Jump to content

User talk:JavaKid

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tbjablin (talk | contribs) at 17:49, 18 April 2007 (Re: C# v. Java). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, JavaKid, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few more good links to help you get started:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Kukini 14:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: C# v. Java

I think I'm going to step out for a while. You seem to be having greater success at dealing with 24.65 than I have. Quite possibly due to your considerably greater patience and your unwillingness to flame back. At this point, 24.65 seems to think I am a flaming nut case, and my edits seem only to further inflame the issue. Sections 3 and 4 seem to stir up too much partisan debate, and ultimately, I liked the article better when it focused on the languages and the platforms, rather than the relative success of one technology or the other, which is subject to change anyway. If you'd like I can deny being your puppet, but that seems unlikely to be persuasive. I should be so lucky as to be your sock. Good luck. Tbjablin 00:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will be happy to look over and comment on any changes you'd like to run by me, but I think a personal appearance on the article's talk pages my inflame partisan passions, so I will restrict myself to your talk pages, until things have died down a bit more. Tbjablin 10:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've just noticed that there is an article already dealing with Criticism of Java. So that's part of the problem solved, I'll simple strip all the politics from Java.vs.C# and direct folks over to that page. Perhaps there needs to be another dealing with criticism of .Net/Mono? For example, there's been claim and counterclaim that C# and .Net were politically motivated. There's also some debate over how far the legal protection Microsoft agreed with Novell for Mono extends beyond Novell customers. Is this enough to mandate a separate article, I wonder? Given that I have "Java" in my username it probably isn't wise to create an article noting criticisms of a Java rival -- even though it is with the best of intentions. Could you or someone else do this? JavaKid 10:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think splitting off the criticism is really a good idea. Moving criticism to its own article is generally done on Wikipedia only when criticism sections have grown overlong. How about moving all the licensing/legal/political problems to the licensing section, and creating new section to discuss compatibility of free alternatives. I think the pre-installation issue is too contentious on its own, and tends to overrepresent minorities (ie Haiku users everywhere mourn the lack of a compatible runtime. All five AtheOS users violently protest the lack of a compatible runtime.). Pre-installed is just a poor proxy for installed base, but no one really knows what the installed base is. Additionally, even though .NET is now pre-installed with Windows, most Windows users have lax updating habits, widespread deployment will likely coincide with Vista. And how come Mono won't Worldwind? I think the winning argument here is that C# and Java both have FS problems, but use different language to describe them. Editing the sentences to have explicit sectionwise parallelism may be an unobjectionable way to rectify the situation without arousing accusations of raging fanboyism. I think 24.65 views us as violently partisan hacks, and denying it is unlikely to be persuasive. Maybe we could establish some credibility if we added some convenient facts about .NET. Tbjablin 17:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]