You youngins! You maybe don't remeber this but you can actually thank Microsoft for the fact that they can't sue Ximian. I can't remeber exactly when it was (> 10 years ago), Apple sued Microsoft for copying its look and feel. Microsoft won (thankfully) and set a good precedent IMHO.
As for imitating other products, I wish people in the Open Source community would be a bit more understanding about this. It helps. How?
I'm using OpenOffice 1.0 at the moment. One of the things (in fact probably THE thing) that makes it EASY TO USE is that it's like MS Office. Give that client side Open Source products are in the minority, they can use every helping hand they can get to become the majority. Wether you like the product being copied or not, it make it a helluva lot easier for people to transition across to the Open Source equivalent.
One of the reasons people may like Open Source is because it's free (as in beer) - but this is a lie. A while ago, the business community woke up to the idea of TCO (total cost of ownership), and so they tend to take into account things like training/support/transition costs more. Having Open Source clone the L&F of commercial package helps keep the TCO down and thus makes Open Source more attractive for businesses.
One other benefit, is that wether you personally like the product or not, Microsoft does fork out money on ensuring the usability of their products. This is the sort of money the Open Source community generally doesn't have, but can benefit from anyway by simply copying the L&F of a commercial product.
In the longer term, when Open Source has established itself as a winner in the marketplace, sure, fell free to innovate a bit more - but it's not there yet and copying a sucessful app is a sound and appropriate strategy for helping it to get there.
I've used a multi-dimensional monitor for years! Admittedly, it's only got 2 dimesions, but is a hell of an improvement over that one dimensional SOAB I'd been using beforehand.
Aside from the new Sun suit, the AOL suit and the two tracks of the Government case, don't forget that MS also has 100 consumer class actions and the European Commission is currently looking at MS and has the power to levy very large fines. Have a look at this article
artcile last week from The Economist
MS's attitude was that there was no way they were going to allow Linux to take over the Windows programming market in a way that might make Windows irrelevant. They succeeded.
The Linux comminty's attitude was that there was no way they were going to allow Linux to become "just a better way to write Windows apps." They succeeded.
As a result, Linux is virtually irrelevant to Windows client app development, and since Windows is the vast majority of all "computer-scale" clients, Java is irrelevant for almost all client programming. Go team!
First > IMO, this goes against natural selection Then > If you want a child so badly, lady, go ADOPT ONE
The "goal" of evolution (of which natural selection is but one part) from the perpective of an individual is to pass on the individual's genes (Read some Richard Dawkins such as "The Selfish Gene" for a more complete discussion). A female can already affect the charateristics in her child to some degree already - by selecting a mate. From a purely genetic point of view, it is completely sensible for an individual to "pre-select" those genes that have the best chance of survival. Adoption guarantees that 0% of the individuals genes are passed on. From a genetic point of view, the lady has made a sensible choice by increasing the chances that her offspring will live to an age where he/she will be able to reproduce.
Regarding the logging and regex packages: Just because a package is less functional does not mean that it is intrinsically bad. If the package is suitable for the majority of uses by the majority of developers, then it's probably OK - after all, it's easier for someone to learn a small package rather than a large one. If you require something more specific, then you are still free to use the packages you metnioned. The JDK logging and regex packages ADD choice - surely this is a "good thing"?
Please take a close look at both the openess of.NET and the multilanguage capabilities. Neither are everything they are cracked up to be. Only the CLR and a "core" set of C# classes are open - everything else (i.e. the really useful bits that everyone needs) are not. My question - do you trust Microsoft to open these up?
You mention (must have seen this somewhere before on Slashdot:-) that Java should be Open Source / Standardised. I, like many Java developers have no instrinsic problem with this. However, there is the issue of cross-platform portability:
Many people complained when Sun would release a JDK for Windows and Solaris that it didn't have one of Linux. Then they complained when a Linux JDK was created that it didn't come out at the same time. Now with Sun releasing all 3 JDK simeltaneously (and the likes of Apple and IBM not usually far behind), consider this:
How likely do you think this situation would be if the JCP (or something like it) was not in place? Do you really think you would be saying "As far as that... it runs GREAT on Linux. Probably the most SOLID VM I have ever run." if Java was Open Source?
Maybe it would be:
"Well the Linux version is pretty good - can't use the xyz library because that's Windows only and it will probably be out of beta only 6 months after the Windows version but hey - it's Open Source! That make me FEEL GOOD!"
What I would LOVE is to see Java open sources while ensuring that it remains cross-platform. While some would claim that open source would guantee that, it is not provable. Sun believes that there is too much risk. While you may not, agree with that you have Java that is:
a) free (as in beer)
b) you can read the source code the the whole API
c) you can change (but not distribute) the source
d) works on all major plaforms (including FreeBSD now BTW)
For me, and many other Java developers, these still place it far ahead of anything Microsoft is doing - and while Mono iterests me, its going to be a LONG time before it can match Java's (or even.Net's) current functionality.
Generics are scheduled for the 1.5 release. Spec and early access release are already available.
What is your evidence for:
a) Downcasts from Object hurting performance?
b) That Generics will help the situation?
The way generics are currently implemented, the VM is going to be unchanged and will still require a "CHECKCAST" bytecode to be present after each downcast.
Having the VM optimise away cast checking would require it to ensure that all runtime casts are valid. This is non-trivial given that classes are loaded dynamically.
If it is not possible to safely optimise away cast checks, what would you rather have? A VM that runs marginally slower (check what percentage of your bytecode are CHECKCASTS and I'd be surprised if it was > 1%) or a VM that runs securely?
Slashdot Mirror
You youngins! You maybe don't remeber this but you can actually thank Microsoft for the fact that they can't sue Ximian. I can't remeber exactly when it was (> 10 years ago), Apple sued Microsoft for copying its look and feel. Microsoft won (thankfully) and set a good precedent IMHO.
As for imitating other products, I wish people in the Open Source community would be a bit more understanding about this. It helps. How?
I'm using OpenOffice 1.0 at the moment. One of the things (in fact probably THE thing) that makes it EASY TO USE is that it's like MS Office. Give that client side Open Source products are in the minority, they can use every helping hand they can get to become the majority. Wether you like the product being copied or not, it make it a helluva lot easier for people to transition across to the Open Source equivalent.
One of the reasons people may like Open Source is because it's free (as in beer) - but this is a lie. A while ago, the business community woke up to the idea of TCO (total cost of ownership), and so they tend to take into account things like training/support/transition costs more. Having Open Source clone the L&F of commercial package helps keep the TCO down and thus makes Open Source more attractive for businesses.
One other benefit, is that wether you personally like the product or not, Microsoft does fork out money on ensuring the usability of their products. This is the sort of money the Open Source community generally doesn't have, but can benefit from anyway by simply copying the L&F of a commercial product.
In the longer term, when Open Source has established itself as a winner in the marketplace, sure, fell free to innovate a bit more - but it's not there yet and copying a sucessful app is a sound and appropriate strategy for helping it to get there.
I've used a multi-dimensional monitor for years!
Admittedly, it's only got 2 dimesions, but is a
hell of an improvement over that one dimensional
SOAB I'd been using beforehand.
Aside from the new Sun suit, the AOL suit and the two tracks of the Government case, don't forget that MS also has 100 consumer class actions and the European Commission is currently looking at MS and has the power to levy very large fines. Have a look at this article artcile last week from The Economist
SEARCH AND REPLACE:
MS's attitude was that there was no way they were going to allow Linux to take over the Windows programming market in a way that might make Windows irrelevant. They succeeded.
The Linux comminty's attitude was that there was no way they were going to allow Linux to become "just a better way to write Windows apps." They succeeded.
As a result, Linux is virtually irrelevant to Windows client app development, and since Windows is the vast majority of all "computer-scale" clients, Java is irrelevant for almost all client programming. Go team!
- Idea: Prehaps Java & Linux can help each other?
First
> IMO, this goes against natural selection
Then
> If you want a child so badly, lady, go ADOPT ONE
The "goal" of evolution (of which natural selection is but one part) from the perpective of an individual is to pass on the individual's genes (Read some Richard Dawkins such as "The Selfish Gene" for a more complete discussion). A female can already affect the charateristics in her child to some degree already - by selecting a mate. From a purely genetic point of view, it is completely sensible for an individual to "pre-select" those genes that have the best chance of survival. Adoption guarantees that 0% of the individuals genes are passed on. From a genetic point of view, the lady has made a sensible choice by increasing the chances that her offspring will live to an age where he/she will be able to reproduce.
Regarding the logging and regex packages: Just because a package is less functional does not mean that it is intrinsically bad. If the package is suitable for the majority of uses by the majority of developers, then it's probably OK - after all, it's easier for someone to learn a small package rather than a large one. If you require something more specific, then you are still free to use the packages you metnioned. The JDK logging and regex packages ADD choice - surely this is a "good thing"?
.NET and the multilanguage capabilities. Neither are everything they are cracked up to be. Only the CLR and a "core" set of C# classes are open - everything else (i.e. the really useful bits that everyone needs) are not. My question - do you trust Microsoft to open these up?
:-) that Java should be Open Source / Standardised. I, like many Java developers have no instrinsic problem with this. However, there is the issue of cross-platform portability:
.Net's) current functionality.
Please take a close look at both the openess of
You mention (must have seen this somewhere before on Slashdot
Many people complained when Sun would release a JDK for Windows and Solaris that it didn't have one of Linux. Then they complained when a Linux JDK was created that it didn't come out at the same time. Now with Sun releasing all 3 JDK simeltaneously (and the likes of Apple and IBM not usually far behind), consider this:
How likely do you think this situation would be if the JCP (or something like it) was not in place? Do you really think you would be saying "As far as that... it runs GREAT on Linux. Probably the most SOLID VM I have ever run." if Java was Open Source?
Maybe it would be:
"Well the Linux version is pretty good - can't use the xyz library because that's Windows only and it will probably be out of beta only 6 months after the Windows version but hey - it's Open Source! That make me FEEL GOOD!"
What I would LOVE is to see Java open sources while ensuring that it remains cross-platform. While some would claim that open source would guantee that, it is not provable. Sun believes that there is too much risk. While you may not, agree with that you have Java that is:
a) free (as in beer)
b) you can read the source code the the whole API
c) you can change (but not distribute) the source
d) works on all major plaforms (including FreeBSD now BTW)
For me, and many other Java developers, these still place it far ahead of anything Microsoft is doing - and while Mono iterests me, its going to be a LONG time before it can match Java's (or even
Generics are scheduled for the 1.5 release. Spec and early access release are already available.
What is your evidence for:
a) Downcasts from Object hurting performance?
b) That Generics will help the situation?
The way generics are currently implemented, the VM is going to be unchanged and will still require a "CHECKCAST" bytecode to be present after each downcast.
Having the VM optimise away cast checking would require it to ensure that all runtime casts are valid. This is non-trivial given that classes are loaded dynamically.
If it is not possible to safely optimise away cast checks, what would you rather have? A VM that runs marginally slower (check what percentage of your bytecode are CHECKCASTS and I'd be surprised if it was > 1%) or a VM that runs securely?