On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Gilles Chehade <gilles@openbsd.org> wrote:
quoted text
> Mayuresh Kathe a icrit :
>
>
> > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Marco Peereboom <slash@peereboom.us>
wrote:
quoted text
>  >
>  >>  > 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.