Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:27:06 -0800
From:      "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
To:        <absinthe@pobox.com>, <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: Java on FreeBSD)
Message-ID:  <000b01c166ad$951f0ce0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20011105141028.75556.qmail@web10402.mail.yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
>[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Dylan Carlson
>Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 6:10 AM
>To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
>Subject: Re: Java on FreeBSD)
>
>Sun spent the money developing Java and it makes sense that they're trying to
>protect it from being forked irresponsibly (as Microsoft has tried to do, and
>has happened in the case of Kerberos).
>

While I agree with most of what you say I do draw the line at this.  I don't
see how Sun would lose money by modifying the Java standard to include the
Microsoft
modifications.  Instead, all I saw with the Sun/Microsoft fight was a pissing
contest that Sun used to embarass Microsoft because they were lucky enough to
catch Microsoft with their pants down. (ie: violating a legal contract)  There
was no real interest there on Sun's part in working together.

Also, Microsoft didn't fork Kerberos.  What they did was violate the de-facto
Kerberos implementation used by everyone else.  They were within the Kerberos
standard however.  Microsoft's Kerberos implementation wouldn't have been a
problem if they had simply published the details of how they were using the
"vendor defined" field.  It was the fault of the Kerberos standard's writers
for
putting the loophole in the Kerberos standard to start with, they admitted
this since they started talking about how they needed to change the Kerberos
standard to close the loophole.

I don't disagree that what Microsoft did with Kerberos and Java was in bad
faith, however. Microsoft has shown a solid, consistent history of looking for
loopholes in
official and de facto standards and attempting to make trouble with them.
It's basically pointless technical pissing matches because in cases where
Microsoft
does succeed in changing things, everyone else changes, and in cases where
they fail, they quietly bring their stuff into compliance later on.

>Sun's trying to do the right thing, and bring in revenue at the same time.  I

No, they are trying to bring in revenue, they only do the Right Thing as long
as doing it doesen't conflict with the revenue stream.  The Right Thing in
Java would have been to give it over to a global standards body that was
independent a long time ago.  There's plenty of other technology companies
that have done the same thing with their own standards in the past.

Ted Mittelstaedt                                       tedm@toybox.placo.com
Author of:                           The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:                          http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000b01c166ad$951f0ce0$1401a8c0>