Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fernando Saldanha who wrote (8105)	3/7/1998 11:23:00 PM
From: Beachbumm	Respond to of 64865

To all: amusing letter to Red Herring. License to scale Your "antitrend" for 1998, "NT Server Doesn't Take Over the Enterprise"), cites misleading statistics: sales of 732,000 copies of NT Server in 1996 vs. sales of 616,000 Unix systems. This comparison has confused end users and trade-press writers for years. Unix systems generally serve very large numbers of users. The sales of NT Server have mostly been very small-scale systems. Comparing simple license numbers is wrong, and the number of users served by Unix systems will continue to outpace those served by the less scalable NT. Harry Foxwell harry.foxwell@east.sun.com The editor responds We know that a typical Unix system serves more users than an NT Server. This is a fairly boring point, Harry. And it supports our argument, doesn't it? NT isn't yet the dominant enterprise system, and God knows when it will be. I guess the letter writer was from SUNW. Beachbumm

To: Fernando Saldanha who wrote (8105)	3/8/1998 2:37:00 AM
From: uu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Fernando: Re: Visual J++ I heard that recently Oracle did a usability test study of Visual J++, Symantec Visual Cafe Pro, Borland's JBuilder (which incidently Oracle is licensing and is calling it AppBuilder), and Sun's Java WorkShop. Of all products tested, Visual J++ scored the highest by about 30% from the second in place (Symantec's VCPRO) followed by JBuilder and then Java Workshop. The purpose of the test was to find ways to improve the User Interface and usability features of AppBuilder (Oracle's version of Borland's JBuilder). The test was supposedly done by random selection of developers. Having used all products mentioned above plus at least another 10-12 other Java development tools from smaller vendors myself, I have also come to like Microsoft's Visual Studio environment better than everyone else's (I have used Visual C++, as well as Visual J++). Despite the fact that Visual J++ is an "absolute useless" product at this time (as far as most - if not all - Java developers are concerned due to its lack of support for the industry accepted Java standards - i.e. JDK 1.1), it does have a very unique development environment and user interface that comes very natural to the users and very easy to learn and work with. This is partially due to the fact that most Java Developers (if not all) have been working with C++ and most have come to use no other C++ development tool but Microsoft's Visual C++ product. Therefore, in my humble opinion, it is logical to deduce that "when" Microsoft makes Visual J++ work with Sun's JDK 1.1 and turns it into actually a product that can be used (!), most developers will use that product. I know I will and so would my group and fellow colleagues of 300+ developers. As always of course just my opinion. Regards, Addi Jamshidi