By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
434,948 Members | 1,975 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 434,948 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Sun admits: Java is crap

P: n/a

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=

San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs) is
working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by Sun
Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose virtual
machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to a
description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability
of Java by hosting multiple tasks.

Jul 21 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
47 Replies


P: n/a
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs) is
working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by Sun
Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose virtual
machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to a
description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability
of Java by hosting multiple tasks.

Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.
Jul 21 '05 #2

P: n/a
TheLetterK wrote:
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs)
is working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by
Sun Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose
virtual machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to
a description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability
of Java by hosting multiple tasks.


Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


It has problems.

The problems that crap would have.

Jul 21 '05 #3

P: n/a

"TheLetterK" <th********@spymac.com.broken> wrote in message
news:9n*******************@bignews6.bellsouth.net. ..
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs) is
working on a research effort to address issues with the memory footprint,
startup and execution times when running multiple Java applications
concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by Sun
Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose virtual
machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to a
description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability of
Java by hosting multiple tasks.

Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


I'm just damned glad that .Net doesn't have any problems!

Jim Hubbard
Jul 21 '05 #4

P: n/a
Theatre Mgmt wrote:
Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs) is working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by Sun Labs's Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose virtual machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to a
description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability of Java by hosting multiple tasks.


Like .NET Application Domain? It's convenient but not a very solid
solution, since real isolation can only be achieved by OS kernel (you
MUST use processes). For example, your app opens port 80 via JNI, and
it's not closed after quiting, then the port will remain occupied until
the whole VM shutdown.

Jul 21 '05 #5

P: n/a
TheLetterK wrote:
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs)
is working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by
Sun Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose
virtual machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to
a description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability
of Java by hosting multiple tasks.


Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


And it's still the best choice. .NET it's vaporware.
When there's something similar to JBoss for .NET I will take a look
at it. Until there I will consider it crap.
And we should have in mind that what they are trying to do with Java
it's something .NET it's far away from even trying.

Regards.

--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC
jk******@bgsec.com
bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPA—A

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"
Jul 21 '05 #6

P: n/a
"* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
[...]
Like .NET Application Domain? It's convenient but not a very solid
solution, since real isolation can only be achieved by OS kernel (you
MUST use processes). For example, your app opens port 80 via JNI, and
it's not closed after quiting, then the port will remain occupied until
the whole VM shutdown.


The article deals with the issue of running lots of Java apps on
a shared server. Presumably none of these would be permitted to
use JNI - on grounds of basic security - so it seems unlikely that
that issue would come up.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #7

P: n/a
Tim Tyler wrote:
"* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x
x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=

[...]
Like .NET Application Domain? It's convenient but not a very solid
solution, since real isolation can only be achieved by OS kernel

(you MUST use processes). For example, your app opens port 80 via JNI, and it's not closed after quiting, then the port will remain occupied until the whole VM shutdown.


The article deals with the issue of running lots of Java apps on
a shared server. Presumably none of these would be permitted to
use JNI - on grounds of basic security - so it seems unlikely that
that issue would come up.


What if one app running on the server invokes some system call that
hangs all other threads? Then all other apps on the same server will
just freeze!

Jul 21 '05 #8

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
Tim Tyler wrote:
"* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s .
[...]
Like .NET Application Domain? It's convenient but not a very solid
solution, since real isolation can only be achieved by OS kernel
(you MUST use processes). For example, your app opens port 80 via
JNI, and it's not closed after quiting, then the port will remain
occupied until the whole VM shutdown.


The article deals with the issue of running lots of Java apps on
a shared server. Presumably none of these would be permitted to
use JNI - on grounds of basic security - so it seems unlikely that
that issue would come up.


What if one app running on the server invokes some system call that
hangs all other threads? Then all other apps on the same server will
just freeze!


A "system" call? You mean via something like JNI again?

Making such calls is not possible in a secure environment like the
sandbox Java server processes execute in.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #9

P: n/a
Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2
0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote
or quoted:
Tim Tyler wrote:
"* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s .
[...]
> Like .NET Application Domain? It's convenient but not a very
solid > solution, since real isolation can only be achieved by OS kernel > (you MUST use processes). For example, your app opens port 80 via > JNI, and it's not closed after quiting, then the port will remain > occupied until the whole VM shutdown.

The article deals with the issue of running lots of Java apps on
a shared server. Presumably none of these would be permitted to
use JNI - on grounds of basic security - so it seems unlikely that that issue would come up.


What if one app running on the server invokes some system call that
hangs all other threads? Then all other apps on the same server

will just freeze!


A "system" call? You mean via something like JNI again?

Making such calls is not possible in a secure environment like the
sandbox Java server processes execute in.


Yes, but finally the JRE has to use system calls, right? Without JNI
it's possible to achieve a total isolation -- but how much would it
cost, to wrap every such calls prefectly? For instance, the VM would
need to record each ports and files opened, so that it can release them
if some app dies, and it may also need to setup the priorities for each
threads correctly. So why not just use the OS's process model? .NET has
shown that doing isolation inside processes is a pain and can hardly be
used for any serious purpose (such as an app server for public web
hosting).

Jul 21 '05 #10

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d .
Tim Tyler wrote:
> "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u What if one app running on the server invokes some system call that
hangs all other threads? Then all other apps on the same server
will just freeze!


A "system" call? You mean via something like JNI again?

Making such calls is not possible in a secure environment like the
sandbox Java server processes execute in.


Yes, but finally the JRE has to use system calls, right? Without JNI
it's possible to achieve a total isolation -- but how much would it
cost, to wrap every such calls prefectly? For instance, the VM would
need to record each ports and files opened, so that it can release them
if some app dies, and it may also need to setup the priorities for each
threads correctly. So why not just use the OS's process model?


I believe some JVMs offer the choice of green threads or native
threads.

Probably the main reason for using the underlying OS's facilities
in this sort of area is portability.

If you rely on features from the underlying OS, you have to re-write
those features on every operating system you port your VM to - and
get them to behave the same way on each one.

On a system like Java that runs on a large number of OSes, that sort
of effort would become painful, and would be a source of compatibility
headaches. In many respects, it's better to do it yourself - and
then you can be more certain of your system behaving uniformly in
different environments.

Doing it yourself also gives you full control over factors such as
which resources can be shared. You can run multiple JVMs each in
their own OS process today - the problem is that that fails to make
effective use of shared resources.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #11

P: n/a
tab
Would you say that Java might be it's own OS that runs on top
of other OS's?

Jul 21 '05 #12

P: n/a
tab wrote:
Would you say that Java might be it's own OS that runs on top
of other OS's?

I would only say that if a user could open a window called java and type

java list directories

Jul 21 '05 #13

P: n/a
Tao Mein Poi Sen Zing coughed up:
tab wrote:
Would you say that Java might be it's own OS that runs on top
of other OS's?


I would only say that if a user could open a window called java and
type
java list directories


Which is evidence of a *SHELL* not an *OS* .

--
Forgetthesong,I'dratherhavethefrontallobotomy...
Jul 21 '05 #14

P: n/a
Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d .

A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2
0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote
or quoted:
Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d

Jul 21 '05 #15

P: n/a
> > Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


I'm just damned glad that .Net doesn't have any problems!

I would not say this too loud.
..NET is still in it's early stages, some other big problems might occure
regarding backwards compatibility and stuff.
I love .NET but I am also realistic enough that nothing is perfect.

--
http://www.skyscan.be
Jul 21 '05 #16

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Olaf Baeyens
<ol**********@skyscan.be>
wrote
on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:38:32 +0200
<42***********************@news.skynet.be>:
> Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
> different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


I'm just damned glad that .Net doesn't have any problems!

I would not say this too loud.
.NET is still in it's early stages, some other big problems might occure
regarding backwards compatibility and stuff.
I love .NET but I am also realistic enough that nothing is perfect.


I think the previous poster was being slightly sarcastic, as the
speed of adoption of .NET has apparently been comparable to
that of a snail stuck in jelled treacle, or perhaps that of
a snail stuck in molasses during the month of January.

And of course, since .NET depends for a large amount of its
proprietary functionality on Windows, .NET inherits many of
the problems of Windows, which for the most part revolve
around various bits of malware infecting one's system.

However, with Mono one might have a fighting chance to
work around some of these issues; the main problem with Mono
is that it faces, AFAICT, a rather uncertain future, mostly
because Microsoft might very well patent the interesting bits
and leave Mono with the unprofitable dregs.

And yes, Java has problems; I've posted at length about some
of them. It's a very usable environment, though.

--
#191, ew****@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
Jul 21 '05 #17

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Thomas G. Marshall
<tg****************@replacetextwithnumber.hotmail. com>
wrote
on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:37:12 GMT
<cj22e.22102$aS5.20254@trndny05>:
Tao Mein Poi Sen Zing coughed up:
tab wrote:
Would you say that Java might be it's own OS that runs on top
of other OS's?


I would only say that if a user could open a window called java and
type
java list directories


Which is evidence of a *SHELL* not an *OS* .


True, although Jython might make a tolerable shell on top
of Java the OS -- if Java is in fact an OS. Depends in
part how one defines an OS; the main bit missing in Java
is the ability to handle device interrupts, DMA transfers,
and the like.

But at its heart, an OS is a series of promises made to the
user (or the application programmer in lieu thereof) that,
if one calls a certain routine, one gets a result back and
it does something. Put that generally, it sounds a bit
silly, but certainly that's what most operating systems
do nowadays, at some level:

- timer handling -- set a timer and alarm, get the time, convert the
time to a more user-friendly form
- file and directory manipulation -- create a directory, open a file,
get the entries of a directory
- volume/partition manipulation -- initialize a volume, make a volume's
files available ("mount")
- disk manipulation -- handle interrupts on a disk, transfer data
from/to, create volumes, delete volumes, etc.
- video handling
- audio handling
- process creation, manipulation, and deletion
- process communication
- network communication
- user event interception/handling (keyboard, mouse, etc.)
- etc.

Java is missing disk manipulation and volume/partition manipulation
(although Java can inquire roots; not sure if that's the same
thing as mountpoints or merely a way to get the single-letter
Windows drives).

There was a concept long ago called JavaOS but I for one have no
idea whatever happened thereto. It kinda died.

--
#191, ew****@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
Jul 21 '05 #18

P: n/a
JTK
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs) is
working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by Sun
Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose virtual
machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to a
description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability
of Java by hosting multiple tasks.


This is a red herring. Java was almost as fast as compiled C++ when it
was released. Then they improved the speed in the next release, and it
was even more almost as fast as complied C++. But Sun wasn't finished
yet: another release, and Java was so fast it was almost as fast as
compiled C++!

But that's ancient history. Today's modern Java has blown the
proverbial doors off. What with yer JVMs and JITs and JINIs and
whatnot, why, today's Java is almost as fast as complied C++.

All that said, I have to give Sun credit for realizing that there is
still room for improvement, and for working even at this late date
toward a bright new future where Java is even faster. Why, if we're
lucky, this new "multitasking" (whatever that is, sounds newfangled!)
will make Java so fast it will be almost as fast as compiled C++!!!

These are indeed heady days, fellow Javapologists!
Jul 21 '05 #19

P: n/a
JTK wrote:
This is a red herring. Java was almost as fast as compiled C++ when it
was released. Then they improved the speed in the next release, and it
was even more almost as fast as complied C++. But Sun wasn't finished
yet: another release, and Java was so fast it was almost as fast as
compiled C++!

But that's ancient history. Today's modern Java has blown the
proverbial doors off. What with yer JVMs and JITs and JINIs and
whatnot, why, today's Java is almost as fast as complied C++.

All that said, I have to give Sun credit for realizing that there is
still room for improvement, and for working even at this late date
toward a bright new future where Java is even faster. Why, if we're
lucky, this new "multitasking" (whatever that is, sounds newfangled!)
will make Java so fast it will be almost as fast as compiled C++!!!

These are indeed heady days, fellow Javapologists!


Mabye we didn't read the same thing.

What I see is the inability of java to run more than one instance on the
same machine without gathering memory errors and crashing. Obviously,
java didn't cross the border into the 21st century...
Jul 21 '05 #20

P: n/a
JTK coughed up:
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs)
is working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by
Sun Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose
virtual machine for executing multiple Java applications, according
to a description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java
HotSpot Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the
scalability of Java by hosting multiple tasks.


This is a red herring. Java was almost as fast as compiled C++ when
it was released. Then they improved the speed in the next release,
and it was even more almost as fast as complied C++. But Sun wasn't
finished yet: another release, and Java was so fast it was almost as
fast as compiled C++!

But that's ancient history. Today's modern Java has blown the
proverbial doors off. What with yer JVMs and JITs and JINIs and
whatnot, why, today's Java is almost as fast as complied C++.

All that said, I have to give Sun credit for realizing that there is
still room for improvement, and for working even at this late date
toward a bright new future where Java is even faster. Why, if we're
lucky, this new "multitasking" (whatever that is, sounds newfangled!)
will make Java so fast it will be almost as fast as compiled C++!!!

These are indeed heady days, fellow Javapologists!


LOL!

--
Whyowhydidn'tsunmakejavarequireanuppercaseletterto startclassnames....
Jul 21 '05 #21

P: n/a
14 7/8" x 8 1/2" coughed up:
JTK wrote:
This is a red herring. Java was almost as fast as compiled C++ when
it was released. Then they improved the speed in the next release,
and it was even more almost as fast as complied C++. But Sun wasn't
finished yet: another release, and Java was so fast it was almost as
fast as compiled C++!

But that's ancient history. Today's modern Java has blown the
proverbial doors off. What with yer JVMs and JITs and JINIs and
whatnot, why, today's Java is almost as fast as complied C++.

All that said, I have to give Sun credit for realizing that there is
still room for improvement, and for working even at this late date
toward a bright new future where Java is even faster. Why, if we're
lucky, this new "multitasking" (whatever that is, sounds newfangled!)
will make Java so fast it will be almost as fast as compiled C++!!!

These are indeed heady days, fellow Javapologists!


Mabye we didn't read the same thing.

What I see is the inability of java to run more than one instance on
the same machine without gathering memory errors and crashing. Obviously,
java didn't cross the border into the 21st century...


I don't see that exactly, nor did I read it into the article. Java's /new/
technology of sharing everything among apps might behave that way, but
certainly not the JVM-per-app-per-process thing of yore.

--
Whyowhydidn'tsunmakejavarequireanuppercaseletterto startclassnames....
Jul 21 '05 #22

P: n/a
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:13:33 -0600, 14 7/8\ x 8 1/2\ wrote
(in article <3a*************@individual.net>):
JTK wrote:
This is a red herring. Java was almost as fast as compiled C++ when it
was released. Then they improved the speed in the next release, and it
was even more almost as fast as complied C++. But Sun wasn't finished
yet: another release, and Java was so fast it was almost as fast as
compiled C++!

But that's ancient history. Today's modern Java has blown the
proverbial doors off. What with yer JVMs and JITs and JINIs and
whatnot, why, today's Java is almost as fast as complied C++.

All that said, I have to give Sun credit for realizing that there is
still room for improvement, and for working even at this late date
toward a bright new future where Java is even faster. Why, if we're
lucky, this new "multitasking" (whatever that is, sounds newfangled!)
will make Java so fast it will be almost as fast as compiled C++!!!

These are indeed heady days, fellow Javapologists!


Mabye we didn't read the same thing.

What I see is the inability of java to run more than one instance on the
same machine without gathering memory errors and crashing. Obviously,
java didn't cross the border into the 21st century...


Maybe they need to look at Java on Mac OS X. The Apple team has gone to
great efforts to reuse resources when multiple Java processes are running on
the same machine. Far better than the Windows runtime.

--
Bill Tschumy
Otherwise -- Austin, TX
http://www.otherwise.com

Jul 21 '05 #23

P: n/a
On 2005-03-29, The Ghost In The Machine <ew***@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Olaf Baeyens
<ol**********@skyscan.be>
wrote
on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:38:32 +0200
<42***********************@news.skynet.be>:
> Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two
> different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.

I'm just damned glad that .Net doesn't have any problems!
I would not say this too loud.
.NET is still in it's early stages, some other big problems might occure
regarding backwards compatibility and stuff.
I love .NET but I am also realistic enough that nothing is perfect.


I think the previous poster was being slightly sarcastic, as the
speed of adoption of .NET has apparently been comparable to
that of a snail stuck in jelled treacle, or perhaps that of
a snail stuck in molasses during the month of January.

And of course, since .NET depends for a large amount of its
proprietary functionality on Windows, .NET inherits many of
the problems of Windows, which for the most part revolve
around various bits of malware infecting one's system.


Utter nonsense. .NET has as much (if not more) security built in as
Java does.
However, with Mono one might have a fighting chance to
work around some of these issues; the main problem with Mono
is that it faces, AFAICT, a rather uncertain future, mostly
because Microsoft might very well patent the interesting bits
and leave Mono with the unprofitable dregs.


Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #24

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
*royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
in case other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


That's called marketing.

Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
contents or even the author of message in question is really
pretty feeble PR material.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #25

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "14 7/8\" x 8 1/2\"" <re***@of.paper> wrote or quoted:
What I see is the inability of java to run more than one instance on the
same machine without gathering memory errors and crashing. Obviously,
java didn't cross the border into the 21st century...


Obviously, you don't know what you are talking about :-(
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #26

P: n/a
In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
*royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
in case other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


That's called marketing.

Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
contents or even the author of message in question is really
pretty feeble PR material.


I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
..NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #27

P: n/a
Tom Shelton wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
.NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.


Exactly.

There is no implicit license necessary. Anyone can build the
equivalent of what mono is, and owe no royalties.
Jul 21 '05 #28

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <to*@youknowthedrillmtogden.com> wrote or quoted:
In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
*royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
in case other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.
That's called marketing.

Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
contents or even the author of message in question is really
pretty feeble PR material.


I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. [...]


It seems to me as though a publicly accessible web page is pretty "public"?
It sounds like they have an actual license.
It doesn't sound remotely like that to me.
MS reps have stated multilple times in the media that their patents
related to .NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.


Has anyone ever seen the terms and conditions in question?

What do they say?
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #29

P: n/a
On Wednesday 30 March 2005 00:11, Tom Shelton
<ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net>
(<s6********************@comcast.com>) wrote:

If the emphasis in the following quotation is changed, it means something
different.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer royalty-free RAND licensing
to the *ECMA-submitted components of .NET*

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


So, Microsoft embraces the "ECMA-submitted components of .NET" and extends
them with proprietary, unlicensable abandon? This is what's proved to be
their standard practice. Is this a lure to get others to spend their time
and energy implementing incompatible software? Microsoft already has some
"RAND licensing" which forbids the use of the license in Free software.

By itself, these statements by Microsoft (and perhaps Intel and HP) are
insufficient to allow characterization as "the go ahead".

Jul 21 '05 #30

P: n/a

"Tom Shelton" <ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Mar. 10, 2004 08:59 PM
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.
one year later ... no ECMA-licence is here.
But now something completely different:

Jason Matusow, Microsoft's director of the shared-source-department
has doubts about Mono's legal status:

http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/a...28/402992.aspx
It is important to note however that it doesn't grant any rights to the
underlying platform. I know, this leads to the question - is
Mono legally licensed? It is not our software, you are going to have
to ask Novell as they are the leaders of that project.


Sounds like "we Microsoft think that Mono has no legal licence".

Pythogoras
Jul 21 '05 #31

P: n/a
In article <d2*************@news.t-online.com>, Pythogoras wrote:

"Tom Shelton" <ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Mar. 10, 2004 08:59 PM
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


one year later ... no ECMA-licence is here.


I'm only quoting another source. A source that says that Novell/Ximian
have a letter granting rights on the ECMA components on royalty-free
RAND licensing. Is it true? I don't know. I just thought it was an
interesting quote.
But now something completely different:

Jason Matusow, Microsoft's director of the shared-source-department
has doubts about Mono's legal status:

http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/a...28/402992.aspx
It is important to note however that it doesn't grant any rights to the
underlying platform. I know, this leads to the question - is
Mono legally licensed? It is not our software, you are going to have
to ask Novell as they are the leaders of that project.


Sounds like "we Microsoft think that Mono has no legal licence".


It sounds like - ask novell.

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #32

P: n/a
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:14:06 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:
In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
*royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
in case other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


That's called marketing.

Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
contents or even the author of message in question is really
pretty feeble PR material.


I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
.NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.


Where? All their .NET patents are available under non-royalty RAND
terms? I don't believe it.
Jul 21 '05 #33

P: n/a
In article <r5********************************@4ax.com>, spam wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:14:06 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:
In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:

Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
*royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
in case other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.

That's called marketing.

Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
contents or even the author of message in question is really
pretty feeble PR material.


I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
.NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.


Where? All their .NET patents are available under non-royalty RAND
terms? I don't believe it.


Not all their .NET patents - all their ECMA/ISO component related
patents.

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupda...887217,00.html

According to Herman, third parties will have to enter into a
reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) license agreement with
Microsoft. "But," says Herman, "while RAND sometimes means there could
be a financial obligation, [Microsoft] ŗwill be offering a conventional
non-royalty non-fee RAND license. We've always made that clear to anyone
who has asked." In other words, there will be no financial obligation.

That was from Michele Herman - MS's Director of Intellectual Property.
The article still calls into question Mono. But, Herman does say
royalty free standard RAND.

http://www.msversus.org/node/225
But Microsoft (and our co-sponsors, Intel and Hewlett-Packard) went
further and have agreed that our patents essential to implementing C#
and CLI will be available on a "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" basis
for this purpose.

This is from the dotgnu wiki (the other open source .NET implementation
by the GNU guys)...

http://wiki2.dotgnu.info/PatentFUD
In response to an inquiry from the DotGNU project, the
secretary-general of ECMA has confirmed that Microsoft has
promised "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" licensing for any
patents that they might get on ideas that are necessary for
implementing the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.

Some of these clearly state they aren't sure about Mono. But, they do
indicate the MS is promising royalty free rand terms for the ECMA/ISO
components.

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #34

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <to*@youknowthedrillmtogden.com> wrote or quoted:
In article <d2*************@news.t-online.com>, Pythogoras wrote:
"Tom Shelton" <ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote:
Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557


Mar. 10, 2004 08:59 PM
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


one year later ... no ECMA-licence is here.


I'm only quoting another source. A source that says that Novell/Ximian
have a letter granting rights on the ECMA components on royalty-free
RAND licensing. Is it true? [...]


That's not what it says. It says Miguel had a letter from someone saying
these would be offered - not that the offer had already been made.

I.e. it's a claim by Miguel reported by a third party - not some sort of
license agreement.

Has anyone so far successfully licensed any of the ECMA components of
..NET? You would think Novell would be head of the queue in this
department - but it appears that not even they have a license.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #35

P: n/a
On 2005-03-31, Tim Tyler <ti*@tt1lock.org> wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <to*@youknowthedrillmtogden.com> wrote or quoted:
In article <d2*************@news.t-online.com>, Pythogoras wrote:
> "Tom Shelton" <ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote: >> Actually, I just came across this today:
>>
>> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
>
> Mar. 10, 2004 08:59 PM
>
>> Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
>> Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
>> to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
>> kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
>> free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
>> more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
>> premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
>> other infringement was uncovered.
>>
>> So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
>> go ahead and a license.
>
> one year later ... no ECMA-licence is here.
I'm only quoting another source. A source that says that Novell/Ximian
have a letter granting rights on the ECMA components on royalty-free
RAND licensing. Is it true? [...]


That's not what it says. It says Miguel had a letter from someone saying
these would be offered - not that the offer had already been made.

I.e. it's a claim by Miguel reported by a third party - not some sort of
license agreement.


Ok... I see what you mean. I misinterpreted that. Sorry.
Has anyone so far successfully licensed any of the ECMA components of
.NET? You would think Novell would be head of the queue in this
department - but it appears that not even they have a license.


I don't know. Has Novell even tried?

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #36

P: n/a
Tom Shelton poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:
http://wiki2.dotgnu.info/PatentFUD
In response to an inquiry from the DotGNU project, the
secretary-general of ECMA has confirmed that Microsoft has
promised "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" licensing for any
patents that they might get on ideas that are necessary for
implementing the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.

Some of these clearly state they aren't sure about Mono. But, they do
indicate the MS is promising royalty free rand terms for the ECMA/ISO
components.


If it is not in the license yet, it is still only a promise.

And we well know how much to trust promises from a company that thieves
ideas from its partners.

--
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
When all you have is Microsoft software, everything looks like Windows.
Jul 21 '05 #37

P: n/a
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:59:43 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:
In article <r5********************************@4ax.com>, spam wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:14:06 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:
In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:

> Actually, I just came across this today:
>
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
> Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
> Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
> *royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
> of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
> like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
> stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
> more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
> premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
> in case other infringement was uncovered.
>
> So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
> go ahead and a license.

That's called marketing.

Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
contents or even the author of message in question is really
pretty feeble PR material.

I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
.NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.


Where? All their .NET patents are available under non-royalty RAND
terms? I don't believe it.


Not all their .NET patents - all their ECMA/ISO component related
patents.

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupda...887217,00.html

According to Herman, third parties will have to enter into a
reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) license agreement with
Microsoft. "But," says Herman, "while RAND sometimes means there could
be a financial obligation, [Microsoft] ŗwill be offering a conventional
non-royalty non-fee RAND license. We've always made that clear to anyone
who has asked." In other words, there will be no financial obligation.

That was from Michele Herman - MS's Director of Intellectual Property.
The article still calls into question Mono. But, Herman does say
royalty free standard RAND.

http://www.msversus.org/node/225
But Microsoft (and our co-sponsors, Intel and Hewlett-Packard) went
further and have agreed that our patents essential to implementing C#
and CLI will be available on a "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" basis
for this purpose.

This is from the dotgnu wiki (the other open source .NET implementation
by the GNU guys)...

http://wiki2.dotgnu.info/PatentFUD
In response to an inquiry from the DotGNU project, the
secretary-general of ECMA has confirmed that Microsoft has
promised "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" licensing for any
patents that they might get on ideas that are necessary for
implementing the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.

Some of these clearly state they aren't sure about Mono. But, they do
indicate the MS is promising royalty free rand terms for the ECMA/ISO
components.


This "license" is taking longer to put together than MS's development
of longhorn - why? What's today, year two, three, or four of the
coming licence?
Jul 21 '05 #38

P: n/a
On 2005-04-01, spam <no@spam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:59:43 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:
In article <r5********************************@4ax.com>, spam wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:14:06 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:

In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
> In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:
>
>> Actually, I just came across this today:
>>
>> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
>> Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
>> Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
>> *royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
>> of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
>> like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
>> stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
>> more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
>> premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
>> in case other infringement was uncovered.
>>
>> So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
>> go ahead and a license.
>
> That's called marketing.
>
> Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
> viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
> from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
> promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
> contents or even the author of message in question is really
> pretty feeble PR material.

I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
.NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.

Where? All their .NET patents are available under non-royalty RAND
terms? I don't believe it.


Not all their .NET patents - all their ECMA/ISO component related
patents.

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupda...887217,00.html

According to Herman, third parties will have to enter into a
reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) license agreement with
Microsoft. "But," says Herman, "while RAND sometimes means there could
be a financial obligation, [Microsoft] ŗwill be offering a conventional
non-royalty non-fee RAND license. We've always made that clear to anyone
who has asked." In other words, there will be no financial obligation.

That was from Michele Herman - MS's Director of Intellectual Property.
The article still calls into question Mono. But, Herman does say
royalty free standard RAND.

http://www.msversus.org/node/225
But Microsoft (and our co-sponsors, Intel and Hewlett-Packard) went
further and have agreed that our patents essential to implementing C#
and CLI will be available on a "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" basis
for this purpose.

This is from the dotgnu wiki (the other open source .NET implementation
by the GNU guys)...

http://wiki2.dotgnu.info/PatentFUD
In response to an inquiry from the DotGNU project, the
secretary-general of ECMA has confirmed that Microsoft has
promised "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" licensing for any
patents that they might get on ideas that are necessary for
implementing the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.

Some of these clearly state they aren't sure about Mono. But, they do
indicate the MS is promising royalty free rand terms for the ECMA/ISO
components.


This "license" is taking longer to put together than MS's development
of longhorn - why? What's today, year two, three, or four of the
coming licence?


Why do you think they don't have one? I kind of doubt they would just
post it publicly.

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #39

P: n/a

"Tom Shelton" <ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:s6********************@comcast.com...
On 2005-03-29, The Ghost In The Machine

<ew***@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Olaf Baeyens
<ol**********@skyscan.be>
wrote
on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:38:32 +0200
<42***********************@news.skynet.be>:
> Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two > different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.

I'm just damned glad that .Net doesn't have any problems!

I would not say this too loud.
.NET is still in it's early stages, some other big problems might occure regarding backwards compatibility and stuff.
I love .NET but I am also realistic enough that nothing is perfect.


I think the previous poster was being slightly sarcastic, as the
speed of adoption of .NET has apparently been comparable to
that of a snail stuck in jelled treacle, or perhaps that of
a snail stuck in molasses during the month of January.

And of course, since .NET depends for a large amount of its
proprietary functionality on Windows, .NET inherits many of
the problems of Windows, which for the most part revolve
around various bits of malware infecting one's system.


Utter nonsense. .NET has as much (if not more) security built in as
Java does.
However, with Mono one might have a fighting chance to
work around some of these issues; the main problem with Mono
is that it faces, AFAICT, a rather uncertain future, mostly
because Microsoft might very well patent the interesting bits
and leave Mono with the unprofitable dregs.


Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


But the *ECMA-submitted* components are a pretty small part of .NET. That's
like getting a license for Java the language, the java.lang library but not
JDBC, Servlets, JSP, etc.... Can they get royalty free RAND licensing for
ADO.NET for example?

-mike
Jul 21 '05 #40

P: n/a

"* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x ,
d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *"
<aq*********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@f14g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
Tim Tyler wrote:
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2
0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote
or quoted:
Tim Tyler wrote:
> In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . > > Tim Tyler wrote:
> > > "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u
> > What if one app running on the server invokes some system call

that > > hangs all other threads? Then all other apps on the same server
> > will just freeze!
>
> A "system" call? You mean via something like JNI again?
>
> Making such calls is not possible in a secure environment like the > sandbox Java server processes execute in.

Yes, but finally the JRE has to use system calls, right? Without JNI it's possible to achieve a total isolation -- but how much would it
cost, to wrap every such calls prefectly? For instance, the VM would need to record each ports and files opened, so that it can release them if some app dies, and it may also need to setup the priorities for each threads correctly. So why not just use the OS's process model?


I believe some JVMs offer the choice of green threads or native
threads.

Probably the main reason for using the underlying OS's facilities
in this sort of area is portability.

If you rely on features from the underlying OS, you have to re-write
those features on every operating system you port your VM to - and
get them to behave the same way on each one.


Given the fact that Sun only officially develops JVM for linux, solaris
and windos, why would portability be an issue at all?

On a system like Java that runs on a large number of OSes, that sort
of effort would become painful, and would be a source of

compatibility
headaches. In many respects, it's better to do it yourself - and
then you can be more certain of your system behaving uniformly in
different environments.

Doing it yourself also gives you full control over factors such as
which resources can be shared. You can run multiple JVMs each in
their own OS process today - the problem is that that fails to make
effective use of shared resources.


Modern OSs provide very good IPC, much better than Java's. If Sun
really wants JVM to be an OS itself, it would be fine. But currently
the "Java OS" is a very crap one -- instead of making general OS
functions cross-platform, Sun just removes those which are not easily
portable, such as ACL for file system and IPC message queue.

If JVM is an OS:
1.No security model for file system.
2.File operations are unclear. For example, can you modify a file
opened by other app?
3.Single-process only (what a joke!). No process control. No fork.
4.No shared libraries.
5.No shell, no job control, no internal scripting system.
...

Sounds a bit like DOS, right?


No. As far as I understand, the main reason for this project is simply to
allow multiple Java apps to run within the same VM.
2.File operations are unclear. For example, can you modify a file
opened by other app?


How are they handled now? I'm sure you're aware that you can have multiple
Java apps running on the same PC but in different VMs, right? When two Java
apps have a resource conflict, the OS handles it. I don't see why it would
be any different with a multi-app VM running on the same OS. That is of
course unless the OS it runs on is DOS :).

-mike

Jul 21 '05 #41

P: n/a
In article <wa*********************@news20.bellglobal.com>, Michael N. Christoff wrote:

"Tom Shelton" <ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:s6********************@comcast.com...
On 2005-03-29, The Ghost In The Machine

<ew***@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote:
> In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Olaf Baeyens
><ol**********@skyscan.be>
> wrote
> on Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:38:32 +0200
><42***********************@news.skynet.be>:
>>> > Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are two >>> > different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.
>>>
>>> I'm just damned glad that .Net doesn't have any problems!
>>>
>> I would not say this too loud.
>> .NET is still in it's early stages, some other big problems might occure >> regarding backwards compatibility and stuff.
>> I love .NET but I am also realistic enough that nothing is perfect.
>>
>
> I think the previous poster was being slightly sarcastic, as the
> speed of adoption of .NET has apparently been comparable to
> that of a snail stuck in jelled treacle, or perhaps that of
> a snail stuck in molasses during the month of January.
>
> And of course, since .NET depends for a large amount of its
> proprietary functionality on Windows, .NET inherits many of
> the problems of Windows, which for the most part revolve
> around various bits of malware infecting one's system.
>


Utter nonsense. .NET has as much (if not more) security built in as
Java does.
> However, with Mono one might have a fighting chance to
> work around some of these issues; the main problem with Mono
> is that it faces, AFAICT, a rather uncertain future, mostly
> because Microsoft might very well patent the interesting bits
> and leave Mono with the unprofitable dregs.
>


Actually, I just came across this today:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from Microsoft,
Intel and HP stating that they would offer *royalty-free* RAND licensing
to the ECMA-submitted components of .NET. [Aside: He said they were
kicking around catchy names like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the
free and non-free stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
premature to promote this before the patent review was complete in case
other infringement was uncovered.

So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
go ahead and a license.


But the *ECMA-submitted* components are a pretty small part of .NET. That's
like getting a license for Java the language, the java.lang library but not
JDBC, Servlets, JSP, etc.... Can they get royalty free RAND licensing for
ADO.NET for example?

-mike


Probably not - thats why they already have their own alternatives if
for some reason MS decides to do something about it.

You need to understand that the primary goal of Mono is not necessarily
for compatability with .NET (though, they try hard for that). The
primary goal is to have a great application development environment that
avoids the ABI issues going from one distro to another. I think the
primary reason that Miguel liked .NET over Java was the fact that
CLR/CTS focused on a multilanguage environment. This meant that they
could wrap their C libraries once and provide services to many
languages. The focus on .NET compatability (ADO.NET, ASP.NET,
System.Windows.Forms, etc) - is for the purpose of luring ISV's to
consider more Linux oriented development/porting of their applications.

--
Tom Shelton
Jul 21 '05 #42

P: n/a
Tom Shelton poked his little head through the XP firewall and said:
In article <wa*********************@news20.bellglobal.com>, Michael N. Christoff wrote:

But the *ECMA-submitted* components are a pretty small part of .NET. That's
like getting a license for Java the language, the java.lang library but not
JDBC, Servlets, JSP, etc.... Can they get royalty free RAND licensing for
ADO.NET for example?


You need to understand that the primary goal of Mono is not necessarily
for compatability with .NET (though, they try hard for that). The
primary goal is to have a great application development environment that
avoids the ABI issues going from one distro to another. I think the
primary reason that Miguel liked .NET over Java was the fact that
CLR/CTS focused on a multilanguage environment. This meant that they
could wrap their C libraries once and provide services to many
languages. The focus on .NET compatability (ADO.NET, ASP.NET,
System.Windows.Forms, etc) - is for the purpose of luring ISV's to
consider more Linux oriented development/porting of their applications.


That's an interesting idea, Tom. Hope it pans out.

--
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
When all you have is Microsoft software, everything looks like Windows.
Jul 21 '05 #43

P: n/a
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:42:46 -0600, Tom Shelton
<ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote:
On 2005-04-01, spam <no@spam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 05:59:43 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:
In article <r5********************************@4ax.com>, spam wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:14:06 GMT, Tom Shelton
<to*@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLmtogden.com> wrote:

>In article <IE********@bath.ac.uk>, Tim Tyler wrote:
>> In comp.lang.java.advocacy Tom Shelton <ts******@youknowthedrillcomcast.net> wrote or quoted:
>>
>>> Actually, I just came across this today:
>>>
>>> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/4557
>>> Importantly, Miguel also said that Ximian had a letter from
>>> Microsoft, Intel and HP stating that they would offer
>>> *royalty-free* RAND licensing to the ECMA-submitted components
>>> of .NET. [Aside: He said they were kicking around catchy names
>>> like 'polio' or 'cholera' to distinguish the free and non-free
>>> stacks] I told Miguel he should publicize the letter
>>> more because it was such a relief to me, but he said it would be
>>> premature to promote this before the patent review was complete
>>> in case other infringement was uncovered.
>>>
>>> So, it looks like MS, Intel, and HP have already given the Mono team the
>>> go ahead and a license.
>>
>> That's called marketing.
>>
>> Not very competent marketing either - making it look as though the
>> viability of your product is dependent on an offer by email
>> from an individual claiming to represent some company, offering
>> promises of future goodwill - and then failing to disclose the
>> contents or even the author of message in question is really
>> pretty feeble PR material.
>
>I'm not sure what you mean? This isn't marketing. Novell/Ximian have
>never made this public. I happend across this reference and thought it
>was interesting. It sounds like they have an actual license. MS reps
>have stated multilple times in the media that their patents related to
>.NET were available on non-royalty standard RAND terms.

Where? All their .NET patents are available under non-royalty RAND
terms? I don't believe it.

Not all their .NET patents - all their ECMA/ISO component related
patents.

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupda...887217,00.html

According to Herman, third parties will have to enter into a
reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) license agreement with
Microsoft. "But," says Herman, "while RAND sometimes means there could
be a financial obligation, [Microsoft] ŗwill be offering a conventional
non-royalty non-fee RAND license. We've always made that clear to anyone
who has asked." In other words, there will be no financial obligation.

That was from Michele Herman - MS's Director of Intellectual Property.
The article still calls into question Mono. But, Herman does say
royalty free standard RAND.

http://www.msversus.org/node/225
But Microsoft (and our co-sponsors, Intel and Hewlett-Packard) went
further and have agreed that our patents essential to implementing C#
and CLI will be available on a "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" basis
for this purpose.

This is from the dotgnu wiki (the other open source .NET implementation
by the GNU guys)...

http://wiki2.dotgnu.info/PatentFUD
In response to an inquiry from the DotGNU project, the
secretary-general of ECMA has confirmed that Microsoft has
promised "royalty-free and otherwise RAND" licensing for any
patents that they might get on ideas that are necessary for
implementing the ECMA-334 and ECMA-335 standards.

Some of these clearly state they aren't sure about Mono. But, they do
indicate the MS is promising royalty free rand terms for the ECMA/ISO
components.


This "license" is taking longer to put together than MS's development
of longhorn - why? What's today, year two, three, or four of the
coming licence?


Why do you think they don't have one? I kind of doubt they would just
post it publicly.


Because no one has come out and said they've got one. Because MS or
the other minor contributers don't hold patents for either the CLI or
C# ECMA standard. Because your three cut and pastes are all future
tense. Because any thing I've ever read about the "license" has been
future tensed. Because it's easy to find the shared-source license
from MS for the ISO/ECMA standards but no mention of the RAND license.
Because after reading the following
http://www.ecma-international.org/me...eofconduct.htm
I assumed it would be easy to contact MS and get a license but it
seems it's not so therefore there's no license.
Jul 21 '05 #44

P: n/a
spam wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:42:46 -0600, Tom Shelton
<ts******@YOUKNOWTHEDRILLcomcast.net> wrote:
This "license" is taking longer to put together than MS's development
of longhorn - why? What's today, year two, three, or four of the
coming licence?


Why do you think they don't have one? I kind of doubt they would just
post it publicly.

Because no one has come out and said they've got one. Because MS or
the other minor contributers don't hold patents for either the CLI or
C# ECMA standard. Because your three cut and pastes are all future
tense. Because any thing I've ever read about the "license" has been
future tensed. Because it's easy to find the shared-source license
from MS for the ISO/ECMA standards but no mention of the RAND license.
Because after reading the following
http://www.ecma-international.org/me...eofconduct.htm
I assumed it would be easy to contact MS and get a license but it
seems it's not so therefore there's no license.


I can't believe Tom is still pumping this crap!
I even gave him the telephone numbers, at MS, to
call directly and settle this (for him) once and for all.

You are required to obtain a license from MS to implement (just) ECMA.
Mono does not have and is not seeking a license for ECMA.

None of which matters - because .NET has moved on to version 2
since the tiny subset was handed over the ECMA - that stuff isn't
even available!

Get over it Tom - they have no license (and they won't be getting one anytime
soon, because the stuff they are implementing isn't even up for licensing).

Jul 21 '05 #45

P: n/a
plm
TheLetterK <th********@spymac.com.broken> writes:
Theatre Mgmt wrote:
Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by
Sun Labsís Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose
virtual machine for executing multiple Java applications, according
to a description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java
HotSpot Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the
scalability of Java by hosting multiple tasks.


Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are
two different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


It is better to say that Sun tried to expand Java's application
domain. It is perfectly fit for its current main focus (server side
enterprise software). Sun has expanded Java's domain before with the
J2ME (expanding into some areas of embedded software), now it just
tries to further expand the domain.

There is no programming environment fit for every need; the fact that
an environment can be improved and used for new applications does not
imply that the environment currently has problems or is crap.
Jul 21 '05 #46

P: n/a
In comp.lang.java.advocacy "* * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 3 x x , d 2 0 0 2 x x ) * * *" <aq*********@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
Tim Tyler wrote:
[Java process management]
I believe some JVMs offer the choice of green threads or native
threads.

Probably the main reason for using the underlying OS's facilities
in this sort of area is portability.

If you rely on features from the underlying OS, you have to re-write
those features on every operating system you port your VM to - and
get them to behave the same way on each one.


Given the fact that Sun only officially develops JVM for linux, solaris
and windos, why would portability be an issue at all?


Because they license their technology to hundreds of other vendors.
Doing it yourself also gives you full control over factors such as
which resources can be shared. You can run multiple JVMs each in
their own OS process today - the problem is that that fails to make
effective use of shared resources.


Modern OSs provide very good IPC, much better than Java's. If Sun
really wants JVM to be an OS itself, it would be fine. But currently
the "Java OS" is a very crap one [...]


Yes - you can't write a proper OS in Java at the moment - Java isn't
up to it.
If JVM is an OS:
1.No security model for file system.
2.File operations are unclear. For example, can you modify a file
opened by other app?
3.Single-process only (what a joke!). No process control. No fork.
4.No shared libraries.
5.No shell, no job control, no internal scripting system.
...


I think you are a bit confused about Java's capabilities, there.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ ti*@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
Jul 21 '05 #47

P: n/a
On 2005-03-28 01:25:21 +0300, TheLetterK <th********@spymac.com.broken> said:
Theatre Mgmt wrote:

Sun project seeks to solve Java memory, execution issues

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...8059&e=1&ncid=
San
Francisco (InfoWorld) - Sun Microsystems Laboratories (Sun Labs) is
working on a research effort to address issues with the memory
footprint, startup and execution times when running multiple Java
applications concurrently.

The Multi-Tasking Virtual Machine (MVM), developed as a prototype by
Sun Labs’s Barcelona, Spain research team, is a general purpose virtual
machine for executing multiple Java applications, according to a
description on the java.sun.com Web site. Based on the Java HotSpot
Virtual Machine and its client compiler, MVM increases the scalability
of Java by hosting multiple tasks.

Admitting there's a problem, and eadmitting your product is crap are
two different things. Java isn't crap, but it does have problems.


...or trolling newsgroups in your basement.. Whatever, he had reply so
he had won :)

I think Apple has solved a big deal of memory, speed issues, especially
starting. Sun should not look elsewhere and I bet they work together.

www.apple.com/java

e.g. sharing VM across apps etc.

Ilgaz Ocal
Jul 21 '05 #48

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.