Improving Java for Linux

[John D. Gwinner]

Jim:

> Microsoft is right.  Sun is trying to turn the Java platform into a
> proprietary environment which only Sun controls.  Microsoft is hesitant
> to support all of the Sun APIs as many of them do not integrate nicely
> with the Microsoft environment.  I think we are going to have the same
> integration issues with Java and our free software environment.

Agreed heartily.  We have to watch BOTH companies.  

> So, does anybody else feel like it might be time to "diverge" a bit from
> Sun's definition of what the Java platform should be?  

Not only that, if we can come up with some core base set, this might be a
better target for standardization through whatever body (ISO?  I'm not up
on that), as a lowest common denominator, or a robust core or however you
think of it.  Is Java patented?

I have a lot of problem with a basic language being treated as proprietary
in any event; I like this idea a lot.

Although a totally 'pure' environment is a nice thing, I think to be
vialbe (fast, capable, small), some link to native code will be necessary.
 I agree, if this can be based on existing open / free code, this is a
good way to go.



		== John ==