Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL

  1. #1
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw Guest

    Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    Kunle -

    I think the point is that in the past, Microsoft _have_ supported Java, and
    people are already used to being able to run Java applets in their browsers.
    This change is going to be _really_ annoying to people who are currently
    doing Java development (and there are a lot of developers who have turned
    to Java in the last few years). It means that users are going to be greatly
    inconvenienced. Having to search around for the right disk with the JVM
    "just" to run an application which ran OK in the last version of Windows
    is a real waste of time.

    Having said that, Microsoft have not worked on a new JVM for some time.
    If developers want to use more recent versions of the Java language, they
    will have to provide a setup routine for the Java 1.3+ plug-in. The only
    question remains is whether Windows XP will also block Java applets using
    this plug-in.

    As for the anti-competitive bit, well it seems far too much of a coincidence
    that they are removing the Java platform whilst adding the groundwork for
    the .NET platform.

    --
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
    Programmer/Analyst
    Chordiant Software
    Brentford
    UK

    "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >Tim,
    >
    >I cannot see anything anti-competitive in removing Java support from Windows
    >XP. You seem to be suggesting that since MS is classified as a monopoly,

    it
    >is obliged to distribute competing runtime platforms from it's competitiors
    >as part of it's products. So if I released my kPlatform virtual machine
    >technology for embedded scripting/development, can I count on MS being
    >obliged to distribute my runtime or does this only apply to Java. If so

    why?
    >
    >As for the default security settings, there have been a few security
    >exploits that involve the combined use of Active Scripting and Java aplets.
    >I don't see a problem with turning off support for applets in mailboxes.

    The
    >removal from the high security zone is a bit puzzling I admit. Bu given

    that
    >Java is no longer supplied, what does it matter anyways?
    >
    >Kunle
    >
    >"Tim Romano" <tim_romano@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:Xns90E37340BBC0Btimromano@209.1.14.192...
    >> I read that XP will not ship with a java runtime. If true, that will
    >> strike a more severe blow to Java than the default security settings.
    >> I agree that such moves are anti-competitive, in that they are actions,
    >> taken by a monopolist, that disrupt applications using competing
    >> technologies.
    >> Tim Romano
    >> www.aimsdata.com/tim
    >>
    >>
    >> "Debbie Locker" <dlocker@possie.org> wrote in
    >> news:3b5584bc$1@news.devx.com:
    >>
    >>
    >> > [...]
    >> > In XP, the default security settings in Outlook and Outlook Express
    >> > will automatically block Java applets in user inboxes.

    >>
    >> > [...]
    >> > XP's security definition changes will block Java applets
    >> > in browsers when administrators opt for high security settings.

    >>
    >> > [...]
    >> > To date, no Java applet has been linked
    >> > to a large-scale virus outbreak via email or on the web. If XP's
    >> > security settings that wrongly categorize Java continue, the real risk
    >> > will be to innovation and open competition.
    >> >
    >> > Anyone concerned about innovation open competition should visit
    >> > www.POSSIE.org, or contact Microsoft directly.

    >



  2. #2
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    news:3b582724$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Kunle -
    >
    > I think the point is that in the past, Microsoft _have_ supported Java,

    and
    > people are already used to being able to run Java applets in their

    browsers.

    They also supported *all* MS-DOS programs in the past. Not anymore. Stuff
    changes...

    <SNIP>

    > As for the anti-competitive bit, well it seems far too much of a

    coincidence
    > that they are removing the Java platform whilst adding the groundwork for
    > the .NET platform.


    Not a coincidence at all. They are competing technologies. Sun could have
    allowed MS more leverage with respect to continued use of Java. It chose not
    to.

    Kunle



  3. #3
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    >news:3b582724$1@news.devx.com...
    >>
    >> Kunle -
    >>
    >> I think the point is that in the past, Microsoft _have_ supported Java,

    >and
    >> people are already used to being able to run Java applets in their

    >browsers.
    >
    >They also supported *all* MS-DOS programs in the past. Not anymore. Stuff
    >changes...


    Irrelevant. Java is becoming used _more_, not less, and it is being constantly
    upgraded, not left behind in the software dumper. Why can't Microsoft just
    bite the bullet, reconcile with Sun, and aply for a Java 1.3 licence? It
    would save the hassle of having to make users install an extra plugin!

    >
    ><SNIP>
    >
    >> As for the anti-competitive bit, well it seems far too much of a

    >coincidence
    >> that they are removing the Java platform whilst adding the groundwork

    for
    >> the .NET platform.

    >
    >Not a coincidence at all. They are competing technologies. Sun could have
    >allowed MS more leverage with respect to continued use of Java. It chose

    not
    >to.


    Oh yes, I know - I was being ironic. I suppose it is a bit too much for
    Microsoft to help the users in this case. And as for the J++ 6 point - I
    have to say that I am mightily glad that Sun protected the language in the
    way they did. Portability is the most important thing with Java!

    --
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
    Programmer/Analyst
    Chordiant Software
    Brentford
    UK

    >Kunle
    >
    >



  4. #4
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    news:3b66a1ff@news.devx.com...

    > >They also supported *all* MS-DOS programs in the past. Not anymore. Stuff
    > >changes...

    >
    > Irrelevant.


    Not at all. Support for *any* feature never implies eternal support.

    > Java is becoming used _more_, not less, and it is being constantly
    > upgraded, not left behind in the software dumper.


    To most Windows developers (even us J++ developers), Java is now irrelevant.
    C#/.NET are able replacements.

    > Why can't Microsoft just
    > bite the bullet, reconcile with Sun, and aply for a Java 1.3 licence? It
    > would save the hassle of having to make users install an extra plugin!


    Same reason that Sun didn't bite the bullet and accept that not every Java
    developer wishes to (be virtually forced to) write cross-OS portable apps.
    JNI is a braindead solution and, RMI/JRMP as a replacement for DCOM for
    Windows-only Java apps was laughable.

    If you admit that there is a need for platform-specific code (JNI suggests
    that Sun does), then you need to do it properly like MS sought to do for
    Windows or not at all. Of course if you are Sun and you hate/fear MS and
    Windows anyways and then MS out-engineers you and produces absolutely the
    fastest JVM of *any* platform......

    > >Not a coincidence at all. They are competing technologies. Sun could have
    > >allowed MS more leverage with respect to continued use of Java. It chose

    > not
    > >to.

    >
    > Oh yes, I know - I was being ironic. I suppose it is a bit too much for
    > Microsoft to help the users in this case.


    Most Windows users don't make use of Java. Ever. Those that are most likely
    to - corporate developers and users - still have it as standard AFAIK.

    >And as for the J++ 6 point - I
    > have to say that I am mightily glad that Sun protected the language in the
    > way they did. Portability is the most important thing with Java!


    Sun didn't protect the language. It fought to protect it's business against
    the best JVM (at the time of the trial) and MS's audacity to augement this
    JVM with superior access to native OS functionality. That most Java users
    (J++ had more users than all the other tools) welcomed this was of no
    consequence to Sun.

    Both companies had their private [unsavoury] agendas but, to portray Sun as
    the victim of MS treachery is a bit much. And totally inaccurate...

    Kunle



  5. #5
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    >news:3b66a1ff@news.devx.com...
    >
    >> >They also supported *all* MS-DOS programs in the past. Not anymore. Stuff
    >> >changes...

    >>
    >> Irrelevant.

    >
    >Not at all. Support for *any* feature never implies eternal support.


    Feature !!??

    Considering how scarily *big* Java is these days, I don't think you are doing
    justice by calling it a _feature_. Incidentally, please remind me as to
    what other features have been removed from Internet Explorer since, say,
    v 3.0 ?

    >
    >> Java is becoming used _more_, not less, and it is being constantly
    >> upgraded, not left behind in the software dumper.

    >
    >To most Windows developers (even us J++ developers), Java is now irrelevant.
    >C#/.NET are able replacements.


    Why is Java irrelevant? (Sensible answers only, please ...). And, for sure,
    C#/.NET is probably quite good (I've literally only started playing with
    VB.NET), but why go for the Java clone when you can play with the real thing,
    with the stability that it will undoubtably have when compared to a neophyte
    platform like .NET. What innovations have Microsoft so cleverly hidden from
    us?

    >
    >> Why can't Microsoft just
    >> bite the bullet, reconcile with Sun, and aply for a Java 1.3 licence?

    It
    >> would save the hassle of having to make users install an extra plugin!

    >
    >Same reason that Sun didn't bite the bullet and accept that not every Java
    >developer wishes to (be virtually forced to) write cross-OS portable apps.
    >JNI is a braindead solution and, RMI/JRMP as a replacement for DCOM for
    >Windows-only Java apps was laughable.
    >


    Well, all I can say is that cross-platform is a _very_ important thing for
    our company, 'cos we support 6 OSs.

    >If you admit that there is a need for platform-specific code (JNI suggests
    >that Sun does), then you need to do it properly like MS sought to do for
    >Windows or not at all. Of course if you are Sun and you hate/fear MS and
    >Windows anyways and then MS out-engineers you and produces absolutely the
    >fastest JVM of *any* platform......
    >


    Oh, for sure. But then again, I wouldn't be using Java. If I was targeting
    an OS, then I would simply choose the appropriate tool for the job - no issue.
    As for the fastest JVM - really? In which case, it is a real shame they
    can't create a new JVM for Java. Or at least, Sun ought to poach the team.

    >> >Not a coincidence at all. They are competing technologies. Sun could

    have
    >> >allowed MS more leverage with respect to continued use of Java. It chose

    >> not
    >> >to.

    >>
    >> Oh yes, I know - I was being ironic. I suppose it is a bit too much for
    >> Microsoft to help the users in this case.

    >
    >Most Windows users don't make use of Java. Ever. Those that are most likely
    >to - corporate developers and users - still have it as standard AFAIK.
    >


    Uhuh. Yes, I know. I've been programming VB for a number of years now.
    I am only branching off into other realms because of commercial factors
    i.e. what the clients want. I'm also branching out into VB.NET to see how
    practical it would be to port our VB5 code over. Should be interesting.

    >>And as for the J++ 6 point - I
    >> have to say that I am mightily glad that Sun protected the language in

    the
    >> way they did. Portability is the most important thing with Java!

    >
    >Sun didn't protect the language. It fought to protect it's business against
    >the best JVM (at the time of the trial) and MS's audacity to augement this
    >JVM with superior access to native OS functionality. That most Java users
    >(J++ had more users than all the other tools) welcomed this was of no
    >consequence to Sun.
    >
    >Both companies had their private [unsavoury] agendas but, to portray Sun

    as
    >the victim of MS treachery is a bit much. And totally inaccurate...


    Um. I didn't. I only said, I am very pleased that Sun protected the language.
    Come on - we don't want the situation we have with C and C++, with slight
    incompatibilities luring you into using proprietary extensions. And I don't
    give a **** about the politics of this issue. If one is trying to do portable
    code, it is generally a good idea to avoid this sort of stuff.

    >
    >Kunle
    >
    >


    -- Mark --

  6. #6
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    news:3b681b55$1@news.devx.com...

    Mark,

    > >> >They also supported *all* MS-DOS programs in the past. Not anymore.

    Stuff
    > >> >changes...
    > >>
    > >> Irrelevant.

    > >
    > >Not at all. Support for *any* feature never implies eternal support.

    >
    > Feature !!??


    Erm....yes. The ability to run Java applets is a feature that Windows' IE
    used to support as standard. Now it is to become an optional feature. ;-)

    > Considering how scarily *big* Java is these days, I don't think you are

    doing
    > justice by calling it a _feature_. Incidentally, please remind me as to
    > what other features have been removed from Internet Explorer since, say,
    > v 3.0 ?


    Perhaps IE3's Internet Mail application. It was dropped and something else
    replaced it.... ;-)

    > >To most Windows developers (even us J++ developers), Java is now

    irrelevant.
    > >C#/.NET are able replacements.

    >
    > Why is Java irrelevant? (Sensible answers only, please ...).


    Let me qualify that statement - "Java is now irrelevant if all you want to
    do is write Windows applications."
    Why?, there are better tools for developing Windows applications - the Win32
    sets of tools (i.e. Classic VB, VC++, Delphi, C++ Builder etc) were better
    in this regard and the .NET platforms is even better now.

    > And, for sure,
    > C#/.NET is probably quite good (I've literally only started playing with
    > VB.NET), but why go for the Java clone when you can play with the real

    thing,
    > with the stability that it will undoubtably have when compared to a

    neophyte
    > platform like .NET. What innovations have Microsoft so cleverly hidden

    from
    > us?


    ..NET has certainly benefitted from MS's experience with VMs in the past but,
    it is more than a clone of the Java platform. It improves on the Java
    platform in a number of areas.

    > >Same reason that Sun didn't bite the bullet and accept that not every

    Java
    > >developer wishes to (be virtually forced to) write cross-OS portable

    apps.
    > >JNI is a braindead solution and, RMI/JRMP as a replacement for DCOM for
    > >Windows-only Java apps was laughable.
    > >

    >
    > Well, all I can say is that cross-platform is a _very_ important thing for
    > our company, 'cos we support 6 OSs.


    And for some of the projects I've work on (and others I am yet to work on).
    Nevertheless, I value the ability that .NET promises for the future where I
    get to chose whether an application is portable or OS dependent. And I
    prefer it's native code solution to JNI. And it's platform middleware
    interop solution to Java's "not invented here" syndrome. Of course cross-OS
    ..NET is years away....

    > >If you admit that there is a need for platform-specific code (JNI

    suggests
    > >that Sun does), then you need to do it properly like MS sought to do for
    > >Windows or not at all. Of course if you are Sun and you hate/fear MS and
    > >Windows anyways and then MS out-engineers you and produces absolutely the
    > >fastest JVM of *any* platform......
    > >

    >
    > Oh, for sure. But then again, I wouldn't be using Java.


    Why not?. The only reason I can see is because Sun wants it that way. MS
    pretty much proved the point that it is possible to have a choice with Java.

    > If I was targeting
    > an OS, then I would simply choose the appropriate tool for the job - no

    issue.

    So would I. Hence the assertion that Java is irrelevant for the vast
    majority of developers who have no cross-OS needs. The .NET platform on the
    other hand promises developer choice (although that is probably a few years
    away).

    > As for the fastest JVM - really? In which case, it is a real shame they
    > can't create a new JVM for Java. Or at least, Sun ought to poach the

    team.

    It was the fastest JVM. That they couldn't create a new JVM is all down to
    Sun's lawsuit and the resulting settlement agreement. Not sure if they would
    have wanted to by the end in any case.

    > >Most Windows users don't make use of Java. Ever. Those that are most

    likely
    > >to - corporate developers and users - still have it as standard AFAIK.
    > >

    >
    > Uhuh. Yes, I know. I've been programming VB for a number of years now.
    > I am only branching off into other realms because of commercial factors
    > i.e. what the clients want. I'm also branching out into VB.NET to see how
    > practical it would be to port our VB5 code over. Should be interesting.


    For those times when cross-OS is a requirement, Java is often a good
    solution although Kylix is making inroads for Windows/Linux portability.

    > Um. I didn't. I only said, I am very pleased that Sun protected the

    language.
    > Come on - we don't want the situation we have with C and C++, with slight
    > incompatibilities luring you into using proprietary extensions. And I

    don't
    > give a **** about the politics of this issue. If one is trying to do

    portable
    > code, it is generally a good idea to avoid this sort of stuff.


    Problem is a 100% portable language isn't new. They were simply
    unpopular/weak. You need access to many underlying OS services to write
    powerful applications. You either end up reinventing the facilities of every
    platform or you aim for a lowest common denonminator. Neither is a
    satisfactory solution. Better to cover most cases and provide access to the
    underlying platform where appropriate. And give developers the choice of
    when/how to do so...

    Kunle



  7. #7
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    Hi Kunle -

    "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    >news:3b681b55$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    >Mark,
    >
    >> >> >They also supported *all* MS-DOS programs in the past. Not anymore.

    >Stuff
    >> >> >changes...
    >> >>
    >> >> Irrelevant.
    >> >
    >> >Not at all. Support for *any* feature never implies eternal support.

    >>
    >> Feature !!??

    >
    >Erm....yes. The ability to run Java applets is a feature that Windows' IE
    >used to support as standard. Now it is to become an optional feature. ;-)


    Well, it's a shame that two companies can't stop acting like children and
    benefit us (the developers), and our clients. Looks as if we are going to
    have to just resort to the Java 2 plugin *8-( .

    >> Considering how scarily *big* Java is these days, I don't think you are

    >doing
    >> justice by calling it a _feature_. Incidentally, please remind me as

    to
    >> what other features have been removed from Internet Explorer since, say,
    >> v 3.0 ?

    >
    >Perhaps IE3's Internet Mail application. It was dropped and something else
    >replaced it.... ;-)


    Nope, it's still there - just rebranded with the "Outlook" trademark, albeit
    "Express" i.e. completely different codebase. Interesting case that - it
    has so many features now, you can actually automate via COM interfaces!

    >> Why is Java irrelevant? (Sensible answers only, please ...).

    >
    >Let me qualify that statement - "Java is now irrelevant if all you want

    to
    >do is write Windows applications."
    >Why?, there are better tools for developing Windows applications - the Win32
    >sets of tools (i.e. Classic VB, VC++, Delphi, C++ Builder etc) were better
    >in this regard and the .NET platforms is even better now.


    Agreed. Personally, I would use VB 5/6 for my Windows development. It's
    simply the best development system MS have ever made. I was just chatting
    with a co-worker who has moved from VB to Java development, and he really
    misses the ability to rewrite the code whilst running the code in the IDE.

    >> And, for sure,
    >> C#/.NET is probably quite good (I've literally only started playing with
    >> VB.NET), but why go for the Java clone when you can play with the real

    >thing,
    >> with the stability that it will undoubtably have when compared to a

    >neophyte
    >> platform like .NET. What innovations have Microsoft so cleverly hidden

    >from
    >> us?

    >
    >..NET has certainly benefitted from MS's experience with VMs in the past

    but,
    >it is more than a clone of the Java platform. It improves on the Java
    >platform in a number of areas.


    Could you please give me a few pointers as to the new benefits?

    >> Well, all I can say is that cross-platform is a _very_ important thing

    for
    >> our company, 'cos we support 6 OSs.

    >
    >And for some of the projects I've work on (and others I am yet to work on).
    >Nevertheless, I value the ability that .NET promises for the future where

    I
    >get to chose whether an application is portable or OS dependent. And I
    >prefer it's native code solution to JNI. And it's platform middleware
    >interop solution to Java's "not invented here" syndrome. Of course cross-OS
    >..NET is years away....


    But I thought that the whole point of the .NET platform was that it _will
    be_ OS independent. Otherwise, what's the point? Incidentally, I think
    you said somewhere that you could use WinForms as a Java applet replacement.
    I was looking at the new version of the Object Browser, and there's simply
    tons of stuff there that is Windows dependent. Is this going to be cross-OS,
    just as long as that OS is made by Microsoft? *8-)

    >> >If you admit that there is a need for platform-specific code (JNI

    >suggests
    >> >that Sun does), then you need to do it properly like MS sought to do

    for
    >> >Windows or not at all. Of course if you are Sun and you hate/fear MS

    and
    >> >Windows anyways and then MS out-engineers you and produces absolutely

    the
    >> >fastest JVM of *any* platform......
    >> >

    >>
    >> Oh, for sure. But then again, I wouldn't be using Java.

    >
    >Why not?. The only reason I can see is because Sun wants it that way. MS
    >pretty much proved the point that it is possible to have a choice with Java.


    Well, as I said above, I would want to use VB with Windows. Practical reasons:
    Not particularly slow, large (and cheaper :-) ) developer base, higher productivity.
    Sorry, I know I sound prejudiced here. I would use any tools within reason
    - really. :-) Why not cross-OS VB?

    >> >Most Windows users don't make use of Java. Ever. Those that are most

    >likely
    >> >to - corporate developers and users - still have it as standard AFAIK.
    >> >

    >>
    >> Uhuh. Yes, I know. I've been programming VB for a number of years now.
    >> I am only branching off into other realms because of commercial factors
    >> i.e. what the clients want. I'm also branching out into VB.NET to see

    how
    >> practical it would be to port our VB5 code over. Should be interesting.

    >
    >For those times when cross-OS is a requirement, Java is often a good
    >solution although Kylix is making inroads for Windows/Linux portability.


    Yeah, so I have heard. The problem with Kylix is that Linux is not mainstream
    in the enterprise sector - they don't seem to trust it. Talking of Delphi
    - don't you think that .NET looks _so_ like Delphi as well?

    >
    >Kunle
    >


    --
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
    Programmer/Analyst
    Chordiant Software
    Brentford
    UK

  8. #8
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    news:3b69473a$1@news.devx.com...

    > Hi Kunle -


    Hi Mark,

    > Well, it's a shame that two companies can't stop acting like children and
    > benefit us (the developers), and our clients. Looks as if we are going to
    > have to just resort to the Java 2 plugin *8-( .


    True.

    > >..NET has certainly benefitted from MS's experience with VMs in the past

    > but,
    > >it is more than a clone of the Java platform. It improves on the Java
    > >platform in a number of areas.

    >
    > Could you please give me a few pointers as to the new benefits?


    Some things I consider to be benefits over the Java platform:
    - the variety of language compilers supplied as standard and the tools to
    facilitate easy development of new languages
    - cross-language interop including cross-language inheritance
    - ASP.NET (much better performance than JSP/Servlets even in beta on my
    boxes)
    - ADO.NET (no doubt JDBC would be "upgraded" to include features from this
    as was the case with ODBC and ADO)
    - powerful OS and middleware interop (P/Invoke and COM interop)
    - ECMA involvement (it's only for a subset of .NET but that's more than the
    Java platform)
    - better performance for

    > >And for some of the projects I've work on (and others I am yet to work

    on).
    > >Nevertheless, I value the ability that .NET promises for the future where

    > I
    > >get to chose whether an application is portable or OS dependent. And I
    > >prefer it's native code solution to JNI. And it's platform middleware
    > >interop solution to Java's "not invented here" syndrome. Of course

    cross-OS
    > >..NET is years away....

    >
    > But I thought that the whole point of the .NET platform was that it _will
    > be_ OS independent. Otherwise, what's the point? Incidentally, I think
    > you said somewhere that you could use WinForms as a Java applet

    replacement.
    > I was looking at the new version of the Object Browser, and there's

    simply
    > tons of stuff there that is Windows dependent. Is this going to be

    cross-OS,
    > just as long as that OS is made by Microsoft? *8-)


    ..NET is certainly OS-independent capable. But I won't go so far as to say
    that's the whole point. MS isn't rushing to endow competiting platforms with
    the benefits of it's expensive research and development programmes.
    Nevertheless, I predict that the important bits will become be available on
    the important OS platforms within a couple of years.

    My statement about WinForms is currently only for the Windows platform. That
    may change.

    > >> Oh, for sure. But then again, I wouldn't be using Java.

    > >
    > >Why not?. The only reason I can see is because Sun wants it that way. MS
    > >pretty much proved the point that it is possible to have a choice with

    Java.
    >
    > Well, as I said above, I would want to use VB with Windows. Practical

    reasons:
    > Not particularly slow, large (and cheaper :-) ) developer base, higher

    productivity.
    > Sorry, I know I sound prejudiced here. I would use any tools within

    reason
    > - really. :-) Why not cross-OS VB?


    J++ was as close to VB as Java could come. At least that's what I believed
    until I tried VB.NET and C#....

    > >For those times when cross-OS is a requirement, Java is often a good
    > >solution although Kylix is making inroads for Windows/Linux portability.

    >
    > Yeah, so I have heard. The problem with Kylix is that Linux is not

    mainstream
    > in the enterprise sector - they don't seem to trust it. Talking of Delphi
    > - don't you think that .NET looks _so_ like Delphi as well?


    It's the so-called "Hejlsberg effect" ;-)
    Uncanny...

    Kunle



  9. #9
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Kunle Odutola" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS>okocha.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    >news:3b69473a$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    >> >[.NET] is more than a clone of the Java platform. It improves on the

    Java
    >> >platform in a number of areas.

    >>
    >> Could you please give me a few pointers as to the new benefits?

    >
    >Some things I consider to be benefits over the Java platform:
    >- the variety of language compilers supplied as standard and the tools to
    >facilitate easy development of new languages


    True - although I am sure that I have heard of a few companies who are using
    the Java virtual machine which their own languages. But yes, not ones supported
    by Sun.

    >- cross-language interop including cross-language inheritance


    The latter is a very cool feature.

    >- ASP.NET (much better performance than JSP/Servlets even in beta on my
    >boxes)


    Really? I have always been an ASP fan, so this sounds good. Is there any
    truth in reports I have heard that the ASP model has been changed considerably?
    Also, how do this fit in with Web Service? Or does ASP simply create GUIs
    for browsers?

    >- ADO.NET (no doubt JDBC would be "upgraded" to include features from this
    >as was the case with ODBC and ADO)


    Is this COM ADO with a wrapper, or a complete redesign?

    >- powerful OS and middleware interop (P/Invoke and COM interop)


    I suppose the former is the equivalent of "JNI". As for the latter - it's
    essential!

    >- ECMA involvement (it's only for a subset of .NET but that's more than

    the
    >Java platform)


    My God! Where would they start? Surely this is too big a subject - would
    it be called something like "ECMA web services layer"?

    >> >> Oh, for sure. But then again, I wouldn't be using Java.
    >> >
    >> >Why not?. The only reason I can see is because Sun wants it that way.

    MS
    >> >pretty much proved the point that it is possible to have a choice with

    >Java.
    >>
    >> Well, as I said above, I would want to use VB with Windows. Practical

    >reasons:
    >> Not particularly slow, large (and cheaper :-) ) developer base, higher

    >productivity.
    >> Sorry, I know I sound prejudiced here. I would use any tools within

    >reason
    >> - really. :-) Why not cross-OS VB?

    >
    >J++ was as close to VB as Java could come. At least that's what I believed
    >until I tried VB.NET and C#....


    When I can write VB on Linux, I will rejoice ...

    >> >For those times when cross-OS is a requirement, Java is often a good
    >> >solution although Kylix is making inroads for Windows/Linux portability.

    >>
    >> Yeah, so I have heard. The problem with Kylix is that Linux is not

    >mainstream
    >> in the enterprise sector - they don't seem to trust it. Talking of Delphi
    >> - don't you think that .NET looks _so_ like Delphi as well?

    >
    >It's the so-called "Hejlsberg effect" ;-)
    >Uncanny...


    This is the bloke poached from Borland to Microsoft, I take it?

    >
    >Kunle
    >


    --
    Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
    Programmer/Analyst
    Chordiant Software
    Brentford
    UK


  10. #10
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Re:_ALERT_-_XP_COULD_DISABLE_JAVA_IN_WEB_BROWSERS_AND_EMAIL


    "Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
    news:3b6aa79f$1@news.devx.com...

    > >Some things I consider to be benefits over the Java platform:
    > >- the variety of language compilers supplied as standard and the tools to
    > >facilitate easy development of new languages

    >
    > True - although I am sure that I have heard of a few companies who are

    using
    > the Java virtual machine which their own languages. But yes, not ones

    supported
    > by Sun.


    I am aware of JPython, Component Pascal, Smalltalk, Rhino (JavaScript), JESS
    (expert system shell) and a few BASICs.

    > >- ASP.NET (much better performance than JSP/Servlets even in beta on my
    > >boxes)

    >
    > Really? I have always been an ASP fan, so this sounds good. Is there any
    > truth in reports I have heard that the ASP model has been changed

    considerably?
    > Also, how do this fit in with Web Service? Or does ASP simply create

    GUIs
    > for browsers?


    ASP.NET is tres cool. It is for creating web apps (which may expose also web
    services) but the programming model is simialr to traditional event-driven
    programming a la VB.

    > >- ADO.NET (no doubt JDBC would be "upgraded" to include features from

    this
    > >as was the case with ODBC and ADO)

    >
    > Is this COM ADO with a wrapper, or a complete redesign?


    A redesign. ADO is still available via COM Interop.

    > >- ECMA involvement (it's only for a subset of .NET but that's more than

    > the
    > >Java platform)

    >
    > My God! Where would they start? Surely this is too big a subject - would
    > it be called something like "ECMA web services layer"?


    MS submitted C#, the runtime and a subset of it's class libraries to ECMA .

    > >J++ was as close to VB as Java could come. At least that's what I

    believed
    > >until I tried VB.NET and C#....

    >
    > When I can write VB on Linux, I will rejoice ...


    Have a look at Gnome Basic. I don't remember if it is complete etc..

    > >It's the so-called "Hejlsberg effect" ;-)
    > >Uncanny...

    >
    > This is the bloke poached from Borland to Microsoft, I take it?


    Yes. Anders is known for his work on Turbo Pascal, Borland Pascal, Delphi,
    J++ and now C#.

    Kunle



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center