Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Java Programming

Challenging The OEMs on Java 181

There's a great Dan Gillmor article, from his blog [?] regarding the challenge issued by Tim O'Reilly and Clay Shirky to the computer OEMs, asking them to include the latest Java JRE. As Microsoft has said they won't be including Java in WinXP, but are cool with "letting" OEMs put in other programs, let's see the manufacturers strike a blow for competition, and compatibility, and including a non-"extended and embraced" JRE.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Challenging The OEMs on Java

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Nope, no one. Not for JBuilder, or TogetherJ, or WebLogic Console. Not at all. Ever. Or Forte. In fact, I don't think anyone has ever downloaded the Swing classes.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    I just really hope that this move doesn't convince good Java developers to switch to C#...

    That is in fact happening. I can tell you firsthand that at one of the top companies working on client-side Java, senior management just sent out an e-mail saying that if Java doesn't come bundled with new browsers we will start porting to C#.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    I agree with Bjarne... Java IS a platform. And a good one for deploying web applications that generate dynamic content from server processing. But NOBODY uses Java client applications, or Java applets.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    That's one thing I don't understand about the American psyche - surely, in a court case, an out-of-court settlement is a tacit admission of guilt? The one I _really_ don't get is when they settle to avoid admitting guilt in a court of law. Surely they've just effectively admitted guilt anyway? And yet the general public in america then seems to think treat them as innocent, when they're patently not, while in Europe we throw up our hands at the insanity of Americans....

    Not considering settlement-admitting-guilt in later cases seems to me to be a bit like the patent office not considering prior art that wasn't in their own database...
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Since 90+% of the "end user" machines out there run Windows, just use the java plug-in. It is a ONE TIME 5MB download. This download will get you a 1.3 JVM that works great. Sun also includes the plug-in for Linux and Solaris. I am not sure what the status is for the Macintosh, but either way that would give you 95% of all the Internet connected client machines in the world. If they do include one for the Macintosh, or one is allready bundled with OSX, then that would give you around 99% of the worlds Internet connected computers.

    The download and install are a joke in Internet Explorer, and it provides Applet cacheing! So after your first run, no more slow downloads.

    It also makes it easy to update your code across all machines.

    However, if you are looking to run full blown applications (no more sandbox)then look at Java Web Start. I have only worked with it for a little bit, but it seems cool.

    Having said all this, I would still love for the OEM's to preload the Java runtime 1.3. If the 5 major OEM's did this then it would save the users the 5MB download. With hard drives over 20GB on new systems, who cares about 10MB more storage.

    What percentage of users will ever do anything with it? Who knows.

    Steve Michael
    Network Architect
    Performance Strategies Inc
    Indianapolis Indiana
  • by Anonymous Coward
    "Microsoft is trying to reduce diversity in computing. Java is one way to maintain the little that's left, and maybe grow it."


    Lets call apples, apples people.

    Java is really about having this layer over everything. SUN has this view of Java being the everything language of the internet. Java being the language all applications are written in... the 'format' in which all data is transferred (as a java object), the "operating system" in which everything runs (the JRE), the authentication system everything uses.

    Java is about destroying diversity wherever it finds it... in the name of creating a "standard".

    This, folks, is exactly what Micro$oft is about too... if you are talking about Sun vs. MS... the real question that should be asked is Which STANDARD do to like better?

    It is not about freedom vs. oppression.

    It is not about having choices.

    What its about is two big mega-coprporations duking it out over whose vision will create the new standard in programming.
  • +5 funny? reallly?

    The only thing funny about this is how retarded it is. That's just one dir up from the one Hemos posted which was the JRE. This link is to the SDK.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:48AM (#72930)
    Dan appears to be under the delusion that a 'free to distribute' license actually holds any water when you're a bigger company.

    I happen to work for one of said OEM's, and was part of the discussions to do this very thing. Suffice it to say, it's never as simple as 'just include it in the image, it's free dummy - look at the license' - not when we've both got lawyers and marketing and executives, etc. Not only that, Sun directly competes with the OEM's in a good number of cases (especially on the server, appliance server and storage side) - it's akin to Gateway asking Dell to put a piece of (albeit industry-standard) software on their systems with their name all over it. That just doesn't happen.

    Obviously we decided not to include the JRE. FYI, Microsoft played no role in the decision that was made.
  • While Opera's a great program (though I've found the 5.11/5.12 versions to be doggy), there's a better reason for not including it: It's not free. Consumers are going to balk at even a reduction in the typical opera price ($40 IIRC) that an OEM might get for licensing, knowing that IE and NS (both well known names in browsers) are free.

    Mind you, I'd like to see OEMs put a demo version of Opera , or a link to O's homepage, with the looser terms, on the desktop. Offer the consumer the choice. Of course, now that I think about it, most OEM's have everything default to 640x480; I dread to imagine all the icons that might be on the screen at once!!

  • by Masem ( 1171 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:54AM (#72932)
    The JRE is only around 8 to 9 megs of compressed disk space, so compared with the XP bloat, a user's not going to notice that Java's installed or not.

    The JRE is an intelligent DLL under Windows in that it is not loaded until it's needed, unlike the underlying IE DLLs which are loaded at the start and take up memory even if not used. So it's not going to slow the user or comsume memory until it's needed.

    The critical thing that needs to be done by Sun with regards to Java support is to have something like Windows Update or the Quicktime Updater: the ability to run one program that will grab the newest and latest files and install them, using a diff-like method instead of downloading *everything* again. If you tell a user that they can upgrade for a quick 500k download and to just press 'here', as opposed to telling them to download the newest JRE by going to some site, and downloading ANOTHER 8meg file, you'll have more people that stay current.

  • It depends on how Microsoft chooses to implement this choice. From the way they have been promoting the 'download any JVM you want' option, you'd think that they were going to make IE 6 use the OJVM standard for embedding third party JVM's in their web browser, as is supported on the Macintosh using Apple's Macintosh Runtime for Java standard.

    I really doubt that this is the case, which means people wanting to use Sun's JVM will have to code their HTML to use the (much more complex) ActiveX/Netscape Plugin based Java Plug-in, rather than the old fashioned <APPLET> tag.

    Really, though, for distribution of Java applications to the user's desktop, the best thing going right now is Sun's Java Web Start [], which makes it super, super easy and efficient to distribute Java applets and applications to Windows desktops.

    I just put support for Java Web Start into Ganymede, and our users are loving it. No more having to start up a full web browser to get the Ganymede client going, no more having the Ganymede client killed off if they forget and quit their browser while the client is running.

    Java Web Start is some wonderful stuff for free standing Java applications. If every IBM, Gateway, and Dell PC out there came with it I would be in seventh heaven. Unfortunately, Sun happens to be a hardware competitor to all of those companies, so it's not clear how much they would want to help Sun out with this.

    - jon
  • Nobody's "forcing" the vendors to do anything. This is a request being made by an influential group of (self-appointed) customer advocates.

    Not everything is a freedom issue. This is just a request.

  • Although I agree that a JavaOS would run Java stuff much more efficiently, you do seem to blame some of the wrong things for the Java bloat. In particular you claim that not using native services and reimplementing them in Java loses.

    I don't think this is true. In my experience it takes far more code to interface to an existing high-level interface than to reimplement it. My best example is X window managers, I have written both them and toolkits that talk to them. I would say 50% of the window manager is interfacing code to the applications, and the code the toolkit uses to talk to the window manager is 1.6 times larger than the code in the window manager to draw and drag windows. Thus if the window manager were eliminated we would all programs would have a piece replaced with a piece that is 1/1.6 in size, and ALL of the window manager is removed. This would result in significant savings overall.

    Another way to look at it is to imagine the widgets in your JavaOS. Do you really think that at the widget point (like the interface to a text input field) Java would abrubtly stop being used, and the rest coded in assembler or C? Or, more likely, wouldn't the widget itself be in Java and talking to a lower-level interface that draw letters and rectangles. And then wouldn't that lower interface be well-documented and the "widget" just run in user space?

    Of course it would work like this, because it would be about a million times easier to design such a system. The same thing is true when writing a toolkit to run on a system you don't control.

    The problem with Java is not that it is a bad idea to program to a low level, but that the implementation itself is badly done and bloated. Swing could learn a lot from gtk or even (god forbid) mfc.

  • Yes, I was trolling. My point is that there's shedloads of stuff which 'costs nothing' to install, and some of it is actually pretty good. There's no reason why Java should get special treatment. OTOH, ship a half-decent perl5 environment and people could really get some useful work done :-).
  • by Ed Avis ( 5917 ) <> on Friday July 20, 2001 @05:13AM (#72937) Homepage
    We should also demand that manufacturers ship a copy of Cygwin with each Windows PC. It costs them nothing but makes it much easier to download and run lots of free software ported to Windows.

    Heck, while you're at it, why not 'demand' that they include a Linux partition? Hard disk space is cheap these days.
  • for starters you didn't even link to the current level... that's 1.3, not 1.2 as you're linking.

    But far more importantly you only linked to one option, Sun... as if they were the only game in town, or even the best game in town. Try [] if you want a serious JVM.
  • by malkavian ( 9512 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @06:51AM (#72939)
    A lot of home users these days buy computer mags, just to try and learn a little more about them..
    This is the original distribution method for both IE and Netscape.. They appeared on the cover disks of magazines.. With big titles proclaiming the latest releases
    A lot of people still use dialups, and will be more than a little miffed that they're supposed to download such huge bits simply to view java..
    However, putting an installer on a CD would be a bit of a sales booster for people not wanting to spend hours downloading over a 14.4 modem. :)
    And it would also be able to proclaim all these new releases of Java, nudging people to stay current.

  • Sun's JVM does beat IBM's on Win32

  • Slashdot routinely promotes (or promoted) DVDs, movies, music CDs, and other products from the two industries which have attacked the Free Software movement more aggressively and more effectively than Microsoft ever has: the Recording Industry Association of Amaerica (RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).

    While I boycott both of those industries, and have for over a year and a half now, it is because I personally have chosen to give up immediate consumer gratification in order to remain at least somewhat true to my conscience.

    Slashdot, on the other hand, bemoans the attacks on one hand and actively markets their products on the other, indirectly putting even more money into the pockets of those who are financing litigious thuggary against free software volunteers. Despicable, but they have presumably decided that playing both sides against the middle enhances their bottom line in some fashion, perhaps through increased readership, add revinue, or some other less obvious mechanism. Or perhaps the editors are simply as unable to go without their instant consumer gratification as most of America is and thus are attending the opening night of movies like Final Fantasy the movie because they cannot be bothered to wait (when nearly every penny opening night goes to the hollywood studios rather than the local theatre, as opposed to seeing the movie 4 weeks later when nearly every penny goes to the local theatre instead) because they simply cannot live a day without their bread and circuses, never mind social, political, or economic consiquences.

    Sites like slashdot and kuro5hin (which has seriously declined over the last few weeks, sufficiently so that I removed links to it on my own website) are not where we should be looking for "leadership" or even significant support. If any of us are really serious about reclaiming our rights we need to organize our own political action groups, and/or support existing ones such as the FSF and the EFF. K5, slashdot, and their ilk have shown themselves to be fair weather activists at best, ready to run back to the couch and submit to the mindless drone of the television and whatever the media moguls are feeding us at the first hint of seeing something new or shiny.
  • No Sun's JDK isn't installed by default but it is included in the CONTRIB directory (on the extras CD). Saved me from yet another huge download.

  • Uh... Microsoft's version of Java was faster and less broken than any other JRE on the market for quite a while. As for completeness, it was *too* complete, adding extensions that would undermine cross-platform compatibility.

    Actually no, it wasn't complete. It didn't include JNI, for example, instead using MS's own JDirect. That among other reasons was why Sun sued MS. And won, in case you've forgotten than. It was a fast interpreter, though; MS used a different GC system to that of Sun derived VM's of the time, and it did pay off in terms of speed.

    But of course Sun wanted to keep everyone playing in their little sandboxes and sued MS to take those things out. So now Java has been taken out.

    No, MS were not allowed to create anything beyond JDK 1.1.4 level (as I recall) by virtue of the court judgement. Sun generally don't object to extensions to the JDK, as long as the whole JDK is included. For example Apple's JDK for OS X has extra libraries for native access to Cocoa, but it still fully supports JFC/Swing.

  • It would actually be better to install it for the user. Many windows users cannot insatll programs, or if they run into a problem with the intstall they are unhappy.

    Personally I'd like to see OEM's include Netscape 6.x the latest and/or mozilla. As well as an option to install Linux. Or maybe offer dual boot systems off the get go and see how many people buy a dual boot. Or offer a trial vmware with other OSes installed. Or even includes some of the software for other apps.

    I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
    Flame away, I have a hose!

    • The /. crowd doesn't have a lot of sway with OEMs because most people here don't buy straight OEM machines, or at least don't use it with the software it comes with. We're in the difficult position of arguing as "expert" witnesses in the best interest of customers who themselves don't really care one way or the other.
    • How many OEMs have pre-installed Perl on their Windows machines ever? I take it you don't buy OEM machines very often...
  • I think the difference is that Java is going to be much more useful to the average OEM Windows customer than Perl or Python. There are at least Java games (Atomica, anyone?) and some apps that they might want to use, but there's not a whole lot written for Win32+Perl/Python that the average user is going to want. On a Linux box, Perl and Python are definitely more important than Java, of course.

    I don't think there's any fear of OEM Windows customers not getting the most recent VB runtime :)

  • First off, I don't think everyone will be running out and buying Windows XP anytime soon

    New machines will comes with XP, and only XP. Scenario: one of your customers, who is networked, buys a new computer, for whatever reason. (e.g. added an employee or old computer died). Now your customer has a computer running XP.

    XP will come with latest MS applications. They give spreadsheet (created with Excel XP or whatever it'll be called) to Win98 Office 2000 user or Win95 Office 97 user, etc. Excel locks up the machine when it tries to load the latest document, or if they're lucky, display error message. They find out that the only fix is to "upgrade" their Win9x boxes to XP. (For some reason, it never occurs to them to "downgrade" the new machine. Besides, where are they going to get another Win9x license? They won't be for sale anymore.)

    In less than a year, the customer's site is completely XP.

    I have seen this happen at multiple customer sites, and twice (will probably be 3 times by end of year) at our largest customer's site. It's so sad to see people trash a perfectly good network. :( And the users complain, but they're just pawns...

  • Particularly as version 1.4 is currently in beta, available for download from

    Release is scheduled for fourth quarter of 2001, ie RSN now :)


  • by DGolden ( 17848 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @06:31AM (#72949) Homepage Journal
    One way to get massive client-side deployment of the JRE would be for Sun, or a third party, to release a killer game that uses Java3D...

    This would also be cool for Linux people, since the game would run unchanged on linux :-)

  • by Quarters ( 18322 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:46AM (#72950)
    Yeah, that'll work... I'm sorry, but Slashdot's record on activisim is pretty damn weak. For instance, Slashdot tried to institute a boycott against the MPAA and all of it's products. Yet, every week we have JonKatz acting as a paid wind-bag and reviewing every piece of tripe that is coming out of Hollywood.

    I wouldn't expect Slashdot to support a boycott of anything.

  • OSX ships with the latest Java runtime... and it is better than the other versions because it has hardware accelerated graphics and provides separate, external JARs for accessing all OSX functionality.


  • There is a difference between "used by the general computing public" and "no one" (as suggested by the original poster).
  • There are a quite a few normal persons using Java applications to access databases at their workplace. These applications are nowhere near being used by "everyone" (the way IE, Word or Outlook Express are) as they are custom-made, but they exist. Of course you can also create those kinds of applications with VB or Delphi (most are, I guess), but Java gets used for this. That's a problem with Java desktop apps in general, I think - there are hardly any that you can buy off the shelf, but companies, esp. big ones, have quite a few Java apps running on their systems.
  • Java or Visual Basic?
    I'll take Java, particularly when I can use IBM's.
  • The JRE is an intelligent DLL under Windows in that it is not loaded until it's needed,

    How is this different from a regular dll that isn't loaded until its needed? I don't think the default behavior really qualifies it as "intelligent". Personally, in a time of flush computer resources, I think waking enough of myself up to be able to start quickly when the user needs me would make me "smarter" than laying up on my fat ass until somebody does need me.
  • Microsoft's version of Java is left incomplete, slow, and broken.
    Users blame Java and Sun for how much Microsofts Java sucks.

    Actually, most people blamed Netscape for how much their version of Java sucked - which is what turned people off from it in the first place.

    And Microsoft's implementation was the fastest of the bunch - which is why Sun ended up cheating on the CaffeineMark benchmarks.


  • This is new in JRE 1.4 that uses a XML file to define packages that a full up application might need. As part of this it can automatically pull the latest required JDK if it is required.

    A really good way to deploy java to the client side.
  • "Don't want to pay for MS Office? Here's Star instead."

    to which MS will say "The license for Windows will now cost you *MORE* than what you were paying for Windows and Office combined" - or words to that effect.
  • Actually, the JRE is only about 6 Meg.
  • And what will you say if I, as a customer, come to you and say "I will not buy a system from you because you have not provided a full set of software on your PC for web browsing. Therefore, I will buy from another OEM."

    Or, what will your tech support say when they start getting calls from customers that a number of web sites that used to work no longer work with the new computer that they bought from you. If you get a number of these calls, won't the cost of tech support cut into your margins?

    Regarding putting the technology of a competitor on your PC's. The JRE would be included mostly so that applets still work, i.e. a client-side technology. Do you really see Sun as competitors on the client-side? I would think that Sun is only viewed as a competitor in servers, where the installation of a JRE is probably not a big issue, since the administrators of that system are sophistocated users and can install whatever they need by themselves.

    What I'm getting at is that I see putting the JRE on your PCs as a customer need that does not help out your competition (Sun) in a market that matters. Are there legal issues that keep you from putting the JRE on your systems? If Sun does not see the importance of clearing any legal hurdles so that there will be a JRE on every platform shipped, then they are too stupid to succeed!
  • The number of existing OEM customers that are dependant on Java (through web browsing, whether they realize it or not) is huge. The number of customers dependant on cygwin is miniscule.
  • Well, we use Jikes to compile the program, so it really is only the JRE that we need.

    It's subpara (i) that you quoted that causes us grief (and is in a different form in the 1.1 license)

    (i) you distribute the Software complete and unmodified and only bundled as part of, and for the sole purpose of running, your Programs

    We're not redistributing JRE to run our program, we're redistributing it to run the user's programs, ergo we're out of luck.

    If you can come up with a different intrepretation, please email me at (It's not like anybody at Sun is ever going to notice or care whether JRE ships with our product or not, but it's my responsibility to make certain we are completely compliant with any applicable licenses).

  • by west ( 39918 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @05:43AM (#72963)
    People might like to look at the JRE license agreement before they talk about free redistribution. The agreement *clearly* states that it's *only* allowed to be redistributed for the *sole* purpose of running the *accompanying* Java program. (JRE 1.2 and above)

    In other words, you can't give JRE to somebody else to allow them to run their program.

    How do I know this? I've been trying to get permission from somebody at Sun to redistribute the JRE with our educational Java IDE [] for months. So far, no go. Even worse, you can't even purchase a license to redistribute it because it's "freely redistributable" and there is no provision at Sun for licensing it :-(.

    My sales guy at Sun has tried heroically, but the lawyers have the final say.

    Now, we're just small (well, miniscule) fry compared to the manufacturers, but it certainly means prolonged negotiation with Sun before obtaining permission to put it on their machines.
  • Bloated useless applets - I agree. Off the top of my head however, I can come up with several
    good uses for applets:

    Invisible applet web bugs with the ability to open sockets to the server from which they came.
    This still has lots of potential.

    Intranet "fat" clients. Give you a manner to distribute the client from a single source, no
    need to run all over and update software on the client machines.

    Units in a distributed system. No fancy GUI, just the real deal. This gives ease of access, people
    can join eg. with literally only a click in their browser - no installation needed.

    Having said this, I also agree that applets are not the killer application they were made to be
    6 years ago. I believe Flash makes a better frontend for GUIs, I believe RealPlayer is a better
    streaming media client. Why should a JRE be treated differently from another pluggable
    browser element? People will need to get as used to upgrade their JRE as they are to upgrading
    their Flash/RealPlayer/Whatever.

  • Why not demand? Why not beg, cajole, ask, threaten (if you can but let's face it you are Microsoft). Why is it that the OEMS are so far up MS butt that they are deadly afraid of installing a JRE or a linux partition.

    I say ask every OEM for everything you can. We are not MS and can not threaten them with financial penalties but maybe if enough people demand and ask we will get our voices heard too. Why should the bullies be the only people getting their way.
  • Because this is slashdot. Any post praising Microsoft or bashing linux gets moderated to high heaven.

    I remember when slashdot was actually for open source now it's for microsoft.
  • Why is this idiot liear moderated up.

    "First, why all this pleading that Java should be considered a vital part of the OS?"

    LIE. Nobody said anything like this. Nobody said it should be part of the OS they said it should be pre-installed by the OEM. Go learn english and re-read the posts.

    "Yet here is Microsoft removing the JRE from the OS ('unbundling', if you will), leaving you free to install any version from any vendor, and everyone is complaining about it"

    LIE. Nobody is complaining about anything they are urging the OEMs to pre-install the JRE. Not only are you a liar but you seem to be profoundly confused about the difference between bundling a ham sandwith with your OS and calling it innovation and the PC manufacturers pre-installing applications. A stupid liar.

    "Finally, isn't this how Microsoft's much-hyped new OEM licensing should work?"

    Here you are just plain stupid. Well duh you brickhead of course this is the way the OEMs shoudl work. All bundling should be done at the OEM level and the OEMs should be free to bundle and UNBUNDLE any thing they want. People are asking the OEMs to bundle their favorite thingie why do you have a problem with that?

    "All in all, this is something that's more in line with the philosophy that /.ers support - you only have to install what _you_ want, not what the OS vendor wants - but everyone here is complaining about it."

    Whoo hoo here you are just babling incorently. See if you can understand this simple concept really I'll try and use small words. We want the OEMs to listen to us because WE ARE THEIR CUSTOMERS. Did you get that? WE ARE BUYING THE PC NOT MICROSOFT. Why should the OEM listen the OS manufacturer when they should be listening to their customers.

    "It seems to me that the consistency of arguments on /., such as it is, goes out the window when a chance to bash Microsoft appears..."

    Well this is the biggest lie of all. Your post got moderated up because it bashed slashdot and defends MS. There are numerous other examples of that on this topic alone. The days of slashdot being an open source community are long gone. Now it's full of astro-turfers and MS shills like yourself.

    Of course I will be moderated down for actually pointing out that you are liar and critisizing Microsoft.
  • So is the reason that Sun won't let you put the JRE on your machines, or that your company won't put competing software on the machines? Could you please make this clear? You company doesn't directly compete with Sun in the virtual-machine market and would lose no buisness if you included the JRE.

    So you've made the choice that you are going to use your position in the market to keep a perfectly good technology from being accepted. Not only that, your action is diminishing the consumer's benefit for buying your product.

    You just made the same decision that MS did. Maybe the Justice Department should sue you for unfair buisness practices.
  • "The thing that fascinates me is how Sun sees itself as a big competitor to MS. Prior to Star Office, what software products did Sun sell and market for the PC?"

    Well, no products for the PC, but you might remember that they also make an OS called Windows that competes directly with the Sun model of Hardware+OS(Solaris) for servers. They definitely compete with MS in the OS market.
  • Many non-techs couldn't tell you what JRE stands for, much less why they need it while browsing the web.

    I think any computer distributor who really had their customers' interests in mind would distribute a JRE, given the volume of web pages their customers will encounter that needs one.
  • First off, I don't think everyone will be running out and buying Windows XP anytime soon. Why? Because it really is unnecessary for most. The expenditure isn't justified.
    I worked for a company in the UK that did the outsourced support for Windows 95. I saw it from beta onwards. I had a line to MS that I could use to get questions answered.

    I though Windows 95 didn't have a hope in hell of getting anywhere. Its architecture was crap, it was unstable, it sucked resources up like a hoover in overdrive... It looked OK, but I just couldn't see why a user would move up to Windows 95.

    I reasoned that for the vast majority of users, there would be no benefit to moving. Most of them write short documents or use small spreadsheets. How many people were ACTUALLY having problems with resources under Wndows 3.x? And those few that did have problems could always run under WinNT instead...

    I reckoned without two things:
    1. Users are stupid
    2. Microsoft has great marketing
    I saw people go into PC World at midnight on the day of release, and buy an "upgrade bundle" of Windows 95 and 8Mb or 16Mb of additional RAM. And in those days, RAM wasn't cheap.

    People were spending up to 300 pounds just to run Windows 95.

    I had this contant vision of users fititng their RAM, doing the upgrade, finishng it and then lookign at the screen. They click on the Start button. They "oooh!" and "aaah!" at it for a while. And then they start Word, and it runs no faster. Maybe even slower. But by this time, they're not going to admit they've wasted money. They're happy with it. Even if they did gain nothing except a documents menu and an emptier bank balance. (And the documents menu is duplicated with the MRU list on the Word file menu anyway, but never mind that.)

    The average user gained nothin initially. And by the time Windows 95 was a viable platform, they still gained little. To really gain, they had to buy a new machine, with hardware designed for 95 and powerful enough to run software designed for 95.

    Windows XP is the same. Most machines out there are under-specced for it. (It requires 128Mb of RAM to work well, IMHO.) The only difference is that, being based on Windows 2000, Windows XP should be stable. But the home edition lacks the security features. The new interface will make people "oooh!" and "aaah!" a bit, and then they'll rationalise their investment by appreciating the new colour scheme. (Blue! How, um, blue! Very. Blue.)

    Microsoft is going to throw money at marketing this thing. People will by it. Nothing can stop that, because the only way is to educate people not to do it. But none of the media will do that - to tell people they won't need Windows XP would be a wonderful way to never see a pre-release or beta ever again, for any computer magazine. Or website. Or TV program. Microsoft will pull all the stops.

    I never believed it could be done the first time.

    I admit I was wrong, and I'm humbled by the experience. I've learnt my lesson - Never Underestimate Microsoft.
  • If a large computer manufacturer was willing to install opera, I think they'd be willing to sell licenses in bulk for a buck or two. That could translate out to a revenue boost of a million or two bucks that they'd normally not get. How many people actually download and pay for Opera anyway?
  • by pondlife ( 56385 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @06:09AM (#72973)
    Several points here... First, why all this pleading that Java should be considered a vital part of the OS? Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the question, and even given the prevalence of Java on the Internet, this does rather come across as a bunch of Java guys whining about why their favourite language is really important and everyone should have it whether they want it or not. Why not also plead for the installation of Perl, Python etc. on all new PCs? It would make just as much sense...

    Second, /.ers habitually slam Microsoft for including components in the OS that aren't a core function, and yet aren't optional (ie IE). Yet here is Microsoft removing the JRE from the OS ('unbundling', if you will), leaving you free to install any version from any vendor, and everyone is complaining about it. You can't have it both ways, guys...

    Finally, isn't this how Microsoft's much-hyped new OEM licensing should work? While I admit it's a bit of a sop to the antitrust lobby rather than a serious concession, surely removing Java is completely in line with this? By removing Java, OEMs who believe there is a market for a PC with Windows 2000/XP and Java are free to include the JRE.

    All in all, this is something that's more in line with the philosophy that /.ers support - you only have to install what _you_ want, not what the OS vendor wants - but everyone here is complaining about it. It seems to me that the consistency of arguments on /., such as it is, goes out the window when a chance to bash Microsoft appears...
  • Closer, danov, but that's not a JRE. This is the JRE link []
  • If I were Microsoft I'd give financial incentives to the PC vendors to not include Java. They've used Windows pricing as a lever in many cases before (look at what they did to IBM) and there's nothing stopping them from doing it again.

    While they are restricted against denying the manufacters the right to change the desktop, they aren't restricted in how they can price things, nor what they can do with marketing money. And money is a huge bargaining chip.

    As a result I would be surprised if any of the large PC manufacturers ended up bundling the JRE.

    I also don't think it much matters, Java is terrible in the browser (this from someone who has been writing Java almost exclusively since 1995). If I'm writing applications rather than applets I'll just ship the JRE with the installer.

    jim frost
  • Who's pleading? All the posts I saw from Java developers were either indifferent or actually approved the removal of the lame 5-year old VM - less confusion this way. (I, being a Java developer, also think it's a good thing.)

  • Why not include a nice little "Hello, world" example program with your IDE? Then the user would need the JRE to run your program. Of course, it would also be installed when they went to run their programs, too, but that's coincidental, right? ;^>

  • by Smilodon ( 66992 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @05:14AM (#72978)
    They (Microsoft) are aggravating their loyal developer base as well. I attended last year's (7/2000) Microsoft PDC (Professional Developer's Conference) where the .NET "initiative" was rolled-out. It soon became obvious that Java was a non-starter in the .NET vision of the future. "What about Java?" questions were pretty much ignored by the Microsoft presenters, and the tone of the questions got more and more heated as the conference progressed. One person asked during a C# (C-sharp) presentation, "Isn't this Microsoft Java?", which obviously angered the presenter.

    Remember, most of these folks are die-hard Microsoft developers, who have been using MS J++ to develop enterprise applications (and yes, applets). I think Microsoft hopes that in a couple of years, everybody will be using C# and this whole Java thing will have been a bad dream. The most recent move of not including the JRE is no surprise, considering this strategy. Next will be not making it available from Microsoft at all.

    Of course, Sun could have won the day by announcing during the conference that they were releasing Java to a standards committee, but that was just wishful thinking. I imagine that Cold Fusion will be the next target, XP somehow causing CF pages to be mysteriously broken or a "security risk" (hint: Use ASP+ instead).

    I'm not a big Microsoft "conspirist". Frankly, a conspiracy implies some sort of subterfuge or cleverness in my opinion. Microsoft is far too heavy-handed to rate that title. They're just bullies, nothing more.

    V V

  • Come on .. how did this get a score of 4 for "Interesting" .. its a blatant troll. Another Microsloth I think.

  • The thing that fascinates me is how Sun sees itself as a big competitor to MS. Prior to Star Office, what software products did Sun sell and market for the PC?

    Solaris on the server, Sun clients running Solaris on the desktop, vs Windows. iPlanet servers on the server, vs IIS. There are probably a couple more, though.

  • As has been pointed out before, Opera and Netscape and other browsers have been crying in their milk for years about the level of IE integration, when they could have been doing something about it.

    Internet Explorer is two parts: a bundle of COM objects that adhere to a public and fixed com interface, and a bundle of glue that uses those COM objects together to make it a single application.

    Netscape could have implemented these same COM interfaces, and have gotten at least half of the integration that IE did. By depending on the APIs, Microsoft would have likely cleaned it up to allow more seamless replacement, as they have cleaned up DirectX about eight times.

    But no, Netscape sued Microsoft (oh, wait, Netscape asked the Feds to sue Microsoft), so of course the IE COM interfaces are still a little rough and incomplete.

    Remember when Lotus bitched and moaned about how it was impossible to write a "real" program on Windows, because their 1-2-3W version 1.0 sucked bigtime? Remember how Philippe Kahn, hardly the friend of Redmond, told him to shut up because he didn't know what he was talking about?

    Obligatory Slashdot Disclaimer: yes, Microsoft is vicious, ruthless, and large. It is exactly for these reasons that they often lose in court, and in many cases, they deserve to lose. I don't work for them, nor do I care what OS is monopolistic in ten years.

    Don't win by litigation, win by quality products. Netscape, Adobe, Sun, they may win little battles with the help of a judge. You're not going to win a court war against a multi-billion-per-quarter revenue machine. You're going to win a war by making Microsoft irrelevant, one market at a time. But Microsoft is more vulnerable if you just write better code and use every interface they expose to integrate and replace their features.

  • FWIW, my roomate bought a comp from eMachines about 6 months ago. Imagine my surprise when I saw him using StarOffice on it because it came bundled. He never complained about it at all (aside from speed, which is more a severe lack of RAM problem than anything) because it is a perfectly viable alternative to MS Office. I hope it does start to be a bundled option for a lot of OEMs. "Don't want to pay for MS Office? Here's Star instead." It's certainly ready for it.

    "I may not have morals, but I have standards."
  • Yeah, and they could hire John Romero and Tom Hall [] to write it. It'd be great!

    "I may not have morals, but I have standards."
  • This has hardly been a black eye because people believe what they want. One MS dumb dumb in my office sees this as evidence that "Microsoft has changed". Some jerk below thinks that Netscape could have avoided problems by using the "com" package IE uses to "integrate" iteself with the OS better, as if that were possible without a complete code rewrite or desirable. MS claims that they are eliminating java for security reasons. Whatever! MS has got as large a black eye as it can possibly have from the poor perfomance of its OS and applications. What could be worse than that? All this desktop placement and JAVA FUD are just so many distractions and missinformation.

    OEMs should dump MS altogether. A preconfigured Red Hat box is no more difficult to operate than a preconfigured MS box. Bundled up with something like Star Office, even the pointiest haired boss would appreciate it. With 5% of all desktops, linux is as mainstream as Apple. A few of these boxes on display at CompUSA and on sale at Dell would end all of this Monopoly liscence and compatibility BS forever.

  • Several Points here... First, why all this pleading that Java should be considered a vital part of the OS? Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the question, and

    There, see, you said it not me.

    Java was not part of MS OS like IE was because you could remove java and still work your computer. Remember the comingiling article you saw on Slashdot today? Ever tried to run an MS poluted PC without Exploder? It works just a little worse than one with Exploder.

    Don't worry too much, there is no new microsoft. No one who uses MS or writes code for MS is free.

  • by bflong ( 107195 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:41AM (#72995)
    This is how it goes:

    Sun creates a cross platform language called Java.
    Microsoft does not like cross platform becouse it != WIndows!
    Microsoft "supports" Java becouse people want it and it's a buzz term that gets press.
    Microsoft's version of Java is left incomplete, slow, and broken.
    Users blame Java and Sun for how much Microsofts Java sucks.
    Microsoft removes it's broken software from Windows siting "Security Concerns".
    Users don't care becuse "Java sucks anyway"
    Microsoft crushes a another competitor.

    Yeah. Boy, I'm sure glad MS did the "right thing" because no one enjoys "webpages with Java"

  • Or am I thinking of the old 'Activator'?
  • What's being asked is that the computer makers thoroughly test and understand the workings of the JRE being packaged.

    The JRE is about as stone simple as you can get in terms of installation[1]. They don't need to understand jack squat about how the JVM works as long as the person making the disk image can click through a few dialog boxes to install it. Analogy: do you understand how a glow plug works? Can you drive a car with a diesel engine?

    Besides, don't you think Sun or IBM would jump all over themselves providing technical info to OEMs willing to try this with their JREs?

    Regarding Microsoft support of OEM installations (either of MS products or otherwise): hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahaha. thanks, I haven't laughed that way in a long time.

    [1]Well, unless you're using Mozilla. But I don't see OEMs shipping a beta product as the main browser anytime soon.

    News for geeks in Austin: []
  • What's being asked is that the computer makers thoroughly test and understand the workings of the JRE being packaged. Then what? Incure the cost for this themselves? It was easy when Microsoft included the software and something broke -- microsoft tech support is more than willing to assist you with your problems.

  • Brett Glass asks: "Why not ask manufacturers to bundle Opera? It comes with the latest JRE."

    Like it or not, Opera really isn't a maintstream browser. If the PC is shipped with anything other than Explorer, the PC maker is going to have to deal with the expense of a lot more tech. support calls from people asking what happened to Explorer.

    Java support, on the other hand, just makes thing work that wouldn't have, and doesn't change the rest (except for taking up 0.05% of the hard drive space). If somebody hits a web site that tells them they need Java, and they have to download it over a dial-up, they're going to be mad at the PC maker for giving them an incomplete system. Since it's free, on top of all that, there's really no reason for any PC maker not to include a JRE.

    I think Microsoft has just given themselves a black eye for no good reason here. They get another round of bad PR, but Java support will still be put on the PC's by Dell, GateWay, Micron, IBM, etc., plus AOL.
  • by a_n_d_e_r_s ( 136412 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @05:11AM (#73008) Homepage Journal
    If the OEMs start to include the JRE why not also include the OpenOffice office suit. It doesn't cost them anything and will amke it possible for them to sell a office suit to theirs custumers without.

    If its good anouth most people would even have to get MS Office and could put a big dent in MS sales.

  • I can't say I enjoy webpages with java.
    Then you probably haven't been to []... :) ... Now that computers are getting faster Java speed is not that much of an issue IMHO.

    $HOME is where the .*shrc is

  • This entire line of reasoning is ridiculous. You can still download the JDK and JRE for free. You can buy Java IDEs from a number of vendors. If you want Java on your computer, its easily achievable. Hell, if we are going to insist on OEMs putting a language toolkit on every computer (why you would do this is beyond me), at least make it an open language.
  • Sorta like the gimmick .99 cents added to the end of any price on sale items.

    First, I think you meant the gimmick 99 cents, or .99 dollars. I'm not trying to give you a hard time; it's just a pet peeve of mine. Next, it's really more like a gimmick 1 cent that's subtracted. Psychological studies have shown that when dealing with numbers, most people don't want to bother with more than a couple of digits of precision, and prefer to truncate, rather than round. Thus, a lot of people see "5.99" and think "5". If you're mathematically inclined, this sounds crazy, but I've seen it in action. Most of the people I know generally don't fall for this, except with gasoline prices. They see "1.379" and think (and say) "1.37".

  • All Sun needs is an auto update tool that gets run every month or week to let you now when a new version is out. Every other little tray icon application does something like that, so no reason Sun can't include a little something that does the same.

    On the other hand, you have Java apps that might work with 1.1 and not with 1.4. Having end users casually perform upgrades may not be something developers want, which could cause more headaches than its worth. Updating the JRE could be left to individual developers and as long as its in a common place (C:\jdk, C:\jre, etc) they won't need to duplicate work.

  • The Internet is unfortunately full of applets that suck. What I meant by Javascript not going anywhere was that it is an example of something has been standard and you don't see it disappearing because there is no war over was just accepted. Bad choice for an example, I should have chosen something without the word Java in it so that you guys wouldn't have been reminded of the newbie "is Javascript the same as Java" questions.
  • It also means the person taking the money has to open the till for change. Makes it harder for a shop assistant to simply pocket the money.
  • Consumers do have some influence when OEM'S make corporate decisions but ultimately Microsoft is their main customer for keeping them in bussiness and giving them money. Each OEM is begging Microsoft to be the first on the block to have windowsXP pre-installed because if they are not the first, then consumers will pick a competitor.

    MS office became standard because oem's wanted cheaper prices for dos/windows 3.1. Microsoft holds all the keys for software distribution sadly enough. If I were Michael Dell, I would make sure no computer would come with java at all. I would email Gates about the java issue and hope for a discount. If I could get a %10 price decrese I could make alot more money in such tight economic times. This is really sad and is proof that Microsoft is really a monopoly. Why do you think HP and Dell do not even advertise desktops with linux pre-installed outside of linux tradeshows? Also Sun's staroffice is free. WHy are no OEMs acknowledging its existance? It costs them nothing? The answer is it just might anger MS.

    Compaq killed alpha and refused to benchmark alpha vs pentiumIII running NT because they might anger intel. So they killed it and now can recieve greater profits by having lower intel prices.

    If I were Michael Dell and if the Microsoft's OEM LEGAL AGREEMENT did not have a clause on not installing sun's java on all pc's, I would still not install it. Even for free. It makes good bussiness sense but it means bad news for consumers and sun.

  • The JDK is arguably an installation of the Java language. The JRE is just a virtual machine. Some of us like to have it around in order to run the same compiled Scheme code [] on Linux and Windows.
  • by brlewis ( 214632 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @06:19AM (#73031) Homepage
    something that's more in line with the philosophy that /.ers support

    There's one consistent philosophy that all /.ers support? Could somebody write it up and put it on a web page? How am I supposed to know what to think if nobody tells me?

  • by danov ( 215996 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:43AM (#73032) Homepage
    Other Java proponents have asked Hemos to include the latest Java JRE link [] in his /. posts.
  • In fact, Mac IE doesn't have a JVM at all. It just interfaces to Apple's virtual machine.

    Of course, the result is that it gets better Java support than (Mac) Netscape. How odd. ;)

  • by KarmaBlackballed ( 222917 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @05:32AM (#73034) Homepage Journal
    I think Microsoft has just given themselves a black eye for no good reason here.

    According to the settlement with SUN a little while back, M$ is not allowed to update any of their existing Java JVM technology, only to use what they wrote a few years ago. Under these conditions it seems reasonable that they do not want to include these old (incompatible?) DLL files with the new OS.

    ~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
  • I've used Opera for Linux intensively for months. About 5% of the time it doesn't show something that Netscape 4.77 can, but it's easy to copy and paste the url to Netscape browser (i had both apps running).

    Opera is good for opening alot of browser windows while only taking up one task's worth of my taskbar. It also has a nice builtin google search field. It's pretty much better than Netscape in all ways except the aforementioned. (As of yesterday i just use Mozilla 0.9.2, though, because it includes an email client and is nicer than Netscape 4.77.)

  • ...what with the lawsuit that MS had to pay to settle.

    And afaik IE5.01 and 5.5 as a standard install don't install the JVM either but will prompt you with the option to download it if needed.

    I doubt this will affect Java much - considering it seems to be moving into the embedded space in any case =).

  • by HaiLHaiL ( 250648 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:46AM (#73050) Homepage
    From the article:

    What if I said the best thing that could happen to all of us is a complete backoff of all the bundling beyond what's specified in the W3C definition of the Web. Take Flash out. Take Java out...

    Are we sure that we're just talking about the web here? The JRE gives the ability to run both applets [] in browser and normal Java apps... and it's not like there's a shortage [] of [] those []

  • You make some good points. I would tend to disagree on the whole Swing performance issue, though. True, Swing is piggy in its cycle consumption, but this is being offset by beefier hardware to the point where I'm not sure I care about this too much anymore. At my company (large N.A. bank) we run quite a number of Java client apps (e.g. a call center desktop) and performance is fine.

    Anyways, the real point of my note is regarding the demise of JavaOS. I happened to be working with IBM labs at the time IBM had pitched in to bring JavaOS to market. The reason JavaOS died (according to my peers at IBM) were:

    • JavaOS was targetted at network station types of devices (IBM was developing their own) and not home-computing devices
    • IBM came 'round to thinking the underlying o/s did not need to be Java - just a really peppy *nix variant with really good Java support
    • Sun did not (or does not) have the client o/s experience and needed IBM to pull it off. IBM's vision of *nix-powered NCs (which they brought to market) effectively killed JavaOS.

    Of course, there were likely other political intrigues here...

  • by Xcom ( 262429 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:29AM (#73053)
    "This is a move with little or no cost for the OEMs but tremendous potential benefits for their customers."

    If you have not noticed the news on the sales of new computers being very low as of late then it might suprise you that OEMs will do anything to cut costs and unless there is a huge public outcry they will not bother with it. Some might just do it to make it seem like they are adding features that others do not. Sorta like the gimmick .99 cents added to the end of any price on sale items.
  • Which actually brings up another problem. Which JRE will be distributed as the standard? How often will users need to update the runtimes?

    Dancin Santa
  • Not bunding Java reduces Java support to the same level as these other no-one-would-ever-download-such-a-huge-plugin plugins:

    • Flash
    • Acrobat
    • Quicktime
    etc. All it means is that you have to use the Java Plug-in tag syntax instead of the tag and make sure your applet is good enough to make people want to download and install the plugin. It's not a really big deal.

    For example, visit one of the Java plug-in demos [] and see how easy it is to install the silly thing.

    [Hm, having done just that, it's not quite as easy as Flash, but oh well. Maybe Sun will wise up.]

  • Sure, you can include the JRE, but your Windows licenses will cost you $50 more per pop...

    Instead of just making a statement like this, could you provide a little more information? Why would it cost another $50 per license? Are you referring to labor for including the JRE in the image? Some sort of hidden license fee that nobody knows about? Some sort of evil action you expect M$ to take in response?


  • If the OEMs start to include the JRE why not also include the OpenOffice office suit. It doesn't cost them anything and will amke it possible for them to sell a office suit to theirs custumers without.

    This idea is interesting... with one change. Most people buying a computer right now get a choice between Microsoft Office or Microsoft Works. It's rare for anybody to buy a new system with no office software at all. Based on this, OEMs may now have the incentive to provide a slightly lower-cost package to the user (assuming that Microsoft Works has a per-license cost). They could perhaps shave another $50 or $100 off the cost of their computer if the user chooses Open Office instead of the other two. But in order to know whether that will fly, you must find out what kind of wierd license agreements OEMs have with Microsoft.


  • by GreyPoopon ( 411036 ) <gpoopon@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Friday July 20, 2001 @06:00AM (#73075)
    What is your fascination with Java that makes you think it should automatically be installed everywhere?

    Name one other VM language that has been, up to this point, included with every mainstream browser install. That's where the loss is. I honestly don't care whether or not all browsers come with Java. But I can write currently write applets that will work on almost any browser since V 3.0 of Netscape and Internet Explorer. And it'll even work on Opera.

    Having a JRE available as an option works fine if the browser will always be downloaded in the first place. But users who can download and install a new browser aren't the ones I worry about. It's those that buy their computer with Windows pre-installed and don't know how to really change anything. If I design web pages with java applets, I want to be sure that pretty much anybody can see them. (with the obvious exception of Lynx users)

    Like I said, I don't care WHAT the language is, but it needs to have most of the same capabilities as Java. And it needs to be multi-platform, multi-browser capable. Oh, and it needs to ALREADY be installed and running on the older browsers. Let me know when you figure out how to solve that problem.


  • by PeteSlater ( 412250 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:50AM (#73077)
    From my point of view, as a full time Java developer, this is more of a blessing than a curse.

    When developing applets for clients I will no longer need to explain to them that IE has a JVM that is 5 years old and that they need to download a new one - I simple have say, visit Sun [] and get the latest JVM.

    This is what I have to do when developing an application and people seem fairly happy with that.

    I just really hope that this move doesn't convince good Java developers to switch to C#... there really is no need unless you want to stick with MS .NET strategy.

    I think O'Reilly has the right idea though - have OEMs include the latest JRE on any machines they distribute - that way customers will have a reasonable up to date runtime which they can use as they see fit.

  • "As Microsoft has said they won't be including Java in WinXP, but are cool with "letting" OEMs put in other programs, let's see the manufacturers strike a blow for competition, and compatibility, and including a non-"extended and embraced" JRE."

    Right. So I can ruin an already fragile (yet functioning) Windows XP with even more restriction-bashing code. Give me a break.

    These are the same people who argue against bloat by MS, but when it's bloat by a 3rd-party company (other than AOL), and it might wreck even further hell on the system's stability, they're all for it.

    Why don't we throw g++ in there, while we're at it? And Perl? Let's fill the whole hard drive with interpreters and engines.

  • Why? Because your choice doesn't happen to be one on the list, and you'd like to force your code choice on the other 95% yourself? I'd prefer that Windows XP included Perl and g++, but I can't have that. And my guess is most people would never use any of the environments anyway.

    There's a reason why MS is even honoring the notion that they can drop Java, and it isn't just the war between Sun and itself. So few sites use Java nowadays that most Windows users never touch it. If it were a different story (like the AOL debacle) MS would be more or less forced to provide it because of the sheer numbers.

    Face it. The war is over. Java was a great academic language, and it's "fun" to code in, but it's not going to take over c++ on the desktop and HTML on the web anytime soon.

  • For all practical purposes, 1.3 is the latest. There was a maintenance release just recently put out - 1.3.1. Also released was 1.4 beta, with gold master expected in November.
  • Contact me. Perhaps you're talking to the wrong people at Sun, or perhaps whoever is operating as your agent is doing a bad job.

    I had a similar need, and I had no problem in terms of dealing with Sun.
  • Excactly why I hope this non-bundling of a bad JRE from microsoft will be good. If, big if, OEMs decide to bundle modern 1.3 or 1.4 JREs. Some developers might consider the 100% java application more seriously. Since Mac should have a decent JRE with OSX, and Linux users are generally skilled enough to go get one, folks might be able to exploit write once, run anywhere (with a few minor changes). Of course, the moment THAT happens in a serious way, Microsoft's barrier to entry goes away and the desktop no longer belongs to them.
  • by javabandit ( 464204 ) on Friday July 20, 2001 @04:57AM (#73093)
    As a Java developer. I can't really say that I care.

    First off, I don't think everyone will be running out and buying Windows XP anytime soon. Why? Because it really is unnecessary for most. The expenditure isn't justified.

    Lastly, I do agree with the person who said that its a matter of choice. If the JRE is needed to be installed, then it can be downloaded and installed. That's it.

    Forcing a company to include anything in their distros really violates the very priniciples that most "freedom in software" people (including myself) uphold.

    Trust me, people. Microsoft is going to dig their own grave... soon enough. Just a matter of time.
  • If Microsoft is letting the OEMs put custom software on the PCs, will they also allow having Linux pre-installed?

"I prefer the blunted cudgels of the followers of the Serpent God." -- Sean Doran the Younger