Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Databases Programming Software Sun Microsystems IT

Oracle and Sun Team Up to Provide .NET Alternative 335

Posted by Zonk
from the other-white-meat dept.
segphault writes "Ars Technica has an article about the new partnership between Sun and Oracle, designed to provide an alternative to .NET." From the article: "According to Ellison and McNealy, their mutual goal is the production of a complete Java-centric enterprise datacenter architecture that leverages Solaris 10 and Oracle's Fusion middleware. Designed specifically as an alternative to Microsoft's .NET technology stack, the new platform is competitively priced and based on robust frameworks."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Oracle and Sun Team Up to Provide .NET Alternative

Comments Filter:
  • hilarity (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BitterAndDrunk (799378) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:33PM (#14472791) Homepage Journal
    Since Oracle Applications is still driven by ActiveX controls.

    As is their AIM methodology.

    In fact, Oracle Apps downloads are unsigned, untrusted. You have to open the browser (and it must be IE) pretty dern wide to use it.


    • The reason I ask is that most people seem to use the Java front-end or the HTML front-end. I haven't seen people use ActiveX at all with eBusiness Suite or Oracle database....

      Just checking the install that I have... yup that just uses Java as well.

      I can't find ActiveX anywhere on the various Oracle products I've got installed at the moment.
      • Re:Which version? (Score:3, Interesting)

        Yes, it's all java. I should have been more clear - the JRE 1.1.18 that Oracle Applications will download is triggered by an ActiveX control.

        As is the entire AIM (Application Implementation Methodology) suite.
        The eCommerce suite (CRM, iStore, iSupplier Portal, et al) avoids this issue entirely, as would an alternate method to download the JRE. But the "standard" implementation of Oracle Apps wil require opening the security settings wide like I said.

    • As respondents have posted, it's the JRE that uses this control scheme. The actual application is java based.

      But AIM is still ActiveX so the original point halfway stands.

  • Pricing... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:34PM (#14472795)
    "the new platform is competitively priced"

    What!? I remember when Oracle and Sun charging was based on how much money fell out your pockets when they turned you upside down and shook you.

    Seriously though, an alternative is nice, but isn't that alternative already here and called Java? I suppose a nice end-to-end branding a-la .NET wouldn't go amiss, but what's the point? Sufficient technologies already exist out there to do what they're trumpeting as new...
    • Re:Pricing... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Debiant (254216) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @07:02PM (#14472936)
      I think It's not just about technology, but about user end and development support.

      If I compare Java and .NET, I must say I think it's right now much easier to do things with .NET .

      I'm not talking about being platform independent, robustness or things directly related to merits of some programming language or enviroment, but more about how many potential people have access .NET technology.

      For example, VB programmer may with some training be able to move his old VB code's business logic to .NET server. Same goes to C++ programmers. Even Java developers may find C# much more intresting than Java, because it pretty close but still diffrent(and not with a negative way). In a way .NET is a culmination of many programming languages, and that way looking far ahead of Java where you can only 'plug in' with Java only.

      Besides Microsoft with it's traditional method, is trying to support .NET much as it is possible.

      So I can understand why Ellison is trying to do what he is. as he sees that .NET has much synergy. More I look .Net, more I've started to wonder why it has been so overlooked.

      It's coming fast, where I'm looking at it.
      • Re:Pricing... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by malraid (592373) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @07:32PM (#14473059)
        I wouldn't say that .Net has been overlooked. .Net is mostly popular with MS centric developers, people that mostly used VB o VC, not so much with Java people. Some Java developers might be tempted to look to what C# has to offer, but at the end of the day, both are only tools. You can build great or crappy programs in any language. Large enterprises that have lot's of J2EE code WILL NOT swtich to .net, simply because J2EE has delievered, while .Net still has to prove to be as robust as Java. Java used to be sexy back in the 90s, now it's the new COBOL.
      • Re:Pricing... (Score:2, Interesting)

        by OpenServe (885833)
        So I can understand why Ellison is trying to do what he is. as he sees that .NET has much synergy. More I look .Net, more I've started to wonder why it has been so overlooked.

        What is truly mind boggling is the apparent conclusion that Java's correct "answer" to .NET is anything but a heavy embrace of open source. (Apache/LGPL style) The only way to match the growing "synergy" of .NET is to work from the grassroots up and not look only at the "big iron" markets. While lucrative, they can not yield sufficie
        • The areas where Java is weakest are on the client side and this is where .NET has / will have it beat hands down unless drastic changes are made.
          But so what? The client side is rapidly being taken over by JavaScript/HTML and to a lesser extent, Flash.
      • Re:Pricing... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Decaff (42676) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @08:53PM (#14473358)
        For example, VB programmer may with some training be able to move his old VB code's business logic to .NET server.

        It is not just a matter of training - VB.NET has many differences from VB.

        and that way looking far ahead of Java where you can only 'plug in' with Java only.

        I really don't know how people come up with statements like this. The facts could not be more different. There are more than 200 different languages than run on the JVM. A large proportion of them integrate well with Java, and can used Java classes and libraries. There are implementations of LISP, Ruby, Python, Basic, Modula, Pascal, Fortran and even COBOL. There are currently far more languages implemented on the JVM than on .NET.
        • While it'd be nice to say that all of those languages are equally supported on Java, they aren't. Java is the primary language on the JVM; most documentation is for Java only; and functionality, performance, etc. with non-Java languages varies.

          At the very least, Microsoft offers VB.NET and C# which are both equally supported by Microsoft and most vendors; they also have J# and C++, which have varying degrees of support (I can create web projects using C#, J#, or VB.NET; .NET Compact Framework projects with

          • While it'd be nice to say that all of those languages are equally supported on Java, they aren't. Java is the primary language on the JVM; most documentation is for Java only; and functionality, performance, etc. with non-Java languages varies.

            The support depends on the vendor - there are many vendors for non-Java languages on the JVM. Naturally, support will vary.

            Still, when someone says a product works with .NET, it's safe to assume that it's supported with at least VB.NET and C#, whereas most Java produ
          • t the very least, Microsoft offers VB.NET and C# which are both equally supported by Microsoft and most vendors; they also have J# and C++, which have varying degrees of support (I can create web projects using C#, J#, or VB.NET; .NET Compact Framework projects with C# or VB.NET; .NET Windows Forms applications with any language.) All of these languages are supported out of the box with Visual Studio 2005.

            Tell me again how VB.NET differs from C#, aside from the syntax candy. Last I checked, they supporte

            • VB.NET has these where C# doesn't:
              Automatic type casting (where appropriate);
              Late binding; Functions like IsNumeric, IsNothing, etc.;
              the My namespace (in 2.0);
              other things I can't remember right now

              There are less things an inexperienced programmer has to worry about in VB.NET than in C# -- they can simply ignore what type a variable is and just use it, most of the time (e.g. SomeInt = SomeString will compile and hopefully work, if SomeString can be converted properly.) Many of the changes to VB are nec

      • More I look .Net, more I've started to wonder why it has been so overlooked. .NET sure is nice. C# is the only language that can go toe to toe with Java and win most aspects of the comparison. .NET confers the abilty to mix in most other languages that are/have been used in various Microsoft products. .NET Compact Framework puts J2ME in the shade, and has since it first came out several years ago, and will continue to at least until a replacement fot MIDP 2.0 ships in quantity - at least 18 months, and perh
        • Sure, C# as an individual language is better than Java. And certainly for any UI applications, C#/.NET rocks Java's world. Absolutely, Java should have a linker and "registry" of sorts - certainly this classpath nonsense is way too much work as it stands.

          On the other hand, Java is still waaaay more modular for almost any server application than .NET. In Java, you call components which are add-on libraries (hence the incredible aggravation of 10 million directories, XML config files and classpath entries)

        • Javas biggest implementation will be application/menu/programming layers in the forthcoming Blue Ray DVD standard.

          To .Nets features, you have an incredible amount of run time type and linking information that can do things with network enabled applications that were simply not possible before. Forget client/server, think about "clouds" of information logic that can be passed over networks and applications that are incredibly customizable on the fly.

        • The new ATi display control panel is powered by .NET, and many other applications are taking this path too.
        • well ms used the .net brand on passport so anyone who uses hotmail or msn messenger will be somewhat familiar with the .net brand.

      • For example, VB programmer may with some training be able to move his old VB code's business logic to .NET server.

        Wrong. VB.Net is very, very different to VB6 to the point where much of the code will have to be rewritten to either run or run well. Not to mention that there will be extensive training required for VB6 developers to learn the more OO ways of VB.Net.

        and that way looking far ahead of Java where you can only 'plug in' with Java only.

        Wrong. There are many languages that will run on the JVM e.g. Py
      • Ha! You said "synergy!" For a second there I thought you might actually be technical.

        -matthew
    • Seriously though, an alternative is nice, but isn't that alternative already here and called Java?

      No, .NET is a microsoft specific but language-neutral standard. You can write all of your .NET aplications in java. Network app frameworks like this (language neutral) are absolutely fantastic - but who can blame anyone for wanting to see a non MS entity control the standard?
  • If it isn't a resource hog.

    Hopefully they'd put some effort into making sure it is at least as secure as .Net
  • by ltwally (313043) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:41PM (#14472827) Homepage Journal
    "...the new partnership between Sun and Oracle, designed to provide an alternative to .NET. ... Designed specifically as an alternative to Microsoft's .NET technology stack..."
    That's kinda funny, 'cause here I was thinking that .NET (which is only a couple of years old) was the alternative to Java (which is 10+ years old).
    • Re:That's funny... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by timeOday (582209)
      You have to wonder where Java might be right now if they'd gotten EJB and AWT right the first time!
      • Too much comittee thinking on both of those. They tried to solve a problem that so few people had. They listened to the corporate CxOs instead the developers and got J2EE. This is a good lesson for all.

        I think they should have renamed EJB3 to something else, it is going to suffer from it's name being associated with the madness that was EJB.

    • Another insightful post mismodded as funny.

      The real funny thing is that the article is a cross between an anti-Microsoft flame and another newsvertisement.

      TFA also says, "Both companies have lost a lot of relevance in the modern world, where cost-effective open source software and disposable commodity hardware reign supreme."

      Oops. That is the meat of the article. Its hard to keep stock prices up when you are "loosing relevance" in your area of doing business. Stock plot here [yahoo.com].

      Offtopic, but I have to know.
      • IANAMG but exponentials pop up in some financial applications, like the value of an investment with reasonably constant annual return over a long period of time. On a linear plot, all but the most recent behavior is crushed into a nearly flat line because the value rises (roughly) exponentially; however, on a log plot it's easier to see the long-term behavior.

        For example here's the Dow Jones Industrial Average for ~80 years:
        Log: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=%5EDJI&t=my&l=on&z =l&q=l& [yahoo.com]
    • Re:That's funny... (Score:2, Informative)

      by BarryNorton (778694)
      That's kinda funny, 'cause here I was thinking that .NET (which is only a couple of years old) was the alternative to Java (which is 10+ years old).
      Come off it, look at the core .Net technologies (before they were re-branded): COM (implementing the multiple interfaces per object idea without multiple inheritance) predates Java, ODBC predates JDBC etc. etc.
      • Re:That's funny... (Score:3, Informative)

        by skraps (650379)
        Sorry, I'm as big a Microsoft fanboy as any, but this is just wrong. .NET and COM are completely different. COM is basically a convention for interoperating between C/C++ programs. .NET is its own virtual machine and set of languages. ODBC may be similar to JDBC, but that has nothing to do with .NET! .NET uses something called ADO.NET, which is nothing at all like ODBC.
        • Re:That's funny... (Score:2, Insightful)

          by BarryNorton (778694)
          You were there when COM was originally released? You were there when VBX was replaced with ActiveX? You were there when ODBC was wrapped in an ActiveX interface forming ADO? You were there when COM was the means of interfacing with Visual J++? You were programming Visual J++ when Sun started legal challenges eventually leading to .Net? You've been programming Microsoft more than a few months?... seems not! Thanks for the lecture though.
  • Some odd reason (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hsmith (818216) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:41PM (#14472830)
    I don't see the Oracle solution being cheap... But who knows!
  • Proprietary (Score:5, Insightful)

    by trollable (928694) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:44PM (#14472842) Homepage
    "According to Ellison, this is all about providing users and developers with technology based on standards. But what standards is he talking about, and are those the standards that consumers care about? The availability of an open source .NET implementation based on ECMA standards certainly makes Java look more proprietary."

    The whole JDK1.5 API is public and totaly available to be implemented by anyone (www.jcp.org). Also there is already a 98%-complete implementation of it (www.classpath.org). OTOH, only a small part of .NET has been proposed to the ECMA, which is not even a standard organization. Mono provides only a small subset of .NET.

    (that said, the most used Java Platform (Sun) is still proprietary)
    • Mono provides only a small subset of .NET.

      You are welcome to go one all you like about how you like the Java standards story better than the .NET standards story, but you really need to stop making this demonstrably false claim about Mono's API coverage.

      As you can see here [ximian.com], Mono covers about 98% of the v 1.1 (Everett) framework, which is what most shops still use. This is comparable to the JDK 1.5 implementation you just touted!

      And as you can see here [ximian.com], Mono already covers about 90% of the just-relea

      • I apologize. It seems they have progressed a lot since I checked. At that time, a lot was missing but more important, there was no intention to implement the part out of the standard. Things have changed and it is great. And you're right that the situations are comparable, in terms of implementation (according to the percentages reported, that may have a different signification).
  • As a sysadmin... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:44PM (#14472844)
    As a sysadmin, I work with a plethora of applications, systems, integrators and vendors. We run everything: AS400, PHP, J2EE, linux, windows, perl, oracle, db2, postgres, mysql...I could go on, and on. Windows bashing aside, Java is the only technology that's "advanced" enough to break itself. I can literally run some of my perl scripts over and over until the cows come home...or leave my cisco routers up for 700 days...or reboot linux til I'm blue in the face and it's always predictable. When they fail, there's some reason: Disk space, upgraded software, user error, low memory, gamma rays, etc. Java is not that way - java has a mind of its own doesn't need an excuse to not work 1/1000 times.

    My point here is that I feel for the people who will be administering this system - all of those sleepless nights troubleshooting transient failures with no fixes or even causes. Oh well, they made their bed, I suppose.
    • Re:As a sysadmin... (Score:2, Informative)

      by SimplyBen (898147)
      I'd have to 100% disagree with you here. "java has a mind of its own" is an extremely ignorant statement. While the quality of many java applications is below acceptable, critizing the virtual machine and its related frameworks and apis from the perspective of a systems adminstrators is doing nothing but spreading FUD. Java has several advantages that the majority of other technology stacks lack. That advantage is choice. This being said it is a double edged sword. Don't like writing SQL? Use hibernat
    • Java by itself doesn't "BREAK". Applications that are poorly written BREAK. Some application crashes CAN crash the JVM and you lose all your Java apps but if you need 100% uptime there are ways to configure the JVM to deal better with the errors. You could also look into some of the newer operating systems such as Solaris 10(Containers, Predictive Self-Healing, DTrace tool), or virtualization. Modern Java servers such as Websphere/WebLogic can be setup where one flaky program only kills one instance of the
    • by MisterP (156738) * on Saturday January 14, 2006 @09:44PM (#14473527)
      I'm in the same boat. I look after everything under the sun. Everything from shitty little 2 server ASP websites to 20 server clusters with TB's of backend disk.

      I have java servlets used by over 2000 people 24x7. When was the last time I had to restart the JVM? Dec 2002. I also have 8 java (jsp) web applications used by 200,000 ISP customers 24x7. JVM uptimes range from 2 years to several months. On the flipside, i have applications that need to be restarted every week.

      The difference? The developers.
  • imitation... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Swamii (594522) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:46PM (#14472856) Homepage
    ...is the sincerest form of flattery.

    Rather than teaming with Larry Elliscum, a better move for Sun would be to open Java up to the ECMA/ISO for standardization.
    • Rather than teaming with Larry Elliscum, a better move for Sun would be to open Java up to the ECMA/ISO for standardization.

      I'm sure that's on ISO's to-do list, but they're waiting to receive the standards documentation for PHP. :p
       
    • by WebMink (258041) <slashdot@nOspam.webmink.net> on Saturday January 14, 2006 @08:13PM (#14473218) Homepage
      Rather than teaming with Larry Elliscum, a better move for Sun would be to open Java up to the ECMA/ISO for standardization.

      Why exactly would that help? Right now the Java standards are open to input from a wide range of voices, from individual developers through open source communities like Apache to corporations like Oracle and IBM. No voice has overall control, no-one can force through self-serving capabilities and everyone gets to use the specifications royalty free. All of them know their contributions can be implemented as open source yet that the market in which they operate can't be monopolised by any single company.

      Sun started ECMA standardisation and then realised half-way through the process that it was going to produce the worst of all worlds; a rubber-stamp for the work Sun had done, with no input from any communities and a freezing of the specs by the ECMA dinosaur, combined with a loss of the ability to enforce the Java trademark and an inevitable embrace-and-extend by companies like Microsoft and IBM. Sun should have worked this out before starting with ECMA but fortunately realised in time and pulled out of the process. The result was the creation of the JCP and the most open, competitive software market the computer industry has yet seen.

      Microsoft fully understands the PR value of ECMA and is cynically using it to rubber stamp it's Office 12 XML format to undermine the openness of OpenDocument. That action has done us the good service of showing us just how intellectually bankrupt ECMA actually is. What the Java platform needs is not the destruction ECMA would bring, but rather the further evolution of the JCP, which is working better than pretty much any standards body before it and is only hampered by the public perception of Sun control.

      • No voice has overall control, no-one can force through self-serving capabilities

        You're dreaming; the entire JCP is there to "force through self-serving capabilities". Worse, because Sun's mandatory compatibility requirements, if you don't implement all their shit, you can't implement any of it. And the result is that there are no third party Java implementations--only Sun's implementations and its derivative.

        and everyone gets to use the specifications royalty free.

        "Royalty free" in that you don't have to
    • And an even better move would be to help the Java VM use native controls for its host OS, so Java programs on Macintosh stop looking like ugly hideous mutants that nobody wants to use.

      Run a .net application alongside a non-.net application on Windows. Can you notice the difference, visually/behaviorally between the two? No? That's the POINT, and that's something Java totally missed.
  • by slashk (519084) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @06:48PM (#14472868)
    i for one am sick of dealing with classpaths and 250 jars inside of jar files inside of war files inside of ear files - catch my drift.

    i'm also sick of J2EE containers with class loaders schemes that are more complicated than my senior year algebraic structures course.

    build a linker into java just like .net has, and something like a GAC.
    than allow versioning of libraries.

    then get rid of checked exceptions so i don't have to do try/catch/wrap/rethrows(or do nothing) in 90% of my J2EE code.

    then get rid of stateful, local session beans - how redudant is that???

    then find a way to get rid of the 14 million defines i need in my server.xml to specify which implementation of each 'open, standard' interface i need

    so, java as a language - it's ok
    java as a platform - SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    left java for .net after 6 years of dealing with Sun's bullcrap and i have never looked back.
    • i for one am sick of dealing with classpaths and 250 jars inside of jar files inside of war files inside of ear files - catch my drift.

      So unpack the jar files into a common directory and re-archive them all together. They're basically just renamed zip files.

      War files are intended to be independent: that's what they're for. They are meant to be a drop-in web application piece.

      i'm also sick of J2EE containers with class loaders schemes that are more complicated than my senior year algebraic structures cour

  • Um... (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by msimm (580077)
    No? Why would I be interested in another .NET lock-in project. Open would be news, but this just sounds like more crap to tag onto my tech budget that could be done with any number of existing technologies.
    • I expect this really is semi-big news for those that may need extra ammo to get management to buy off on using Oracle & Sun products where they're appropriate. But I do agree that Sun and Oracle are definitely hoping to tag something onto a lot of people's tech budgets. :)
      • I can see where your coming from. We use Oracle on our database already. Thats got a pretty hefty price tag, especially as you scale up. We are weening ourselves OFF of sun hardware after about 6 years of it. Of course the punchline is the new Opteron systems look great.

        But at the end of the day keeping our tech budget low means making compromises, sometimes the right ones, sometimes the wrong ones. The less closed-source software we are locked into the better. After all, the point is being profitable and
  • by MosesJones (55544) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @07:04PM (#14472946) Homepage

    So the world's largest database vendor is paring up with the world's largest big server provider as competition to Windows and .NET?

    Sounds like Microsoft joining up with Dell to compete with Apple on the desktop.

    • So the world's largest database vendor is paring up with the world's largest big server provider as competition to Windows and .NET?


      Sun is not the "world's largest big server provider".
  • by bcrowell (177657) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @07:09PM (#14472964) Homepage
    Y'know, I was just saying to myself, "Self," I said to myself, "you really need an enterprise datacenter architecture that leverages middleware based on robust frameworks." Wow, they must have been reading my mind!
  • by Gunark (227527) on Saturday January 14, 2006 @07:12PM (#14472975)
    Lets hope this means they're going to do something about J2EE. Between Enterprise Java Beans and Java Server Faces, J2EE is a sordid mess right now.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 14, 2006 @07:31PM (#14473056)
    So now Sun is taking on .NET and they're teaming up with Oracle for it ? What a load of nonsense. According to Sun themselves [sun.com] the whole partnership is almost entirely based on Oracle choosing Solaris 10 as their preferred platform. You can read more about that here [sun.com].

    IMO some "reporters" only read what they want to read. Sun already has Java and it has got quite a big foothold to last. Solaris 10 is also kicking some serious ass. Why on earth would they want to directly confront a company like MS when they can easily expand their own market and slowly strengthen their position ? IMVHO the big competitor for Sun is Linux at this time. Something clearly displayed when looking at Novell which almost immediatly started "OpenSuSE" after the release of OpenSolaris. Coincedence? I wonder...

    This step has IMO nothing to do with .NET, and if you take the effort to skim the Sun news articles I'm sure you'd conclude the same. What about this: Linux with either MySQL or Postgres vs. Solaris 10 with Oracle, or MySQL/Postgres if you so prefer. And all based on almost the same price / options.

    Utopia? Then why is Oracle also jumping on the "opening up some products [oracle.com]" bandwagon ?

    No, I don't think MS has much to worry, Sun is targeting another audience here.
    • Something clearly displayed when looking at Novell which almost immediatly started "OpenSuSE" after the release of OpenSolaris. Coincedence? I wonder...

      The reason for OpenSuSE was Fedora Core, and the reason for Fedora Core was competition Debian and other free Linux distributions.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Requirements
    Qualifications:

    5+ years Java, J2EE
    4+ years Microsoft Dot Net
    4+ years Sun Dot Java
    3+ Internet Explorer Programming

    ** Attention to detail
    ** Likes to work on mulitple projects simultaneously
    ** Excellent communication skills (written, verbal and other)
    ** Must be able to work 50+ hours per week
    ** Up to 90% travel
    ** No benefits!
  • Here we go again, two firms absolutely unfit to compete against Microsoft in their products' price/performance, one basically in its death throes, the other one continually losing the market to the SQL Server... What a great duo! I'm sure they will come up with a real .NET killer. At least this time (they sadly have been failing this task on several noble attempts).

    Seriously, I doubt world needs yet another infrastructure (even assuming this one will be Java-based). The only thing that I see happening by

  • SAP, not .NET (Score:2, Informative)

    by jt2190 (645297)

    Read the source (article), Luke!

    According to the article linked to by arsdigita [techtarget.com], this is not about .NET at all, but about SAP. It looks to me like Oracle is actively porting its middleware to Java in order to claim that they are easier to develop for and less proprietary than SAP's counterparts. Sun and Oracle will promote each other's non-competing products as a part of this deal.

  • After spending part of 2005 writing an app in Java, I must say, I don't really like it. I started out very excited about eclipse, and hibernate, and I wrote a huge pile of code, and got many things working quickly. But in the end, I didn't feel like I had much control. The ability to tune and analyze performance was not really there. Furthermore, the whole community of Java-heads seem to be "performance, not a problem". My problem domain involves large data sets (~ 1 GB in ram or more), so I really cou
  • OK, so here's what Sun needs to do in order to provide an "alternative" to .NET:
    • add missing features to Java: multidimensional arrays, true generics, portable unsafe code
    • remove bloat from Java, like JNI and many of the APIs
    • remove compatibility requirements
    • make Java an ISO and ECMA standard
    • stop being so goddam arrogant about WORA and cross-platform compatibility: as a Linux developer, I want high quality Linux GUIs and Java GUIs suck on Linux
    • open source the JRE and JVM under the LGPL, BSD, or Apache li
  • ...the new platform is competitively priced...


    We'll see. Consider that it's coming from the software and hardware company legendary for their high prices.
  • When they're talking about a ".NET killer", they're actually talking about a suicide pact.
  • Grow up boys, you're not Bill Gates. You're not going to be Bill Gates. That's not such a bad thing. People don't like Microsoft anyway.

    QUIT running your companies like vengefull morons bent on doing everything with a goal of hurting Microsoft. Its getting predictable, boring, and less and less profitable.

    Larry, you're not selling enough of your application suite to matter to anyone. Sorry to break that to you. Market share wise, you're still a database company and lately you're getting your clock cle

Any given program, when running, is obsolete.

Working...