Article View: borland.public.jbuilder.java.language
Article #19875Re: RMI in InterNet Explorers
From: Bruno da Silva Bozza
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 00:00
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 00:00
22 lines
1437 bytes
1437 bytes
Simon Waters wrote: > Marc Jourdenais wrote in article <3482E833.E945E691@pcn.com>... > > >Yes and no... > >IE4 can run applets that use RMI, but Microsoft chose not to include the > >necessary base classes. You can get a patch from the Microsoft site > >containing the RMI classes or put the Sun JDK in your classpath ahead of > >the Microsoft classes so that IE picks up actual Java base classes. > > > >Of course, requiring all your IE users to patch their browser installation > >may not be acceptable from a practical standpoint. > > > > Then again if you include the appropriate links to Microsoft on the page, > you might think of it as doing them a favour ? Now I really understand the lawsuit. It's deliberate. I mean, they could have put their stuff in another package, still ship RMI classes and let the public decide. Does Microsoft at least give a reason why they chose not to include these classes (other from damaging Java)?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<34833733.F287B96F@aol.com.br>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<34821466.C9B13068@aol.com.br> <3482E833.E945E691@pcn.com> <65ur1h$18h9@forums.borland.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f74b3,d0511095c11e923 X-Google-Attributes: gidf74b3,public From: Bruno da Silva Bozza <bozza@aol.com.br> Subject: Re: RMI in InterNet Explorers Date: 1997/12/01 Message-ID: <34833733.F287B96F@aol.com.br> X-Deja-AN: 294331991 References: <34821466.C9B13068@aol.com.br> <3482E833.E945E691@pcn.com> <65ur1h$18h9@forums.borland.com> Organization: None Newsgroups: borland.public.jbuilder.java.language