W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-plugins@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Microsoft benefits a lot by loosing (?)

From: Reza Roboubi <reza@requestfinder.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:25:27 -0700
Message-ID: <3F5F96C7.97A519A5@requestfinder.com>
Cc: public-web-plugins@w3.org

Yes.  I certainly agree with the reasons you sight for Java's
unpopularity (surely on the applet side.)  Jake also mentioned it's
complexity, which is very valid also (I'm fluent with C++, so I'm not
whining, but for the web, there are much simpler ways.)  

That is why it would be really, really interesting to see some good work
by W3C on "Javascript."  It does  not need to be complicated at all. 
Scripting languages are not, at all, even hard to implement.  Just look
at the many choices out there: Tcl, Perl, Python.  Certainly, to merely
standardize Javascript, and add a few essentials like file and network
access, is very easy for W3C to do.  And the GUI is just DOM.  Too
easy!  And all of us benefit if we do it.

--
Reza.


"Richard M. Smith" wrote:
> 
> Also long as Microsoft has their OS monopoly, I don't see them loosing
> their browser monopoly.  People use IE because its there when they buy
> their computers.
> 
> If Microsoft has to ship Sun's JVM, I personally don't see it hurting
> Microsoft very much.  It seems to me that client-side Java has never
> been very popular and never lived up to Sun's hype of '94-'95.  The
> mistake Sun made was not  integrating Java properly into Web browsers by
> providing easy DOM access to Java applets.  That's why technologies like
> DHTML and JavaScript get used much more than Java.
> 
> Richard
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Reza Roboubi
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 3:25 PM
> To: public-web-plugins@w3.org
> Cc: 'W3C Public Web Plugins List'
> Subject: Re: Microsoft benefits a lot by loosing (?)
> 
> "Richard M. Smith" wrote:
> >
> > Microsoft already controls the browser market with an estimated 95%
> > share.
> >
> > Trust me, Microsoft has no desire to give Eolas a half a billion
> > dollars.
> >
> > Richard
> 
> Yes.  You're absolutely right Richard.  But how does MS do that?  In
> large part due to it's proprietary features, which are furthered by
> it's monopolistic grip.  Don't you agree?
> 
> MS does not achieve it's market share by being standards compliant.
> It thrives on being a monopoly, and standards (such as imposed by W3C)
> are the beginning of the end, as far as monopolies go.  Recent court
> rulings force MS to discontinue MSJ, and Sun is free as a bird to
> distribute it's Java plug-in to Unix, Linux, and any other OS
> competing with Windows.  The courts _force_ MS to allow Sun, to
> distribute it's competing Java to IE.  MS, for the first time,
> has NO more options left, but to comply, or face breakup.
> 
> This patent ruling just seems like the best thing that could happen to
> MS, and it comes _just_ at the right time.  It feels like a free
> license, by the courts of law themselves, to go ahead and monopolize.
> 
> And so what if Sun thinks it can object? At the pace courts move, by
> the time they sort out what Sun is screaming about, MS will have left
> nothing of Java but the feathers.
> 
> Do you guys think MS is in love with what W3C stands for?  I just
> find that very hard (or impossible) to believe given MS's track
> record.
> 
> --
> Reza

-- 
Reza
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2003 17:22:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:03 UTC