Improving Java for Linux

[Tony Kimball]

: > Microsoft is right.  Sun is trying to turn the Java platform into a
: > proprietary environment which only Sun controls.  

I disagree, because Sun has applied to submit Java for ISO
standardization.  Sun wants Java to be portable.  Sun does not
want Java to be restricted to any range of platforms.  That is
why Sun is actively developing JVM models for embedded, for
smartcards, for PDAs, &c.  

Certainly it may be foolhardy for Sun to restrict reference platform
source code the way it does, but that does not make Sun the enemy of
free-dom.  

: > 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?  

Foolhardy.  Defeats the whole purpose of Java.  Wait until ISO
standardizes.  If ISO standardizes, Sun will follow, and so should
free-dom.

: ...a lowest common denominator

That's JDK 1.1 right now, JDK 1.2 in a few months.  

: Is Java patented?

No.

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

In what sense?  I really don't like to perpetuate these non-productive
threads by participating, but this is really coming from some
alternate, counterfactual, universe.  In what way is Java being
treated as proprietary, aside from the trademark?  In terms of the
JVM, Kaffe is (non-conformant) Java, Access Co. Ltd. of Japan's
JV-Lite is (non-conformant) Java.  I don't see anyone sueing anyone
over the technical substance -- just Sun sueing Microsoft for
violating a contract.  No bearing on the free world, whatsoever.
Y'all seem to be buying the FUD!  Stop that!