Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights

  1. #1
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights


    The following was written by bob_furick@MSN.COM on the dotnet mailing
    list. Note, this is provided as an interesting bit of
    information/commentary. It may or may not represent my views and I refuse
    to be called to account for its contents. So there. Have fun. :-)


    Some facts on Microsoft and SUN to help in the JUMP religious wars. Might
    as well start from the facts.

    (1) Server Sales
    Microsoft does not compete with SUN. Microsoft is a threat to SUN.
    There is a big difference between the two concepts.
    In the third quarter of 2000 ( July - September 2000 ) SUN sold
    96,000 units of servers and the entire UNIX market ( HP, IBM, SUN, etc. )
    sold 195,000 units. Microsoft sold 750,000 copies of NT and W2000
    servers. That's an 8 to 1 over SUN and almost 4 to 1 over all UNIX
    vendors. This doesn't include Linux, as nobody can figure out exactly how
    many Linux copies are actually running.

    More importantly, 60 % of Sun's sales revenue came from 10 % of the
    units at the high end. People I know who worked at Sun in the mid 1990s
    say that most of Sun's profits come from the high end units.

    ( July - September 2000 Sun unit sales - from SUN
    publicity release 12/18/00 )

    $ 750 Million - 723 units at $1.03 Million average
    each
    $ 902 Million - 8,110 units at $111 K average each
    $1,179 Million - 88,108 units at $ 13K average each

    That's $2,831 in server hardware sales for SUN +
    $2,200 in software and accessories for a total $ 5.0 Billion for 3rd
    quarter 2000.

    Intel servers running Linux or W2000 generally cost 1/2 to 1/3 the
    cost of a UNIX or Solaris box. If Microsoft shows that clusters of
    inexpensive servers can replace the top end UNIX units, it will be a
    disaster for Sun. Half their revenue will go away and all their profits.
    That is why Microsoft is a threat, not really a competitor at the high
    end.

    Scott McNealy himself has said that Java is a calling card, a way to get
    into customer's doors to talk abut servers. Sun can only maintain its
    lock on Java by casting somebody as an "evil empire" that Sun must protect
    against. By waving the Microsoft flag, Sun has been able to delay
    releasing Java to the public domain. If you read the San Jose Mercury
    News, (http://www.BayArea.com) you will see the large and real contempt
    Silicon valley types have for software engineers in the rest of the world.
    They are the "smartest" the "best" and the "brightest". Anyone who proves
    otherwise is subject to attack.

    (2) Languages and Copyrights
    In the 50 years of computer science, no major language except Java
    has been copyrighted. Where would the industry be if Bell Labs had
    copyrighted C (1978) and C++ ( 1984), and sued Hewlett Packard for
    creating STL. What if Bell Labs sued anyone who built a run-time library
    that didn't pass Bell Labs tests. What if McCarthy ( MIT 1959 ) had
    patented Lisp, and sued to stop new implementations. Lots of what we
    know about recursion, denotational semantics, and dynamic binding comes
    from Lisp.

    All languages are built from the ideas of prior engineers. Bridge
    designs and automobile designs are based on imitating prior engineering
    success. The same holds true for programming languages. Quotes from
    History of Programming Languages ( Thomas Bergin ACM Press, 1991
    0-201-89502-1) tell most of the story about Lisp, ALGOL 68, C, and C++.

    Here is part of the Lisp story by Guy Steele :
    "Moreover in the 1960s ,IBM and MIT disputed who had
    invented core memory and IBM insisted on enforcing its patents against
    MIT. MIT responded by declining to use IBM equipment as extensively as it
    had in the past. This provided further impetus to use DEC equipment
    instead, particularly for Lisp and AI ................ ( page 248)

    Because Sussman had been studying ALGOL [Naur 68], he
    suggested starting with a lexically scoped dialect of Lisp. .... It
    appeared that such a mechanism would be needed anyway for keeping track of
    acquaintances for actors. Lexical scoping allowed actors and functions to
    be created by almost identical mechanisms. " (pg 249 )

    Dennis M. Ritchie talking about C
    "The scheme and type composition adopted by C owes
    considerable debt to ALGOL 68,although it did not, perhaps, emerge in a
    form which ALGOL adherents would approve. The central notion I captured
    from ALGOL was a type structure based on atomic types ( including
    structures ), composed into arrays, pointers ( references ) and functions
    ( procedures ). ALGOL 68's concept of unions and casts also had an
    influence that appeared later " ( page 679 )

    Bjarne Stroustrup on C++
    " One common question at C with Classes presentations was "Why use
    C? Why didn't you build on say, Pascal? One version of my answer is
    found in Stroustrup [ 1986b]." ........................

    " At the time I considered Modula-2, Ada, Smalltalk, Mesa, and Clu
    as alternatives to C and as sources for ideas for C++ [ Stroustrup 1984b],
    so there was no shortage of inspiration. However only C, Simula, ALGOL 68,
    and in one case BCPL left noticeable traces in C++ as released in 1985.
    Simula gave the ability to declare variables anywhere in a block (Section
    15.3.3.1) and BCPL gave // comments (Section 15.3.3.1)" ( page 711 )

    The quotes above highlight three points
    (a) all languages are built from the successes of prior art. Part
    of an engineers' responsibility is to not re-invent the wheel. We build on
    the backs of others, whether for airplane wing design or for programming
    language design.
    (b) Copyrights on languages are a bad idea. None of the
    advancements above would have occurred if each language had been
    copyrighted.

    (c) SUN needs a copyright on Java to get in the door of its
    customers. It needs to sell those big servers. SUN used the "Microsoft
    Bully flag" to keep control of Java.

    Now that Microsoft is gone, do you think SUN will release JAVA to the
    public domain?

    bob furick

    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

  2. #2
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights

    > Now that Microsoft is gone, do you think SUN will release JAVA to the
    > public domain?
    >


    No. The patent on XPointer technology is a clear indication that they plan
    on continuing along their current path.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message
    news:3ad9ed3b.943264296@news.devx.com...
    >
    > The following was written by bob_furick@MSN.COM on the dotnet mailing
    > list. Note, this is provided as an interesting bit of
    > information/commentary. It may or may not represent my views and I refuse
    > to be called to account for its contents. So there. Have fun. :-)
    >
    >
    > Some facts on Microsoft and SUN to help in the JUMP religious wars. Might
    > as well start from the facts.
    >
    > (1) Server Sales
    > Microsoft does not compete with SUN. Microsoft is a threat to SUN.
    > There is a big difference between the two concepts.
    > In the third quarter of 2000 ( July - September 2000 ) SUN sold
    > 96,000 units of servers and the entire UNIX market ( HP, IBM, SUN, etc. )
    > sold 195,000 units. Microsoft sold 750,000 copies of NT and W2000
    > servers. That's an 8 to 1 over SUN and almost 4 to 1 over all UNIX
    > vendors. This doesn't include Linux, as nobody can figure out exactly how
    > many Linux copies are actually running.
    >
    > More importantly, 60 % of Sun's sales revenue came from 10 % of the
    > units at the high end. People I know who worked at Sun in the mid 1990s
    > say that most of Sun's profits come from the high end units.
    >
    > ( July - September 2000 Sun unit sales - from SUN
    > publicity release 12/18/00 )
    >
    > $ 750 Million - 723 units at $1.03 Million average
    > each
    > $ 902 Million - 8,110 units at $111 K average each
    > $1,179 Million - 88,108 units at $ 13K average each
    >
    > That's $2,831 in server hardware sales for SUN +
    > $2,200 in software and accessories for a total $ 5.0 Billion for 3rd
    > quarter 2000.
    >
    > Intel servers running Linux or W2000 generally cost 1/2 to 1/3 the
    > cost of a UNIX or Solaris box. If Microsoft shows that clusters of
    > inexpensive servers can replace the top end UNIX units, it will be a
    > disaster for Sun. Half their revenue will go away and all their profits.
    > That is why Microsoft is a threat, not really a competitor at the high
    > end.
    >
    > Scott McNealy himself has said that Java is a calling card, a way to get
    > into customer's doors to talk abut servers. Sun can only maintain its
    > lock on Java by casting somebody as an "evil empire" that Sun must protect
    > against. By waving the Microsoft flag, Sun has been able to delay
    > releasing Java to the public domain. If you read the San Jose Mercury
    > News, (http://www.BayArea.com) you will see the large and real contempt
    > Silicon valley types have for software engineers in the rest of the world.
    > They are the "smartest" the "best" and the "brightest". Anyone who proves
    > otherwise is subject to attack.
    >
    > (2) Languages and Copyrights
    > In the 50 years of computer science, no major language except Java
    > has been copyrighted. Where would the industry be if Bell Labs had
    > copyrighted C (1978) and C++ ( 1984), and sued Hewlett Packard for
    > creating STL. What if Bell Labs sued anyone who built a run-time library
    > that didn't pass Bell Labs tests. What if McCarthy ( MIT 1959 ) had
    > patented Lisp, and sued to stop new implementations. Lots of what we
    > know about recursion, denotational semantics, and dynamic binding comes
    > from Lisp.
    >
    > All languages are built from the ideas of prior engineers. Bridge
    > designs and automobile designs are based on imitating prior engineering
    > success. The same holds true for programming languages. Quotes from
    > History of Programming Languages ( Thomas Bergin ACM Press, 1991
    > 0-201-89502-1) tell most of the story about Lisp, ALGOL 68, C, and C++.
    >
    > Here is part of the Lisp story by Guy Steele :
    > "Moreover in the 1960s ,IBM and MIT disputed who had
    > invented core memory and IBM insisted on enforcing its patents against
    > MIT. MIT responded by declining to use IBM equipment as extensively as it
    > had in the past. This provided further impetus to use DEC equipment
    > instead, particularly for Lisp and AI ................ ( page 248)
    >
    > Because Sussman had been studying ALGOL [Naur 68], he
    > suggested starting with a lexically scoped dialect of Lisp. .... It
    > appeared that such a mechanism would be needed anyway for keeping track of
    > acquaintances for actors. Lexical scoping allowed actors and functions to
    > be created by almost identical mechanisms. " (pg 249 )
    >
    > Dennis M. Ritchie talking about C
    > "The scheme and type composition adopted by C owes
    > considerable debt to ALGOL 68,although it did not, perhaps, emerge in a
    > form which ALGOL adherents would approve. The central notion I captured
    > from ALGOL was a type structure based on atomic types ( including
    > structures ), composed into arrays, pointers ( references ) and functions
    > ( procedures ). ALGOL 68's concept of unions and casts also had an
    > influence that appeared later " ( page 679 )
    >
    > Bjarne Stroustrup on C++
    > " One common question at C with Classes presentations was "Why use
    > C? Why didn't you build on say, Pascal? One version of my answer is
    > found in Stroustrup [ 1986b]." ........................
    >
    > " At the time I considered Modula-2, Ada, Smalltalk, Mesa, and Clu
    > as alternatives to C and as sources for ideas for C++ [ Stroustrup 1984b],
    > so there was no shortage of inspiration. However only C, Simula, ALGOL 68,
    > and in one case BCPL left noticeable traces in C++ as released in 1985.
    > Simula gave the ability to declare variables anywhere in a block (Section
    > 15.3.3.1) and BCPL gave // comments (Section 15.3.3.1)" ( page 711 )
    >
    > The quotes above highlight three points
    > (a) all languages are built from the successes of prior art. Part
    > of an engineers' responsibility is to not re-invent the wheel. We build on
    > the backs of others, whether for airplane wing design or for programming
    > language design.
    > (b) Copyrights on languages are a bad idea. None of the
    > advancements above would have occurred if each language had been
    > copyrighted.
    >
    > (c) SUN needs a copyright on Java to get in the door of its
    > customers. It needs to sell those big servers. SUN used the "Microsoft
    > Bully flag" to keep control of Java.
    >
    > Now that Microsoft is gone, do you think SUN will release JAVA to the
    > public domain?
    >
    > bob furick
    >
    > ---
    > Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond




  3. #3
    Sjoerd Verweij Guest

    Re: Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights

    > If Microsoft shows that clusters of
    > inexpensive servers can replace the top end UNIX units,


    *giggle*
    http://www.tpc.org/new_result/tpcc_perf_results.asp




  4. #4
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights

    SUN's new motto...

    "Our servers provide nearly 30% of the performance of other servers for just
    under 5 times the price."

    "Our cluster server is almost as fast as our non-clustered server, and it
    only costs twice as much."

    "They may be faster, and they may be cheaper, but they didn't invent Java."

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Sjoerd Verweij" <nospam.sjoerd@sjoerd.org> wrote in message
    news:3a71fdc2@news.devx.com...
    > > If Microsoft shows that clusters of
    > > inexpensive servers can replace the top end UNIX units,

    >
    > *giggle*
    > http://www.tpc.org/new_result/tpcc_perf_results.asp
    >
    >
    >




  5. #5
    Ray Mercer Guest

    Re: Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights

    "Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message
    news:3ad9ed3b.943264296@news.devx.com...
    >
    > The following was written by bob_furick@MSN.COM on the dotnet mailing
    > list. Note, this is provided as an interesting bit of
    > information/commentary. It may or may not represent my views and I refuse
    > to be called to account for its contents. So there. Have fun. :-)


    Nice way to avoid being pinned down for what you post. Not my style though.
    BTW, what does any of this have to do with VB7??? Oh yeah I forgot, VB7 has
    been sacrificed so that MS can try to compete in the Sun/Java server-side
    programming space, I forgot.


    > (1) Server Sales
    > Microsoft does not compete with SUN. Microsoft is a threat to SUN.
    > There is a big difference between the two concepts.
    > In the third quarter of 2000 ( July - September 2000 ) SUN sold
    > 96,000 units of servers and the entire UNIX market ( HP, IBM, SUN, etc. )
    > sold 195,000 units.


    This is hardware right?

    > Microsoft sold 750,000 copies of NT and W2000
    > servers.


    Sure. I am writing this on W2000 Advanced Server right now which I use
    because I have had copies of W2K shipped to me (from MS and MSk.k. which is
    Microsoft, Japan) for free for being on Beta and just being and all-around
    nice guy ;-). I also have an MSDN subscription which means that MS sold a
    few more "copies of NT and W2000" there...

    > That's an 8 to 1 over SUN and almost 4 to 1 over all UNIX
    > vendors.


    That's apples vs. oranges. HTH.

    > This doesn't include Linux, as nobody can figure out exactly how
    > many Linux copies are actually running.


    Hmmm. Makes you wonder doesn't it. FWIW, I have a Linux box here too. ;-)
    Ray Mercer




  6. #6
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Sun, Microsoft, & Copyrights

    On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 18:20:36 +0900, "Ray Mercer" <raymer@mvps.org> wrote:

    >Nice way to avoid being pinned down for what you post.


    What's your problem? I posted it to see what discussion followed. Is
    that OK with you, or do you feel a reply just isn't good enough, that you
    must have someone to 'pin down'?


    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

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