Slashdot Mirror
Challenging The OEMs on Java
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.
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.
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.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
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
- jon
Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
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.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
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.
Malk
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
Choice of masters is not freedom.
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.
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.
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...
/.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...
/.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...
Second,
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
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.
Smilodon
V V
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"
Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
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: www.geekaustin.org
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
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.
If its good anouth most people would even have to get MS Office and could put a big dent in MS sales.
Just saying it like it are.
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?
Other Java proponents have asked Hemos to include the latest Java JRE link in his /. posts.
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 ~~
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
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
reech bee-yond ur clip-0n
"This is a move with little or no cost for the OEMs but tremendous potential benefits for their customers."
.99 cents added to the end of any price on sale items.
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
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.
GreyPoopon
--
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
From my point of view, as a full time Java developer, this is more of a blessing than a curse.
.NET strategy.
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
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.
Pete
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.