> Then you are not using XML right. Oh, I have heard this same argument so many times... I still have to see _anyone_ "using XML right".
> For one the format shouldn't be changing much You really should read The Mythical Man-Month; change is in the essence of software development.
> Converting two thousand numbers to text should take 50 microseconds at the most. Yes, but what about parsing two thousand XML elements, building their DOM and then going thru it?(and SAX is not much better, not to mention much more limited). If you haven't realized yet the insane overhead of XML parsing you have never had to use XML in any serious production environment.
At risk of repeating myself:
"The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not solve the problem well." -- Phil Wadler
Python's main problems right now are multiple inheritance with all the unnecessary complexity it adds to the language and the lack of a decent concurrent programming model, stackless could provide a good concurrent programming model.
But while it's outside the main distro stackless will only be a niche toy, so go nag Guido to include channels from stackless into Python 2.5!
Now you can enjoy the power and beauty of the CSP model in Linux and other Unixes thanks to plan9port including libthread and Inferno; yes, it's all Open Source.
You obviously have no clue what you are talking about, there are many wavelengths that can't be covered from the ground and that are not properly covered by and other space telescope, specially in the UV.
Hubble has some other great advantages over any ground telescope: a much darker background, and possibility of _much_ longer observation times, for certain things this is not important, but for other tasks this is _fundamental_.
When you request some time at Hubble you already have to explain _why_ that task can't be done in any other way, so Hubble is already being used only for things that can't practically be done with anything else.
And JWST wont help with this, because as anyone with a clue knows, it's designed to _complement_ Hubble, not to replace it, and their capabilities do not overlap.
Currently there are not even plans to build anything that could replace what Hubble provides.
And for those that say that Hubble is old, thanks to the previous Shuttle missions to it, many of it's instruments have been replaced with much better and improved versions keeping it at the front of the state of the art.
(Actually the cancelled servicing mission was going to install some really cool and powerful bits that costed various hundreds of millions of $ and now are just gathering dust)
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
You are either ignorant or trolling, the original Unix developers already developed in the "open source" way long before RMS came along with his GNU crap.
Here is a very good article about the Lions book and how code was shared during the old days of Unix: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/11/3 0/lions/
Before there was an Open Source Initiative, before the Free Software Foundation was even a twinkle in St. iGNUcius' eye, Unix hackers were fighting lawyers and commercial interests for the right to copy and distribute source code.
I was just re-reading the Acme paper this afternoon, and this made me wonder, acme was supposed to eventually support non-textual graphics but this was never implemented, why? and what ideas did you have for such an implementation?
If done right that could allow acme to replace rio completely;)
That is an easy one, one word and a single digit number: Plan 9
Having in mind that Rob Pike and a few other Plan 9 developers now work at Google, I wonder if they had anything to do with this question...
There has been some speculation among Plan 9 fans about what the hell is Rob doing at Google, aside from some small contributions to the Plan 9 on Unix project no one knows what he is working on... I hope that some day we will all get to find out;)
Why use a bad Java clone(that is what.NOT is after all) when you can use an elegant and KISS language like Limbo? Not to mention that Inferno brings the ideas of Unix into the distributed environment world in the most beautiful way... Paraphrasing God Henry Spencer: Those who don't understand the work done at Bell Labs are doomed to reinvent it, poorly.
P.P.S.: For those that don't know what Inferno is and to bypass SlashDot filters here is some text from Dennis M. Ritchie himself: Limbo is a programming language intended for applications running distributed systems on small computers. It supports modular programming, strong type checking at compile- and run-time, interprocess communication over typed channels, automatic garbage collection, and simple abstract data types.
And here is an extract from an interview with Ken God Thompson, creator of Unix and co-inventor of C: Computer: How does your work on Plan 9 and Inferno derive from your earlier work on Unix? What are some of the new ideas arising out of this work that could and should apply to distributed operating systems in general? Thompson: [...] In Plan 9 and Inferno, the key ideas are the protocol for communicating between components and the simplification and extension of particular concepts. In Plan 9, the key abstraction is the file system any thing you can read and write and select by names in a hierarchy and the protocol exports that abstraction to remote channels to enable distribution. Inferno works similarly, but it has a layer of language interaction above it through the Limbo language interface which is [somewhat] like Java, but cleaner.
What do you find interesting in a VMS and Java clones is beyond me, two of the worst technologies ever created in the history of software. Not to mention the most directly at odds with the Unix philosophy.
If you are going to "reshape this industry", you could at least try to do so into a less hideous new shape. (l)Unix has been dead for more than fifteen years[1], but betterthings have been around for almost as long.
If you like C but are tired of doing memory allocation, why don't you use the language that the creators of C spent twenty years designing[2] to overcome C limitations: Limbo
Rob Pike admitted that the main problems with C (as a high level language) are the lack of proper strings and the lack of garbage collection, with limbo you get that and a bunch of other really wonderful goodies, like the best parallel programming framework using CSP and the most beautiful and simple distributed environment thanks to 9p/Styx.
Note: Now you can even run most of Plan 9 user space under Linux: Plan 9 on Unix
[1] "Not only is UNIX dead, it's starting to smell really bad." -- Rob Pike circa 1991 [2] Directly or indirectly most languages developed at Bell Labs for the last 30 years have been predecessors of Limbo
Best wishes and I hope that some day you will correct your misguided ways
"Practical Issues in Database Management" is an excellent book that every database user and developer should read.
After reading that book I realized that what I hate is _not_ relational databases, what I hate is SQL. I wish there were a popular alternative to SQL, but the future only looks worse with XML databases and other abominations...
The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not solve the problem well.
-- Phil Wadler, POPL 2003
Now, when you combine XML and SQL... my worst nightmares become true.
"If I must be ruledby larcenous bullies, I much prefer that they be located far away. Local bullies know far more about me and my doings than faraway bullies sitting in offices in Washington, and can oppress me far more effectively."
Source Henry Spencer: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Htt7u5.E6n%40 spsystems.net
Now can you explain to me what does this have to do with a web browser? because I don't see it.
And for the record I have been developing web applications for over 5 years, and I can tell you, it's a _bad_ idea.
And the use of XML over HTTP as some kind of RPC is just stupid, wasn't CORBA already bad enough? "Hey, yea, but if we use HTTP we can bypass firewalls!" Marvelous! You could as well dump the firewall into the trash can.
The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not solve the problem well.
-- Phil Wadler, POPL 2003
P.S.: I have great respect for the Mozilla development team, they are all nice people, I still have my t-shirt from the first European Mozilla Developers Conference(and from the second), I just hope they don't become too misguided and blinded by stupid fashions.
I don't want that crap, and I don't want Gnome's crap either.
I want a web browser, if I wanted some kind of megalomaniac "application development platform" I will use Python, thank you very much.
And as long as they don't give me access to the source under an open source license I wont touch it. I have been burned once(Windows), twice(Java), I'm not going to get burned a third time, if you want me to rely on your software you better give me the source and let me fix it(or let others fix it).
As Al Viro, one of the very few reasonable Linux kernel developers, said:
All software sucks, be it open-source [or] proprietary. The only question is what can be done with particular instance of suckage, and that's where having the source matters.
-- viro [http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/040 4.3/1344.html]
It's sad that we have to get to this, but in the current software industry having access to the source under a open source license is the only warranty that you are not going to be royally screwed, I don't want to be at the mercy of the economic targets of some random company, I already have enough trouble taking care of _my_ business.
Life is too short to run proprietary software.
-- Bdale Garbee
And as for Gnome, I will quote viro wise words again:
Yeah... "Infinitely extendable API" and all such. Roughly translated as "we can't live without API bloat". Frankly, judging by the GNOME codebase people who designed the thing[GNOME] are culturally incompatible with UNIX.
And yea, that is you, my dear Miguel, you have as little clue as RMS of what Unix is all about, I advice you that when you get tired of all that.NOT gratuitous complexity and over-designed crap you take a look at the only sane OS left: Plan 9; and if you are tired of doing "memory management", why don't you use Limbo (The Limbo Programming Language by Dennis M. Ritchie)?
The most effective debugging tool is still careful thought, coupled with judiciously placed print statements.
-- Brian W. Kernighan, in the paper Unix for Beginners (1979)
But I think the key to debugging is not the technique used for debugging, but how one wrote the code in the first place, here again God Kernighan hits the nail in the head:
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan
Once again, at the time of debugging, simplicity shows it's superiority to the complexity that seems to be so much in fashion this days. That is why I still prefer C to C++; rc to bash; AWK/sed to Perl; Plan 9 to Linux; Limbo to Java; 9p to NFS,...
This is the forgotten key to software design:...there are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
-- C.A.R. Hoare, The 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Or put in another way:
The cheapest, fastest, and most reliable components are those that aren't there.
-- Gordon Bell
Back in the topic of debugging, aside from the sacred printf, the Plan 9 debugger acid is often helpful, and now you can even use it on Linux/BSD!
Limbo was developed in Bell Labs by the the same people that created Unix, C, and Plan 9, and someone once described it as "the language the creators of C would have come up with if they had been give and enormous amount of time to fix and improve C", that is exactly what Limbo is.
This whole thing reminded me of the MS's settlement with AOL-TW, that involved AOL killing Mozilla development, I wonder how long will Sun keep supporting OpenOffice.org after this... fortunately for anyone that uses OO.o(not me), OO.o is Open Source so in a way the cat is out of the bag, still, IIRC sun provided most of the development resources, while Mozilla the dev team was under 50 people IIRC(more like 20 in reality), I think I heard sun has 300 people working on OO.o...
Does anyone here see a pattern? Apple, Corel, AOL, Sun,... (I'm sure there have been a few more) What you do when you have an (practically) infinite pile of cash? pay your competition to kill any product that might threatens your monopoly.
As for Java, IBM better start to think what they are going to replace it with...
I'm glad I dumped Java completely and now I work mostly with Python, not only it's a much nicer language, I also don't have to worry about Sun politics anymore.
If you use java you are still in time to switch to something better, more portable, truly open, and that "sucks less", something like Python... or like Inferno/Limbo;)
[Inferno is now really Free, you can download it from Vitanuova, and as an extra you will get the greatest C compilers ever created, Ken God Thompson C Plan 9 compilers! don't worry about the "details" form, you can just click the "proceed to download" button]
Slashdot Mirror
"XML is like violence: If it doesn't solve your problem, you aren't using enough of it."
Yes, forgot to mention that one, it's one of my recent additions to my quotes database; do you know the author?
> Then you are not using XML right.
Oh, I have heard this same argument so many times... I still have to see _anyone_ "using XML right".
> For one the format shouldn't be changing much
You really should read The Mythical Man-Month; change is in the essence of software development.
> Converting two thousand numbers to text should take 50 microseconds at the most.
Yes, but what about parsing two thousand XML elements, building their DOM and then going thru it?(and SAX is not much better, not to mention much more limited). If you haven't realized yet the insane overhead of XML parsing you have never had to use XML in any serious production environment.
At risk of repeating myself:
"The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not solve the problem well." -- Phil Wadler
"The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not solve the problem well." -- Phil Wadler
The Semantic Web, Syllogism, and Worldview
"metadata is just data with unstandard interfaces"; read, write, and hierarchical file namespaces rule
Stackless is nice... specially channels.
Python's main problems right now are multiple inheritance with all the unnecessary complexity it adds to the language and the lack of a decent concurrent programming model, stackless could provide a good concurrent programming model.
But while it's outside the main distro stackless will only be a niche toy, so go nag Guido to include channels from stackless into Python 2.5!
This is what it means for me: http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/rsc/thread/
Also see Brian W. Kernighan's "A Descent into Limbo" and Dennis M. Ritchie's "The Limbo Programming Language".
And of course Hoare's classic: Communicating Sequential Processes.
Now you can enjoy the power and beauty of the CSP model in Linux and other Unixes thanks to plan9port including libthread and Inferno; yes, it's all Open Source.
You obviously have no clue what you are talking about, there are many wavelengths that can't be covered from the ground and that are not properly covered by and other space telescope, specially in the UV.
Hubble has some other great advantages over any ground telescope: a much darker background, and possibility of _much_ longer observation times, for certain things this is not important, but for other tasks this is _fundamental_.
When you request some time at Hubble you already have to explain _why_ that task can't be done in any other way, so Hubble is already being used only for things that can't practically be done with anything else.
And JWST wont help with this, because as anyone with a clue knows, it's designed to _complement_ Hubble, not to replace it, and their capabilities do not overlap.
Currently there are not even plans to build anything that could replace what Hubble provides.
And for those that say that Hubble is old, thanks to the previous Shuttle missions to it, many of it's instruments have been replaced with much better and improved versions keeping it at the front of the state of the art.
(Actually the cancelled servicing mission was going to install some really cool and powerful bits that costed various hundreds of millions of $ and now are just gathering dust)
So stop the FUD already and inform yourself.
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
--Thomas Jefferson
IP is a myth, time to take back our freedom from government sponsored monopolies!
"Intellectual Property" == communism
(Mod parent up, he said what I wish I had said myself)
Here is a very good article about the Lions book and how code was shared during the old days of Unix:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/11/
You obviously have never used Acme, the greatest UI ever created:
;)
"Acme: A User Interface for Programmers" By Rob Pike
And now you can even run it on (l)Unix thanks to rsc's plan9port: http://swtch.com/plan9port/
I was just re-reading the Acme paper this afternoon, and this made me wonder, acme was supposed to eventually support non-textual graphics but this was never implemented, why? and what ideas did you have for such an implementation?
If done right that could allow acme to replace rio completely
P.S.: For the parent, if you want to know more about Rob's view on user interfaces I recommend that you at least read his papers: 8½, the Plan 9 Window System and The Text Editor sam
Rob's opinion of OO is well known; one of my favorite quotes by him is: "object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing."
As for building on Unix and C, his(and Bell Labs') answers are well known:
- Plan 9
- Limbo
- Inferno
- [New]Squeak
I think that he and the Bell Labs folks already answered those questions over 10 years ago:
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/9.html
(See specially the first section: Motivation)
uriel
Q. What's broken with Unix? How would you fix it?
;)
That is an easy one, one word and a single digit number: Plan 9
Having in mind that Rob Pike and a few other Plan 9 developers now work at Google, I wonder if they had anything to do with this question...
There has been some speculation among Plan 9 fans about what the hell is Rob doing at Google, aside from some small contributions to the Plan 9 on Unix project no one knows what he is working on... I hope that some day we will all get to find out
> > Lets have the BEST of everything in one core repository.
> like This[www.freebsd.org] one?
Sorry, I'm sure you made a small mistake...
The one you were thinking of is This one.
Or maybe This one.
Styx-on-a-brick is really cool and fits directly into the Unix way of doing things:And then you can easily connect it an Inferno Grid: http://www.vitanuova.com/solutions/grid/demogrid.
Why use a bad Java clone(that is what
uriel
P.S.: And yes, for those still living under a rock, Both Inferno and Plan 9 are Open Source. Inferno: http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/net_download4T.h
P.P.S.: For those that don't know what Inferno is and to bypass SlashDot filters here is some text from Dennis M. Ritchie himself: Limbo is a programming language intended for applications running distributed systems on small computers. It supports modular programming, strong type checking at compile- and run-time, interprocess communication over typed channels, automatic garbage collection, and simple abstract data types.
And here is an extract from an interview with Ken God Thompson, creator of Unix and co-inventor of C:
Computer: How does your work on Plan 9 and Inferno derive from your earlier work on Unix? What are some of the new ideas arising out of this work that could and should apply to distributed operating systems in general?
Thompson: [...] In Plan 9 and Inferno, the key ideas are the protocol for communicating between components and the simplification and extension of particular concepts. In Plan 9, the key abstraction is the file system any thing you can read and write and select by names in a hierarchy and the protocol exports that abstraction to remote channels to enable distribution. Inferno works similarly, but it has a layer of language interaction above it through the Limbo language interface which is [somewhat] like Java, but cleaner.
What do you find interesting in a VMS and Java clones is beyond me, two of the worst technologies ever created in the history of software. Not to mention the most directly at odds with the Unix philosophy.
If you are going to "reshape this industry", you could at least try to do so into a less hideous new shape. (l)Unix has been dead for more than fifteen years[1], but better things have been around for almost as long.
If you like C but are tired of doing memory allocation, why don't you use the language that the creators of C spent twenty years designing[2] to overcome C limitations: Limbo
Rob Pike admitted that the main problems with C (as a high level language) are the lack of proper strings and the lack of garbage collection, with limbo you get that and a bunch of other really wonderful goodies, like the best parallel programming framework using CSP and the most beautiful and simple distributed environment thanks to 9p/Styx.
Not only that, but now Inferno/Limbo and Plan 9 are open source.
Note: Now you can even run most of Plan 9 user space under Linux: Plan 9 on Unix
[1] "Not only is UNIX dead, it's starting to smell really bad." -- Rob Pike circa 1991
[2] Directly or indirectly most languages developed at Bell Labs for the last 30 years have been predecessors of Limbo
Best wishes and I hope that some day you will correct your misguided ways
uriel
"Practical Issues in Database Management" is an excellent book that every database user and developer should read.
After reading that book I realized that what I hate is _not_ relational databases, what I hate is SQL. I wish there were a popular alternative to SQL, but the future only looks worse with XML databases and other abominations...
The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not solve the problem well.
-- Phil Wadler, POPL 2003
Now, when you combine XML and SQL... my worst nightmares become true.
uriel
As Isaac Asimov put it (wording approximate):
0 spsystems.net
"If I must be ruledby larcenous bullies, I much prefer that they be located far away. Local bullies know far more about me and my doings than faraway bullies sitting in offices in Washington, and can oppress me far more effectively."
Source Henry Spencer: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Htt7u5.E6n%4
Now can you explain to me what does this have to do with a web browser? because I don't see it.
And for the record I have been developing web applications for over 5 years, and I can tell you, it's a _bad_ idea.
And the use of XML over HTTP as some kind of RPC is just stupid, wasn't CORBA already bad enough? "Hey, yea, but if we use HTTP we can bypass firewalls!" Marvelous! You could as well dump the firewall into the trash can.
The essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard, and it does not
solve the problem well.
-- Phil Wadler, POPL 2003
P.S.: I have great respect for the Mozilla development team, they are all nice people, I still have my t-shirt from the first European Mozilla Developers Conference(and from the second), I just hope they don't become too misguided and blinded by stupid fashions.
I don't want that crap, and I don't want Gnome's crap either.
0 4.3/1344.html]
.NOT gratuitous complexity and over-designed crap you take a look at the only sane OS left: Plan 9; and if you are tired of doing "memory management", why don't you use Limbo (The Limbo Programming Language by Dennis M. Ritchie)?
I want a web browser, if I wanted some kind of megalomaniac "application development platform" I will use Python, thank you very much.
And as long as they don't give me access to the source under an open source license I wont touch it. I have been burned once(Windows), twice(Java), I'm not going to get burned a third time, if you want me to rely on your software you better give me the source and let me fix it(or let others fix it).
As Al Viro, one of the very few reasonable Linux kernel developers, said:
All software sucks, be it open-source [or] proprietary. The only question is
what can be done with particular instance of suckage, and that's where having
the source matters.
-- viro [http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/04
It's sad that we have to get to this, but in the current software industry having access to the source under a open source license is the only warranty that you are not going to be royally screwed, I don't want to be at the mercy of the economic targets of some random company, I already have enough trouble taking care of _my_ business.
Life is too short to run proprietary software.
-- Bdale Garbee
And as for Gnome, I will quote viro wise words again:
Yeah... "Infinitely extendable API" and all such. Roughly translated
as "we can't live without API bloat". Frankly, judging by the GNOME
codebase people who designed the thing[GNOME] are culturally incompatible
with UNIX.
And yea, that is you, my dear Miguel, you have as little clue as RMS of what Unix is all about, I advice you that when you get tired of all that
uriel
A program that produces incorrect results twice as fast is infinitely slower.
-- John Osterhout
The cheapest, fastest, and most reliable components are those that aren't there.
-- Gordon Bell
The most effective debugging tool is still careful thought, coupled with
judiciously placed print statements.
-- Brian W. Kernighan, in the paper Unix for Beginners (1979)
But I think the key to debugging is not the technique used for debugging, but how one wrote the code in the first place, here again God Kernighan hits the nail in the head:
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore,
if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not
smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan
Once again, at the time of debugging, simplicity shows it's superiority to the complexity that seems to be so much in fashion this days. That is why I still prefer C to C++; rc to bash; AWK/sed to Perl; Plan 9 to Linux; Limbo to Java; 9p to NFS,...
This is the forgotten key to software design:
so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies and the other way is to make
it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
-- C.A.R. Hoare, The 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Or put in another way:
The cheapest, fastest, and most reliable components are those that aren't there.
-- Gordon Bell
Back in the topic of debugging, aside from the sacred printf, the Plan 9 debugger acid is often helpful, and now you can even use it on Linux/BSD!
Plan 9 on Unix
Also the chapter on debugging in The Practice of Programming by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike is very good.
Always remember:
The clear successor for C is Limbo.
a .com/idown4e.pl
Limbo was developed in Bell Labs by the the same people that created Unix, C, and Plan 9, and someone once described it as "the language the creators of C would have come up with if they had been give and enormous amount of time to fix and improve C", that is exactly what Limbo is.
Dennis M. Ritchie: The Limbo Programming Language
Brian W. Kernighan: A Descent into Limbo
Together with Inferno, Limbo forms the best platform for distributed applications.
Inferno and Limbo were recently released under an open source license and you can download them here:
http://cgi.www.vitanuova.com/cgi-bin/www.vitanuov
Inferno/Limbo are the only hope for some sanity in the software industry!
Best wishes
uriel
This whole thing reminded me of the MS's settlement with AOL-TW, that involved AOL killing Mozilla development, I wonder how long will Sun keep supporting OpenOffice.org after this... fortunately for anyone that uses OO.o(not me), OO.o is Open Source so in a way the cat is out of the bag, still, IIRC sun provided most of the development resources, while Mozilla the dev team was under 50 people IIRC(more like 20 in reality), I think I heard sun has 300 people working on OO.o...
... (I'm sure there have been a few more) What you do when you have an (practically) infinite pile of cash?
;)
Does anyone here see a pattern? Apple, Corel, AOL, Sun,
pay your competition to kill any product that might threatens your monopoly.
As for Java, IBM better start to think what they are going to replace it with...
I'm glad I dumped Java completely and now I work mostly with Python, not only it's a much nicer language, I also don't have to worry about Sun politics anymore.
If you use java you are still in time to switch to something better, more portable, truly open, and that "sucks less", something like Python... or like Inferno/Limbo
[Inferno is now really Free, you can download it from Vitanuova, and as an extra you will get the greatest C compilers ever created, Ken God Thompson C Plan 9 compilers! don't worry about the "details" form, you can just click the "proceed to download" button]
Best wishes
uriel