Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [pcgen] 1.5 NOT in Tiger release - Should be a download after and NOT available in Panther and below...

Expand Messages
  • John Rudd
    ... That s one way to look at it. Another is they want it to actually be integrated with the deeper layers of their object oriented API, and Sun has already
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 28 8:41 AM
      On Apr 28, 2005, at 6:32 AM, Michael wrote:

      > --- Frugal <frugal@...> wrote:
      >> Sun is at least as much at fault. If Sun produced a Mac build of java
      >> in
      >> the same way that they produce a Windows and a Linux build of Java
      >> this
      >> would not be a problem.
      >>
      >> regards,
      >> Frugal
      >>
      >
      > If Apple would let them, Sun would. Sun started to make a JRE for Mac
      > OS, but
      > Apple shot them down. "Mine! Not yours! *We* will make the JRE for our
      > precioussssss."

      That's one way to look at it. Another is "they want it to actually be
      integrated with the deeper layers of their object oriented API, and Sun
      has already shown that they don't know their posteriors from a hole in
      the ground when it comes to dealing with object oriented libraries"
      (you may remember that Java's class library is based upon Apple's class
      library (though, at the time, it wasn't Apple's, it was NeXT's)). Sun
      _completely_ bungled their dealings with/version-of that library. I
      wouldn't be surprised if the reason Sun dropped Openstep was as much
      because NeXT told them to stop distributing the embarrassing piece of
      software (Openstep for Solaris) that they had come up with. Apple
      wants the Java on their platform to be done correctly, integrating at
      the right levels, instead of sitting on top at the wrong levels. Since
      Sun isn't up to that task, and has proven that they're not up to that
      task, Apple has to do it themselves.

      (yes, I'm an Apple customer now, but at the time I was using both
      NeXT's OS (on NeXT hardware, Intel, and Sparc) and Solaris, and
      directly compared them ... and I wouldn't be an Apple customer today if
      their new software wasn't based on NeXT's, instead I'd be a FreeBSD
      user, just like I was during the days between NeXT's last version of
      Openstep and Apple's first complete release of OS X. My point being
      that this isn't just customer-fandom, but having actually directly used
      and compared the different pieces of software I'm talking about (and I
      also still use Solaris and Sun's version of Java at work))

      You may also remember that Microsoft feels the same way about Sun's
      implementation of Java, and Sun got a court order to stop them from
      doing the same thing Apple decided to do ... luckily for Sun, MS was
      ALSO adding some nefarious changes in their version of Java, and thus
      the court order was supported. But, MS's effort was not just about
      "embrace, extend, undermine", it was also about producing a better
      quality implementation than Sun was. Probably the only reason why no
      one hates the linux implementation of java is that it's the most like
      Sun's own native version that they might actually get it right (that,
      or there's no one within the linux community, who has the right
      combination of authority, coherent design skills, and a reasonable
      concept of mature software design ... given the nature of linux, it's
      probably some of both). But, really, the people who brag about Sun and
      Java tend to be talking more about portability than quality. For
      quality, you go to third party implementations. Which, for OS X, is
      effectively what Apple is: a third party implementation of Java.

      (I remember when Cygnus was still around, they had a demo of their Java
      implementation running alongside Sun's ... it was a clock application
      running on both JVMs, and the hands on the clock running on the Cygnus
      JVM version were quickly spinning around the clock face, while the
      hands on the Sun version were slowly tick-tick-ticking along; the Sun
      people at Embedded West used to come over really excited that we
      (Cygnus) were doing something with Java, and then slink away when they
      saw what it was we had done)

      So, of the 3 platforms talked about in the quoted mateiral, the two
      coherent ones both dislike Sun's version of Java enough to want to do
      their own. One of them has a court order telling them not to. The
      other one is the one you're complaining about on their lag time for
      releasing their versions of Java.


      And, yet a third way of looking at it is that no application should
      change the underlying infrastructure it depends upon without changing
      major version numbers. For PCGen to depend upon a new version of
      Java/embrace Java API changes without going to 6.0 could be seen as
      more of an indictment of PCGen than Apple.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.