Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Ordered to Carry Java

Posted by timothy on from the macro-management dept.

An anonymous reader was the 17,232th person to submit that "Microsoft has been ordered to include Sun's Java runtime in Windows. Coverage from AP (via Yahoo), Reuters (via news.com), and, let's say, the BBC."

4 of 718 comments (clear)

  1. Appropriate coercion? by MacAndrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's interesting to guess whether others are submitting a given story. I guess this was a no-brainer.

    Coercion: the power to require Microsoft to include Java is the same that allows the gov't, or any successful antitrust plaintiff, to force them to do anything different. Because of their market power, which puts them on nearly every desktop in America, their default config has a lot of promotional influence. Up to now, that influence has entirely favored Microsoft, which sounds appropriate ... until you get back to that monopoly abuse.

    Whether THIS particular coercion is a good idea, we'll see. Whether coercion is never the right thing, well that's much broader.

    A partial analogy would be Microsoft owning the default Yellow Pages distributed to everyone's door and selecting who can be in it -- say, virtually everyone but "Sun." Now, anyone can go get one of the other free directories, but will they? Advantage: Microsoft.

    Also, Java isn't exactly a competitor's product; it's also an attempt at an industry-wide open standard that Microsoft wants to subvert, dominate, and exploit. Hey, they already tried.

    It's a difficult problem to set things right in the wake of antitrust problems. Market forces generally do a decent job of figuring these things out (the "invisible hand"). But when some clever party makes the market its own, and then abuses it, the rules have to change, and gov't regulation, or a breakup, are the most common remedies.

    If you don't think MS should have been sued in the first place, you will not believe any of these rationales, and probably not that antitrust is necessary in the first place. Many think some market failures need correction, but not everyone.

  2. Hello people? by graveyhead · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is it just me, or is this thread boiling over with ignorance?

    This is *exactly* what MS did to Netscape a few years back, and a court found them guilty. They bundled their own technology and made it inconvienient to use competing products. *cough* .NET *cough*

    It seems to me that this judge is basically just upholding that ruling and *not* allowing MS to do the same thing to Sun.

    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
  3. Keep it in perspective by jjohnson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A lot of posters have gone on about the pros and cons of this as a victory for sun. But remember, Sun will benefit very little from this. In the Java software space, they're nowhere. They don't sell the language. They have next to nothing to offer for development tools at a price. About all they get is bragging rights.

    It's IBM who's probably tipping the bubbly right now. And, a lot of Java developers.

    --
    Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  4. Re:That's ludicrous by gss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What's next? Should Microsoft be forced to include Mozilla with every copy of Windows?

    In a word yes! That is if Microsoft shipped with Windows say a 5 year old version of Netscape and modified it only work for websites running IIS. (Not the best analogy but the best I could think of right now :)

    This is what essentially Microsoft has done with its bastardized version of the Java VM. Microsoft's VM is an old version of 1.1 modified with it's extensions which enabled developers to lock themselves to the Windows platform. Now of course most developers learned this early on and avoided the lock-in, plus most of Java development is done on the server now, but Mircosoft continues to provide their old VM. This alone has pretty much killed off most client side Java.

    I believe Sun made the first big mistake years ago by not providing the definitive Windows VM. You didn't see Macromedia giving Microsoft the right to implement Flash anyway they saw fit way back when.

    I don't necessarily agree with this ruling either, I actually would have been happy if the ruling was to force Microsoft to eliminate their old VM from existence.