Humorous thought re Sun vs. Microsoft

Tim Smith

Well it is... (snicker snicker) Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.

Navin

... and not until a Sun version of .NET even exists. :-D Actually, I think I'd be more inclined to use .NET if it were more mutli-platformable... Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Daniel Turini

What I don't understand is: why Java and not Python or Perl??? I see dumb people

Megan Forbes

Chris Losinger wrote: ..not until Sun has 85% of the desktop OS market and has been labelled a monopoly by the US DOJ. Yeah, excelling in your field is such a terrible crime these days... :suss:

I knew it would end badly when I first met Chris in a Canberra alleyway and he said 'try some - it won't hurt you'..... - Christian Graus on Code Project outages Damned nice for remote servers where using Enterprise Manager is like wadding through treacle while covered in velcro, upside down -Paul Watson on SQL Server Query Analyser

Navin

Are you talking about the Mono project? Hmm, not sure if I want to rely on something whose name means "Monkey" in Spanish. :-D Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Chris Losinger

excelling in your field is one thing. using your market power to eliminate competition through unfair trade practices is quite another. -c

There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic

Smaller Animals Software

Navin

I wonder how difficult it would be to get Python or Perl to run in the same type of restricted "sandbox" environment as Java? So that no* damage could be done to client machines. * well, excepting the exploitation of security breaches, of course. :-D Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Navin

You konw, I think the Microsoft settlement should have gone differently. They should have used the same tactic as they did with tobacco in the 60's... require all Microsoft products to have a surgeon general's warning stating that the use of the product may be hazardous to your healt. :-D Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Alvaro Mendez

Because Java rocks (the language and cross-platform concept behind it, not the class library). If it didn't, Microsoft wouldn't have jumped on it right from the start. Regards, Alvaro

Well done is better than well said. -- Benjamin Franklin (I actually prefer medium-well.)

Terry Denham

But what you're forgetting Chris is that this judgement was reached by a biased and corrupt judge so his opinion is to be suspect too, but due to our justice system once he declared his findings of fact these can't be challenged in the appeals process only the ruling. Remember is is the same judge that said MS couldn't bundle IE with Windows and was overthrown during appeal. Thats like saying Sun can have Motif, or Linux cant ship Mozilla or Apple can't ship whatever the hell they ship with these days. Or that Apple can't bundle iMovie or only allow the iPod to work with Apple (oh, they got away with that one).

Tim Smith

:omg::wtf::rolleyes::laugh: :-D Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.

Chris Losinger

Terry Denham wrote: what you're forgetting no i'm not forgetting anything. MS killed Netscape, which was at the time, a far better browser, by using its OS monopoly to force OEMs to ship configurations which gave preference to IE. then there's the long list of other OEM arm-twisting MS has been accused of. Terry Denham wrote: Thats like saying Sun can have Motif no, again, it's nothing like that... until Sun has over 85% of the desktop OS market and been found to be a monopoly. -c

There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic

Smaller Animals Software

Terry Denham

Chris Losinger wrote: no i'm not forgetting anything. MS killed Netscape, which was at the time, a far better browser, by using its OS monopoly to force OEMs to ship configurations which gave preference to IE. then there's the long list of other OEM arm-twisting MS has been accused of. Using its monopoly to kill Netscape. HA. The thing that killed Netscape is Netscape itself. How many copies of Netscape's browser did you buy? Off all the people I know personally I was the only one that bought a copy of NS4 and I was laughed at by my friends. Their reasoning is why pay for it when you can download it for free. So if everyone was downloading it for free how did Netscape ever think they were going to be profitable. It was ok to download NS when NS was clearly superior but once IE became on par with NS then NS just became a large download. The same thing holds true for Netscapes Webserver. While it was the defacto web server for some time, as improvements were made to IIS and to Apache, why pay money for Netscape web server when there are just as good options for free. The one thing that I would agree that MS did wrong was to force OEMs to pay for Windows on how many units they shipped not how many units they shipped with Windows, so this became a tax of sort. Chris Losinger wrote: no, again, it's nothing like that... until Sun has over 85% of the desktop OS market and been found to be a monopoly. You're using circular logic here. MS was found to be a monopoly by a corrupt judge so you have to suspect his opinion. Its kind of the chicken and the egg thing. If the chicken was really a horse then it can't have layed an egg. :)

Joe Woodbury

Chris Losinger wrote: MS killed Netscape Not true. Even Jackson's [very biased] "findings of fact" found that IE 4 was as good as, or superior to, Netscape. Moreover, there was NO finding that Navigator's market share collapse was due to Microsoft's OEM agreements despite the many claims to the contrary. Chris Losinger wrote: no, again, it's nothing like that... until Sun has over 85% of the desktop OS market and been found to be a monopoly. Why desktop OS market? Why not server market where .NET shines? Plus, you're also suggesting something that the courts have universally rejected, that simply having a monopoly entitles a competitor to bundle their products with the monopoly holding company. Long rant: If Microsoft ships a Java VM should it be Sun compliant? Yes. I don't think anyone desputes that, including Microsoft. Should Microsoft be forced to ship a Java VM? No. The court has no power to do this and the current judge would be overturned on appeal, guaranteed. Should Microsoft be forced to ship Sun's Java VM? I say no, since it would be unprecedented. But this is the recourse the current judge WANTS to make, but he knows he'll be overturned on appeal unless he can get his ducks lined up perfectly. IF Sun can prove damages, there is an opening, but Sun's own internal documents admitting their own incompetence concerning Java on the client pretty much damns them. That won't stop Judge Motz any more than logic stopped Judge Jackson; their open hatred for Microsoft colors everything they do (which is unfortunate, since it buries Microsoft's truly illegal and problematic acts in a mountain of bulls--t.) Should Microsoft be forced to pay Sun $1 billion? Sure, if that was Sun's actual damages, but it isn't. In fact, Sun's going to have a hard time arguing they suffered any monetary damages at all since they give Java away. Even the everlastingly biased Judge Motz is trying to talk Sun into dropping claims for monetary damages.

Joe Woodbury

Ah, you beat me to it. But I'll joing in anyway. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

CodeGuy

Python, in fact, does have a "sandbox" security mode built into its standard library. I don't know about Perl tho. Brandon

Chris Losinger

Joe Woodbury wrote: Plus, you're also suggesting something that the courts have universally rejected, that simply having a monopoly entitles a competitor to bundle their products with the monopoly holding company. i'm certainly not suggesting that. that particular idea has never even crossed my mind. Joe Woodbury wrote: Not true. Even Jackson's [very biased] "findings of fact" found that IE 4 was as good as, or superior to, Netscape. Moreover, there was NO finding that Navigator's market share collapse was due to Microsoft's OEM agreements despite the many claims to the contrary. so when he agrees with you, you're OK with what he says. but when he doesn't, he's "biased" and you get to use the "ironic" quotes around legal terms? -c

There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic

Smaller Animals Software

Chris Losinger

Terry Denham wrote: MS was found to be a monopoly by a corrupt judge so you have to suspect his opinion. MS is a monopoly, independent of whether or not Judge Jackson found it guilty of abusing that monopoly. it's not illegal to be a monopoly. it's only illegal to abuse the power that comes with it. Terry Denham wrote: so this became a tax of sort and there you go - abuse of monopoly. -c

There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic

Smaller Animals Software

Daniel Turini

Alvaro Mendez wrote: Because Java rocks (the language and cross-platform concept behind it, not the class library). If it didn't, Microsoft wouldn't have jumped on it right from the start. Ok, jumping over the Java rocks part, what I meant is: why a judge would decide to force MS to put Java and not alternate language? Because Java rocks? Which law in the US says this? I see dumb people

Terry Denham

Chris Losinger wrote: and there you go - abuse of monopoly. Ok, agreed. But your whole argument about using its monopoly power to kill off Netscape is flawed and you didn't answer my question. How many copies of Netscape browser did you buy? Put your money where your mouth is.