| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Sun Sues Microsoft From Inside a Glass House | |
|
||
| Time: 11:37 EST/16:37 GMT | News Source: CW360° | Posted By: Julien Jay | ||
|
Sun is railing at Microsoft, but maybe it should be hiring coders rather than lawyers. Sun boss Scott McNealy is an entertaining act, with a nice line in puns. For example, Microsoft's .net becomes ".not", Intel's Itanium is the "Itanic", and IBM's Regatta server is "Regretta". As comedians, Larry Ellison, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are not in the same league. However, what the company has to say no longer seems relevant or interesting. In the 1980s, Sun beat the drum for networking and open standards, and those were important campaigns. Today, everybody is in favour of both, but it is still unclear why anybody should buy Sun servers running Sun's Solaris on Sun's Sparc chips with Sun's iPlanet software, or Sun's Unix workstations with Sun's Hotjava browser and Sun's Star Office suite. A decade ago, buying Sun looked less proprietary and far less restrictive than something that locked you in to IBM for life. But, now that you can run GNU/Linux on cheap Intel hardware, how many people care? | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 328 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:41:19 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 3/21/2002 1:23:36 PM |
| #3 - Neat article... not sure how it has any impact on the article above, however. |
| #2 By 5444 (208.180.245.184) at 3/21/2002 1:28:26 PM |
|
#3,
Sounds like they are trying to reinvent UML?? Or make up the tools that rational or softwire supports?? El |
| #3 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 3/21/2002 2:18:59 PM |
|
#3 - Well it's nice to see Sun is still following Microsoft's cart. Microsoft detailed their similar vision at least 2 years ago at the PDC.
JD - Yes, this article explains why Sun's greatest problem is Linux and not Microsoft. This post was edited by sodablue on Thursday, March 21, 2002 at 14:20. |
| #4 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 3/21/2002 3:29:56 PM |
|
#6 - I think you need to give Gosling a little more credit. They guy *is* brilliant, and has contributed a lot to computing during his career.
Anyway, I think, to some extent, Biztalk already implements this kind of technology. It might not be to the same scale or scope that Gosling is talking about, but Biztalk allows you to manipulate code via images. In addition, as #5 stated, Rational has a nifty tool for VS.NET that lets you do the same kind of Biztalky thing in any of your projects. I saw a demo of it, and I had absolutely no idea what the Rational guy was doing, but it sure looked cool! |
| #5 By 1845 (12.254.231.11) at 3/21/2002 3:31:46 PM |
| JD, how are Sun's business practices similar to Microsoft's? |
| #6 By 1845 (12.254.231.11) at 3/21/2002 3:36:40 PM |
| #3 I just don't see your point at all. It seems that Gosling is pursuing something similar to UML and the rational tool suite or the current functionality of Visio 2002 Enterprise Architect. Aside from this, what does this have to do with Sun's persuing profits via litigation (e.g., the topic of the article I thought you were posting about). |
| #7 By 5444 (208.180.245.184) at 3/21/2002 3:43:46 PM |
|
Actually Sun's business practices are Worse than M$haft or AOHELL.
One of quite a few organizations are Dropping Sun do to thier lack of customer support. And expensive closed platform. Even getting better performance in the deal. and MUCH cheaper. (intel based computers with linux) The business that Sun is loosing is because of MS. Most are moving from one brand of Unix to another brand Linux. On less expesive hardware with companies that actually offer support. That is where Sun needs to look at thier weaknesses and solve those issues. Better Customer support. Better programmers. And then they would loose less customers. but they have a lot of bridges they have to fix to get there. El |
| #8 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 3/21/2002 11:58:40 PM |
|
#13.
1. Both, a bit moreso with Microsoft 2. Both, but moreso with Sun 3. To a very large extent Sun, and to a small extent Microsoft. 4. Again mostly Sun, but to a small extent Microsoft. |
| #9 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 3/22/2002 2:26:15 AM |
|
#18 - Care to qualify your statements? McNealy is the King of FUD. That's a widely excepted fact, even at Sun! j/k :-)
I've read 7 or so books about Microsoft (ranging from their business model/practices, to the DOJ dealings, to strategy, to software development practices), and the Microsoft culture has never been about FUD. In fact, Microsoft has only recently even started defending itself against this FUD. Historically, Microsoft has done nothing more than publish citations of 3rd party benchmarks, or occasionally sponser open benchmarks. Can you cite a single publication in which Microsoft attacks any other company on the basis of anything but technical merit? (ie, benchmarks, productivity analysis, etc.) The only incidents I can think of are dealing with GNU, and you can hardly call it FUD. |
| #10 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 3/22/2002 10:34:08 AM |
|
#18 - Are you sure it doesn't show that you know nothing about Microsoft?
#20-22 - I would appreciate actual links to Microsoft press releases, or interviews with Microsoft executives. The links you provided were actually FUD from Linux zealots. Here's an example of Sun FUD for you: http://news.com.com/2008-1082-817522.html It's an interview with James Gosling. |
| #11 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 3/22/2002 3:58:37 PM |
|
JD - The GPL license is viral.
|
| #12 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 3/22/2002 11:32:15 PM |
|
JD - Quite clearly the 3rd definition... "Something that poisons one's soul or mind"
|
| #13 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 3/22/2002 11:33:08 PM |
|
#30 - Why is it because I don't agree with your bias, that it is *I* who is not objective?
|
| #14 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 3/23/2002 1:24:28 AM |
|
#27 - "Yes they intentionally tried to break DR-DOS w/ 3.1..."
Ah, so I see you've been a victim of some FUD yourself. You do realize that story is fictitious, don't you? The only thing that Windows 3.11 did was display a message saying that you weren't running MS-DOS, so Windows wasn't guaranteed to work properly because DR-DOS was not an MS Product. I suppose you could call this FUD (although, I wouldn't), but you certainly can't accuse Microsoft of trying to break DR-DOS by display a text message before Windows loaded. |
| #15 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 3/23/2002 1:27:33 AM |
|
#36 - I think Microsoft objects to GNU because of the crappy business model, and are over reacting - letting their knee jerk reactions get the better of them.
(By "Microsoft" I mean the minority which has voiced their original opinion on the matter, not the ones that were forced to agree for fear of the appearance of disunity.) Just as people who object to socialism called the USSR "evil" or a "virus." Of course, the USSR did a lot of bad stuff independent of socialism, but I'm sure you see my point. Oh, and as far as proving MS doesn't do FUD, I was simply replying to somebody accusing MS of doing FUD. It's not my responsibility to prove a negative; it's your responsibility to prove the positive. Just as saying that the reason God exists is because I can't prove he doesn't, but offer no proof that he does; saying MS spreads FUD because we can't prove they don't, doesn't fly. This post was edited by RMD on Saturday, March 23, 2002 at 01:30. |
| #16 By 1845 (12.254.230.230) at 3/23/2002 4:07:42 AM |
|
I believe in God RMD, but let's leave that for another forum. JD, not sure whether you want to categorize me as a Microsoft zealot or not (not all too sure what you mean by that anyway), but regardless, I have a few thoughts about the GPL.
If you think of the way a computer virus spreads, there is a striking similarity to the GPL. A few years back I was working at a virus free machine. I inserted a floppy and copied a few files (one of the happened to have Michelangelo attached). He decided he liked my HD and attached a few copies of himself to several local files. What does the GPL do? Here is some seemingly innocent code that does some nice stuff. Little does it know that a vicious GPL is attached to it. As soon as some other unsuspecting chunk of code decides to talk to it, the GPL replicates it self and infects that chunk of code as well. With respect to intellectual property rights, patents, and copyrights the GPL is a vicious killer. On first glance I generally accept all marketting hype as just that - hype. I feel, however, that Microsoft's explanation of the GPL is dead on. I suppose you can say that you always have to choose to use GPL infected code, but the behaivor is quite similar to that of a virus - allegorically if nothing else. This post was edited by BobSmith on Saturday, March 23, 2002 at 04:10. |
| #17 By 1845 (12.254.230.230) at 3/23/2002 3:37:31 PM |
| Yes I as quite serious and the analogy is just that an analogy. It does well characterize the behaivor of GPL'ed code when introduced to a non GPL'ed system. Also, for the record the adjective you are looking for is "viral" not "virul". |
| #18 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 3/23/2002 7:28:16 PM |
| Sensible! Nice! :-) |
| #19 By 1845 (12.254.230.230) at 3/23/2002 7:30:24 PM |
|
So what which is more radical - radical pro-Microsoft or Microsoft zealot?
I don't believe that I commented on whether Microsoft uses FUD. I just said that I agree with the characterization of GPL'ed code. Viral Operating System - hmm, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Not meaning to offend you but I think we may not be using the same definitions - GPL'ed code and operating system do not mean the same think. GPL is a license which says if you use any part of the code that I govern, I now govern that new composite product. That is quite threatening to intellectual property rights. You don't collect royalties on stuff in public domain. |
| #20 By 1845 (12.254.230.230) at 3/23/2002 10:17:06 PM |
| True and I don't use GPL, and so my code is not infected. If you have tuberculosis and those around you catch it are you viral? It is the disease that is viral. The sick person is infected. The Linux kernel that is GPL'ed is infected. GPL itself is the virus. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 328 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:41:19 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
