JeremyP wrote:
>
>> I also think Microsoft designed Windows so programs like Java would
>> run poorly. That way, the could mitigate the threat Java caused on
>> their desktop monopoly.
>
> This is off topic, but I'm intrigued as to how you think that
> Microsoft could have designed an operating system that could recognise
> a particular class of program and sabotage its performance.
At least until recently, they simply used undocumented intefaces for
their own programs to give them an advantage over the worse-performing
documented versions and for things like office, they pre-load their own
shared libs into ram at boot time so everyone else looks worse. Last
year they released tens of thousands of pages of previously withheld
documentation and specifications though, so perhaps the practice no
longer stands.
> If Java
> runs poorly on Windows compared to other programs, it's because the
> design of the Java VM is bad (at least in the the context of the
> Windows environment).
Java was a bit more evil:
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-251401.html?tag=untagged
Microsoft originally sold 'something-like-java' that, if you used the
default settings, generated code that wasn't java, wasn't portable, and
made it look like everything but windows was broken.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell_at_gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=1065&dsMessageId=1091834
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org].
Received on 2009-02-02 19:49:16 CET