>>>Java has its place in that equation, but does not dominate it.
When Reardon popped up out of nowhere on November 20 to talk about "enrich[ing] . . . apps with native platform features" using Microsoft Java vs. "restrict[ing]" one's self "to cross-platform features" with real Java, I knew something was up. The articles later linked to this thread confirm my suspiscion.
George Orwell would be proud of these guys. I mean, it really takes some linguistic summersaults to say that Java's cross-platform portability is a "restriction" and that having apps that run properly on only one platform constitutes "enrichment."
I think Microsoft is out to destroy, or at least neuter, Java -- neuter it in the sense that it no longer is capable of doing the one thing that sets it apart from other programming languages, and, not coincidentally, removing the one property Java has that threatens to erase the barriers to entry (or exit, depending on your point of view) that keep Microsoft's market dominance in place.
Not to get too technical and far afield from my area of expertise, but Java's potency derives from the fact that it is cross-platform: you get the same functionality on one platform that you do on all others. If Microsoft succeeds in developing a Windows-specific, impotent version of Java, then neutered Java applications become just like active-X web sites: they look like sh-- unless you use Microsoft's proprietary products to view them. Then, at some point, neutered Java becomes just another variant of C -- it will have some advantages, but nothing to get overly-excited about. Who's gonna want to get it on with neutered Java, when Visual Basic is so much more potent and easy?
I think, though, that the market needs a cross-platform programming language that is integrated into a network computing environment and not tied to one platform. Like Navigator, real Java is better integrated with the networking environment than is neutered Java or its likely operating environment, Internet Explorer, will ever be. Companies need to save money, and they need potent programs that perform the same on all platforms, not better on Windows and lousy on others. Developers want to develop applications that are strong and capable in any number of different environments, not some wimpy thing that's only good on one platform. Real, fully-cross-platform Java fills those needs. Neutered Java won't. So, in the end, I think the deamnds of the market will keep Java cross-platform and prevent it from slipping into impotency.
But Microsoft's attempted neutering of Java is major news, and it is something these guys need to be called on.
And BTW, what would the folks at DOJ say if they knew about this? |
