PULP
Stuff that doesn't suck
Stuff that really sucks
Opinions on Stuff that Matters

The Java Lawsuit:  Sun vs. Microsoft
(don't forget to read the caveats!)
Updated November 1998

This one is really easy to "net out" and explain logically, in my opinion. Sun is pissed that Microsoft gives developers the option to write a Java application that will run only on Windows, and take advantage of features in the Windows operating system. Sun is claiming that Microsoft is trying to "flood the market" with its own "divergent version of Java" in an effort to undermine the promise of letting developers create software that runs on different operating systems. Alan Baratz, President of Sun’s software division, said that Microsoft is trying to "hijack" the Java platform, and is asking for a temporary injunction to bar Microsoft from distributing Java software that doesn’t meet Sun compatibility tests.

Okay, let’s look at the contract that Sun and Microsoft signed way back when they decided they were going to be "partners" with Java:

Do you see the areas above that I highlighted? So Sun signed a contract giving Microsoft the right to modify, adapt, and create derivative works". Microsoft did just that, modified, adapted, and created derivative works so developers could take advantage of stuff in the Windows operating system. And now, Sun is pissed that Microsoft allows developers to write a Java application that will only run on Windows and take advantage of stuff in the Windows that is unique to the operating system.  Of course, a developer could choose to ignore those features unique to Windows, and use Microsoft’s Java development tool to create a true cross platform application if the developer chooses. But it is up to the individual developer what features to include.

So, given that the contract both companies signed says Microsoft can modify, adapt, and create derivative works, Sun is still suing that Microsoft is trying to flood the market with its own "divergent version of Java." Duh, you said in the contract that Microsoft could do this. Now you a filing a lawsuit so that Microsoft can no longer do this? Can Microsoft help it that Sun was such a bonehead to agree to this in the first place? Shouldn’t companies that make such stupid moves like this get killed off before they cause anymore damage?

Also, PC Magazine (April 7) declared that "[Microsoft's] Java environment was the fastest and most compatible on our tests" and selected Microsoft's implementation as its Editor's Choice for two years running. PC Magazine is not biased towards Microsoft, in fact, most magazines like to rag on Microsoft for reasons stated elsewhere on this website.

Yet, incredibly, Sun is suing Microsoft because Microsoft has an "incompatible" version of Java on the market, even though independent publications say that the Microsoft Java Virtual machine is the fastest, most compatible, VM on any operating system in existence today? It is even faster and more compatible than SUN’s implementation on Sun Workstations. Why?  Because Microsoft has a stable of  hot-shit, world class developers that can write code that will SMOKE.  Other companies, like Sun, Apple, Netscape, etc, have a bunch of wanna-be, wish-I-could-be developers.

My Conclusion: Sun is whining because they fucked up on the initial contract, and they are trying to rescind what they agreed to on that initial contract. They are also whining because they can’t write Java Virtual Machine software that is better than Microsoft. What does Sun expect, that Microsoft will assist Sun in crushing Windows??? What the hell are they thinking?

So, if anyone complains to you about how Microsoft is "polluting the Java Language" like all the luddites in the press like to talk about, your response should be, "DUH.....Sun signed a contract with Microsoft giving them the right to 'modify, adapt, and create Derivative Works of the Technology '. Did Sun expect Microsoft to help write software to kill themselves off?  Why did Sun agree to such a stupid contract, especially one that also says, 'a perpetual and irrevocable (without regard to any termination or expiration of this Agreement'"?  And now they are trying to revoke it?