Sun vs. MS: Whose side are you on?

COMMENTARY--Divorce is often ugly, especially when children or pets are involved. The same goes for legal battles between Microsoft and Sun over Java--with computer users taking on the role of the kids stuck in the middle.

My colleague David Coursey chided both sides in a recent column, in which he pointed out that consumers expect to find enabling technologies such as Java or media players pre-installed on their computers.

"Sun's lawsuit is silly, but Microsoft needs to do the right thing for customers--if not for Sun--and make popular technologies, like Java, routinely available when customers buy Windows XP alone or already installed on a new machine. And if Microsoft won't do the right thing voluntarily, well then, let's let the Department of Justice make them do it," he wrote.

YOUR RESPONSES took a hard look at the specifics of Sun's latest charges as well as interpretations of Microsoft and Sun's past disputes. But many of you wondered about more practical matters: where the bundling should begin and, even more problematic, where it should end.

"Both Perl and Python run on virtual machines that have freely available implementations for Windows. I love both languages, but in truth I don't think Microsoft should be forced to install them when the downloads are free and not that large," John Napiorkowski argued. "The only difference between the Perl/Python community and the Java community is that [Perl/Python] doesn't have a big corporation behind it, trying to hide its ambition to become tomorrow's Microsoft behind the banner of open source and Web standards."

"What about Flash? That's really popular. How about AIM? Lots of users there, too. Let's not forget WinZip," Rob Green put forth. "Why should Microsoft have to ship Java over any of these other products? They are all very popular, and I would note they got popular from users downloading them. I don't buy this argument. "

"Microsoft tells you up-front that XP does not come with Java installed. They also tell you where you can get it, and even made it so that XP does not delete a previous version of the Java Virtual Machine if you are upgrading (and reading the instructions). What else do you want from them?" Zac Howland wrote. "You are just being lazy by asking them to give you everything."

WHILE SUN SUPPORTERS didn't spend much time defending CEO Scott McNealy from charges of whining, many of you reminded the naysayers that Microsoft was  found guilty of monopolistic practices. To some of you, such as Gerardo Tasistro, the latest flap over Java is just another episode in the same old story.

"Why doesn't Microsoft do this? They would lose their monopoly and their potential for growth," he wrote. "If they can't take on the Web with .Net--getting a new market going there so they can milk it for all it's worth--then Microsoft might enter some hard times. With a saturated PC hardware market, Microsoft's OEM OS sales can't keep growing as much as an Internet market could with .Net sales."

"Windows XP will offer to download the Microsoft Virtual Machine. This is a very important point, because the average computer user doesn't understand that there is more than one Java plug-in out there, and that the one Microsoft is offering is several years out-of-date," Joseph Lindenberg pointed out. "This is Microsoft's way of trying to freeze Java at the stage of development where it was in 1997. "

In addition, Doug Skoglund complained that Microsoft's own Web-creation tools support Java, and the company's move could cause problems for his viewers. "Microsoft owes something to its FrontPage customers. By incorporating elements that require Java, Microsoft has an obligation to handle the Sun situation in a different manner, or at least handle the obligation to FrontPage customers. Microsoft has done a bad job on this one--that's my only point."

MEANWHILE, I had to admire some of your use of analogy, no matter how strained. For example, Zac Howland compared the bundling issue to parts used in automobiles. "Asking Microsoft to ship Java with Internet Explorer is like asking Toyota to ship their cars with Ford transmissions."

Or David Maggard's fast-food analogy. "I like Wendy's hamburgers better than McDonalds', but I like McDonalds' fries better. But I would never expect Wendy's to start selling [its competitor's fries], and anyone who sued for that would be assumed by everyone to be crazy."

Putting aside the analysis of CEO personalities, finger-pointing around monopolistic practices, and the future of distributed computing, the immediate burden of this legal dispute will fall on consumers (and those of us who support them).

Most computer users don't know or care about a virtual machine, or any other fundamental technology for that matter. They just want their computer, browser, or program to work. And work now. For many, any extra download time or installation is an annoyance and worrisome.

Like that angry couple in family court, no doubt we will hear from Microsoft and Sun on who knows best for computer users. We can only hope for joint custody.

David Morgenstern, past editor of eMediaweekly and MacWEEK, is a freelance editor and branding consultant based in San Francisco.

Whose side do you take in the latest Microsoft-Sun legal battle? TalkBack to me!