By William Fellows
Sun Microsystems Inc executives told Hewlett-Packard Co that no, there is nothing new in its Java community license model that alters the business model to the extent that HP’s embedded software operation would U-turn and take a license. The same Sun executives told HP that for the same reasons there is also nothing new that would make HP want to participate in the new development process. Sun has still not provided the terms and conditions for joining the expert groups that will develop Java API extensions, and although third parties may lead those efforts it appears they will still be appointed by Sun, as have been IBM Corp (for real-time) and Xilinx Corp (for boundary scanning). Indeed, although Sun didn’t make it clear in all of the Java 2 hoopla this week, it was careful to reassure Merrill Lynch & Co analysts who said that the number of companies paying subscription fees to create or modify the Java API should rise, more than offsetting the loss of [upfront Java] license revenue in the near term. HP expects that when Sun finally reveals terms and conditions of participation in the Java development and maintenance, and submits Java for ISO standardization through the PAS process next quarter, it will start alarm bells ringing all over the industry.
Three ways
Meantime there are at least three possible scenarios to the stand-off over real-time Java, believes Jim Bell, general manager of Hewlett-Packard Co’s embedded software group. The players are Sun, IBM and other members of a yet-to-be created ‘expert’ group led by IBM. HP, Microsoft and a dozen or so others are leading a separate effort under the auspices of the Real-Time Working Group. The HP group expects to see its work carried to ISO via NCITS, the US National Committee for Information Technology Standards. Sun has its PAS route to ISO. Both use NIST requirements as their beginnings. The first end game is that Sun may decide to outsource maintenance and testing of some Java extensions to third party organizations, as VP Java technology and architecture Jim Mitchell indicated this week (CI No 3,555). This might, it could be envisaged, include real-time work. Second, Sun could, resulting from industry pressure, change its model to such an extent that HP and others would embrace it. Bell says some Sun executives are known to favor this approach. The third, and least favorable outcome would be that the two would be competing with each other.
