Improving Java for Linux
John D. Gwinner
gwinner at northnet.org
Thu Nov 6 02:31:08 PST 1997
> 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 ==
More information about the kaffe