LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA Archives

TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA  June 1997

TEAM-ADA June 1997

Subject:

Software dispute is just one battle in a war for computer dominance

From:

"Allan (Doc) Spurr" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Sat, 14 Jun 1997 11:52:10 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (151 lines)

Fellow teamers:
Thought you all might enjoy the following article from the local paper
here
in Philly. I include it here without further comment at this time.  The
address
of the article on line is:
http://www2.phillynews.com/inquirer/97/Jun/08/business/DUEL08.htm

Philadelphia Inquirer: Business

Software dispute is just one battle in a war for computer dominance

By David E. Kalish
ASSOCIATED PRESS

ATLANTA  -- Microsoft Corp. chairman Bill Gates and the head of IBM's
Lotus
software unit are making rival pitches to technology executives about
what may be
the next big advance in corporate computing.

The dispute is widening an industry rift about the future shape of
corporate
computer networks.

With Microsoft angling to extend the dominance of its Windows operating
system,
Lotus president Jeff Papows argued last week that businesses should take
full
advantage of new technology that lets different systems work together
seamlessly.
He spoke at the spring Comdex computer trade show here.

Both sides are in favor of the run-anywhere Java programming language,
but
Microsoft thinks any software works best when written for a specific
operating
system, particularly its Windows system.

Java, developed by Sun Microsystems Inc., aims to help a company's
hodgepodge
of computers, from desktop PCs to mainframes, work in sync no matter
which
operating system runs the machines.

Because the Java language lets programmers write a single version of
software
that will run on any system, it could threaten the dominance of
Microsoft's
Windows operating system, which runs 90 percent of all personal
computers.

Gates told a Comdex audience that while Microsoft ``certainly'' was
supporting
Java, ``we don't see it as the only computer language,'' because
software should
work with individual operating systems.

``It's a little strange getting religious about this,'' Gates said,
alluding to
his rival's urging of a more purist view one day earlier.

Microsoft licenses Java from Sun, but is thought by many to be creating
specialized versions to make Java software work better on Windows.

For his part, Papows urged software developers to support industrywide
adoption
of the ``100 percent pure'' Java method of writing programs, saying
anything
less would doom ``hopes of a write-once environment.''

The suggestion was that if Microsoft's version of Java prevails, that
would
further the company's dominance of the operating systems that run
desktop and other
business computers, and reduce the technology choices.

``Do not let this hope for an application renaissance pass us by,''
Papows told
several thousand information-system managers, retailers and other
high-tech
players. ``If we screw this up, we are all going to be enormous losers
as a consequence.''

One of those losers if Java isn't accepted as an industrywide standard
could be
Lotus Notes. The IBM ``collaborative'' software enables employees on
different
computers to work on the same project and documents at the same time.
Its
distinguishing feature is the ability to update, or replicate, new
information
so the proper people receive it.

Lotus is trying to remake its Notes to work better with the Internet,
and IBM
is investing heavily in the Java language so it can redesign Notes to do
that.
The idea is to exploit Java's ability to work with all computers and
computer
networks.

For businesses, ``run-anywhere'' software would relieve a costly and
time-
consuming problem: the need to develop and maintain software for a
variety of
machines, to teach employees how to use different programs, and to get
the
mish-mash ofsystems to work together.

Papows and Gates also clashed on another aspect of business computer
networks.
Papows called on technology managers to support IBM's vision of a
slimmed-down
office PC, which would be cheaper to buy and maintain than $2,000 to
$3,000
personal computers. Software for the machines would be downloaded via
the Internet or
corporate networks, instead of requiring costly installation on each
machine.

Gates, while also advocating the so-called network computer, supported
machines
that contain hard drives that continue to give individual users many
advantages
of conventional PCs, such as keeping personal files secure.

The rival visions promoted by IBM and Microsoft left some in the
audience
adopting a wait-and-see attitude. For one thing, Java applications for
businesses
aren't expected to be available in quantity for at least another year.

``It would be nice to have everything work with Java,'' said James Ivey,
head
of lending for First National Bank of Georgia, which uses a mix of IBM
mainframes
and desktops running on Windows 95.

But as far as whose Java vision prevails, Gates ``can probably do it.
He's
certainly got the money and the influence.''


with STANDARD_DISCLAIMER; use STANDARD_DISCLAIMER;
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan R. Spurr,   Lead Software Engineer  [log in to unmask]
Lockheed Martin, 1301 Virginia Dr. Suite 305, Fort Washington PA 19034
Voice: (215) 283-3164;  FAX: (215) 283-6970
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager