This guy called scott is too full of himself. Anyway, I think the platform independence of Java has proven attractive to many developers since its inception and remains its strongest point. I think Sun's stewardship of Java TM has been excellent and they can be trusted to do what's best for Java.

Attempts by IBM and others to implement the java specification for their products e.g. websphere, BEA weblogic, etc would alrady have spawned a myriad of incompatible java platforms had it not been for Sun's compliance requirements (remember the path JBoss had taken before certification?).

Lets all be patient and have a little faith, a la James Gosling.

>Respond as you like - I won't see it.
Scott, on the off chance you do see this, I wish you well.

Guys, keep it civil. I''m getting tired of the people throwing invective around. I've not edited any threads yet; let's keep it that way, eh?

As far I know mono is suffering of the lack of information about .net documentation, so they cannot advance since they don''t know what to implement.
I really appreciate this project of mono, but that''s quite sure that M$ won''t release the necessary documentation, not before they have had lots of time to make their own use of it, and when they finally have new specifications, maybe they''ll release that one mono needs (for now), and will again continue with their politics of hiding APIs and interfaces.
Maybe the only chance will be to reverse engineer what is needed to complet mono.
It''s of M$ usual practices to deny access to information while it may leave them in advance, in a while they try to sabotage other products on their platform. Did all of you know what was stacker? or what happened to netscape? or why lotus 123, Harvard graphics, word perfect and lots of other good softwares or original ideas couldn''t raise in the unfertile soil of windows hidden APIs or just couldn''t work because a new boot mechanism didn''t let any way of loading your software. And what about that guy with his protocol for internet which was stolen and M$ now that made lots of money with that just had to pay almost nothing for the original owner? They get too much money that it''s economically viable to stole something and later pay for it with a thousand percent of profits.
Hope any of you one day suffer of having your ideas stolen and seeing your product being replaced by a poor copy that just is packed in windows, the idea is, do not have an good idea!!
These are M$ usual uncompetitive practices, and as thoug

>>Thank you for proving my point, your lack of humility is more apparent than ever<<
last post:
you''re very welcome and again, you''ve proven your ability to completely miss the point, disregard the substantive content, and focus on the trivial. Essentially I was saying, "mind your own business" - that post was to you - I don''t owe you humility - you certainly didn''t show me any. Respond as you like - I won''t see it.

>It''s not up to you to determine when someone does and does not have the right to repond to a post; I'll make the decision myself, thank you very much.

Thank you for proving my point, your lack of humility is more apparent than ever.

>>The mono project is working feverishly on SWF. It is far from completion, but is capable of running simple forms. It uses a tweaked library version of WINE for Win32 calls.>>

thanks for the info - I've heard of the project but haven't followed it. My background for many years has been commercial software development - not internal. I guess what I was trying to get at was that the final solution involves more than the software - it involves the deployment platform as well. We generally can't be constrained in that respect - if the customer runs Linux back ends, we'll deploy server side Linux solutions, same for Solaris, Windows, etc. Client side gui generally doesn't cause too many issues in my world but the platform independence of java is key to deploying on whatever back-end solves the problem for the customer. Still, I'll be interested in checking this out.

<>

I''m sorry you feel that way - the post I read was a very nasty attack on me, not on this forum - reread it. I was not apologized to, the forum was. I''d argue that anyone spoken to that way deserves an apology, for which I most certainly would have been accepting. I''d also say my response was pretty even tempered, given the attack that triggered it - far more gracious than was necessary. I''d also note that your "upbringing" comment was pretty snippy itself - pretty much misses the point of the entire exchange - also misses everything of substance I wrote. You might feel differently if you were the target. It''s not up to you to determine when someone does and does not have the right to repond to a post; I''ll make the decision myself, thank you very much.

>>I'm not aware of any port of the GUI portion - as far as I'm aware, the forms portion of .NET still calls directly into the Win32 API, just as MFC did. This requires, to my knowledge, a Windows deployment platform.

The mono project is working feverishly on SWF. It is far from completion, but is capable of running simple forms. It uses a tweaked library version of WINE for Win32 calls.

Scott,
Academic made his apologies. Your upbringing sounded wonderful, however it didn't teach you to accept contrition graciously. Rubbing his nose in it was unnecessary and deserves an apology.

Normally, I wouldn't even respond to this given it's
clear irrationality. 24 years in the industry have taught me that those who are unable to control themselves are best ignored. But, since you've posted since, in a somewhat more reasonable way, I will.

<<< Scott your such a winnie, >>>

Not sure what a winnie is, sorry.

<<< it's obvious you have emotional problems >>>

The absurd irrationality of your post, like the first - totally uncalled for and childish. I would argue that clearly unmanageable anger points toward emotional issues.

<<< , first of all grammer I am working unlike you and I am typing fast so get agrip it's obvious you do not have an education just by your attitude and response, >>>

23 years of software developement - mainframe/cobol to 2-tier client server (perhaps you''ve heard of a product called PowerBuilder - not such a big deal since 2-tier evolved but blew VB away in its time - worked on the development team that built it) to web-based app development (perhaps you''ve heard of a company called Amazon.com - worked on the team building their auction/ZShop/merchant platform) to IP telephony. My education is quite significant, as have been my engineering accomplishments. In my working world, communication skills are just as important as design and coding - you aren't taken seriously without both. Also, check your 2 posts - I'd say your attitude is pretty poor. If attitude is any indicator of education, which you suggest and I disagree with, I'd argue yours is lacking.

<< first of all .NET does not just run on Windows >>

I''m away of attempts to port it - I''m not aware of any significant use of it off windows - if I''m wrong I apologize. I''m not aware of any port of the GUI portion - as far as I''m aware, the forms portion of .NET still calls directly into the Win32 API, just as MFC did. This requires, to my knowledge, a Windows deployment platform.

<< second a framework is not what solves problems, i.e JavaSpaces is more a blue print than a framework, >>

I never mentioned framework in my post - I used the term platform. Your example here is of a framework that runs on the Java platform. Your initial post spoke of languages - my response was intended to point out that it''s not about the language. You can write Python and run it on a Java VM, for example. Where you come up with frameworks to respond to my post is unclear to me.

<>

People take me seriously based on the work I've delivered over the years, the problems I've solved and the revenue I've generated. What you say is pretty meaningless - it's what you do that matters. Take a second look at your 2 posts - I don't think you've got any business talking about manners. Oh, and by the way, I didn't learn manners (note, not manors) in school - they were taught to me as part of my upbringing. Seriously, reread that last post of yours. A forum for the exchange of ideas related to an article causes this kind of emotional turmoil in you? You should consider some help - or perhaps some time away from the anonymity of the internet.

Unix dying? Solaris dying? Please! When was the last time you looked at Solaris (wuz it called SunOS by any chance?) or actually tried it?

Nothing is perfect, there''s always compromise. Spend some time, evaluate, leave the ideology and bias behind, consider the right hardware platform and OS for the solution just as you do for languages, persistence, tools and other technologies.

Get Solaris x86 for free, try it and see for yourself. http://wwws.sun.com/software/download/operating_sys.html
You might just be suprised to discover what organizations using Solaris already know :) I use Solaris, Linux, and windows where and when indicated by the solution requirements. I use Java and occasionally JRuby on all of them. The Java platform unites them all.

Here are some links to get you started.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/12/10/sun_sets_solaris_x86_free/

http://www.serverwatch.com/news/article.php/3093001

http://www.storagepipeline.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=14800363

http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/faq/indexPerf.html

Great synthesis David!!! That''s all, they''ve made a treaty and will soon have the gates key for the hell. They pretend M$ doesn''t want java and linux dead, since are strong technologies, the only difference is, they cannot buy linux. But if they may influence in java development to make it a .net compatible, then why to choose java if that''s just a new flavor of .net?

The name ''Faust'' has become deeply rooted in European mythology as the name of a man who sold his soul to the devil in return for earthly power and riches.
or is it
The name ''SUN'' has become deeply rooted in IT mythology as the name of a company that sold its soul to the devil in return for earthly power and riches.

It seems to me there's a common enemy for Sun and Microsoft, that''s the Linux juggernaut. IBM, HP and other big companies are stepping up with Linux, so it's moved beyond the techie world of OSS and entered the mainstream of business. Both Solaris and Windows (server stuff) suffer under Linux, and Solaris is getting hit the hardest. It's too bad Sun hasn't shown a great commitment towards Linux rather than hoping it can prop up its Solaris business.

I know Academic, there''s not full right answer,
but then what is the new technologies working
for? And what about reusability? That''s really
what managers do, they want to make it cheap
just for now, despite you may have to pay again,
and again and forever for that same solution, or
even to adapt every time to work with new
necessities.

This short term kind of thinking is surely what
makes money for most of us, once my manager said
if there weren''t M$, we wouldn''t have the(ir)
problems to solve :).

But I''m sure you as is in the high level end of
thinking are aware the cross platform solutions,
the compatibility are the long term issues that
the enterprises begin to see. We shouldn''t
forget computing is a relatively young science,
and even most for the broad part of enterprises
that mostly just adopt it with the internet
boom.

We know if we do the thing the simpler, but the
right thing it''s much less likely to give us
problems on future. Every system needs a hard
rock as a platform foundation, as a building,
then the right support columns to keep the
structure. That''s real for engineering, just we
try to take every kind of material and glue
together and we will have a not very beautiful
picture of our building.

These managers of today are the assembly, cobol,
etc programmers of the past, one day we will
substitute them, and will we still think the
same way? We''ll have a big legacy, but will we
do the same errors?

Just received this: (please, copy all between [
and ], just for the case this link is word
wrapped)

? View the McNealy-Ballmer news conference [http://see.sun.com/Apps/DCS/mcp?r=70042SCu4AoX_0120003akI042SCu0mm1eim1jK]

? Read the news conference transcript
[http://see.sun.com/Apps/DCS/mcp?r=70042SCu4AoX_0120003akK042SCu0mm1eim1jK]
? Software CTO John Fowler sizes up implications for
software
[http://see.sun.com/Apps/DCS/mcp?r=70042SCu4AoX_0120003akM042SCu0mm1eim1jK]
? See Java guru Jim Gosling''s take on the agreement
[http://see.sun.com/Apps/DCS/mcp?r=70042SCu4AoX_0120003akJ042SCu0mm1eim1jK]

A little faith, Gosling? Please. I lost my faith in Sun the second they chose your crap over OpenStep.

By the way this editor sucks.

Paulo, very long indeed, just a quick response and please anybody respond.
I am just trying to make a living that?s all, and I am not trying to force my opinions on people like I mistakenly did before and I am sorry for that, but one thing you said kind of precludes why M$ is popular despite all of the open source issues. Have you ever programmed in VB, it?s easy, simple to use and yes you can be a monkey if you like, but I can develop an app in less than half the time than in java, and we don''t need to get personal just a note I work in whatever is required and have a cert in java, I say this in jest minus the after thought of scalability (DCOM MTS, .NET or J2EE). But the reality of it all is that the business space does not care about extensibility, or elegant solutions or spaghetti code. Managers just want you at your desk and they want a working app as soon as they can have it, they don?t care about OOA OOD they don?t care if it?s extensible they don?t care if it?s java, c++, c# or vb, they just want it to work (and not break), once it?s running leave it alone and let it run just get it done make it work and leave it alone that?s what business is about, making money and for the ?good the bad and the ugly? M$?s tools and integration products have been doing that, this is the real bottom line just get it working (bug free) make your coin and move on, we are simply pawns.

paolo wrote : >Java isn't Sun's primary
business, >because you may get it for free
> Yes for application developers. But if you
ever tried to > manufacture and sell a Java
enabled device you know the > licensing cost.

Well, I agree with you Rodger, I''ll try to fix.
The big language players have a two role in this
whole history. First, when they come to sell a
solution to an enterprise they need to convince
the owner of the problem in the enterprise that
this is the cheapest solution for him.
Let''s simplify and think the enterprise has
already the hardware thing, all x86 over, lets
see, NT4

They should have already gone to M$ to ask about
improvements, and ask for solutions for they
problems to which they should be answered with
the electronic secretary default
response "Upgrade, upgrade to new wXXXX, and all
your problems will be solved" (no matter what
were the problems)

So they have the hardware, people at M$ will say
despite the price of the whole solution, this is
not where they will spend most of the money,
they spend it along the sw production phase,
paying for the developers. And they had the most
cheap developers zombies ever, they just made
the language so simple that if you let a bunch
of mindless monkeys locked with, they will still
produce something. M$ did changes on it`s
platform, but asked lots of non OO programmers
from their VB dump try with it. But still
lets say they doesn''t want to change their OS.

Well, for the development people they`ve
said .net is full of jobs, hurry, come to
program, it''s easy, see the dumb, it is
programming in C$

On other side they say, despite they could just
throw out the NT for a free SO and use java for
free, this kind of developer is much more
expensive (since are the people who has lots of
time on development area, and just migrated to
java because java is sexy, because they saw real
problem solving with that), that''s right, now
you have people that choose a real enterprise
platform, they ought be more expensive. Anyway,
they still have the chance of on future change
their OS, and still didn''t got the money for the
tool, they will spend it on the development
thing, which is their product.

Despite of marketing propaganda, let''s see the
facts, the .net platform doesn''t have something
like HotSpot, we can see in benchmarks, .net
byte codes are interpreted always, it cannot be
inlined, or has any dynamic optimization, no
matter the CLR optimization tool is the same of
VC, but this is an static optimization, they
cannot do the same optimizations of C(static
compiling), with the managed languages on
compile time. Did you ever see .net on SMP
machines?, if not, you are lucky, if you see
what was already java and now how is it in
Tiger, there''s no parallel to java.

So that''s not just about languages. And everyone
knows about the M$ practices on burying
concurrence. They''ve got the place for
their .net toy using their blubber money. They
need to just show something to the market,
something that could seem portable and new,
despite that''s the same old thing as before (but
is worthless to say, since none of our chiefs
would ever read a technical column or article)

But I still see the light on end, Ibm and others
were the real java/j2ee improvement
responsible, and despite all this just helped
Sun TM mark java, they had their own products
(that aren''t even called after java, like
Websphere, etc), and if they put the same
technology power on classpath, M$ will not be
able to kill it, M$ may hurt just what it can
buy, it''s hidden, but they`re trying to buy java.

They could buy Sun, they have money for that,
but cannot buy the open interfaces and standards
Sun created, so that it wouldn''t work, they
cannot buy linux, but they may buy java (the
word Java TM), but not the java spirit, which
may have other incarnations as classpath and
others.

I apologize for being arrogant and or upsetting anybody I agree we are all in this together, I will lighten up.

I agree, Academic went off the deap end just because Scott criticized his poor typing, which was pretty obvious. Chill out, have fun with this, stop the verbal attacks.

<>
Actually, it's not about options either. It's about solving the problem. Probably 95%+ of all companies are single-platform. Java independence (borrowed from old VM's) is meaningless to them. Why pay a royalty because a techie says so. Companies want to use the horsepower they paid for. It's about delivering the best solution now. Besides, all this windows crap is really meaningless, again 90%+ applications that actually RUN businesses are so-called legacy machines not Wintel. Do you know what Ebay uses? IBM iSeries servers.
Java is just a choice in a sea of choices. Clearly, the question is who will promote and keep Java alive. Sun lost the war. MS has until 2007 to remove the MSJVM, who''s kidding who.
Java has benefits but not for most companies. Now vendors want multi-platform. Have you ever seen a Swing app side by side with a standard Windows app(pick your language). It''s flat-out embarrassing. How many years you think anyone''s willing to wait.

The IT world hasn't got any better because of Java, just a lot of re-inventing the wheel. How many Swing apps are there that anyone cares about, how many web-sites really use J2EE, instead of every other known web implementation existing. Be realistic, no ones going to give up hardware-dependent languages for Java. Academic is correct in saying that it''s not about languages but needs to add it's all about solving the problem and delivering solutions today. Java hasn't proved it's better than any other language in doing that. You can still write spaghetti code Java, as in "what's an object dude". How many so-called Java engineers know the first thing about OO and are using it to develop apps - probably about 5% or less.

Hey, Academic!

I feel sorry for anyone who has to work with you, Man!

Your arrogance and condescension make you more a liability and an asset for whomever you work for!

You may be perfectly correct in your assessment, but your delivery negates the force of your argument!

Lighten up, Dude!

Everyone reading this url is on the same team, one way or the other, even if we may hold different povs!

<<<<<<<< All I keep on saying over and over, (of course opinoin ) is who cares what language you work in, it''''''''s about engineer principles practices, lang is independent of problem solving. >>>>>>>>>>

Scott your such a winnie, it''s obvious you have emotional problems, first of all grammer I am working unlike you and I am typing fast so get agrip it''s obvious you do not have an education just by your attitude and response, first of all .NET does not just run on Windows second a framework is not what solves problems, i.e JavaSpaces is more a blue print than a framework, you are definitly one of the retards in this industry, go back to school learn and some manors, think before you speak, how can anyone take you serious,,

<<<<<<<< All I keep on saying over and over, (of course opinoin ) is who cares what language you work in, it''''''''s about engineer principles practices, lang is independent of problem solving. >>>>>>>>>>

Scott your such a winnie, it''s obvious you have emotional problems, first of all grammer I am working unlike you and I am typing fast so get agrip it''s obvious you do not have an education just by your attitude and response, first of all .NET does not just run on Windows second a framework is not what solves problems, i.e JavaSpaces is more a blue print than a framework, you are definitly one of the retards in this industry, go back to school learn and some manors, think before you speak, how can anyone take you serious,,

I don''t see any problem thus far ... Sun has played the role of "benevolent dictator" rather well and fairly to date. What seriously bothers me is Sun''s current profitability: that the possibility of their having to either sell out or divest themselves of the Java IP for a buck does indeed loom larger every quarter; and **THEN** ... will Java''s next owner be so benevolent? If it''s M$, don''t count on it.

<<<<<<<<
All I keep on saying over and over, (of course opinoin ) is who cares what language you work in, it''''s about engineer principles practices, lang is independent of problem solving.
>>>>>>>>>>

If you understood anything at all about Java and .Net, you''d know that we''re talking about platforms, not languages. Neither Java nor C# exist as standalone languages - they are dependent on the other components of their respective platforms: their API libraries and runtime containers. Your point is meaningless - it''s not about the language - it''s about what your options are for solving a problem. When you choose Java, you can deploy your solution on Windows, Linux, Solaris, etc. etc. - you''re not constrained. When you choose .Net, you will deploy on a Windows platform - period. To suggest that this debate is about the language makes clear you have no idea what you''re talking about and miss the entire point of the debate - it''s about keeping your solution options open - not being forced into hardware/OS choices because you choose a particular development platform.

<<<<<<
Everybody is an "engineer" or "developer" most have little or know education, experience and true talent this industry suffers because of this monolithilic attitude and retardation of the people whom work in it, if you folks are real engineers get an eduacation, if you have one great, use the best of whats available, solve problems, innovate, contribute to your business, be an outstanding citizen make a differnce, work beyond greed and just cut the whining!!!
>>>>>>>>

You might want to brush up on your education as well - particularly your grammar and spelling. I certainly hope English is not your first language.

Sorry, that last comment should have said:
"It''''s not about being bunch of moronic secret subversive < (Insert_Company_Name_Here) > lapdogs"

The key to all this problem was said at the very beginning of this discussion:

"It's not about being bunch of moronic secret subversive <> lapdogs"

We just can''t go praising one or the other. To be able to succeed, we must understand what''s out there, what our clients/customers use and want, and just provide them the best combination of all.

This is all about cash.....

Microsoft wanted Sun''s lawsuit to go away, and Sun wanted the money. As much as $8B will buy, $10B will buy more. Likely executive stock options and bonuses.

As for the technology itself: I can only hope that Java continues to flourish. Platform independene is a good thing.

I agree with "Academic" to a degree. Good technology design is important. However, writing once and having the software run on any platform would be a great thing to have. Over the long run, M$ would be forced to either fix their awful OS (good security, better usability, less bloat, sustained performance, etc.), or change their entire business model.

All I keep on saying over and over, (of course opinoin ) is who cares what language you work in, it''s about engineer principles practices, lang is independent of problem solving. It''s a joke to see all this grumble on"java is better, c# is better" who the hell cares if you are a developer, develope, this arrogance and politcal mindset is pure crap, it only re-enforces my frim belief that this industry is obver run with ignorance. Everybody is an "engineer" or "developer" most have little or know education, experience and true talent this industry suffers because of this monolithilic attitude and retardation of the people whom work in it, if you folks are real engineers get an eduacation, if you have one great, use the best of whats available, solve problems, innovate, contribute to your business, be an outstanding citizen make a differnce, work beyond greed and just cut the whining!!!

Good for IBM / Linux!

They can now prepare a Java look alike they will open source (ahem).
It will be almost identical to C# or J# or whatever # (actually they got it wrong at MS, it was C$, J$, just one key further - unless the wolf wanted to hide their intentions).

Sun''''s intellectual property? They may get away with it as easily as plagiarist MS did... Sooo easily.

They can now prepare a Java look alike they will open source (ahem).

It will be almost identical to C# or J# or whatever # (actually they got it wrong at MS, it was C$, J$, just one key further - unless the wolf wanted to hide their intentions).

Sun''s intellectual property? They may get away with it as easily as plagiarist MS did... Sooo easily.

All I hear is a bunch of whiners who spread FUD. If you know that Java is dead, then go to C# already. no one is stopping you. Java 1.5 has very impressive features. The folks working on Java are including JVM sharing, and smaller ram footprint, enhacing Swing, and NIO.. But you go ahead and play with C#. Master it well and come back and check up on us and tell us how we would of saved barrel of money. Java is great and I''m not worried anymore. If something becomes better we can always teach a old dog tricks (woof).

Waive 2 billion in a struggling companies face and what do you expect? Sell out. They went for the cashola people. They also cut 3300 more jobs, which really shows how far in the dumper Sun has gone. What will really be funny is to see Sun burn through the 2 billion and start looking for handouts again in a few years. Get your paypal donations ready people. ;-)

It''s the beginning of Java''s end, at least at Sun Microsystems side. Better switch to IBM and BEA logic.

paolo wrote :
>Java isn''''t Sun''''s primary business,
>because you may get it for free

Yes for application developers.
But if you ever tried to manufacture and sell
a Java enabled device you know the licensing cost.

You see, Sun is sinking, people into there have
to raise the stock marks, Java isn''t Sun''s
primary business, because you may get it for
free, and much of other people really prefers
other implementations, and the most of
improvements of java aren''t even Sun''s
contributions. So Sun needs to breath and got
that little last air bobble from M$. They
pretend to say that M$ wouldn''t like to kill
java, the only thing really good that could fail
with their plans of poor .net design.

M$ has used too much money to paint .net as
something good and to make people believe this,
they were who was loosing the blood, they had to
prepare "something" to sell to the market, if
they didn''t had anything they would die since
java was an enterprise development platform,
that was not imposed by marketing, this was
choose because of it''s qualities.

But unfortunately all we know how are the
contracts and agreements done, people who
understands nothing, receives a new Yacht, or
whatever to sign in favor of the big players,
they sell they souls, and who buys know it could
earn even more with that. And this will continue
while M$ has money to buy out everyone who is in
it''s way.

Maybe Sun thinks with Windows in it''s machines
it could sell them, bad idea, did they ever seen
it work on the x86`s?? guess what will M$ do
with their machines too... They had already shut
down solaris for other SOs, linux is free,
they''ve tried that like ibm, but couldn''t sell
either.

And when they discover the sulfur smell on their
last breath, maybe it will be too late... One
more round for the anti-christ.

Sun, a company with $8 billion in cash is teetering on the brink of insolvency?! Come on.

James Gosling I can believe, but Scott McNealy I wouldn''t trust any farther than I could throw him! McNealy and Ballmer represent a dangerous duo. Both have a primary responsibility to their stockholders and the advancement of their company. Poor old Gosling is a sad tired and deluded old coder!

Anyone who believes the future of Java is not on the line with this deal is kidding themeselves. McNealy has sold his very soul to the devil himself. Bill Gates was a harmless hacker by comparsion to Steve Ballmer. This man is a bright well educated ruthless business man! Even if Gosling is right and McNealy (unlikely) entered into this deal with the devil with the best intentions, you better believe that Microsoft''s lawyers put some fine print in the deal that puts Sun into one terrible bind!

This is about an injection of nearly $2 BILLION dollars into a company teetering on the brink of insolvency! The devil is in the details and no one but the principles in the deal know the truth!

Bob Cancilla.

Woof woof. Who said anything about moronic secret subversive Microsoft lapdogs? Sun was moronic way before the deal with Microsoft entered the picture. That company can''t sell their way out of a wet paper bag.

I give ''em 3 more years of life. Woof woof.