Branding only works if it *means* something to the buyer. Volvo *means* safety...that is because Volvo is properly distinguished in the marketplace...it is differentiated...they invest more in safety technology than others and therefore area leaders. So if Sun wants to build a Java brand, then it must identify what distinguished Java devices from those that don't have it. If the buyer/consumer cannot readily tell, then YOU DON'T HAVE A BRAND. No matter how much money you pour into it. So before Sun *wastes* bucketfuls of cash on this, they need to think what distinguishes Java from everything else. The sad truth is that, at the moment, NOTHING DOES. It is a computing platform, and the applications built with it can be built to look just the same with C# or whatever. If the buyers have a *relationship* with Java Games due to their sheer abundance or quality, then they will demand "Java Powered", just like most business users demand MSFT applications. But NONE OF THIS THINKING IS IN EVIDENCE AT SUN. Perhaps Sun should build the Java Network of banks, retailers, cellphones, websites and kiosks that all talk to each other and who together deliver a seamless experience of the network to the users. If this were to happen, then the Java Network would be something *different* than anything else that is out there, and then you have a shot at building a brand.
You ask "What technical differences exist" but that is completely irrelevant. This is a *political* decision that will also have *economic* impact. China was invaded by both the British and the Japanese. They naturally resent that and are interested in controlling their own destiny. Those are the politics of open source. The economics have to do with generating a home-grown technology industry rather than relying on the US or the EU. What do technical differences have to do with any of this? Absolutely nothing.
Yours is actually the only posting I have yet seen looking at this correctly. There happens to be to alternatives in client side development: code for Windows or code for the Web. Now with their market share, MSFT is pushing Windows and OFFICE as the.net connected client. As such, IE is being re-absorbed into Windows/Office and de-emphasized as a target cliend environment. The idea is to cut off the air supply for alternatives routes to the desktop.
This is why the Dell/HP deals to bundle Java with Windows is so important. Specially with the upcoming auto-update capability, it opens the door for an ubiquitous client that is (1) not controlled by MSFT and (2) programmable enough to support upcoming standards (SVG, XForms) that would otherwise have no way to reach ubiquity...no way to become standards.
Strange move? Both Oracle and Microsoft, probably the most popular db engines for deploying SAP are now competing with them at the application level. As others have said, MySQL contributes the recognition and SAP the enterprise-level knowledge. CODE INTEGRATION IS NOT AN ISSUE. Let us assume they just put a MySQL face on SAP-DB...whatever. The key from SAP's point of view is that they are liberated from sending $$$ to MSFT and ORCL.
This almost works. The problems are that (1) you often cannot tell what email address caused you to receive the email message. And (2) the greater issue is that unsubscribing from newsletters/mailing lists the service often uses the 'From:' address to identify who to remove, rather than allowing you to establish it in the message body or on a web form. Result: you spend time messing with your email client to change the From: address to what you need it to be. BTW, the CHEAPO way to create disposable email addresses is simply to get a domain name with catch-all email addresses AND aliases. You use the catch-all to generate all the distinct emails you want, then when you want to kill one you simply create an alias for that particular email address and send it to nobody@nowhere.com. Any enom.com reseller will have these features.
You are not actually making an insteresting point. Bottom line, every programming language boils down to machine code. PLs are actually methods of expressiveness for the developer, somewhat like brushes on a canvas. Furthermore, you are displaying a narrow mindset in performing an analysis based on a single machine. Hello? We are in the network computing age. You ought consider, "What is the meaning of OSs and PLs in a network environment?" What you will find is that programming languages, debuggers, and operating systems are merging into single frameworks to support distributed network components. We consider this a 'web services' conversation today, and that is only because we lack the maturity to 'get' that the complexity of what we are tyring to accomplish today requires a completely different level of abstraction.
Flash is *extremely* important were this deal to come off. How many ways are there for alternative technologies to reach the desktop: MM Flash, Adobe Acrobat, and perhaps RealPlayer are the only non-MS ways to get on the desktop (that is, before the Java injuction). So acquiring the most developer-centric of the vehicles, Flash, consolidates MSFT's desktop control. Additionally, I have begun recommending CFMX as the easiest way to get on the Java platform, which has become notorious for its complexity. With CFMX in their hands, there is no longer a 'first step' on the Java ladder, at least not for now. Perhaps save www.japple.com.
1. Think sales. Employers do not *want* salespeople sitting at the desk. They want you out *there* with customers.
2. Think http://www.elance.com...it is a thriving marketplace for remote knowledge workers, and there will be steady dealflow.
3. Look at e-commerce. If you are very careful and disciplined you can sell good or services online (yes, even on eBay) and get a solid revenue stream going. If you have time to prepare, then perhaps you can do this, but this is basically as complex as going into business for yourself, so watch out.
Quality is (often) defined as fitness for purpose. I have been using StarOffice 6.0 Beta since its release and here is the #1 problem: it does not render documents in the *exact* same way as MS-Word. When sending business correspondence, it is important to know what your document will look like at the other end. To guarantee this, I use the MS-Viewer, for the final check; the alternative being conversion to PDF. This is a *massive* barrier to adoption, and makes StarOffice a non-quality (unfit for purpose) product within a business environment.
Single-logon authentication is not a nice-to-have. It is essential for effective integration of web services. For example, Company A has a hosting service and company B offers an email service. YOU want to offer an integrated offering to your customers and that means indentity management.
Slashdot Mirror
Branding only works if it *means* something to the buyer. Volvo *means* safety...that is because Volvo is properly distinguished in the marketplace...it is differentiated...they invest more in safety technology than others and therefore area leaders. So if Sun wants to build a Java brand, then it must identify what distinguished Java devices from those that don't have it. If the buyer/consumer cannot readily tell, then YOU DON'T HAVE A BRAND. No matter how much money you pour into it. So before Sun *wastes* bucketfuls of cash on this, they need to think what distinguishes Java from everything else. The sad truth is that, at the moment, NOTHING DOES. It is a computing platform, and the applications built with it can be built to look just the same with C# or whatever. If the buyers have a *relationship* with Java Games due to their sheer abundance or quality, then they will demand "Java Powered", just like most business users demand MSFT applications. But NONE OF THIS THINKING IS IN EVIDENCE AT SUN. Perhaps Sun should build the Java Network of banks, retailers, cellphones, websites and kiosks that all talk to each other and who together deliver a seamless experience of the network to the users. If this were to happen, then the Java Network would be something *different* than anything else that is out there, and then you have a shot at building a brand.
You ask "What technical differences exist" but that is completely irrelevant. This is a *political* decision that will also have *economic* impact. China was invaded by both the British and the Japanese. They naturally resent that and are interested in controlling their own destiny. Those are the politics of open source. The economics have to do with generating a home-grown technology industry rather than relying on the US or the EU. What do technical differences have to do with any of this? Absolutely nothing.
Yours is actually the only posting I have yet seen looking at this correctly. There happens to be to alternatives in client side development: code for Windows or code for the Web. Now with their market share, MSFT is pushing Windows and OFFICE as the .net connected client. As such, IE is being re-absorbed into Windows/Office and de-emphasized as a target cliend environment. The idea is to cut off the air supply for alternatives routes to the desktop.
This is why the Dell/HP deals to bundle Java with Windows is so important. Specially with the upcoming auto-update capability, it opens the door for an ubiquitous client that is (1) not controlled by MSFT and (2) programmable enough to support upcoming standards (SVG, XForms) that would otherwise have no way to reach ubiquity...no way to become standards.
Strange move? Both Oracle and Microsoft, probably the most popular db engines for deploying SAP are now competing with them at the application level. As others have said, MySQL contributes the recognition and SAP the enterprise-level knowledge. CODE INTEGRATION IS NOT AN ISSUE. Let us assume they just put a MySQL face on SAP-DB...whatever. The key from SAP's point of view is that they are liberated from sending $$$ to MSFT and ORCL.
This almost works. The problems are that (1) you often cannot tell what email address caused you to receive the email message. And (2) the greater issue is that unsubscribing from newsletters/mailing lists the service often uses the 'From:' address to identify who to remove, rather than allowing you to establish it in the message body or on a web form. Result: you spend time messing with your email client to change the From: address to what you need it to be. BTW, the CHEAPO way to create disposable email addresses is simply to get a domain name with catch-all email addresses AND aliases. You use the catch-all to generate all the distinct emails you want, then when you want to kill one you simply create an alias for that particular email address and send it to nobody@nowhere.com. Any enom.com reseller will have these features.
You are not actually making an insteresting point. Bottom line, every programming language boils down to machine code. PLs are actually methods of expressiveness for the developer, somewhat like brushes on a canvas. Furthermore, you are displaying a narrow mindset in performing an analysis based on a single machine. Hello? We are in the network computing age. You ought consider, "What is the meaning of OSs and PLs in a network environment?" What you will find is that programming languages, debuggers, and operating systems are merging into single frameworks to support distributed network components. We consider this a 'web services' conversation today, and that is only because we lack the maturity to 'get' that the complexity of what we are tyring to accomplish today requires a completely different level of abstraction.
Flash is *extremely* important were this deal to come off. How many ways are there for alternative technologies to reach the desktop: MM Flash, Adobe Acrobat, and perhaps RealPlayer are the only non-MS ways to get on the desktop (that is, before the Java injuction). So acquiring the most developer-centric of the vehicles, Flash, consolidates MSFT's desktop control. Additionally, I have begun recommending CFMX as the easiest way to get on the Java platform, which has become notorious for its complexity. With CFMX in their hands, there is no longer a 'first step' on the Java ladder, at least not for now. Perhaps save www.japple.com.
1. Think sales. Employers do not *want* salespeople sitting at the desk. They want you out *there* with customers.
2. Think http://www.elance.com...it is a thriving marketplace for remote knowledge workers, and there will be steady dealflow.
3. Look at e-commerce. If you are very careful and disciplined you can sell good or services online (yes, even on eBay) and get a solid revenue stream going. If you have time to prepare, then perhaps you can do this, but this is basically as complex as going into business for yourself, so watch out.
Quality is (often) defined as fitness for purpose. I have been using StarOffice 6.0 Beta since its release and here is the #1 problem: it does not render documents in the *exact* same way as MS-Word. When sending business correspondence, it is important to know what your document will look like at the other end. To guarantee this, I use the MS-Viewer, for the final check; the alternative being conversion to PDF. This is a *massive* barrier to adoption, and makes StarOffice a non-quality (unfit for purpose) product within a business environment.
Single-logon authentication is not a nice-to-have. It is essential for effective integration of web services. For example, Company A has a hosting service and company B offers an email service. YOU want to offer an integrated offering to your customers and that means indentity management.