>>If everyone implemented the J/Direct COM interfaces for different
>>processors (and wrapped other platforms in terms of the J/Direct COM
>>interfaces), then we can carry on with what we have, and yet still have the
>>potential for platform neutral applications:
>Yes, if Microsoft were licensing their proprietary COM interfaces, the
>way Sun is licensing the open Java interfaces, what you say might be true.
controlled by the Open Group, and anyone can implement any interface
they want without liscensing.
There is a difference between "doesn't have to" and "can't upgradeQuote:>> It's a threat to the industry. For the Internet, 100% Pure could be useful
>> - if you want to please 100% of your audience 100% of the time. When
>> people mistake the Internet for the rest of the industry, that's when
>> problems will occur. People get a fair deal for the hardware they're using,
>> whatever that hardware is. So why should they upgrade?
>> As a result, nobody ever upgrades their hardware - nobody ever upgrades the
>> technology in their software: A stale industry.
>So you are arguing that because portable Java offers people a way to
>continue using their systems, instead of having to upgrade every
>9 months, it's a *bad* thing?! That's certainly a novel argument.
without fear of violating the holy sun 100% pure java liscense"
remove the _x at the end of my address to reply.