There has to be an eager demand for the product, of which it is waning. One case in point is Fed Ex (they just scrapped an NC plan.
Unless I misunderstand your point of view, please correct me if I am wrong. You seem to be grouping Java based applications, which currently run ontop of Java VMs, with the JAVA O/S.
Java based applications and tools will most likely succeed (I don't believe MS is trying to kill Java as a language, just trying to migrate the Visual Studio apps towards that product as well as C++ and Basic (as a developer, the Visual Studio is the best I have seen on the PC). And in this area, I agree with you.
Where I disagree with your points is the success/failure of the NC and its Java O/S. I believe the Java O/S, just my opinion, will really 'fly' in the real-time O/S environments (where it was intentioned to in the first place).
Your third point about the MS monopoly, and people getting tired of it. That was true of IBM in the 60-80s, which by the way, is own of the proponent you are trying to champion (along with SUN).
About the Oracle and SUN issue. I don't believe I ever said, or inferred that they dropped support for the NC (if I misled you in this way, sorry). I stated that SUN and Oracle both 'dropped the ball' in relation to the NC's future. I don't believe that Oracle and Corel should be in the VC market (its not within their field of expertise, unless they go out and buy out a company which excels in this niche market). At least SUN and IBM have the hardware and marketing know-how to build-sell-and-service these markets.
You are correct in that they have to concentrate on the app market for their new O/S. Much in the same way, a couple of years ago, people were talking about Windows NT. Microsoft was able to bridge that gap through their Windows 3.1 (then 95) platform. As well as agreements with major vendors to port their apps (UNIX and Win 3.1) to the NT platform. This is something that DEC, with their Alpha machines, were unable to succeed at.
Just look at the scrap heap of our technology's history:
1) Amiga, great technology. separate graphics chip, very few business
apps and failed (apologies to those who still have Amigas at home).
2) the NABU system (built here in Ottawa in the 80s (I don't remember
when it started) was ahead of its time, but not enough demand.
3) the Alpha chip. powerfull, fast and 64-bit at a time when most
machines were just moving to the 32-bit field.
4) XEROX Parc, the inventors of mouse and menu technology (they didn't
patent their technology), which Jobs and Wozniak built Apple. A
very usefull machine, but to unwilling to bend to commodity based
prices, as all PCs have become subject to.
5) EDI. Electronic Data Interchange. FAX is definetly inferior
technology, but FAX was quite, readily available and easier for
the average joe-bloe to use.
TANGENTIAL LEAP HERE...
On a side note, our industry has done a very poor job in evolving technology to a state where it actually picks up the worker and helps them along in their job. We have developed applications that halt the worker, shove them off into a room, force them to expend their time learning these new products so that they can resume their job and continue. Companies like Corel (and others) then interrupt you again 12onths later with a new version (stop you in your feet, throw you back in the room, force you to learn the product once again, and then send you back on your way).
TANGENTIAL LEAP BACK...
As to the NC being a dumb-terminal. I never said that. I stated that they will most likely be best candidates to replace ASCII- terminals, they aren't dumb, they actually have graphical display firmware built in to the machine for screen painting (just ASCII-text based painting).
NCs are not depeendent upon the MS O/S, this is true. And neither are the PCs. Ask all those Linux users, OS/2 users, etc... They run very well on PCs, without MS.
Once again you compare apples and oranges. Compare NCs versus PCs. Java O/S versus MS O/S. You state that NCs don't need an MS O/S, just
a Java VM ( but what is a Java VM but a kernel layer on-top of the O/S or an O/S itself.
Yes, the NC will succeed in some environments (a niche market, just as the Apple will have its niche market, if the company is run properly). The NC will replace X-terminals and ASCII-based terminals, where they wish to keep a similar 'central processing' environment. That is, all work done on one CPU (read between the lines people, IBM wants you to buy NCs so they can make a killing on their mainframes, to keep them alive and upgrading).
It comes down to one of three groups to control our computer world. Bill Gates, McNealy/Ellison or IBM? Pick which one you want and support them, because that is how it will end up. McNealy and Ellison dream of being in Bill Gates shoes. And IBM is just trying to climb back on top of the heap again.
I find McNealy and Ellison deceptive and offensive (actually, I don't trust them). Bill Gates is more up-front abut what he wishes to do (I don't say that he isn't arrogant). I lived through the development environment during IBM's reign, I don't wish to be under their tutelage again. |
