[Pc_Support] .NET based on Java?

[Bryan J. Smith]

"Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote:
> First off, you don't consider Ziff-Davis to be credible?  I
> know they are naive at times, but they are very MS-focused.
> They get the lead stories from 

Oops, didn't finish that.

What I was saying was that Ziff-Davis tends to be "selective"
with what they say about Microsoft, so they get the lead buzz
on Microsoft announcements.  Other media outlets have "cut
themselves off" by releasing "less than flattering" stories
on MS.

So when a ZD publication actually says something (like Mary
Jo Foley does on occassion, although she's often a bug-eye
"wow, I can't believe MS would do such a thing!" far too
often), it's typically something MS can't deny.

Furthermore, I'm not some "conspiracy theory" wennie.  I
really _hate_it_ when there is not sound, technical reasons
on MS conspiracy theories.  My favorite one was the comment
by Nicholas P. that Microsoft must be using Linux in Windows
because it's getting more stable (how clueless was
that?!?!?!).

An effort to uncover that Microsoft used Java 1.1 code in
C#/.NET would be just like an effort to uncover that
Microsoft uses BSD code in various portions of the Windows
OS, and even SCO UNIX code before that, let alone OS/2 they
were entitled to (although the Windows 95 team used newer
code after the agreement expired in 1993 which IBM signed
away their rights to sue in 1995).

It's all common knowledge from those who know the development
going on before it was named C# and .NET.  It's not
surprising.  And the _only_ people who are surprised today
are the ones who didn't know that Microsoft licensed Java and
used it to build a Win32-only platform implementation -- let
alone are ignorant of the fact that Microsoft has re-licensed
Java as of 1.4+ and re-gained access to its newer source
releases.

How much C#/.NET is still based on Java is the only
speculation.  Much like how much of the BSD IP stack has been
modified in NT, where libz, OpenSSL, etc... are being used in
different NT components, etc...  It's all speculation.

But if you have any "evidence/proof" that Microsoft threw out
_all_ developments based on Java 1.0/1.1, including the
existing J++ codebase that it had hundreds of thousands of
developers relying on (and they would have to transition them
off of), the outstandingly performing native, Win32-only
interface/run-time it used, etc... when it created C# and the
CLR, then I'm all ears.  ;->

Until then, I rather enjoyed the many discussions I had on
how Microsoft was able to transition their "frozen" J++ work
to C# and the resulting CLR.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith                | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org     |  (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ |   missing headers)