|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 20 2013 @ 09:06 AM EDT |
http://groklawstatic.ibiblio.org/pdf/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/4000/PX04258.pdf
<p>
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 4258<br />
Comes v. Microsoft
</p>
<p>
<b>From:</b> Erich Andersen (LCA)<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, January 17, 1997 10:25 AM<br />
<b>To:</b> Ben Slivka; Brad Silverberg; Charles Fitzgerald; John
Ludwig; Peter Plamondon<br />
<b>Cc:</b> Paul Maritz; Bob Muglia; Tod Nielsen; Brad Chase; Paul
Gross<br />
<b>Subject:</b> RE: Symantec; Sun/AFC
</p>
<p>
ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION. PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD.
</p>
<p>
<b>Privilege Material</b><br />
<b>Redacted</b>
</p>
<p>
-----Original Message-----<br />
<b>From:</b> Ben Slivka<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, January 17, 1997 10:15 AM<br />
<b>To:</b> Brad Silverberg; Charles Fitzgerald; John Ludwig; Erich
Andersen (LCA); Peter Plamondon<br />
<b>Cc:</b> Paul Maritz; Bob Muglia; Tod Nielsen; Brad Chase; Paul
Gross<br />
<b>Subject:</b> Symantec; Sun/AFC
</p>
<p>
Right, actually I did say that we didn't have to give AFC back to Sun, but we
that we are open minded.
</p>
<p>
Peterpla, pdussud, ianel, and I took Mansour and his 5 developers (Walter Bright
(sp?) compiler dude, Steve
(OPTASM dude, now JIT), two dev managers - one for Café and one for
Visual Café (I think), and their debugging
guy). PeterPla & I are going to get an appropriate NDA in place with
Symantec so they can work really closely with
us - I offered to give them an office w/our team and be checked into our source
code, and work closely with us in
designing java native code, edit & continue, etc. (Other parts of
symantec already have an agreement that permits
them access to the Win95 and NT source code)
</p>
<p>
My goal is to have this NDA in place by Wed of next week, coincidentally
Symantec are having a 3 day off-site M-W
of next week to map out their tools strategy.<br />
The symantec folks are cautious about embracing MS because they feel they got a
raw deal on MFC, and that MS
continued that practice by not giving them access to our early Java VM info. I
was very clear that we want to make
them successful, since it will make our platform successful.
</p>
<p>
We also talked about slowing down and coordinating modifications to the Java
language - I proposed a "Java
Language Council" made up of key tools vendors - MS, Borland, Symantec,
PowerSoft (any others?) - who would
cooperate to lean on JavaSoft. Symantec complained about Java "inner
classes" (added in JDK 1.1) as being a
really, really bad hack on the language. No one wants to tum Java into the mess
that C++ is - complicated, slow to
compile.<br />
--bens
</p>
<p>
-----Original Message-----<br />
<b>From:</b> Brad Silverberg<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 16, 1997 4:40 PM<br />
<b>To:</b> Ben Slivka; Charles Fitzgerald; John Ludwig; Erich
Andersen (LCA)<br />
<b>Cc:</b> Paul Maritz; Bob Muglia; Tod Nielsen; Brad Chase; Paul
Gross<br />
<b>Subject:</b> RE: I think we have a winner in our Foundation
Classes for Java
</p>
<p>
our answer regarding if we are giving it back to sun should be, "we're not
obligated to" rather than "no". who
knows maybe there is some circumstance or business relationship where we would
license to sun. in
addition, "no" may be interpreted as we are supposed to but aren't.
whereas, "we are not obligated to" is the
accurate statement.
</p>
<p>
mansour from symantec liked what he saw. he did say though devs like nifc but
thinks ours is better and
they want to provide great tool support for it. i told him that there was more
we didn't talk about and if they
were truly serious about great tools support, we'd should have him back soon to
tellmore.
</p>
<p>
-----Original Message-----<br />
<b>From:</b> Ben Slivka<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday,January 16,1997 3:01 PM<br />
<b>To:</b> Java VM All Teams (Win32 and Win 16)<br />
<b>Cc:</b> Brad Silverberg; Paul Maritz; Bob Muglia; Tod Nielsen;
Brad Chase; Java Leads; Dean McCrory; Yuval Neeman;
Brad Lovering; Anders Hejlsberg; Paul Gross<br />
<b>Subject:</b> I think we have a winner in our Foundation Classes
for Java
</p>
<p>
People at our Java Design Preview were pretty excited, lots of questions.<br
/>
Arthur Van Hoff, who wrote AWT while at Sun, now does Bongo at Marimba, said
"First, thank you for
lixing AWT".<br />
Then he (and others) asked if we were giving it back to Sun. We said no. We're
going to have to nail
down the licensing issues here to make sure we own the IP, but that these
classes are widely available to
tools vendors and all developers.
</p>
<p>
The Sarrus Software guy (forget his name) - they're writing Pencil-Me-In
scheduling app on top of
Netscape's IFC - said we should just put it out there, he thinks we will win the
class libraries battle.<br />
"Netscape is a hell hole" for developers. He also mentioned that he
IFC team (Jayson X?, etc.) are not
at all happy at Netscape.
</p>
<p>
Lots of people want the specs, sample, code, etc. now so they can start playing
with it and give us
feedback - we should probably pick a few key folks and give them early stuff
under a special NDA. Both
to get good feedback and start building buy-in from tools vendors and some key
ISVs.
</p>
<p>
Great work by ianel, francish, and jeffbog (and davidms) to explain the problems
with AWT, and how we
solved them and are producing a great GUI class library. Jeff's code demo was
especially instructive
and compelling!
</p>
<p>
--bens
</p>
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
