4 ms·

I think he actually makes a good point - remember what James Gosling has been through with the Java/Microsoft scandal. What would happen if Microsoft decided t

I think he actually makes a good point - remember what James Gosling has been through with the Java/Microsoft scandal. What would happen if Microsoft decided to make their own Android handsets tomorrow, but "embraced and extended" the Dalvik VM to run some special .NET code? If they gained significant marketshare, they could hijack the Android mobile platform as their own, just like they tried to do with Java. I'm not saying they would do that, or even that they should, but I think this is the line of thinking that Gosling is coming from. Java has always had "write once, run anywhere" as it's motto. Android should try to stick to that ideal as well- it would do the platform good.

jamesbritt 16y ago
Java has always had "write once, run anywhere" as it's motto. Have you found that to be true? I found it to _often_ be the case, but no assurances; you had to pick wisely. Java has had its own problems with fragmentation, despite the motto. If you're going to allow for the variation and variety needed for robust development and platform progress you have to allow for the risk that not all code will always play nice together. That's life. I'd like to see a Microsoft Android. I've few worries about some heavy-handed market dominance, though, since there are few barriers to entry for anyone else to jump in and try the same thing (unlike what was the case with Java when Microsoft was interested).
- illumin8 16y ago
  It's a goal, but we all know how goals don't always jive with reality. It would still be nice to take Java code and run it on any server platform I choose. If a project is written well, it can, which is a major win for Java.
bad_user 16y ago
remember what James Gosling has been through with the Java/Microsoft scandal Yes, I remember Microsoft releasing the first JVM that did JIT compilation. I also remember them having the only usable IDE for Java at the time. I also remember them wanting to add "delegates" to the standard, with Sun responding with an idiotic reply for all to view here: http://java.sun.com/docs/white/delegates.html http://java.sun.com/docs/white/delegates.html Delegates which are now being added through the back-door in the InvokeDynamic JSR ... oh, the irony. If Java is a standard, then Sun should have let others participate. Imagine if the Javascript standard / trademark was controlled by Microsoft, and they would sue Apple / Mozilla for adding "proprietary" extensions to it. Want to avoid fragmentation ... then don't build cripple-ware.
- illumin8 16y ago
  I'm admittedly not a Java expert, and I'll grant you, Microsoft's VM might have had some cool features - hell I bet if you gave them enough time they would have had GPU accelerated 3d graphics available in a browser through Java - for Windows platforms only. The problem with Microsoft is that they are a habitual monopolist and their method of choice is embrace, extend, and extinguish. They were already on step 2 of their plan before Sun's lawsuit stopped them. Do you really think Java would be in the state it is today if you had to target a different VM for every OS? Microsoft always tries to lure developers over to their platform with the "ooh, shiney" factor of new APIs and features. This is like cheese in a mousetrap. Once they have you hooked on their APIs you're screwed.

jamesbritt 16y ago

Java has always had "write once, run anywhere" as it's motto. Have you found that to be true? I found it to _often_ be the case, but no assurances; you had to pick wisely. Java has had its own problems with fragmentation, despite the motto. If you're going to allow for the variation and variety needed for robust development and platform progress you have to allow for the risk that not all code will always play nice together. That's life. I'd like to see a Microsoft Android. I've few worries about some heavy-handed market dominance, though, since there are few barriers to entry for anyone else to jump in and try the same thing (unlike what was the case with Java when Microsoft was interested).

illumin8 16y ago
It's a goal, but we all know how goals don't always jive with reality. It would still be nice to take Java code and run it on any server platform I choose. If a project is written well, it can, which is a major win for Java.

bad_user 16y ago

remember what James Gosling has been through with the Java/Microsoft scandal Yes, I remember Microsoft releasing the first JVM that did JIT compilation. I also remember them having the only usable IDE for Java at the time. I also remember them wanting to add "delegates" to the standard, with Sun responding with an idiotic reply for all to view here: http://java.sun.com/docs/white/delegates.html http://java.sun.com/docs/white/delegates.html Delegates which are now being added through the back-door in the InvokeDynamic JSR ... oh, the irony. If Java is a standard, then Sun should have let others participate. Imagine if the Javascript standard / trademark was controlled by Microsoft, and they would sue Apple / Mozilla for adding "proprietary" extensions to it. Want to avoid fragmentation ... then don't build cripple-ware.

illumin8 16y ago
I'm admittedly not a Java expert, and I'll grant you, Microsoft's VM might have had some cool features - hell I bet if you gave them enough time they would have had GPU accelerated 3d graphics available in a browser through Java - for Windows platforms only. The problem with Microsoft is that they are a habitual monopolist and their method of choice is embrace, extend, and extinguish. They were already on step 2 of their plan before Sun's lawsuit stopped them. Do you really think Java would be in the state it is today if you had to target a different VM for every OS? Microsoft always tries to lure developers over to their platform with the "ooh, shiney" factor of new APIs and features. This is like cheese in a mousetrap. Once they have you hooked on their APIs you're screwed.