COMMENTARY--Let me make sure I understand this: When Microsoft was shipping Java, Sun didn't like it and filed suit. And now that Microsoft has stopped shipping Java, Sun doesn't like it and is suing again. I understand it goes much deeper than this, but I really wish Sun would make up its mind.
Or at least just not change it. I have to agree with Sun CEO Scott McNealy, who has previously maintained that it's not his company's job to police Microsoft. Sun lawyers now say they are suing because of the federal rulings against Microsoft, as well as Redmond's decision not to ship Java.
THERE IS another dynamic at play here. Sun remains in a pique over the feds' inability to neuter Microsoft. So it looks like McNealy & Co. now want to take their own best shot.
As for Microsoft, it has maintained that losing an earlier suit to Sun left it with this concern: If it shipped Java with XP, Sun would have sued to block the operating system's release. Maybe that's legit. Then again, maybe not.
But if this lawsuit is really going to hinge on whether Microsoft is hurting Sun by not shipping Java with Windows XP, then Sun deserves to lose. If you believe all of Sun's hype about the glory of e-commerce and the Internet, then distributing Java over the Internet shouldn't be a disadvantage.
STILL, MICROSOFT SHOULD--with the proper legal releases from Sun--agree to package Java with XP and Internet Explorer. Sun also should be able to expect that, within reason, Microsoft will assure that Java will run properly in a Microsoft environment.
The reason Microsoft should do this is simple: It's the right thing to do for us, its customers. We shouldn't have to care about the Scott vs. Bill rivalry. If Java is a key tool for exploring the Internet, then Microsoft should ship it with Windows XP--period, end of story.
I want to extend this customer-friendly distribution to other software as well. For example, since everyone is going to end up downloading RealPlayer anyway, Microsoft should just ship it with the OS. Windows Media Player, which is a fine product, will live or die on its own, regardless.
IF MICROSOFT WON'T do this voluntarily, I don't think the Sun suit should be the deciding factor. Rather, a "fair distribution" clause should be added to the settlement of the big Microsoft case, establishing a requirement for Microsoft to provide popular non-MS technologies to its customers along with the operating system.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that when I brought up this idea with analysts Tim Bajarin, of Creative Strategies, and Rob Enderle, of Giga Information Group, both thought I'd gone a tad soft in the head.
On Friday's AnchorDesk radio show we discussed some of the problems that Microsoft would be up against even if it wanted to ship Java. The compromise would be to ship Java and other things on a bonus disk that could be updated frequently and shipped with Windows XP.
Even that isn't perfect, so I'll hold my ground: There ought to be some way for customers to avoid big downloads.
OK, SO NOW that I've battered Microsoft a bit, let me get back to beating up on Sun. The reasons Sun's lawsuit is silly is because Microsoft isn't making it difficult for customers to get Java so much as it's just not making it easy. Given the legal wrangling between the two companies, I'm not sure how Sun could have expected anything different.
For people who upgrade to Windows XP, getting Java isn't a problem, because the Java they already have remains in place and works fine. But if you buy a new machine with Windows XP, you will sooner or later come to a Web site or download that requires Java and will be instructed to download it from Sun.
YES, THAT DOES REQUIRE a download, and for people with dial-up Internet connections, it will be slow. But it's hardly Microsoft trying to push Sun out of the market. Sun is also free to arrange for hardware companies to ship Java along with their new PCs, freeing customers from the download requirement. RealNetworks has done this, and it's fairly common to find new hardware with RealPlayer already loaded.
As for the Java market more generally, Microsoft has suffered more because of Java than vice versa. I suppose if Microsoft didn't exist then Java would have been more successful, but the same can be said if Sun had only delivered on its promises. Somebody wake me when we reach the "write once, run anywhere" stage of Java client development, OK?
I have not researched this myself, but in our news story reporter Stephen Shankland quotes a Silicon Valley attorney as saying that federal prosecutors believe findings against Microsoft have nothing to do with the fate of Java--that Microsoft's behavior didn't undercut Java's competitive viability.
So the bottom line is this: Sun's lawsuit is silly, but Microsoft needs to do the right thing for customers--if not for Sun--and make popular technologies, like Java, routinely available when customers buy Windows XP alone or already installed on a new machine.
And if Microsoft won't do the right thing voluntarily, well then, let's let the Department of Justice make them do it.
Do you think Sun's latest lawsuit is lame? Or is it justified? TalkBack to me below.
