|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: os2ann.DISCUSS@bloom-picayune.MIT.EDU Date: 14 Mar 1998 00:01:00 -0500 From: innoval@ibm.net (Dan Porter) Reply-To: innoval@ibm.net Reply-to: innoval@ibm.net Contact: Marianne Roderus 914-835-3838 or innoval@ibm.net [Followups directed to comp.os.os2.misc] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Will Java be Sun's OS/2 (read Waterloo)? Harrison, New York, January 30, 1998 -- Dan Porter, president of InnoVal Systems Solutions, in an open letter to the OS/2 community wrote: A friend emailed a simple question to me. He wrote, "Will Java be Sun's OS/2 (read Waterloo)?" Microsoft's plans to release Visual J++ 6.0 and to possibly coopt Java exclusively for Windows prompted his message. Though I don't agree with his characterization of OS/2, I do agree that Visual J++ 6.0, if sufficiently accepted in the market, could cut off one of the best hopes for curtailing Microsoft's platform domination. Though all the details of Visual J++ 6.0 are not yet available, there is enough information to clearly see that Microsoft is trying to redefine Java into a Window-specific environment. From a technology and implementation point-of-view, Microsoft's plan is brilliantly sinister. Release 6.0, following on the heels of release 1.1, promotes a multi-tier architecture that attempts to control both the server-side and client-side of Java by encapsulating non-Java , and presumably Windows-only, technologies at every level. There is no support for JavaBeans and there are enough other differences to make it Windows-only Java. We have seen Microsoft use its market dominance to attempt to "own" the browser and possibly extend that advantage into significant control of the Internet. Now Microsoft, by leveraging market share, is trying to dominate the latest software development environment to their indisputable advantage. Microsoft wants to "own" Java. This move by Microsoft could ultimately be more predatory and more unethical than the "free" browser initiative. Are there violations of Microsoft's license agreement with Sun in this latest move by Microsoft? I don't know the answer to that. Do any of us? And is this Microsoft move an illegal predatory action by a monopoly? Perhaps. I think so, but there are many informed people who doubt it. If the Justice Department or a state's attorney general pursues this latest move, it could take years to adjudicate. Could our courts even determine the damage to the computer industry and the consumer? Could they do so in time? And what would be a satisfactory remedy? Few of us want a regulated information technology industry. Ironically, that is what we may be moving toward with Microsoft being the regulator. Might we, at sometime, see operating system support tied to the use of Microsoft approved applications and Microsoft certified consultants? Has not Microsoft already employed restrictive covenants in license agreements and contracts that fly in the face of an open and free market? The Java philosophy of "write once, run anywhere" is fundamentally a part of what Java is all about. To call something Java, to even imply that something is Java, and not adhere to this basic principle is totally inappropriate. To my way of thinking, Microsoft's misappropriating of Java, not only the name, but a partial implementation of the programming language, is completely unethical and dishonest. Java is a multi-platform approach to computing every bit as much as it is a programming language. Throughout the computer industry and among well-informed consumers, this is well understood. At its current level of development, Java is an open-architecture, open-market-defined intellectual work by many individuals and companies. Sun owns the right to grant license and the baseline specification. Others, including IBM and individual developers around the world, have contributed significantly to the current definition of Java. In that sense it is not unlike the Internet with an evolving user-influenced design and open-market philosophy. For one vendor, Microsoft, to try and obfuscate the definition of Java and to try to acquire it solely for its own platforms, (and that is what they are doing), is simply unethical. Trevor Smith, the editor of OS/2 e-Zine, may have said it best to me when he said of Microsoft and J++ 6.0, "if you can't beat them, fool them." He's right. That is what makes this unethical and dishonest. This issue, now confronting all of us, is only in part about operating system choices. More significantly, it is a fight to preserve an open and free information technology market. There are a few things that we can all do: 1) Join the Java Lobby at http://www.javalobby.org. This organization supports the "write once, run anywhere" philosophy of Java. Some of us have the time and talents to help the Java Lobby and we should volunteer our time. But even if we don't have time we should lend our name to this all volunteer organization, now 13,000 strong. 2) Encourage others to do likewise. Encourage those who maintain OS/2 and other platform specific web sites (yes, even our favorite e-zines and news sites) to add the Java Lobby logo and a link. 3) Write to our elected representatives. Those of us who live in the United States, should also write to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department, and state's attorney generals. 4) Write to magazines and local newspapers. Letters should be sent to the editor and to the technology editor. At InnoVal, we are going to do our small part. We always said we would stick it out with OS/2. We have and we will continue to do so. The same is true for the 100% pure Java definition. We will be vigilant in adhering to this principle. We are offering and will continue to offer discounts to members of the Java Lobby for our Java products including J Street Mailer, InnoBar, InnoHelp and the InnoMail class libraries when released. Because we support the Java Lobby, we sport its logo on our home page. Those of us familiar with the OS/2 market witnessed a phenomenon that significantly strengthened OS/2 among consumers: outstanding high quality and very useful shareware and freeware. There is a lot of good Java shareware and freeware, but not enough =96 not like there is for OS/2. We must find ways to encourage it. Because InnoBar and InnoHelp will be particularly useful to shareware and freeware authors, InnoVal will offer 50% rebates for InnoBar and InnoHelp to shareware and freeware authors, payable when they release software. The 100% Pure Java logo program available from Sun and Key Labs is a good idea. Though it is fairly easy for a company such as InnoVal to comply with the requirements and pay the $1,000 fee, it is a burdensome requirement for shareware and freeware authors. I would like to see another program adopted, perhaps by the Java Lobby, that allows authors to logo Java applications and applets as being equivalent to "100% Pure Java." This could be based on self-certification or peer review. What else can we do? If you have a good idea, I would like to know about it. I would also suggest that you write to feedback@javalobby.org. They too want ideas. Let's face it. Java is the best technology answer we have to addressing the Microsoft monopoly but not if Microsoft owns Java. Whose Waterloo, Sun's or ours? Dan Porter InnoVal Systems Solutions, Inc. http://www.innoval.com _____________________________________________________________________ | NOTE: Please send submissions by EMAIL os2_ann_req@bix.com | Correspondence to the COOA Moderator: lfirrantello@bix.com . | Please see: http://www.bix.com/pub/os2ann/pindex.htm for posting guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |