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 : BORL: Time to BUY! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kashish King who wrote (9649)	3/30/1998 11:08:00 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10836

I rest my case that David Ray is woefully uninformed about Java and the assertion that some other "language" is going to come along and knock Java out proves my case. There was no such assertion. I simply pointed out that it remains a possibility. Java clearly has a place -- but it may well be that its place ends up in the fashion jewelry and microwave oven business and not on the desktop. Of course, it may happen as you say, too. I just think professional systems people should be careful about jumping on the bandwagon too early. Pros stand back and see how things shake out. You, on the other hand, jumped on the bandwagon far, far too early.

To: Kashish King who wrote (9649)	3/31/1998 5:00:00 AM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10836

>>>Any new language would have to offer a monumental value over Java as Java did over its predecessor.<<< I don't believe that new languages always offer a huge increment of improvement over the languages they replace (as Java portability does.) Usually a small increment, in fact, and sometimes none. Java has made it easy to put a new language front end on the JVM without throwing out the whole investment, and this begs for incremental improvements. In fact, this eventuality was designed in on purpose. For instance, with all the official and semiofficial add-on packages Java is now pretty big and complex. There is room for something simpler, for some group of customers. Others are not happy with the fact that Java used the gnarly 'C' syntax. For another group of customers who were displeased by 'missing' OO elements of Java, like multiple inheritance, the first Java-like language that is fully portable to devices with a VM and increases some of the OO features they want (call them crazy if you will) while reducing the number of required (overlapping, redundant) libraries for mainstream app development will have our money. One ACM survey some years ago noted that at least 10,000 computer languages had been invented by that time. I bet there are a hundred designers with gleams in their eyes that are working on the 'next java' right now. And I don't mean those clowns at the DCOM factory. None of this is to say that I don't support Java. I do, wholeheartedly. But I have had to learn maybe 15-20 computer languages in the last 33 years, at least a new one every two years. I would be amazed to see progress in languages come to a halt because of Java. Rather, I would expect Java to inspire language designers. Cheers, Chaz