MS Must Ship Java With Windows Within 120 Days

Its about time by psycht · 2003-01-16 09:18 · Score: 5, Informative

Its been hell trying to suport end users with our web tool, that is java based, and having to walk them though installing/downloading java from Sun's site.

--
thelikesofwhich.com

Re:Its about time by MisterFancypants · 2003-01-16 09:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

1) You realize, of course, this won't help you for a long time. This only has an impact on new Windows installs. You'll be dealing with users who have older Windows installs for a long, long time.
2) Use the Sun JavaPlugin and/or WebStart, that's what they exist for.
Re:Its about time by Shalda · 2003-01-16 09:25 · Score: 3, Funny

No, this is a bad thing. I (unfortunately) support a program that only works on the bastardized version of Java that Microsoft ships. If they start shipping the "proper" Sun JVM, I'm going to have no end of problems.

--
bance.net
Re:Its about time by The_K4 · 2003-01-16 09:44 · Score: 5, Informative

Actually it sounds like they will be required to put it into XP SP2. Now that's a download/install of it's own, but this isn't just about new installs. Here's the real fun part of this, everytime Sun releases a new JAVA MS will be REQUIRED to include it in the next SP. SO if you don't use java at all, you will still be required to download and in stall it if you want the latest security patches in the newest SP.
Re:Its about time by Narcissus · 2003-01-16 10:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

No, this is a good thing. Just because the product you (unfortunately) support was not written to use the "real" Java, why should everyone else suffer? What was going on with development there, anyway? I'd take a stab and say that someone called out another buzz-word ("Yeah, I like it, but let's write it in Java!") at the time of design...

If you're going to write a Java program, then you should write it to run in Java. Not MS' "Java". You should know that by not writing to the standard, you'll end up in trouble. It would be like me writing an app to use undocumented APIs, and then whinging when they're changed. If I'd have used what I was given properly, I would not have gotten into the mess, and I would have no-one to blame but myself.

The fact that you have to support a program that was not written correctly is not our fault or problem. Don't get me wrong, I feel for you, but that doesn't change anything.
Re:Its about time by suicidal · 2003-01-16 10:25 · Score: 4, Interesting

I don't know, while I didn't read the article....the headline blurb said they'd be required to "ship" it. Knowing Microsoft, that could mean it is in one of those 'extras' folders buried somewhere on the disc. Never installed unless the user digs around to find it!

We'll see...
Re:Its about time by koh · 2003-01-16 10:32 · Score: 2, Funny

Fantastic. The XP autoupdate feature can even be assigned to the task. That would be reeeaaaaally nice to global bandwidth, given the size of the JRE package...

Judges, please be careful when you rule things out... You may be granted what you ruled ;)

--
Karma cannot be described by words alone.
Re:Its about time by Anonymous Coward · 2003-01-16 10:36 · Score: 4, Informative

The version in SP1 is the prehistoric semi-proprietary Java VM that MS stopped shipping a year or two back, with no updates. What they're required to ship is the latest Sun Java VM.
Re:Its about time by DunbarTheInept · 2003-01-16 10:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

You're right - it is a bad thing that the program you have to support was developed for Microsoft's broken implementation only. But don't make the world pay for this mistake by asking for that broken implementation the standard.

--
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Re:Its about time by DunbarTheInept · 2003-01-16 10:51 · Score: 2, Informative
Remember on a dial-up even a 100 KB file is Pain in the A$$ to download.

Remember:
1. Dial-up is obsolete already and "dead". Granted, it will last a long time, but as long as you started the stupid practice of predicting some technology is already "dead" I figured I'm allowed to do the same ;-)
2. "Java on the client" doesn't have to mean "Java being run for the very first time on the client". After the first time, that 100Kb of jar is going to be cached for a week or so, so
  unless the software's timestamp is actually changed in that time, the subsequent uses won't repeat the download.
3. Downloading a Jar file isn't any slower than downloading an .EXE file to run a client application. Remember that Java clients are for more than just web stuff. To make a fair comparasin, compare with downloading and installing software client executables, not just non-interactive web pages.
--
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Re:Its about time by catbutt · 2003-01-16 11:33 · Score: 4, Informative

A couple days ago they supposedly negotiated all the details of this with each other and the judge:

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-980631.html

"Both Sun and Microsoft submitted written proposals Monday, suggesting exactly which of Microsoft's software titles would have to carry or support Java, in what timeframe the order would be carried out and other details."

Apparently all we really know yet is the time frame, not yet the specifics of how it will be installed.

Not so fast by core+plexus · 2003-01-16 09:23 · Score: 5, Interesting

While this is good news, it's not gone through the appeal yet; ""If my order doesn't get stayed or reversed (on appeal), it's going to get done," Motz said. Well, that's stating the obvious.

Microsoft lawyers may be able to either stall it, get it reviewed, or even get it overturned. That's the way the law works. Likewise, there may be other avenues outside of the Courts that Microsoft may take.

This little penguin doesn't forget favors

I feel bad for Microsoft by pyite · 2003-01-16 09:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

I have to side with Microsoft on this one. I don't think the government should have the power to say you must include X in your product. It's like the government mandating that Ford must use Bosch break systems in their vehicles even though Ford can make their own cheaper (purely hypothetical situation). How would everyone like it if the court forced Debian to include Sun's Java as part of the standard install instead of the user having the option to install gcj for instance?

--

"Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by Sabalon · 2003-01-16 09:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

I agree they shouldn't be able to say you must include x.

However, from what I read earlier on in ths case it is not as simple. What I read was that MS had signed a contract with Sun that they would include Java and then backed out, so I guess this comes down to being the punishment for breach of contract, not just because Sun is whining.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2003-01-16 09:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

Microsoft is a monopoly. They don't face the same market pressures that most companies face, and so have to play by a different set of rules. The government is trying to increase competition on the desktop. This can only be good for consumers.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by squiggleslash · 2003-01-16 09:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

How would everyone like it if the court forced Debian to include Sun's Java as part of the standard install
I don't think anyone would give a flying f--- to be honest, as long as you could select "custom install" and remove it.
Of course, Debian isn't an abusive monopoly (or abusive, or a monopoly) and hasn't made any efforts to kill Java, so the situation is rather different and a court wouldn't make that ruling, even if it were the case that we'd all be really, really, upset were the court to make it.
Microsoft is a convicted abusive monopolist. Microsoft used its dominant market position to control the market, and has used that control to crush its competitors or would be competitors. Microsoft's behaviour was immoral, has caused immeasurable damage to the industry as a whole, and was, rightly, found to be illegal. Get over it.

--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by RevMike · 2003-01-16 09:38 · Score: 5, Insightful

Don't feel bad for M$. They did violate the law.

A major point of law in the area of monopolies is that a company that has a monopoly in one area can't use that monopoly to build a second monopoly in another area.

M$ was using Java, then dropped Java entirely in order to promote their .Net product. By excluding Java in favor of their own product, they are trying to leverage their desktop monopoly into another area.

By your example, Ford does not need to use Bosch brakes because Ford is an oligopoly, not a monopoly. If Ford, GM, VW, Toyota, etc. decided to start a joint venture to make their own brakes and exclude Bosch, the analogy would be more apt.

The Debian analogy also isn't valid. There are many viable commercial and non-commercial distros. And Debian also doesn't own a competing product.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by KDan · 2003-01-16 09:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't think that analogy works very well in this case. If you look at the history of the case, you'll see that the whole point of Java was to have a write-once, run-anywhere platform. Java published the specs to that, and Microsoft, having identified this as a great danger to its OS monopoly, hurried to try to break it as much as possible. Hence their coming out with a Microsoft VM which is, on purpose, incompatible with the Sun VM. As Sun owns the Java language and virtual machine specs, that's not only unfair but also illegal.

The fact that Microsoft, after bashing Sun's "Network Computers" initiative a few years back, is now coming out with its very own .NET (which is basically a repackaging of Java + network computers), should clue you in to the dishonesty with which they have been acting. Given all that bad behaviour, it's only fair to give Sun a few brownie points and a chance to get back on top with their excellent Java language, especially now that Micro$oft has had all the time they needed to come out with their competing version (.NET).

Oh, and by the way, we're not talking about the Java compiler (which would be comparable to gcj which you mentioned), but about the Java Virtual Machine, which allows Java programs compiled elsewhere to run on your machine.

Daniel

--
Carpe Diem
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by Coward+the+Anonymous · 2003-01-16 09:50 · Score: 2, Informative

Hence their coming out with a Microsoft VM which is, on purpose, incompatible with the Sun VM.
This is simply not true. The MS VM ran 100% Java Compliant code just fine. The thing MS did as add extensions that were specific to its VM. The Visual J++ tool defaulted to using this extensions. Developers who weren't cafeful could end up writting software that would only run on Windows. But to say that software that was written in pure Java might not work on MS VM is a fallacy.

--
-- Jason
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by RevMike · 2003-01-16 10:02 · Score: 2, Insightful

Not including a competing product by default, because a company wants you to use the product they make. Shameful I tell you. SHAMEFUL!
In a normal market environment, there is nothing shameful about this. It may be good business.
The key point is that in a market based society, gov't should minimize its interference with companies that are participating in a market. However, when a market does not exist (a monopoly) gov't does have the duty to regulate to protect the consumers and competitors in closely alligned markets.
That M$ has a monopoly on the desktop is unfortunate. That M$ extended that monopoly to Office apps because Lotus and Corel are lame is unfortunate. That M$ successfully leveraged their desktop monopoly into a browser monopoly and is trying to do the same in the run-anywhere language space is a SHAMEFUL predatory illegal business practice.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by silas_moeckel · 2003-01-16 10:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is because MS has a monopoly position and they are calling something that realy isn't fully Java Java.

--
No sir I dont like it.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by rhavyn · 2003-01-16 10:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

So where's that uninstall IE, OE, MSN Messenger and all that other crap that I don't want button. Oh, wait, there isn't one. So what that means that if Microsoft is able to leverage their monopoly in the desktop operating system market into new markets by forcing people to have those programs on their computers, the only way to fix the problem is to force them to remove those programs (they say they can't) or force them to distribute the competitors. Then no one can complain that the market is skewed in MS's favor because MS is forced to carry everyone's product. Don't like it, don't bitch to me, go tell Microsoft that you want a level playing field for everyone and to get rid of all the shit they "integrated" into the OS.
The point is, Microsoft has been convicted of being an illegal monopoly. They have been convicted of breaking a contract with Sun to carry Java. People who do those things don't get to make all their own decisions anymore. Sorry that MS's customers are being hurt by their illegal behavior, but it's not like no one has been saying to dumb MS to avoid these kinds of problems.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by sweede · 2003-01-16 10:30 · Score: 2, Informative

What had happened was Microsoft licensed Java from Sun to include in Windows. However, Microsoft violated the contract by adding in new extensions and other features to the Java VM. Now Sun got all pissed off about that and sued MS and broke their contract saying that Microsoft was frozen at whatever version of java they last modified. Now, along with that, Microsoft dominating the OS market has everyone stuck at Java VM version 1.2 (or whatever) and people dont need to download a newer Java version from Sun.

So, what does Sun do now?? They sue MS again and order that Microsoft can no longer distribute a Java VM with Windows (XP). But Microsoft has the whole .NET and C# deal, which is a massive compeitor to Java.

So, what does Sun do this time? They sue MS yet again and order that Microsoft MUST INCLUDE the most recent version of Sun Java with Windows.

Will Sun ever learn ?

--
I follow the SDK and GDN principles.. Spelling Dont Kount, Grammer Dont Neither
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by squiggleslash · 2003-01-16 10:45 · Score: 2, Insightful

Okay then, look at it from the opposite direction. How would you like if the court ordered Microsoft to include Debian as part of the standard install?
I'd laugh my head off. How exactly do you expect me to respond to that? It's gibberish. How, exactly, does Microsoft include Debian as part of the standard install? Does it co-install BOCHS or some sort of VMWare clone? Gibberish!
This ruling requires a company to ship its competitors product.
It requires a company that's caused physical and illegal harm to a competitor to ship their product, at no (real) cost to Microsoft or the competitor except in that the competitor is kept alive.
You MS astroturfers really are a bunch of whiners. Something tells me that you don't complain to your coworkers everytime you hear of someone being thrown in jail because they've committed a housebreaking or a mugging. You presumably don't react with outrage when you hear of a drunk driver having to pay the hospital bills of some poor sod they ran over. Why are you reacting with such outrage over this?
It's not as if some Judge was walking along one day and thought "Hey, wouldn't it be great if a random company was forced to distribute a rival random company's products?". This is an attempt to resolve a real case of damage. It's fair. The penalty matches the crime. Get over it.

--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by KDan · 2003-01-16 10:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yes, there was another era I can remember reading about when everyone really felt the government should not interfere in big businesses. That was back at the beginning of the 20th century, when big pharmaceutical firms like Bayer managed to get away with marketting Heroin as a "non-addictive cure for cough".

Governments (in theory anyway) are mandated by the people. Who better than the people to decide whether a company has misbehaved and should be ordered to behave differently?

Daniel

--
Carpe Diem
Re:I feel bad for Microsoft by revscat · 2003-01-16 10:49 · Score: 2, Informative

Legally, the only point you make is:

2) Something about the supposed monopoly that Microsoft has, and how bad monopolies are, so this one should be broken as much as possible.

This has little to do with Microsoft's monopoly status. The complaint is that Microsoft signed a contract with Sun to distribute a Sun-certified JVM and Microsoft broke both the spirit and the letter of this agreement. They are now being forced to comply, and rightfully so.

Questions.... by Lord_Slepnir · 2003-01-16 09:26 · Score: 5, Interesting

Will this mean that MS must fully integrate java into it's operating system? Or can they get away with just shipping either the free download off of the sun site or even just including a link to download it off it the sun website. Will they have to provide support for it over windows update, or do they only have to provide the initial download?

Re:Questions.... by ZoneGray · 2003-01-16 10:23 · Score: 2, Interesting

I remember back when this suit first got started, and Sun complained that Microsoft hadn't included rmi in their Java distribution. Microsoft's position was that the agreeement only required that Microsoft make it available for download. Which, apparently, was true.

But, when you went to fetch the file from Microsoft, their web site contained an abscure reference to rmi, and directed you to their ftp site. I went to the ftp directory, and looked, and looked, and I couldn't find rmi.

Finally, I found the file. Every file in that directory was listed in uppercase, except for rmi.zip, which was lower-case. This made it extrememly easy to overlook when scanning a directory listing.

I have to admit, I kind of enjoyed the cleverness of the whole thing.

I don't like MS, BUT ..... by mustangdavis · 2003-01-16 09:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

... I don't agree with the ruling ...

It is like telling AOL to ship MSN8 with their latest distro ....

Sun and Microsoft are competitors. MS developes Visual Studio and should promot their programming distro.

If MS has to include Java, wh don't the have to include Perl, Python, PHP, and interpreters for other languages ... or why don't they have to include the Macromedia plug-in?

Everyone has to download the pluins and interpreters for other products, why should Java and Sun be so special?

BTW: My favorite programming language is Java, so I am definately not biased here ... this is my opinion in regards to fair competition

--
HallmarkOrnaments.Com

Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-01-16 09:36 · Score: 2, Informative

It's not the same thing. Microsoft makes the OS and the languages that run on them. They're anti-competitive because they make the OS, provide a language to program for the OS AND use this fact to keep other languages from being used to program the OS.
Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... by powerlinekid · 2003-01-16 09:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yes they are competitors but once Microsoft started leveraging its monopoly through illegal business practices its a whole new ballgame. I'm not too upset about this ruling for that reason. Now if Microsoft had never screwed over sun or anything else for that matter, this ruling would definitly be unfair.

--

can't sleep slashdot will eat me
Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... by legLess · 2003-01-16 09:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Have you been reading the news? You're asking why a convicted child molester shouldn't be allowed to run a daycare center: "All sorts of other people can - what's so special about Mr. Child Molester?" It's special becuase the drastic anti-social behavior for which they've been publically tried and convicted is directly tied to this remedy.
this is my opinion in regards to fair competition
The point appears to elude you. Microsoft has been convicted in federal court specifically for trying to crush Java by illegally extending their monopoly power - this is a remedy. Any company can have a monopoly in any market; what's illegal is using your power in one market (operating systems) to take over another market (e.g. web browsers, office suites).
It is like telling AOL to ship MSN8 with their latest distro
Not at all. If AOL had 95% of the country dialing into their servers, they used their position to try to kill MSN8, were successful in damaging it, were tried and convicted by the federal government, then were ordered to include MSN8 as part of the remedy for their illegal actions ... then you'd have a valid analogy.
If MS has to include Java, wh [sic] don't the [sic] have to include Perl, Python, PHP
Because Perl, Python and PHP weren't the targets of Microsoft's illegal monopoly behavior.

Have people already forgotten that Microsoft has been convicted of the most anti-competitive and anti-free-market behavior possible? That the U.S government has been trying for a decade to rein in their behavior and bring some semblence of competition to the PC market?

--
This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... by wmshub · 2003-01-16 09:55 · Score: 2, Informative

In a perfect world, product and businesses live or die based on their own merits. The anti-monopoly laws are an attempt to (among other things) bring reality closer to this hypothetical perfect system. Microsoft has been found to hold a monopoly, and the judge has decided that Microsoft is using its OS monopoly to help .net against java, so instead of .net or java competing on equal footing, .net will have a huge advantage just because it is backed by a company that happens to also have an OS monopoly. The judge's ruling is an attempt to correct for this. It seems pretty fair to me.

PS - I wasn't quite right when I said that "The judge has decided..."; the trail has barely even started, the judge has officially decided nothing. This ruling is because the judge thinks that Sun will probably win, but Microsoft could use delaying tactics to put off an official ruling until irreparable damage to Sun/Java has been done, so until a ruling comes this will make such delaying tactics less successful.
Re:I don't like MS, BUT ..... by Kefabi · 2003-01-16 10:05 · Score: 2, Interesting

It's not so simple.

You say that Sun's Java and Microsofts .NET should both enter the ring and duke it out, then let consumers pick the winner!

The problem is, Microsoft cheats. Microsoft is trying to guarentee their win before Sun even enters the ring. Microsoft has gone to court, and the courts have ruled that Microsoft has illegally used their monopoly to their advantage.

Once Java was created, Microsoft realized that if it took off, many programs would no longer require Windows anymore to run. Microsoft then attempted to hijack Java by creating their own incompatible Java VM. Microsoft was using their monopoly to force this incompatible VM onto consumers. Microsoft was trying to use their monopoly to beat out Sun's Java.

It is like telling AOL to ship MSN8 with their latest distro ....
Well, AOL didn't try to ship their own version of MSN, try to pass it off as the real MSN, when in reality it wasn't approved by Microsoft. Microsoft tried to ship their own version of Java, pass it off as Java, when in reality it's not truely Java.

Microsoft only forced their incompatible Java VM long enough until they could get .NET developed, and now they want to use .NET to take over what's left of the computer industry, and to kill off any chance that Sun's Java ever had of surviving.

Sun just wants a fair fight. Microsoft wants to kill them before consumers can pick the winner for themselves. Microsoft's trying to set themselves up as the winner before the fight even starts. The justice system was right in saying that Microsoft cannot use their power to force Sun out of the marketplace.

What Microsoft is trying to do is illegal, unethical, unfair and bad for consumers. It's why using a monopoly unfairly is illegal. The government is supposed to help the people and be run BY the people. Microsoft isn't supposed to make choices for us, and it definately isn't run by the people.

How hard is it? by gwernol · 2003-01-16 09:27 · Score: 5, Interesting

Microsoft, which told Motz on Thursday that shipping Java with Windows was not a simple matter and could harm large corporate users of Windows, is almost certain to appeal--a move the judge anticipated.

Does anyone have details of what Microsoft claims was so hard about installing Java with Windows? Given that Sun already provide a complete Windows installer why can't they do this in 120 days? How could this "harm large corporate users". I know Microsoft are just stalling, but what argument did they put forward to the judge? Clearly it wasn't that convincing...

--
Sailing over the event horizon

Re:How hard is it? by javahacker · 2003-01-16 10:14 · Score: 5, Insightful

Installing Java is not the issue. They provided tools to their customers that rely on their VM being present for their corporate web pages to function. I know this because the company I am currently doing contract work for has a web application they purchased for content management of their shared project/business documents. It is written using Microsoft tools, and won't work if you have the Sun VM activated for your browser.

Their argument is valid, that this will cause problems for their corporate clients. It will cause problems whenever it comes out, because some of their corporate clients (or their customers) will not be able to view their web pages properly.

Delaying this rollout is not really going to help much, because most web application get updated when the application changes, not when the client changes. Their corporate customers are going to be very angry with them about this kind of problem.

I don't feel sorry for Microsoft, because they got themselves into this mess by trying to spin Java out of Suns control, and make it into a Microsoft specific version. Now they have been told to live up to their contract with Sun, and must pay the price for their behavior. I do feel sorry for their corporate customers who bought into systems designed around the Microsoft VM, because they were dumb, not culpable. They will end up paying part of the price for Microsoft's past errors.

Most corporate clients will have control of their desktops, and can make their internal users use the Microsoft VM until they can fix things. They can't make joe user on the internet do that, which is where things will break down.
Re:How hard is it? by rhyd · 2003-01-16 12:39 · Score: 2

what a completely stupid point you make. How were these supposed MS corporate customers (dumb enough to be reliant on the MS VM) not inconveinienced at all when MS recently (briefly) decided not to include their VM with XP! Was billy boy thinking of his corporate clients then? No - he was just trying to damage Java and promote .Not

Each new version of a microsoft product has introduced subtle changes that cause headaches (AKA compelling reasons to upgrade everyone) for programmers and admins with lots of desktops. Get used to it or Switch!

--
'Be the change you want to see in the world' - Al Gore

Ok, now where's the CLR by zjbs14 · 2003-01-16 09:28 · Score: 2, Funny

So when is the Microsoft CLR shipping with Solaris?

--
No sig, sorry.

This spoke volumes... by JudgeFurious · 2003-01-16 09:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

"If my order doesn't get stayed or reversed (on appeal), it's going to get done," Motz said.

Anyone else read this and get the impression that Motz isn't particularly confident that it will happen? I read that line and my brain converted it to: "If Microsoft doesn't mind and decides not to take their money and lawyers to a more friendly court farther up stream then it's going to get done, but don't count on it."

--
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.

Odd... by somethingwicked · 2003-01-16 09:31 · Score: 2, Informative

I just installed the Windows version of Opera on a computer this weekend and I am pretty damn sure it gave me the option to install the latest version of Java at that time...

Am I wrong?

And if I'm right, is your company just not willing or unable to do the same thing?

Or are you whining because its not preinstalled by M$? Are there not other platforms that do NOT have Java installed by default?

I would guess that there are but M$ is the most common OS used by your end users so you run into this most often.

--

---"What did I say that sounded like 'Tell me about your day?'"---

Re:Odd... by Hezaurus · 2003-01-16 10:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's not about preinstall. It's about the fact that M$ deliberately includes an outdated & mangled (something like 5 years now) version of Java to make it look bad.
Java and Linux are threat to microsoft, so it's good for M$ when another frustrated users curses 'that fu**ing java' again when it crashes on microsoft's ancient runtime.

Think it like this: how would you feel if all the games would preinstall some buggy old beta version of the display driver for the hardware that your company is manufacturing. If you do this, you should at least inform the users that something better is available.

Funny, if I click to open a pdf-document (without acroreader installed) my XP offers to search the right tool from the internet. I think it should behave the same way if double click on that *.jar - package.

--
No matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it. (T. Pratchett)
Re:Odd... by Tim+C · 2003-01-16 11:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

lots of Java applets around the web do not work on the Mozilla/Sun combo, where they do on IE.

That's because the two VMs are essentially incompatible. IE being the de facto standard web browser, most applet writers make damn sure their applet works with MS's JVM first, then maybe, perhaps Mozilla, if they can be bothered.

And although the majority of applets do work on Moz/Sun, the JVM takes frickin' ages to load for the first time.

Well, of course it takes a while compared to the MS one - it's a hell of a lot bigger! Lots and lots of packages have been added to the API since 1.1.4 (the last version that MS released a VM for, iirc), including the entire Collections API (how anyone can write anything worthwhile without that and not tear their hair out I'll never know...)

--
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Re:Odd... by Lurker_2k · 2003-01-16 15:16 · Score: 2, Informative

LOL.

I've read the settlement quite thoroughly thank you. Have you raed them all? Including the inital one where Sun sued MS for distributing the customized JVM? Sun was 100% in the right on that one. And they deserved that win. Part of THAT settlement allowed MS to distribute their JVM for up to 5 years so as not to leave end users out in the cold. But they couldn't do any more work on it. Ever.

Microsoft however decided to not distribute it for the full 5 years. Sun cried foul and sensationalized the whole thing with "MS is trying to kill Java!" which wasn't quite the case. MS was simply choosing to not distribute their version for the full 5 years they were allowed. Notice the word "allowed" MS was under no legal obligation whatsoever to distribute their version for the full 5 years.

Granted, MS could have simply made it so that if someone tried to download their old JVM it would automatically send them to Sun's download page, but they were under no legal requirement to do so.
Re:Odd... by aufait · 2003-01-16 17:02 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've read the settlement quite thoroughly thank you.
If you did, you would have noticed that it settled all claims between Microsoft and Sun except the antitrust ones. When Microsoft signed off on the settlement, they knew Sun could come back and sue them on antitrust grounds.
Notice the word "allowed" MS was under no legal obligation whatsoever to distribute their version for the full 5 years.
You should read the Judge's opinion to understand his reasoning. When java came out, Microsoft knew it would be a threat to their Window monopoly. However, they had nothing to compete with it. So they entered the contract in order to "pollute" (Microsoft's word, not mine) jave. They added extensions not contained in the spec and their development tools automatically used those extenstions without informing the developers that the resulting code would only work with the windows JVM.
Microsoft achieved their goal. They were able to slow down the adoption of java's acceptence until they couldd come with .NET to compete with Java.

--
I feel like picking a fight with everyone who thinks they are right. - Rainmakers

It will only matter if... by Eric_Cartman_South_P · 2003-01-16 09:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

It will only matter if it is the real, pure, clean and true JRE from Sun that is running. If Microsoft gets to put there own M$-Java in the install, it will make things much worse.

http://java.sun.com/getjava/index.html

Which version of Java? by stefanlasiewski · 2003-01-16 09:31 · Score: 2, Interesting

One thing I can't find out from any of these stories is the Java version?

Is MS shipping Java1.4? 1.1? 1.2? Some truncated version of one of the above?

--
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."

Too little, too late by Teckla · 2003-01-16 09:33 · Score: 3, Interesting

Bundling Java with Windows won't hurt, but it won't seriously help, either.

The web community has overwhelmingly chosen JavaScript for advanced web-based functionality. Java applets are a niche these days, and will most likely remain that way.

Java on the desktop is in sorry shape. You can choose AWT (which is too limited) and Swing (which is too big, slow, and some people think, ugly). It won't be able to compete with the nice native GUIs you get with .NET.

I can't think of very many developers who think writing their desktop applications in Java is a good idea. And I can't think of very many JavaScript developers who will switch to Java once Microsoft bundles Java with Windows.

Besides, we're talking about Microsoft. Who here DOESN'T think Microsoft won't taint Java in some way? Raise your hands. I've got a bridge to sell you.

-Teckla

Re:Too little, too late by mindstrm · 2003-01-16 09:47 · Score: 3, Insightful

Javascript and Java have *nothing* to do with each other.. nothing at all. This is like comparing Javascript to TCL. Or C.

Applets? It's about more than applets. Java applets are a niche? I use some daily in my work, and I *need* them, and it's a pain in the ass when microsoft made using java difficult. It USED to be easy.

Javascript developers? Who are you kidding? Javascript is a joke.

Don't compare them. Don't contrast them. That's like comparing Apples to Moonrocks.
Re:Too little, too late by enjo13 · 2003-01-16 10:01 · Score: 2, Informative

Java applets are in widespread distribution on almost every corporate network I've seen.

AWT is basically deprecated (as the primary GUI system, parts of it are integrated into Swing), and Swing is not 'ugly.' The native look and feel is a bit distateful to a lot of people, but all of my Swing applications look suspiciously like the platform that they run on... So if the default MS Windows look is 'ugly', then yes Swing on Windows is ugly. If the default Aqua look is 'ugly', the same applies.

You seem to be caught in a circa '97 approach to Java on the network. Applets are not about animating icons or handling the form work that Javascript does well. They are about delivering complex programs that do complex things above and beyond what Javascript can do. In many ways they are very complimentary technologies. There is a definite place for Java on the web (and on the Desktop for that matter)... For example, we've managed to support many platforms by our choice of going with a Swing Java desktop application as support for our Palm apps... With minimal effort.

--
Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
Re:Too little, too late by Wraithlyn · 2003-01-16 10:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

Your post is so full of misinformation I don't know where to start.

JavaScript is a client side SCRIPTING language, which has nothing to do with Java. (JavaScript's author, Netscape, decided to cash in on Java's rising popularity by hikacking its name) It does very SIMPLE things through your browser. It has NOT been "overwhelmingly chosen [...] for advanced web-based functionality". Where do you get this stuff?

There are no such thing as "JavaScript developers" anymore than there are "Logo developers". There are web developers who have some scripting skills, and there are real coders who use JavaScript for basic, limited stuff. Advanced client side tasks require something like a Java applet. These are everywhere. Nobody "switches" from JavaScript to Java, the very concept is absurd. They are not designed for the same tasks.

There is huge demand for Java development right now. It is not a niche, it is at the forefront of the mainstream. For desktop apps, AWT is dead and has been for quite a while. Swing 1.3+ is very lightweight and fast, if you know how to code it efficiently. Our company has written many Java desktop apps. Way faster to write than C++ and far less bug prone. And the compiled code will run identically everywhere.

One thing you don't mention at all is Server side apps. Java is kicking ass in this arena and has been for years.

If you read the article, you'd notice it said that Microsoft has been ordered "to begin shipping Sun Microsystems' Java". Not implement their own version. So they won't be tainting it... although they will likely add as much hassle as they can to using it, like not installing it by default.

--
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson

Do your Homework by Anonymous Coward · 2003-01-16 09:35 · Score: 5, Informative

All of you that "feel bad" for Microsoft need to remember that this is happening because MS broke a binding agreement with Sun.

Re:how about the reverse by laertes · 2003-01-16 09:36 · Score: 2, Insightful

Still sound reasonable?

You know what, you're absolutely right.

Forcing a company who has been found to have illegally leveraged Windows (the same OS that MS has been found to have an illegal monopoly on) to destroy a product to help that product.

is exactly the same as

Forcing a free, minor OS to help the company trying to illegally leverage Windows to destroy the free, minor OS.

Thank you for clearing that up.

--

Yes, I'm still a junky. Are you still a bitch?

In other news by JustAnOtherCodeSerf · 2003-01-16 09:37 · Score: 2, Funny

A warehouse in Siberia recieves 3 million coppies of Windows 3.11 (all running java). A Microsoft spokesman is over heard saying "OH! you meant ship it _to_ someone?!"

--
-=sig=-

PLease don't start making applets again by MS_is_the_best · 2003-01-16 09:42 · Score: 2, Informative

I want to make an appeal to all developpers, to let this not be a starting point of making Java applets for the web again!
The web is actually a lot better now developpers know that ActiveX, Java and full Flash sites have a lot of problems attached. Finally there is some knownledge about (and government pressure for use of) the W3.org principles. Portability and accessibility are beginning to become standards for the web. Furthermore, if you really need more action in your site, Javascript can do a lot.

Everyone, whatever disabilities or browser they have, should have the right to use the web. (and Java is still not standard in say Lynx, and electronica for blind people will fail seeing the information).

Java server side is fine, Java for applications is ok, if the application is fast enough or people are willing to wait for it, please please never make applets again...

So actually if everyone listens to me :-), Java on Windows is not such a big deal...

The difference by mindstrm · 2003-01-16 09:43 · Score: 2, Informative

Is that they had a contract with sun, which they broke, several ways. They USED to ship java, people use it, depend on it, and it's a PAIN IN THE ASS not having it included.
They were under contract to keep java in windows... and they broke it.

If they had a contract with macromedia, and then broke it, they could be made to stick to it as well.

Re:The difference by CVaneg · 2003-01-16 09:50 · Score: 2, Informative

For those of you who are interested, a press release linking the contract and other relevant documents can be found at Sun's site here
For those of you more interested in blurbs and sound bites from the article:
Sun, based in Santa Clara, Calif., claims Microsoft views Sun's Java software as a threat because it can run on a variety of operating systems, not just on Microsoft's Windows.
Among tactics cited in the lawsuit, Sun alleges Microsoft promoted an incompatible form of Java that worked best on Windows and, most recently, dropped it from Windows XP, which was introduced in 2001.

Monopolies have different rules by semios · 2003-01-16 09:43 · Score: 5, Insightful

What microsoft is doing is more akin to the phone company, a legally acknowledged monopoly, that blocks you from calling a competitor of theirs. Except in microsoft's case, they reroute the call to a mock phone company which provides different rates and services intentionally meant to dissaude people from switching to that competitor.

It's anti-competive. It's illegal. And this is a fair punishment.

Re:About damn time by zjbs14 · 2003-01-16 09:51 · Score: 2, Interesting

No, the MS JVM (1.1.4 vintage) runs great on Windows. It's the Sun JVM that runs like crap. Of course it's faster on Windows than most of Sun's boxes. Go figure.

--
No sig, sorry.

Because... by mobiGeek · 2003-01-16 09:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

Bad analogy. All analogies are bad...it's just like, say, pork.

AOL has not been found guilty in a U.S. federal court of law of illegally using their monopoly to quash competitors.
Perl, Python, PHP (or the entities responsible thereof) have not taken Microsoft to court to argue that they have been stifled by illegal monopolistic practices.
Sun is the plaintif; the ruling is in favour of Sun.
fair competition is what started this whole case (or a lack thereof).

--

...Beware the IDEs of Microsoft...

In what ways did it not meet standards? by josephgrossberg · 2003-01-16 09:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

Can someone provide a list, or at least a link, describing how the MS implementation of Java was broken?

--

Joe
http://www.joegrossberg.com

Re:In what ways did it not meet standards? by CustomDesigned · 2003-01-16 10:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

A partial list was provided with the initial lawsuit (which was posted online). However, the two problems were naming and completeness.
As part of their contract, MS was forbidden to add public names to system packages (e.g. java.lang, java.net, etc). Nevertheless, they did so. There were some stretchers on both sides.
Microsoft PR claimed that Sun was forbidding them to add Windows specific extensions. This was silly - there was no problem with any number of packages named com.ms.* or whatever (except that the ms.com domain belongs to Morgan Stanley, and thus didn't follow the 3rd party naming convention - but that wasn't in the contract). There were some very nice extensions with proper names - like JDirect which let you call Microsoft DLL's without writing JNI glue. The problem was that Microsoft wanted to name some extensions java.*. This would of course cause the unwary programmer to inadvertantly create Java programs which only run on Windows - despite not knowingly using any MS specific packages. Exactly what MS wanted.
On Sun's part, the contract included a list of packages which Microsoft could not touch the public name space of. More system packages were added to Java 1.1. Sun claimed that Microsoft couldn't touch those either - reasonable, but they weren't in the specific list in the contract.
The completeness problem was along the same lines. Microsoft provided a complete 1.0 API. However, they left out components of the 1.1 API that competed with their own offerings. For instance, they left out RMI and offered DCOM support instead. Sun said that it was understood that the same restrictions regarding system name space pollution and completeness would apply to the packages of subsequent API versions. But this was not spelled out in the contract. It would not be in the ruthless spirit of Microsoft for them to follow the spirit of a contract if they could find a loophole.
Regardless of quibbling over whether the system package list under contract should expand to match new API versions, Microsoft polluted even core packages from 1.0 with handy additions sure to entice the unwary. So they were guilty even by the letter of the law.

This is a load of smelly poop... isn't it? by xmutex · 2003-01-16 10:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Sun start out suing MS to _remove_ Java from Windows, then sue to get it back in, and so on? A few times back and forth?

That's sort of obnoxious, like having a little brother with ADD and a mean streak.

--

jack's bicycle is music to my ears

As a developer by captainclever · 2003-01-16 10:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think this is excellent news; as a developer, the fact that java is not shipped with windows makes it a pain in the ass to write java apps for windows users.
if i write a c++ app, no problem, a user can simply download and run it. If i write a java app, and say distribute it as a JAR file, your average user isnt gonna want to download the Java runtime or sdk, then launch the jar file calling java -jar or javaw.exe or whatever.
Java pre installed on windows means i can easily write pure java apps that will work easily on all windows boxes. Bring it on :)
RJ

--
Last.fm - join the social music revolution

What does this have to do with my rights online? by stratjakt · 2003-01-16 10:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

I never lost the 'right' to use Java on windows.

This is about MS's rights in the marketplace, not my rights online.

Or does anything that has to do with MSFT automatically categorize it as YRO to get peoples dander up?

--
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!

Re:About damn time by TheAwfulTruth · 2003-01-16 10:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

Suns JVM is the ONLY... PROGRAM... EVER... To cause my 512 meg windows machine with 752 meg of VM popup and say "Windows is increasing your windows VM" when running a tiny editing program. Every single actual java program I have ever run using Suns JVM has been buggy and slow. It turns a p4 2.5 gig machine into a 486. It's the crappiest piece of junk I have ever been forced to install on a Windows box (And I've been forced to install both Quicktime AND Real multiple times), and now the entire world has to suffer having it.

Microsoft's JVM was 4x faster and less buggy that Suns. It was SO FAST, that sun had to rig one of their benchmarking programs to hide the fact!

Sun screwed themselves over by being lazy and stupid with their poor JVM implentation and lousy development tools. 4 years later, Sun's Java on the desktop is still a piece of crap. Java could have been something if Sun had had any balls and/or brains. But they have neither and they destroyed their chance.

--
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!

What about product updates? by exceed · 2003-01-16 10:57 · Score: 3, Interesting

Does 'shipping with Java' also apply to including Java on the online Windows Update? If that isn't the case alot of Windows users will still be Java-less by default.

--

void women (int money, time_t time);

The Bigger Microsoft News Today by telstar · 2003-01-16 11:00 · Score: 3, Informative

I know this may get modded as Offtopic, but it's the bigger news story for both Microsoft and the tech industry today:

"Microsoft sets dividend, stock split"

Microsoft is the last of the Dow 30 to start paying a dividend, and paves the way for other tech companies that have held out paying dividends. Should be an interesting morning in trading for MSFT.

What was Sun thinking? by spells · 2003-01-16 11:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

I can't believe people think that this is good for Java! As an enterprise developer, this absolutely sucks.

Java has become one of the primary tools for enterprise development, mostly on the server, but also on enterprise clients, where downloading an applet or java app is typically not time consuming for the client because they are on a LAN.

What takes so long in software development? TESTING, and in java testing different versions of the VM. Up until this point, enterprises have been able to enforce a VM version on enterprise clients, and the developers can count on that version being on the client desktops. Now what? If the enterprise wants to stick with its 1.2.2 or 1.3.1 VM, they can't install WinXP SP2? What happens with the next SP and a new java VM? All enterprise java apps will need to be thoroughly tested with each new service pack, since Sun's VMs are not all backwards compatible.

In addition, if anyone is still righting java applets for the internet, how does this help? What percentage of users are going to have XP SP2 in the next 12-24 months?

This solves none of the Java VM version issues. This was Sun saying "wah wah" in court and getting a sympathetic judge.

Sun needs to hand over Java to the JCP and stop using it as a weapon in its fight against MS.

Get a clue! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-01-16 11:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's clear that so many of you have NO idea what this is about.

Sun and MS (sorry, M$) had an agreement where Microsoft would include a Java runtime with Windows. Only M$ made their own VM/runtime that was 'tweaked' and extended with extra functionality that ONLY worked under Windows.

Sun complained that this implementation was NOT Java, because it didn't match the Java specs. So they got a court to make MS remove their non-standard non-Java Java VM from Windows. But they didn't replace it with a fully-functionaly VM - they replaced it with nothing, contrary to their agreement with Sun.

So all Sun is doing is getting their agreement with MS enforced by a court. This has NOTHING to do with MS being a monopoly or Sun wanting their VM on Windows or anything like that. It comes down to MS creatively breaking a contract in order to kill Java (by nullifying it's main goal of platform-independence) and replace it with C#.

So please, no more posts about "But they wanted MS to remove IE, now they're adding Java?!?" or "This is okay because MS is a monopoly". Go start a thread elsewhere if you want to bitch about it, instead of crapping on about MS abusing their position as monopoly in every Slashdot article. Fuck off.

ramble by rhyd · 2003-01-16 12:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

This isn't necessarily a good thing for sun in short term because it draws press attention to java's failure on the desktop.
However, if microsoft are forced to keep suns latest JRE as part of the standard windows install for a a few years (as the case drags on) then this will be a huge win for Sun.

java has arguably already won the enterprise-server-app war with the entire industry of players oracle,ibm,macromedia,... currently allied versus the beast and will probably win the handheld/mobile battle unless microsoft can defeat sonyErricson, nokia, sharp and palm... Java is currently a huge success everywhere but the desktop.

(aside)
Why has java failed on the desktop.... not just because of the redmond crew but because swing is 'kin huge bloated and considered slow. Swing will always be slow relative to naitive, but I love it because it stays ideologically pure to the spirit of write once run the same anywhere. Its fairly obvious that sun were looking at a 10 year roadmap when they released swing coz its gonna take that long before swing apps run imperceiveably slower than native apps (and no doubt will still look like shit by default). However, a machine shipping with XP today will be able to run swing applications ok.
(/aside)

Its only recent PC hardware that has began to run Swing at an acceptable speed. The timing of this ruling could make desktop java very compelling if it as seamlessly integrated into XP.2003 as it is in OSX

anyways i'm gonna carry on compiling my own p4 optimized sun j2SDK for Linux from source code using gcc3.. "export INSANE=true"woo hoo!

1.Check out photomessa. Its a free (as in beer, the toolkit is under Mozilla Public Licence), small and useful zoomable image browser
2.Install photomessa using java webstart (quick, easy, secure)
3.rethink your java speed prejudices

--
'Be the change you want to see in the world' - Al Gore

This reverses the unfairness by joelgrimes · 2003-01-16 12:23 · Score: 2

I agree that this will be a problem for their corporate customers who depend the MS VM, but what about the reverse? I've personally written apps that work on Sun's vm but not Microsoft's. But I needed Swing, so I've had to break it to the clients that MOST PEOPLE will have to download and install Sun's Java.

NOW it's reversed - the inconvenience is just transferred to people who target MS's VM rather than the current one from Sun. It's hilarious that MS feels it's unfair because that's exactly what they did to Sun. Now if MS wants people to use their crap VM, they have to convince people to download it or install it from their Windows CD.

This has hamstrung Java because the current version from Sun is SO superior to what MS has been shipping - either their home-grown broken one OR the old one the court previously forced them to ship.

Java developers should be rejoicing that they can now write quality apps that make use of the far superior, newer versions of Java and have an even chance of it working on a vanilla Windows install.

--
Textbooks and Open Educational Resources

Re:Other avenues by rking · 2003-01-16 12:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

Ignore the ruling. What are the courts going to do, issue another ruling that says, "we really mean it this time?"

Probably first there would be essentially an ultimatum, yes. Beyond that, start putting people in prison for contempt of court. Board level people I would imagine.

Just like the airline wars... by siskbc · 2003-01-16 12:43 · Score: 2, Interesting

...where Southwest forced Orbitz (a coalition of most airlines except Southwest) to stop listing its prices. Why? Because they thought that Orbitz was intentionally listing Southwest's less-than-best prices, with the intention of making Southwest look uncompetitive. And like you say, if enough consumers keep seeing your company looking bad, they will go with a competitor, not realizing that the company was hosed.

Same with Sun - they had to either get MS to completely abandon any fake Java implemetation, or to ship theirs, which is what happened.

--

-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

Re:Why is the Slashdot crowd pro-Java? by rhyd · 2003-01-16 13:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

Oh yeah... sun pulled out of the whole ISO thing because it was clear MS would have then been free to embrace and extend AKA kill. They provided the JCP as an alternative body which they use to protect Java from the nasty people in redmond. Java isn't really propriatry there are many VM implementations the JCP specs are open. Its just the name Java(TM) thats protected and licensed.

--
'Be the change you want to see in the world' - Al Gore

You miss the point by jam42 · 2003-01-16 13:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

The poster said he has to support an app that is written to "real" Java, and on Windows systems the poster has to walk users through downloading and installing a "real" JVM (from Sun)because MS's is garbage.

Actually, in previous stages of this case Sun got an order forbidding MS from including Java because MS was bastardizing it (with "Java Foundation Classes" wrappers for MFC). Then they "settled" and agreed to let MS include Java, but only version 1.1.3. This was when the current version was 1.3 at least. So the most recent MS JVM is at least four years behind the times.

MS Java *is* Java, but way outdated by aquarian · 2003-01-16 13:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

The problem with MS'Java is not that it isn't real Java, but that it's woefully outdated. Therefore, users can only run old-style Java software, which is severely limited compared to what can be done with Java today.

A good analogy would be some imaginary operating system promising Windows compatibility, but when you actually try it, you find it only supports Windows up to 3.1. Well Windows has changed an awful lot since then, and Java has changed similarly between 1.1 and 1.3/1.4.

Re:MS Java *is* Java, but way outdated by I+Am+The+Owl · 2003-01-16 15:27 · Score: 2, Funny

some imaginary operating system promising Windows compatibility, but when you actually try it, you find it only supports Windows up to 3.1.
Stop beating around the bush and just say "Linux". Sheesh.

--

--sdem

Yes, XP SP1 by greygent · 2003-01-16 14:18 · Score: 2, Interesting

Microsoft already ships Java in Win XP SP1 via Windows Update.

Re:MS Java *is not * Java, *and* way outdated by colinleroy · 2003-01-16 21:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Now, does it look like java to you ? They even tell it's not portable.
You can also download their SDK, it comes with documentation afaik, have a look at it.

--
blah

Slashdot Mirror

MS Must Ship Java With Windows Within 120 Days

79 of 485 comments (clear)