On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Gilles Chehade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mayuresh Kathe a icrit : > > > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > However having chosen C# is in my opinion not optimal. C# is very > >> > limited when it comes to generic and meta-programming. > >> > >> What's next? an OS in java and php? > >> > > > > Marco, it would be better for you if you make informed comments rather > > than just resorting to sarcasm the moment you get a chance. > > Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaOS > > > > ~Mayuresh > > > > > "Sun now officially considers JavaOS a legacy system > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_system> and recommends migration to > Java ME <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_ME> ^[1] > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaOS#_note-0> . This by itself however > is not a full replacement, as Java ME is an API > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API> specification, which runs on top of > an operating system, and is not an operating system in itself." > > I may be mistaken but if they relegate this to the rank of a "legacy > system" instead of improving it and giving more credit to their > language, it must mean something about the use of their language to > design a system.
They relegated it to "legacy system" status because there wasn't a market for it. Java ME targets the embedded systems market and does it quite well. Embedded systems developers typically have used a fixed set of OSes, Sun considered it not worthwhile to introduce one more standard, and instead focused on delivering a platform for application development.
