[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Microsoft and Java
::Boots
------------
http://www.computerworld.com/news/970730javah.html
The Paul Maritz interview that article links to has disappeared from
Computerworld's site, but a copy is appended.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Formerly at http://www.computerworld.com/news/news_articles/970728moritz.html
Microsoft Corp. last week indicated that it would essentially block
efforts to make Java a cross-platform development language, stating
that it wouldn't ship Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s Java Foundation Class
Libraries (JFC). Computerworld senior editor Carol Sliwa caught up
with Paul Maritz, Microsoft group vice president, at a company
reception in Seattle and asked him to explain the software giant's
Java stance.
CW: There's nothing in the license that requires you to ship those
JFCs with Internet Explorer?
Maritz: Correct.
CW: Is that a contentious issue?
Maritz: No. The only reason I brought it up is just that some people
like to play hard and fast with the truth, and they like to say,
'Look, these JFC class libraries are going to be a standard because
everybody has to ship them. Even Microsoft has to ship them.' And
that's not the case. We were very careful when we did the deal to
say that we could have the option of shipping them, but we do not
have to include them in Windows.
CW: Is there some reason you wouldn't want to ship them? Is there
something inferior about them?
Maritz: No. We don't want to put further bloat on top of the system.
We think that basically there isn't a lot of end-user value in them.
And Sun's trying to establish them as basically their platform. It's
a competing operating system.
CW: Do you feel your Application Foundation Class Libraries (AFC)
are superior to their JFCs?
Maritz: No. AFCs ... make it easier to write apps. But our real
strategy is J/Direct. So our answer to JFC is not AFC. It's J/Direct.
CW: It sounds like Microsoft is resentful at Sun for taking a
dictatorial role.
Maritz: The reason we brought it up is Sun likes to blur these two
things together. They like to blur the notion of Java the language
and Java the class libraries. They'd like to package them all into
that concept. We're just saying, 'Hey, there is a difference between
the two. Let's be clear on that.' "
CW: Do you think you're going to end up fragmenting the language even
more?
Maritz: Not the language. You're making the mistake. You're falling
into their mind-set -- [ignoring] the difference between Java the
language from Java the class libraries.
CW: But in the end result, a network manager will have to make sure
he has both sets of class libraries.
Maritz: Let me ask you this question: The fact that you can call
Windows [application programming interfaces] from C++, did that
splinter C++? It did not. It's the same issue.
CW: But if Java's promise is that it'll be a cross-platform
language --
Maritz: No. No. Sun's trying to make it that.
CW: But say there's an electronic-commerce application that somebody
wants to run cross-platform, and that's why they picked Java. And
they use the JFCs to write it.
Maritz: Good luck.
CW: It's not going to run in Internet Explorer.
Maritz: It may or may not. But the point is, that's Sun's problem.
It's not our problem.
CW: Does it end up being companies' problems, too? Are you saying
they're foolish for buying into the theory that there can ever be
cross-platform language?
Maritz: No. We're saying it's no different from any other
cross-platform [strategy]. This isn't the first one -- [there was]
CBT, Appware, etc. We're just saying that, 'Hey, you should realize
that when you're doing that, you're dependent upon Sun to get it to
work.'
CW: But if you bought into the JFCs, then you wouldn't be in this
particular case. If you shipped JFCs, you'd help foster the idea of
cross-platform.
Maritz: And I don't want to ship another operating system on top of
our operating system and burden every copy of Windows with all of
that extra weight.
CW: Do you agree that it makes developers have to make choices and
it makes them have to do more work and it makes companies have to
install both sets of classes? So in the end, it makes life difficult
for everyone, doesn't it?
Maritz: But we think that that's reality, because you either get this
thing to become a heavyweight thing, in which case it's going to
perform badly. Or you have to make it something very small. So we're
not trying to be parties to perpetuating the myth.