian Wilson, a couple of weeks ago and he announced the agreement between RH and Sun.
wasn't the MS java "extended" java? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Yes, this makes sense (Score:3, Informative)
Well, Sun had something to say about it as Microsoft was violating their license with Sun, IIRC.
amemded complaint [sun.com]
In order to obtain the right to make and distribute products incorporating Sun's JAVATM Technology, and to mark such products with Sun's JAVA Compatible trademark, defendant Microsoft entered into two written agreements with Sun in March 1996. Pursuant to one agreement, defendant Microsoft promised to incorporate Sun's JAVATM Technology in certain products, including Microsoft's Internet Explorer 4.0, in a manner that fully conforms with and adheres to Sun's set of published specifications ("JAVA specifications") and "public" application programming interfaces ("JAVA APIs") for the JAVATM Technology.
Microsoft's prior agreements and promises notwithstanding, it has now unilaterally abrogated its obligations under both contracts by refusing to honor its express obligation to implement and adhere to Sun's most current set of JAVA specifications and JAVA APIs for the JAVATM Technology. Rather than comply with its contractual obligations, defendant Microsoft has instead embarked on a deliberate course of conduct in an attempt to fragment the standardized application programming environment established by the JAVATM Technology, to break the cross-platform compatibility of the JAVATM programming environment, and to incorporate the JAVATM Technology in a manner calculated to cause software developers to create programs that will operate only on platforms that use defendant Microsoft's Win32-based operating systems and no other systems platform or browser.
So yeah, Microsoft can and should produce their own JVM, so long as they adhere to the agreements under which they licensed the right to do so from Sun. Sun went to court to stop MS from distributing their version because it didn't meet the standards for compatibility that Sun had put forward in their contract. If they had just done this in the first place, no one would be crying about it now.
Someone please correct me if I've got this wrong.
Re:MS (Score:2, Informative)
Such a poor decision ... (Score:2, Informative)
Microsoft wasn't being forced to carry Sun Java because Sun Java couldn't compete.
Microsoft was being forced to carry it as a remedy of past anti-trust practices of embrace, extend, then obscure.
DC Circuit Court (Score:3, Informative)
A better strategy is to sue in a court under the juristiction of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth has repeatedly shown technical know-how and a willingness to embrace and extend technology, though certainly not in the Microsoft sense. The bottom line is, don't sue if it's obvious you're going to lose from the start.
Re:actually, (Score:5, Informative)
However, Apple's vm is basically sun's VM with some enhancements. First of all there's the Java-Cocoa(Objc) bridge that lets a developer write a java backend with a Obj-C native Cocoa front end. Secondly, the feature you may have heard about that saves much time and reuses code is that the VM caches on disk the HotSpot compliation of the Java byte code. The way it works is that Java code is compiled to JAva byte code by the developer. The VM then compiles byte code to it's own internal representation for eventual compiliation to native code. This code is normally intrepreted, but when a section of code is 'hotspotted' it is then compiled to native code. Apple modified the vm to save the internal representation of the bytecode to disk and use this in the VM. This is automatically done for all core classes at install time and on the fly for other Java code.
Sun is supposedly looking into a way to extend it to other applications. Though only in client application does this make much difference because in server applications classes don't get loaded a lot. (except for JSPs but you really shouldn't be doing cpu intensive stuff in the JSP code, but in a library function)
Re:actually, (Score:5, Informative)
Additionally Apple provides, by default, installations of 1.3.1 and 1.4.1 in a fixed and standardized location, generally following the deployment style other the frameworks provided on the system. They are also updated automatically as needed via the normal Apple Software Update process, just like any other framework/application/etc...
They go out of their way to discourage application developers from installing their own JRE's, it is not needed, it wastes space, and actually could lead to compatibility issues (the JRE they install could be in compatible with the OS version installed, etc.)
Apple tests and maintains correct versions of their JREs for you, they are considered as part of the OS. This is very nice. Why should Java be different then any other OS framework?
I do find it funny that it is worded as saying that Apple has "also agreed to include Sun's Java". Apple goes out of their way to provide Java on Mac OS X, its Apple's JVM/etc. implementation not Sun's.
Re:actually, (Score:4, Informative)
Re:actually, (Score:3, Informative)
At first they expected it in 1.4.2, but because the code is not stable yet, they haven't released a new date
Java chat on 1.4.2 [sun.com]
*snip*
Filip: Startup performance is better in this release, but you only achieve about 1.3.1 startup performance with 1.4.2. Is there going to be some work in the Tiger release to further speed up startup? Also, why is shared VM dropped from 1.4.2, and can we expect it in Tiger?
Ken Russell: We are planning to make more startup improvements in 1.5, but cannot provide specific details at this time. We are continuing to work with Apple Computer to develop and integrate their VM sharing code, but can make no guarantees about its future availability in Sun's J2SE releases.
*snip*