Member Avatar for ! !
  • 3 Contributors
  • 6 Replies
  • 277 Views
  • 3 Days Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by jwenting

Dani AI

Generated

Short, factual context and a couple of clarifications to the thread.

The “alliance” being discussed traces to the broad cooperation and settlement announced in April 2004 that formally settled years of litigation and set a framework for technical collaboration between Microsoft and Sun. Microsoft’s April 2, 2004 press release summarizes the agreements and the areas for joint work (protocols, identity, server interoperability, etc.). (news.microsoft.com)

On the money and timing: public reporting often cites the headline $1.6 billion figure (the two big payments described in the press release), but Microsoft’s filings show the company recorded total payments to Sun of about $1.95 billion when up‑front royalty amounts are included. See Microsoft’s 2004 disclosures for the accounting detail. Microsoft 2004 annual report note. (microsoft.com)

For the historical thread started: the Java/Visual J++ disputes go back to the late 1990s (Sun’s original suit and the 2001 settlement), and the 2004 agreement is what ultimately froze Microsoft’s J++ JVM feature set and settled the remaining claims. For a concise history of Visual J++ and the MSJVM outcome, see the Visual J++ summary. Visual J++ history. (news.microsoft.com)

Practical takeaways for developers: the deal was mostly a business/legal rapprochement and a mechanism for protocol/identity interoperability — it did not merge Java and .NET or remove the platform distinctions developers still face. As wondered about juries: long, technical disputes like these often settle or turn on expert testimony and specialist briefing rather than being decided purely by lay jurors. For a contemporary news recap, see coverage from the period. (wired.com)

Recommended Answers

All 6 Replies

Member Avatar for jwenting

They actually signed a contract to start building such things and cooperate about a year ago :)

Excellent development, bringing 2 good companies that both are entering rough waters together in a joint effort.

Member Avatar for server_crash

I thought this happened once already, and it failed? Or what that the liscence agreement for J++?

Member Avatar for jwenting

Microsoft had a license to create a JVM according to the standard license for doing so as supplied with JDK 1.0 and 1.1.
This license specifically allowed Microsoft to create their own user interface library (as was normal at the time, but Microsoft were the only ones to actually do it).
When Sun became ready to release Swing (then called JFC) they changed that license to disallow 3rd party user interface libraries and immediately sued Microsoft.
That case hung in court for years and years as Sun had to wiggle into ever tighter corners to get at the money, in the end they got an injunction only on Microsoft having put their own library (WFC) into VJ++ as the default rather than Sun's AWT.

It went on from there until Microsoft got tired of playing with Sun and gave them $2 billion in exchange for a strategic alliance, which is now bearing fruit.

Member Avatar for server_crash

Hmmm...Maybe something good will come out of this.

Member Avatar for server_crash

Microsoft had a license to create a JVM according to the standard license for doing so as supplied with JDK 1.0 and 1.1.
This license specifically allowed Microsoft to create their own user interface library (as was normal at the time, but Microsoft were the only ones to actually do it).
When Sun became ready to release Swing (then called JFC) they changed that license to disallow 3rd party user interface libraries and immediately sued Microsoft.
That case hung in court for years and years as Sun had to wiggle into ever tighter corners to get at the money, in the end they got an injunction only on Microsoft having put their own library (WFC) into VJ++ as the default rather than Sun's AWT.

It went on from there until Microsoft got tired of playing with Sun and gave them $2 billion in exchange for a strategic alliance, which is now bearing fruit.

I bet something like this would be hard to fight in court. I mean, would they have to hand select jurors that knew what the guys were talking about?

Member Avatar for jwenting

Yes, but that doesn't stop lawsuits about highly technical issues.
And with the highly successful anti-Microsoft campaigns being waged in the popular press and on the net it's now quite possible to find a jury to give you the verdict you want if you want to hurt the company (as was shown in the anti-trust trial which was based on quicksand yet got an easy conviction).

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.