Subject: microsoft going after installed base
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 09:24:07 -0700 (PDT)



From "http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22076.html"

	We're receiving credible reports that Microsoft will shortly
	unveil Java language support to .NET, alongside its
	home-brewed Java clone C#, and VB, in a project that goes
	under the internal name of "Java.NET". 


The Register's hypothesis:

	The Beast's ultimate goal is to get its .NET platform adopted,
	so welcoming Java developers into the camp simply makes good
	business sense. It runs the risk of devaluing its C#
	proposition, but in the greater scheme of things losing a
	language is a small sacrifice on the road to gaining the
	dominant enterprise developer platform. Which would you rather
	have?


My hypothesis of the real longer term goal:

	Partial upward compatability with an installed base provided
	by plug-and-play network infrastructure components.  "We'll
	run what you've already got -- with a smooth transition to
	a cheaper-to-manage implementation with more features."

	The value add will be self-tuning, self-monitoring components
	with good, global, adaptive performance and robustness
	characteristics, programmed by very high level interfaces
	suitable for 99% of all potential deployment sites.

	Not to say that that approach doesn't have its weaknesses,
	especially if done "MSFT style".


The Register, again:

	.NET developers can already use a third-party Java interface
	from Halcyon Software, who are beta testing a Java compiler
	JIL, and a bi-directional Java/.NET bridge called JROM.
	Microsoft's implementation integrates Java into Visual Studio,
	we're told. 

Why stop at the studio tools?

The leak is just advertising, to get the name "Java" out there before
it's taken away again.  The early, not yet fully integrated November
release is to hassle Sun when funds for law-suits aren't overflowing.


-t