Net Buzz with Richard Wiggins | 16

Dear Ms. Reno; Dear Mr. Gates

When I attended the first JavaOne conference back in 1996, I was blown away by the momentum that you (and Mr. Baratz and Mr. Joy and Mr. Gosling) had managed to engender. Thousands of serious C++ and Smalltalk types were there for your Hollywood-style plenaries and hard core technical sessions. It really looked like Java was going places.

That year, you began touting Java as the solution for all platforms: desktop computers, embedded systems (ironic, isn't it, since Java's predecessor, Oak, was written for the Personal Digital Assistant market that never materialized), and of course the Network Computer. Mr. Ellison really joined the bandwagon on the network computer front. You also found a ready partner in Corel, claiming that we'd dynamically download Java versions of all their office productivity apps and run them on NCs within a year or so.

That December, my co-host and I were thrilled to demonstrate your first NC on our television program. Your engineers put Java and networking into a tiny box in a very short development cycle. Things were looking rosy indeed for Java.

So what happened since then, Mr. McNealy? Where are all the network computers? Why don't I see fleets of them in corporations and universities? Why don't I see them in coffee shops and airport lounges?

And what has happened to Java? You blame Microsoft for hindering the standard, yet Java developers I've spoken to say that your own specifications changed too fast over the years, and that incompatibility was as big an issue with Netscape as it was with Microsoft. And with HP splitting off its own flavor of Java, do you really think your contractural squabble with Microsoft is the only hurdle "standard" Java faces?

You've struck Mr. Gates across the face with the glove many times. As recently as March 1997 you issued a "Windows Downgrade Kit," urging users to drop Windows entirely for a Java virtual machine on their PC. Hmmm, do you really think you offered users applications with the functionality and performance of Office 97? How can you blame Mr. Gates for building the Web into his operating system, when you promised to use Java as a platform for desktop workstations that needed no operating system at all?

A small startup company in my area just bought a Sun server and a bunch of desktop Dells. The Dells came ready to run – hardware, Windows 95, and Office 97. The Sun arrived with a bunch of instructions on how to open the cabinet and install the CD-ROM drive, and then how to load the operating system. They could've bought a Dell NT server, and it would've been ready to roll straight out of the box. Do you think their next server will come from Sun, or from Dell?

Don't you think you'd better serve your shareholders if you devoted your energy to making Java software and Sun hardware as functional and easy to adopt as possible, instead of competing in the courts?

A lot of people compare you to the robber barons who came to power at the end of the last century. It's a compelling analogy; you dominate the dawning of the Information Age, where they dominated the Industrial Age. Rockefeller cornered the market for oil; Carnegie cornered the market for steel. You appear to want to corner the market for information tools.

You claim important differences, but in truth you're playing in every arena in content, technology, and commerce. You own the market for productivity apps. You own the PC desktop, and you want to own the handheld and Web-enabled television markets. You are on your way to owning the server market.

In content, you've never been shy. From MSN to MSNBC to encyclopedia to the Bettman Archive, you're inserting your tentacles everywhere. Your Inktomi deal may give you substantial ownership of searching the Web. Your Sidewalk venture seeks dominant coverage of community information; Slate aspires to be the first serious online rag.

As for commerce, you're setting standards and making alliances in all aspects of electronic commerce – from personal finance to banking to Web sales. From booking a vacation to leasing a car or buying a house, Microsoft stands ready to conduct the online transactions.

And from WebTV to cable alliances to Teledesic, you're moving rapidly into connectivity.

The only part of the information business you've shied away from is computer systems themselves. With the exception of mice and keyboards and such, you've left the hardware business to others.

You argue that antitrust litigation threatens Microsoft innovation. And indeed it may, stifling your deployment of Windows 98. But today's battle may stem from yesterday's sins – or the perception that tomorrow you'll be unstoppable.

With Microsoft reaching so far into the fabric of the U.S. economy – and the global economy – can't you understand why citizens and bureaucrats fear you? Is there any market you've entered that you don't plan to dominate? Don't you think it's inevitable that some of these ventures will be split into separate companies? You've learned in the last six months that you can't ignore governments. Maybe now's the time for you to suggest ways of splitting Microsoft up. The government's scalpel may cut more painfully than your own.

Related Articles

• "You Never Heard of this Search Engine, but You'll Use It" (includes information on Inktomi's deal to be the default search engine on the Windows 98 Start menu).
• Internetnews.com: "Microsoft, U.S. 'not close' to agreement-source" (from Reuters, May 15, 1998).
• Internetnews.com: "Windows 98, Antitrust Suits on Hold" (May 14, 1998).
• The New York Times: "Ever a Pragmatist, Microsoft Compromises" (by Steve Lohr, May 15, 1998).