John "jbob" Bobowicz's Blog

Where's Apple?

I think there is some truth to this because there is a track record of the Mac not being on par with Windows and Linux in terms of priority. I don't think this is unique with Java. I also see this with many multi-platform software applications and also in Open Source. Whether it's Yahoo Messenger or Open Office, Mac appears to be an after thought. I like and use OS X and find this particularly frustrating as well. The interesting point about Open Source is that it appears that the Apple PowerBook is the preferred laptop with Open Source developers. At OSCON, O'Reilly's Open Source Conference, Apple's PowerBook is the overwhelming majority of laptop present at the event. It makes you wonder why OS X doesn't get a higher priority.

Regarding Java support, I think the question that is not being asked is "Where is Apple?"

OS X is Apple's operating system. It's Apple's customers that stand to lose if OS X is not current with it's Java support. It's Apple's OS that is at risk as a viable Java development platform if J2SE 5.0 is delayed on OS X. It's Apple that is trying to make inroads into corporations with their new line of servers. They are not going to make it in that market without either current Java or .NET support.

Apple "appears" to support Java. It ships OS X with Java installed and supported in their development tools. It also provides some cools API to take advantage of OS X features within Java. But how committed are they to Java is they aren't making J2SE 5.0 support on Mac OS X a priority? Are they active contributors to the Mac Community on java.net? Is Apple as committed to Java as the Java developers that use their platform?

Finally, there is another unspoken opinion that gets subliminally suggested in these type of conversations. Instead of directly asking what Apple is doing to remedy this, there are hints that Sun should do more. Comments like "Legend has it Sun had only one person doing the Mac port" listed as an excuse in Chris' table takes our eye off of the ball. It's understandable to expect Sun to take the lead on ports with version 1.0, however, where are the questions regarding the number of Apple people dedicated to future versions?

It's almost like there is this unrealistic expectation that Sun should pick up the slack for everyone else platforms. Just because Sun came to the rescue to the disenfranchised Windows platform when Microsoft abandoned Java, doesn't mean their lack of focus on OS X is an omission. That's Apple's responsibility. You can't ask Sun to give up control of Java with one breath and then hold them accountable for Java's adoption and success with the next breath.

If you're not satisfied with the pace that OS X keeps up with Java, just remember to hold Apple accountable.

Comments

• Sun certainly did not come "to the rescue to the disenfranchised Windows platform when Microsoft abandoned Java".
  Microsoft were forced to abandon Java _by_ Sun.

  If there was no Windows support for Java, then Java wouldn't exist as a mainstream development platform today, end of story. Sun's windows JVM implementation is self-serving, not a nice guy attempt to throw microsoft a bone!

  Posted by: lee_ on October 07, 2004 at 02:19 AM

• jbob-
  I wasn't initially inclined to followup to this blog, but I feel you're misrepresenting some of what I wrote, and I can't allow that.
  The point of my blog was to address what might best be called a psychological condition: Mac-based Java developers' fears of what may happen in the wait for J2SE 5.0 on the Mac. To back this up, I showed that the waits have been pretty long in the past, and that they can lead to developers getting forced off their preferred platform. The goal was not to blame either Sun or Apple for this situation.
  I certainly did not make the case "that Mac OS X is at risk as a viable development platform for Java because of the historical delays in up to date Java support within the operating system", as you claim.
  The rest of your blog relies on assumptions and logic that seem wildly fallacious. Some of the most important:

  It's Apple's OS that is at risk as a viable Java development platform if J2SE 5.0 is delayed on OS X... But how committed are they to Java is they aren't making J2SE 5.0 support on Mac OS X a priority? - Again, it's known that initial work on J2SE 5.0 is underway, with some Tiger functionality available in the OS X 10.4 CD's distributed to developers this summer. That means Apple has been tracking the Tiger betas and porting them, knowing full well that some of that work would be re-done or rendered irrelevant when they had to start over with a drop of the final 5.0. Hardly the behavior of an uncommitted party.Also, how realistic is your expectation of the turnaround? As the Randomness trackback to my blog notes, some of the JCK compatibility tests take days to run. Six days after J2SE 5.0 went final, I don't know if J2SE could even be compiled and tested by now... ignoring completely the whole issue of porting it to a foreign operating system.
  Are they active contributors to the Mac Community on java.net? - Speaking as one of the community leaders/contacts there, I can assure you that Apple was aware of and supportive of the launch of the community.
  OS X is Apple's operating system. It's Apple's customers that stand to lose if OS X is not current with it's Java support. - Outside of the developer realm, this is a dubious claim. For years, magazines like MacAddict and MacWorld advised readers to turn off Java in their browsers to improve performance and eliminate crashes. The few Mac end-users who even know about Java seem actively hostile to it - when I showed off a Java application at ADHOC/MacHack 19 this summer, I was actually booed.
  where are the questions regarding the number of Apple people dedicated to future versions? - I suspect that number is directly proportional to the value it imparts to Apple's hardware sales. In other words, if Java's enough of a selling point, they'll put more effort into it. My sneaking suspicion, spelled out in a previous blog is that the Mac Java market consists only of developers and the small server division. Evangelize all you want, but if having J2SE 5.0 isn't relevant to end-users, Apple's not going to spend much time or money on it, because it won't help sell iMacs.
  Finally, there is another unspoken opinion that gets subliminally suggested in these type of conversations. Instead of directly asking what Apple is doing to remedy this, there are hints that Sun should do more. - Imagine if Apple dropped its Java support entirely. Would it be worth Sun's time to pick up the ball, in order to attract Mac-based developers who might otherwise be unwilling or unable to develop Java apps? Maybe, maybe not. It's a question of self-interest: would that attract enough Java development to be worth the investment? In any case, I expect Sun to act in Sun's best interest, and Apple in Apple's. If I expect Sun to do more for Mac Java, it's because I see it as being in Sun's and Java's best interest, not Apple's and not mine.
  Besides, this scenario has already happened before, when Microsoft polluted and then dropped Java. You call it "disenfranchisement"; I call it Sun being smart enough to not miss out on the biggest pool of potential developers.

  Finally, my name is Chris Adamson. I can't stop you from being disingenuous or perhaps simply clueless, but I can expect you to at least copy and paste my name correctly.

  Posted by: invalidname on October 07, 2004 at 05:19 AM

• This is one of the first times a Sun employee has commented publicly about the Apple/Sun relationship with respect to Java and I find it enlightening. I have covered this space for seven years for a variety of publications and find these statements more revealing than perhaps intended.
  JBob writes "there is a track record of the Mac not being on par with Windows and Linux in terms of priority." Priority to whom? Sun produces the Java implementations for Windows and Linux. Is he claiming that the Mac is not a priority for Sun? As a Sun employee that is an astounding admission. This priority has been implicit in recent Sun releases of desktop applications packaged for Windows, Linux, and Solaris but not packaged for the Mac as well. Does JBob's post imply that Sun considers Mac to be less of a priority as a desktop platform than Solaris or Linux?

  In the next paragraph he notes that Apple "is trying to make inroads into corporations with their new line of servers. They are not going to make it in that market without either current Java or .NET support." Here is a Sun employee advising Apple to invest in implementing .NET support. I don't know if that is a result of the Microsoft agreement, but I never thought I would read that in print.

  As for Java support, how current does it need to be for end users? When will client applications begin to ship that require J2SE 1.5? In a recent (non-scientific) java.net poll we asked what the earliest version of J2SE was that their next app must still support. 86% of the respondents chose 1.4 or earlier.

  JBob writes "You can't ask Sun to give up control of Java with one breath and then hold them accountable for Java's adoption and success with the next breath." Here I think he's plain wrong. Until Sun "gives up control of Java", I think we can ask them to take the lead on the adoption and success of Java. In fact, unlike JBob, I would argue that, by and large, Sun has done this and has been quite successful at it.

  JBob, a Sun employee, concludes, "If you're not satisfied with the pace that OS X keeps up with Java, just remember to hold Apple accountable." I want to add that I do not think JBob's opinions reflect those of the Sun or Apple engineers who actually do the work. They meet with each other with some regularity and do not comment publicly because as JBob wrote about these developers, it is important that they have not forgotten their place" as their "job is to write code. Period. They have a very focused and specialized trade and that is writing code which works and performs well."

  Posted by: daniel on October 07, 2004 at 06:08 AM

• No disrespect but, come on! I find this line of reasoning somewhat ridiculous. Just because Apple does not release their version of Tiger when Sun does, means they're somehow uncommitted to Java developers? Bah.

  I've been developing in Java (yes, 99% server side) for over three years on various PowerBooks. I will admit, at first, Apple did have a pretty significant lag on getting 1.3.x and even 1.4.x out the door. But sans the Tiger release, I feel they're pretty up to date. All the FOSS software I use to develop with does not require any Tiger features. In fact, maybe a little over half even require 1.4. This includes some gui tools such as SquirrelSQL and ArgoUML. There are other tools as well that I've looked at that run pretty well on my PB such as Jedit, Eclipse, Netbeans, and DbVisualizer, just to name a few.

  While I'm excited for the new features that Tiger delivers, I just don't see how every Java project out there is going to need to refactor for Tiger-specific features right at this moment. As usual, people expect somewhat stable and tested software which means not jumping to the latest and greatest until you've had time to test on it. I think Apple will be fine in this area as they will release Tiger via OS X Tiger as a marketing maneuver and then various products/project will probably have 1.5 specific builds ready for use.

  I'm quite comfortable with Apple's 1.4.x release and Tiger release schedule and find no reason to worry about how this affects developers - my initial guess would be zero. I'd hate to say it, but you're line of reasoning strikes me as more of a market speak position than one of reality on the ground. And I would bet that most of the Oreilly PB techies are quite satisfied with their current Java version. But, I suppose if someone on OS X is jonesing for Tiger that much, then they always have access to the source and can go through that, er, exercise themselves.

  Posted by: jasonlee on October 07, 2004 at 08:05 AM

• Thanks to jasonlee and lee_ for being respectful in their replies. I appreciate that people can disagree without being disparaging or personal.
  To Chris Adamson: I'll apologize for the TYPO regarding your name. It was an oversight. I'm sure I have my name misspelled and mispronounced as much as anyone and I have never taken it personally. Clearly you are sensitive to this and all I will say is that it was unintentional.
  I don't believe I misrepresent your blog. It was your blog that got me thinking about the issue. Statements like "..being able to do your Java development on a Mac is a tenuous situation" and "I wouldn't have a Mac if it weren't for being able to develop Java on it" and "if a project in your company moves to J2SE 5.0, being on a Mac is suddenly very difficult." raise big and valid issues. If I drew the conclusion that this could put OS X "at risk" for Java development and that these statements in your blog help make the case, that is not misrepresenting you. I may be wrong, but I'm not misrepresenting you.
  My blog was my personal opinion on the matter and based on what I have experiences as someone using OS X and Java.
  To Daniel: My weblog represents my personal opinion and not the opinion of Sun. The company I work for is not relevant and it's irresponsible to try and use it in yet another of your conspiracy theories. Taking my opinions and trying to inflame them into Sun/Apple relationship issues or make implications that do not exist is unprofessional, especially for an editor. You should know better.

  Posted by: jbob on October 07, 2004 at 11:43 AM

• If Sun open sourced Java, getting the Mac version out would probably be a lot faster.

  Posted by: pulse77 on October 07, 2004 at 03:59 PM

• "If Sun open sourced Java, getting the Mac version out would probably be a lot faster."

  Fah! And Java would be trashed because of it.

  Posted by: zatoichi on October 07, 2004 at 06:50 PM

• And Sun wonders why the market doesn't take Java seriously.

  Java everywhere? Not quite.

  Sun provides Java for Solaris, Windows and a little bit of Linux. But when another platform comes asking to port Java, Sun slaps them down with licensing fees and little assistance.

  Then when a platform is actually successful getting a port out, along comes Jbob to slap the licensee a little more.

  Posted by: dukefetish on October 08, 2004 at 09:38 AM

• Jbob,

  My reply was neither personal nor disparaging, and I would have hoped that you would address the points I made and the questions I raised. Let me make the following points in response to your four line ad hominem reply.

  First, Tim Bray has written a wonderful blog entry containing advice to Sun bloggers titled Sun Policy on Public Discourse. He makes two points that are particularly relevant.
  Bray advises that "Many bloggers put a disclaimer on their front page saying who they work for, but that they're not speaking officially. This is good practice, but don't count [on] it to avoid trouble; it may not have much legal effect." I would add that this is especially relevant on a site that you serve in an official capacity. When I post here, many people know I am the editor-in-chief of the site and this is factored into what I write in my daily blog and in feedback to other content on the site.
  With regards to your post, I took special care to point out that your opinions do not reflect those of the Sun or Apple engineers. That being said, Bray also advises that you "Think about Consequences. The worst thing that can happen is that a Sun sales pro is in a meeting with a hot prospect, and someone on the customer's side pulls out a print-out of your blog and says "This person at Sun says that product sucks.'"
  In the case of your current blog, this would amount to "This person at Sun says...

  ' there is a track record of the Mac not being on par with Windows and Linux in terms of priority.'
  'Is Apple committed to Java developers', and
  'just remember to hold Apple accountable.
  I would hope that you would read my post and respond to the substance. I value the Sun/Apple relationship. I spend much of my day working with Java and use a Mac as much as I can. I welcome your explanation of how my post might inflame this relationship.
  As to your remaining points, I would like you to apologize for a wrongheaded, mean spirited, public and personal attack. Whether or not the company you work for is relevant, I resent your saying that "it's irresponsible to try and use it in yet another of your conspiracy theories." I have never subscribed to conspiracy theories before nor do I now. I see no evidence of any underlying conspiracy and find this implication disturbing. Setting aside the specifics, I've spent enough time looking at swarms to favor emergent behavior as a more common explanation than an orchestrated conspiracy.
  Finally, implying not just that I was inflaming the Sun/Apple relationship but that that was my aim is another accusation for which you should apologize. It is not correct to state that there I took your opinions and tried to "inflame them into [the] Sun/Apple relationship issues" or that I made "implications that do not exist". You conclude that my actions were "unprofessional, especially for an editor. You should know better." You could probably apologize for that as well.
  

  Posted by: daniel on October 08, 2004 at 09:48 AM

• For those following along, there's a couple of things to straighten out. I'm not going to debate those who have disagreed. We're all entitled to our opinions. I am concerned that some of my opinion have been taken out of context and used to raise controversial questions and misleading conclusions. Behavior typically associated with tabloids.

  First, it was written that "This is one of the first times a Sun employee has commented publicly about the Apple/Sun relationship". It is misleading to imply that my opinions reflect the opinions of my employer. It is also misleading to imply that I was commenting on the relationships between Sun and Apple. That is false. I made no reference to any relationship between these two companies. The notion that the lack of a disclaimer somehow implicates my opinions as official opinions of my employer is absurd. So, if I write that I don't like country music will this person think that my company is against the country music industry? That makes no sense.

  Second, The opinion I stated, which is based on my personal experience, is that applications which support multiple operating systems seem to give Windows and Linux a higher priority than Mac OS X. That has nothing to do with Java, Sun, or Apple. The point I was making was that this scenario does not seem to be isolated to Java. This opinion was misrepresented as "Is he claiming that the Mac is not a priority for Sun?" and "Does JBob's post imply that Sun considers Mac to be less of a priority as a desktop platform than Solaris or Linux?". This is nothing less than conspiracy theory. It also implies things that are misleading.

  The reality is that when I switched my personal computer from Windows to Mac I found that the Mac versions were behind or lacking in features. Here's two examples of two pieces of software I use today:

  Yahoo Messenger Mac: ver 2.5.3
  Yahoo Messenger Windows: ver 5.1

  Open Office Mac: ver 1.1.2
  Open Office Windows: 1.1.3

  Looks like Mac support for Open Office and Yahoo messenger lags behind Windows support. So, it's not just Java. That was my point. Maybe it's not a question of priority but the fact remains that Mac users typically have to wait. Either way, I'm not going to debate the word "priority".

  Third, Probably the funniest and most outrageously misleading thing said about my weblog was with regards to Apple's success in the enterprise market. There were actually two simple points to my opinion in this matter:

  1) Apple is trying to make inroads into the corporate marketplace.

  Well, why would they launch multiprocessor servers? Certainly not for the consumer market. So I don't see anything controversial here.

  2) To be successful in the corporate marketplace you need to either support the current version of Java or you need to support .NET

  Like it or not, the corporate world has boiled down to two platforms, Java and .NET. I didn't make that up.

  Somehow, and hopefully not intentionally, this was translated into:

  "Here is a Sun employee advising Apple to invest in implementing .NET support. I don't know if that is a result of the Microsoft agreement, but I never thought I would read that in print."

  I never advised anyone and never suggest that Apple invest in implementing .NET. This is nothing less than a blatant distortion of what I said and is as fabricated as a Michael Moore movie.

  The bottom line is that these statement took my words out of context and suggested some misleading things.

  The contradiction found in burying "I want to add that I do not think JBob's opinions reflect those of the Sun" in the final paragraph after 4 references to the fact that I am a Sun Employee and 4 statements that imply that I am speaking on behalf of Sun, is the final example.

  The risk is not whether a customer takes my original blog in context, it is if they quote the reply and assume it's credible.

  Nice try.
  

  Posted by: jbob on October 08, 2004 at 12:42 PM

• Sorry for the unreadable reply above.... Here's the formatted version.

  For those following along, there's a couple of things to straighten out. I'm not going to debate those who have disagreed. We're all entitled to our opinions. I am concerned that some of my opinion have been taken out of context and used to raise controversial questions and misleading conclusions. Behavior that, prior to this, I have only seen with tabloids.

  First, it was written that "This is one of the first times a Sun employee has commented publicly about the Apple/Sun relationship". It is misleading to automatically imply that my opinions reflect the opinions of my employer (if it's convenient to make your point). It is also misleading to imply that I was commenting on the relationships between Sun and Apple. That is false. I made no reference to any relationship between these two companies.

  The notion that the lack of a disclaimer somehow implicates my opinions as official opinions of my employer is absurd. So, if I write that I don't like country music will this person think that my company is against the country music industry? That makes no sense.

  Second, The opinion I stated, which is based on my personal experience, is that desktop applications which support multiple operating systems seem to give Windows and Linux a higher priority than Mac OS X. That has nothing to do with Java, Sun, or Apple. The point I was making was that this scenario does not seem to be isolated to Java.

  This opinion was misrepresented as "Is he claiming that the Mac is not a priority for Sun?" and "Does JBob's post imply that Sun considers Mac to be less of a priority as a desktop platform than Solaris or Linux?". This is nothing less than conspiracy theory. It also implies things that are misleading.

  The reality is that when I switched my personal computer from Windows to Mac I found that the Mac versions were behind or lacking in features. Here's two examples of two pieces of software I use today:

  Yahoo Messenger Mac: ver 2.5.3
  Yahoo Messenger Windows: ver 5.1

  Open Office Mac: ver 1.1.2
  Open Office Windows: 1.1.3

  
  Looks like Mac support for Open Office and Yahoo messenger lags behind Windows support. So, it's not just Java. That was my point. Maybe it's not a question of priority but the fact remains that Mac users typically have to wait. Either way, I'm not going to debate the word "priority".

  Third, Probably the funniest and most outrageously misleading thing said about my weblog was with regards to Apple's success in the enterprise market. There were actually two simple points to my opinion in this matter:

  1) Apple is trying to make inroads into the corporate marketplace. Well, why would they launch multiprocessor servers? Certainly not for the consumer market. So I don't see anything controversial here.

  2) To be successful in the corporate marketplace you need to either support the current version of Java or you need to support .NET Like it or not, the corporate world has boiled down to two platforms, Java and .NET. I didn't make that up.

  Somehow, and hopefully not intentionally, this was translated into: "Here is a Sun employee advising Apple to invest in implementing .NET support. I don't know if that is a result of the Microsoft agreement, but I never thought I would read that in print."

  I never advised anyone and never suggest that Apple invest in implementing .NET. This is nothing less tha

  The bottom line is that these statement took my words out of context and suggested some misleading things.

  The contradiction found in burying "I want to add that I do not think JBob's opinions reflect those of the Sun" in the final paragraph after 4 references to the fact that I am a Sun Employee and 4 statements that imply that I am speaking on behalf of Sun, is the final example.

  The risk is not whether a customer takes my original blog in context, it is if they quote the reply and assume it's credible.

  Nice try.

  Posted by: jbob on October 08, 2004 at 12:56 PM

• Stupid Questions 16: What's the Difference Between Wildcard Generics and no Generics5r

  Posted by: 3ufblogg on July 17, 2007 at 02:08 AM

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.