Sun responds to Microsoft

Discussions

News: Sun responds to Microsoft

  1. Sun responds to Microsoft (7 messages)

    Sun has posted an open response to an email sent by a Microsoft Public Relations Agency to the press. The sometimes comedy-lined responses cover topics ranging from Sun's XML support, ebXML, JINI, Web Services.

    Read "How to .COM a reality check".

    Threaded Messages (7)

  2. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    It's amazing how cleverly these Sun guys slimed out of asnwering few of the issues. They failed to answer the question of implementation of Solaris in Java. These guys brag about open standards and interoperability and very arrogantly bragged about interoperability across architecture and not implementation. But these guys fail to realizes that ultimately its the implementation where the world faces problems and not the architecture. Designing on papers is comparatively easy and its the executors who face the actual problems. Sun guys fail to realize how difficult it is for the world to adopt Java because there have been so many other languages that still exist today. What will a company do about interoperability from architecture point of view when a piece of code doesn't work with other modules developed few years back in some other language.

    Interoprability and portability in Java is just for the name sake and it really impresses the novices who read the Hello World programs in their text books. But when it comes down to ground reality, programmers all over the world will have to realize that there are lot of hassles involved when some one has to write, compile and run a piece of code written in Java. And then the supporting tools that come with it are so lousy. How about the deployment tool that comes with J2EE as compared to Visual Studio?

    Sun is talking about the concepts coined by their genius employees in 1980s and till and 1990s. But why did they take two decades in implementing it? They have to learn that you don't gain a competitive advantage by waiting for someone else to change the world and then making your next move to take the credit. You have to be a first mover. Else you have to accept open source codes and run like a non-profit organization and claim that you have acceptance in the world. Where as, the truth is, you are accepting whatever exists in the world.

    All the technology that's popular today, Sun has picked up from Microsoft and then built upon it and then they don't even fail to brag about it. Microsoft's work on XML is so impressive that Sun is in no position to match it. Can Sun deny picking up the concept of MTS to build upon it their own distributed computing architecture? It's very easy to talk about proprietary standards of Microsoft. Can Sun ever mention the way they put their hardware customers into a Catch 22 situation by forcing them to buy expensive and customized network cards and other gadgets that goes into their servers? It's just that Microsoft is very open about protecting it's intellectual property where as other companies have been doing it the subtle way. No company can become Sun or Microsoft without protecting its intellectual property.

    Sun did that in their hardware business and in their failing effort to capture the software market they believe in accepting the so called open standards and brag about "Their Java and XML". It's high time Sun realized that they had no other option than to accept open standards since their hardware market is absolutely no-growth business. It's all a matter of convenience for businesses to accept open standards and protect their intellectual property where needed. Sun's employees talk as if Sun is running a charity organization in contributing to the software industry.

    It's not that I'm a big MS fan but it's high time Sun guys realized that they are in no way revolutionary.

    Hang on there till you get the next one.
  3. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    "All the [Sun] technology that's popular today, Sun has picked up from Microsoft and then built upon it and then they don't even fail to brag about it. [...] Can Sun deny picking up the concept of MTS to build upon it their own distributed computing architecture?"

    If Sun learned their distributed computing strategy from anyone, it was Forte and certainly not Microsoft.

    Even though this message is primarily in defense of Sun, i think Microsoft can hardly deny its "Embrace, Extend, Eliminate" strategy for dealing with technolgies. Can Microsoft really deny that it Embraced Java, Extended it, and tried to Elminate it by deprecating it's value to the developers it ensnared in a trap of its own devising? How long has J++ gone without any updates?

    And besides, who really thought MTS was a good idea? Bleh.
  4. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    "All the technology that's popular today, Sun has picked up from Microsoft and then built upon it and then they don't even fail to brag about it. ... Can Sun deny picking up the concept of MTS to build upon it their own distributed computing architecture?"

    All the ideas inside MTS were well known a long time ago (before the MTS was "reinvented"), and they came from distributed transaction processing and transaction monitors such as Tuxedo, CICS etc. Those products are the "parents" or "older brothers" of such products as WebLogic and WebSphere.

    Nearly every Microsoft technology is based on "reinvention" strategy:
    - COM (CORBA)
    - MTS (Transaction monitors)
    - Windows (MAC GUI)
    - VBScript (JavaScript)
    - C# (Java)
    Look at the market and reuse the ideas in your own specific way - that's the philosophy.

    Anyway. As you may know .COM is not the future. The future is .NET.

    Regards

    Wojtek
  5. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    "Anyway. As you may know .COM is not the future. The future is .NET. "

    Yeah, and it will come in the future, not present.

    Who know which day in the future? realy know?
  6. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    This thread : http://theserverside.com/discussion/thread.jsp?thread_id=4306 might also be of interest in the -

    J2EE vs M$ .NET debate...
  7. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    This is my first reply so forgive me if the quoting is a little fudged.

    You Say:"Interoprability and portability in Java is just for the name sake and it really impresses the novices who read the Hello World programs in their text books. But when it comes down to ground reality, programmers all over the world will have to realize that there are lot of hassles involved when some one has to write, compile and run a piece of code written in Java. "

    It's funny you're doing the same thing you claimed the Sun guys were being slimy for, namely giving have ass retorts. What are the hassles of writing compiling and running Java code? Got any good ones? Then ellaborate! I would love to hear your take on how interoperability and portability are namesake only.

    You Say:"And then the supporting tools that come with it are so lousy. How about the deployment tool that comes with J2EE as compared to Visual Studio?"

    I assume you are referring to the command line tools that come with the JDK. Well, for one I have always preferred a good lean command line tool than an over-inflated IDE. This is true for the development I've done not only in Java but C and C++ also. As to Visual Studio, well I'm sure it's a matter of taste but it does little more than annoy me, that applies to Sun's Forte as well, they're just too large and cumbersome for my taste. Give me VI and a command line interpreter any day whoo hoo!

    You Say:"Sun is talking about the concepts coined by their genius employees in 1980s and till and 1990s. But why did they take two decades in implementing it? "

    NFS? NeWS? Do you really think they didn't implement this philosphy as best as technology would allow for the past two decades? Maybe they all sat around saying "Geesh James, can't wait until you and the team get around to creating Java so we can implement all these cool networking ideas. Since we have nothing better to do, lunch anyone?" Come on man.

    You Say:"You have to be a first mover. Else you have to accept open source codes and run like a non-profit organization and claim that you have acceptance in the world. Where as, the truth is, you are accepting whatever exists in the world. "

    That's just silly. So if you choose to incorporate open source you have to run your business like a non-profit organization? Sure, whatever. Since the tone of you message seems to be in defense of Microsoft maybe you would like to give weight to your own words and tell us what they have been first with? Surely you have some examples. Personally the only thing I can think of that's worth mentioning is ODBC and later the OLE DB framework, but I wouldn't be surprised if the foundation for that came from elsewhere. I'll defer to a more knowledgeable reference for that.

    YouSay:"All the technology that's popular today, Sun has picked up from Microsoft and then built upon it and then they don't even fail to brag about it. Microsoft's work on XML is so impressive that Sun is in no position to match it. Can Sun deny picking up the concept of MTS to build upon it their own distributed computing architecture? "

    Hmmm, I don't know but I consider Sun the parent of Java in a sort of weird half adopted invitro fertilized sort of way so this seems a non sequitor to me. Considering that MTS was itself a half-assed rip off I think Sun had a better model to choose from in implementing their distributed services architecture.

    YouSay:"Sun's employees talk as if Sun is running a charity organization in contributing to the software industry. "

    I would hope that people aren't naive enough to believe a large organizations contributions don't have ancillary, maybe even nepharious overtones and strategic significance. Every orginization is out to promote their own aggenda no matter the degree. Some are just more amiable and help more than they hurt.

    YouSay:"It's not that I'm a big MS fan but it's high time Sun guys realized that they are in no way revolutionary. "

    Maybe, maybe not but I still respect their work and place more trust in them. Personally I am fan of SUN but who know's maybe someday they'll disapoint the developer community too.

  8. Sun responds to Microsoft[ Go to top ]

    Pravin,
    - Server-side Java interoperability is relatively a non issue, from my experience. Could you give me examples where this failed?

    - The support for XML in Java is on par with most everything Microsoft has done. Naturally, Sun hasn't done most of that work (IBM's done a lot), but does it really matter whether they do what's "hot"? Sun paid for and lead the XML specification.

    - MTS influenced EJB in certain ways, but again, what does it matter? The market has not embraced MTS and COM+ so far. This train of though just seems to be sour grapes on your part.

    - J2EE tools do suck. No arguments there. But VisualAge is a tremendously better IDE than Visual Studio. It has quirks, and as alternatives I think that Forte has matured to the point that it's excellent.

    - You state most problems are implementation, not architecture. By your connotation I agree that Sun's specs do tend to be drawn in a vacuum, but on the bright side they usually do get them right by the 2nd or 3rd revision (looking at EJB 2, for instance). However, I think fundamentally most problems stem from a lack of understanding of the inherent problems in designing a system. That's not "implementation" per se, just a lack of experience in this industry. What Sun has been attempting to do is encode that experience into its specs slowly over time -- which is why EJB feels wierd at first -- it has heavy influence from COBOL / CICS history.