Three Judges to Review Java Ruling on Thursday

Richard Finney writes " Reuter's Peter Kaplan is reporting that a three-judge panel in Richmond, Va. will hear arguments from Microsoft and Sun over whether it should uphold a Java 'must-carry' order imposed by a lower court judge in December. Here's a quick review of the issue: Microsoft signed an agreement with Sun on implementing Java. Microsoft implemented a non-compliant version ('embrace, extend, destroy' to their critics). Sun called them on it and as 'pushishment,' the courts said Microsoft had to carry the official Sun product for a while. Microsoft's lawyers seem to be on a winning streak lately and their spokesman Jim Dresler says the order is 'unprecedented, unnecessary and doesn't serve the public interest.' Some say this the deciding battle between Java and .NET. Too bad it's not being settled on the technical merits of both products."

Comments

This is a civil suit, not a technical suit.

[bmetzler]

And don't forget, no matter what happens to Java and .Net, civil suits have never been settled on technical notes.

-Brent

Re:Cross platform

[kzeddy]

> However to be fair to them Sun had basically >said Java2 is so broken that some bugs will >never be fixed
What is broken about Java2?

uhm

[Iamthefallen]

"Too bad it's not being settled on the technical merits of both products."

When was the last time anything was settled on technical merits and thereby gained widespread adoption? Zealots from both sides usually state their case and fanatically defend their position while the rest of us pick what we feel more comfortable with. Unbiased technical merit rarely gets attention, and even more rare is that it is the deciding factor when faced with a choice.

Define "Technical"

[4of12]

Too bad it's not being settled on the technical merits of both products."

Certainly there's money involved in the decision or else it wouldn't be in the courts.

But even a "technical" evaluation for complex software products involves many aspects which are subjective and depend on the users.

Exhibit A: Is Perl or Python better? The answer depends on the application and the reviewer. Likewise "Tastes great. Less filling."

Re:Define "Technical"

[edward.virtually@pob]

What's really too bad is that the issue isn't being settled on the moral merits. Microsoft agreed to support Java while the DoJ case regarding Netscape was still alive for the PR value: "see, we're playing nicely with a competitor" and hopefully distracting people from the near daily testimony about the illegal methods [1] it used to destroy Netscape -- how it really plays with competitors. Microsoft has since used every legal and disputedly illegal means to avoid honoring the Java agreement, becoming bolder in its methods as the DoJ case dies [2]. The judge in the Java case was quite certain of his findings [3] and the remedy he proposed was extremely lenient given the damage Microsoft's behavior had on the cross platform viability and hence success of Java. Microsoft should not be able to escape this token punishment by appealing it until it wins.

1. Jackson's Findings of Fact stands, only his remedy was overturned.
2. First came the incompatible extensions and IDEs, then conflicting implementations, and lastly not shipping a JVM at all now that the DoJ case is circling the drain.
3. Unlike Jackson, however, he kept his outrage in check. Doesn't seem to have made that much difference.

Re:Cross platform

[gbjbaanb]

non-compliant menas (accoridng to Sun) 'better than ours'. Nothing MS did broke your java apps running on windows.

Sure they did add features, but you were quite free not to use them, or to use them and say 'my app only runs on windows'. Frankly, what's the problem there, you could write your app using JNI to integrate with some Windows-only component. It wouldn't be cross-platform anymore but would be still compliant.

If Sun had actually sent Java off to become a standard, instead of pretending to, and MS has broken the standard then they'd be the bad boys here, but as it stands, I don't think Sun has anything but legal cr*p on their side.

A funny detail

[quintessent]

Microsoft and Sun originally settled for $25 million, the maximum allowed under the contract. As part of the agreement, Microsoft agreed to stop shipping its Java VM in within a few years.

XP was shipped, and Microsoft decided to fulfill its promise much earlier.

Sun got mad.