::Boots ------------ http://www.computerworld.com/news/970730javah.html The Paul Maritz interview that article links to has disappeared from Computerworld's site, but a copy is appended. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Formerly at http://www.computerworld.com/news/news_articles/970728moritz.html Microsoft Corp. last week indicated that it would essentially block efforts to make Java a cross-platform development language, stating that it wouldn't ship Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s Java Foundation Class Libraries (JFC). Computerworld senior editor Carol Sliwa caught up with Paul Maritz, Microsoft group vice president, at a company reception in Seattle and asked him to explain the software giant's Java stance. CW: There's nothing in the license that requires you to ship those JFCs with Internet Explorer? Maritz: Correct. CW: Is that a contentious issue? Maritz: No. The only reason I brought it up is just that some people like to play hard and fast with the truth, and they like to say, 'Look, these JFC class libraries are going to be a standard because everybody has to ship them. Even Microsoft has to ship them.' And that's not the case. We were very careful when we did the deal to say that we could have the option of shipping them, but we do not have to include them in Windows. CW: Is there some reason you wouldn't want to ship them? Is there something inferior about them? Maritz: No. We don't want to put further bloat on top of the system. We think that basically there isn't a lot of end-user value in them. And Sun's trying to establish them as basically their platform. It's a competing operating system. CW: Do you feel your Application Foundation Class Libraries (AFC) are superior to their JFCs? Maritz: No. AFCs ... make it easier to write apps. But our real strategy is J/Direct. So our answer to JFC is not AFC. It's J/Direct. CW: It sounds like Microsoft is resentful at Sun for taking a dictatorial role. Maritz: The reason we brought it up is Sun likes to blur these two things together. They like to blur the notion of Java the language and Java the class libraries. They'd like to package them all into that concept. We're just saying, 'Hey, there is a difference between the two. Let's be clear on that.' " CW: Do you think you're going to end up fragmenting the language even more? Maritz: Not the language. You're making the mistake. You're falling into their mind-set -- [ignoring] the difference between Java the language from Java the class libraries. CW: But in the end result, a network manager will have to make sure he has both sets of class libraries. Maritz: Let me ask you this question: The fact that you can call Windows [application programming interfaces] from C++, did that splinter C++? It did not. It's the same issue. CW: But if Java's promise is that it'll be a cross-platform language -- Maritz: No. No. Sun's trying to make it that. CW: But say there's an electronic-commerce application that somebody wants to run cross-platform, and that's why they picked Java. And they use the JFCs to write it. Maritz: Good luck. CW: It's not going to run in Internet Explorer. Maritz: It may or may not. But the point is, that's Sun's problem. It's not our problem. CW: Does it end up being companies' problems, too? Are you saying they're foolish for buying into the theory that there can ever be cross-platform language? Maritz: No. We're saying it's no different from any other cross-platform [strategy]. This isn't the first one -- [there was] CBT, Appware, etc. We're just saying that, 'Hey, you should realize that when you're doing that, you're dependent upon Sun to get it to work.' CW: But if you bought into the JFCs, then you wouldn't be in this particular case. If you shipped JFCs, you'd help foster the idea of cross-platform. Maritz: And I don't want to ship another operating system on top of our operating system and burden every copy of Windows with all of that extra weight. CW: Do you agree that it makes developers have to make choices and it makes them have to do more work and it makes companies have to install both sets of classes? So in the end, it makes life difficult for everyone, doesn't it? Maritz: But we think that that's reality, because you either get this thing to become a heavyweight thing, in which case it's going to perform badly. Or you have to make it something very small. So we're not trying to be parties to perpetuating the myth.