138 C. Cross-Platform Java also presented a middleware threat to

138

C. Cross-Platform Java also presented a middleware threat to Microsoft’s

operating system monopoly

57. Cross-platform Java is another middleware technology that has the potential to erode the

applications barrier to entry by gaining widespread usage of APIs without competing directly against

Windows as an operating system.

1. The nature of the Java threat

58. James Gosling and others at Sun Microsystems developed Java in significant part to

provide developers a choice between writing cross-platform applications and writing applications that

depend on a particular operating system.

58.1. Java consists of a series of interlocking elements designed to facilitate the

creation of cross-platform applications, i.e. applications that can run on multiple operating systems.

i. Gosling testified: "The Java technology is intended to make it possible to

develop software applications that are not dependent on a particular operating

system or particular computer hardware . . . . A principal goal of the Java

technology is to assure that a Java-based program -- unlike a traditional

software application -- is no longer tied to a particular operating system and

hardware platform, and does not require the developer to undertake the time-

consuming and expensive effort to port the program to different platforms. As

we said in the Preface to The Java Programming Language, ‘software

developers creating applications in Java benefit by developing code only once,

with no need to ‘port’ their applications to every software and hardware

platform.’ . . . Because the Java technology allows developers to make

software applications that can run on various JVMs on multiple platforms, it

holds the promise of giving consumers greater choice in applications, operating

systems, and hardware. The Java technology has the potential not only to free

individual consumers from concern about whether the software they want to run

is supported by a given operating system, but also to permit corporations and

Internet users more easily to mix different types of computing systems across a

network." Gosling Dir. ¶¶ 20-29(b); see also Gosling, 12/3/98am, at 6:3-6.

ii. Gosling stated this theme in internal documents as early as August 1995: "The

139

issue of making developers CPU and OS independent is that they can port to

Sun or to Windows. . . . Sun's or any alternate CPU company (MIPS and

SGI) key to success is apps. Apps are the key to volume. Java allows

developers to decrease their dependence on Intel and Microsoft." DX 1285;

see also DX 2012, at SUN 87 001685 (“Sun is attempting to establish Java as

a viable computing platform which is hardware and operating system

independent.”).

iii. In his June 1999 rebuttal testimony, Dean Schmalensee recognized “Java is

used for a wide range of things. It’s how my son first learned computer

programming. It’s used to run on a wide array of platforms. That, of course, is

one of its most important selling features from Sun.” Schmalensee, 6/23/99pm,

at 50:5-11.

iv. As the District Court for the Northern District of California found: “Sun's

JAVA Technology comprises a standardized application programming

environment that affords software developers the ability to create and distribute

a single version of programming code which is capable of operating on many

different, otherwise incompatible, system platforms and browsers. Most

computer systems implement platform-dependent programming environments,

such as Microsoft's Win32 programming environment. Programs created to

run on a particular platform will not function on a different platform. Thus, a

software developer must choose the platforms for which it will develop and

support different versions of the same program. Sun's platform-independent

JAVA Technology, which can be implemented on many different system

platforms and browsers, obviates the need for creating and supporting different

versions of the same program.” Sun Microsystems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.,

999 F. Supp. 1301, 1302 (N.D. Cal. 1998).

58.1.1. Java provides ISVs a programming language with which to write

applications. Java also includes a set of “class libraries,” a collection of programs written in Java, that

offer APIs that ISVs can use to develop software applications.

i. Microsoft’s Paul Maritz summarized the different aspects of Java:

“Java, the programming language; Java the virtual machine, which you

need to execute Java programs; and then there’s this collection of other

programs written in Java, which I call the Java classes. And it’s that

collection of software that is being put forward by Sun, and that

Netscape has announced their intent to cooperate with Sun, that forms

140

another body of middleware that I am concerned about.” Maritz,

1/26/99am, at 18:22 - 19:23.

ii. As the District Court for the Northern District of California summarized:

“The Java programming environment allows software developers to

create a single version of program code that is capable of running on

any platform which possesses a compatible implementation of the Java

runtime environment. The Java programming environment comprises

(1) Sun's specification for the Java language, (2) Sun's specification for

the Java class libraries and (3) the Java compiler.” Sun Microsystems,

Inc. v.

Microsoft Corp., 21 F. Supp. 2d 1109, 1112 (N.D. Cal. 1998).

58.1.2. The Java programming environment also provides software developers

a Java “virtual machine” (JVM) that, when ported to different operating systems, serves as the “host” or

“adaptor” to which programs written in the Java language can be run, independent of the underlying

operating system. Together, the Java class libraries and virtual machine are often referred to as the

“Java runtime environment” (JRE).

i. As Gosling explained, Java makes it much easier for ISVs to develop

platform-independent software because Java programs "need not run

by interacting with a particular operating system’s APIs. Instead, they

typically interact with a Java virtual machine (‘JVM’), which is an

intermediate software layer that translates the Java-based program for

the particular operating system and hardware platform that the Java

virtual machine runs on. In essence, the Java-based program views the

JVM as an operating system, and the operating system views the JVM

as a traditional application . . . once a JVM is developed for a software

platform, if the JVM is fully compliant with the Java specifications, . . . it

should run most Java-based programs without the need to recompile or

otherwise modify the programs. . . . Such programs thus have the

potential to run on any PC, other type of computer, or even devices not

traditionally thought of as computers (such as cellular telephones),

provided that the machines have compatible JVMs installed on them.”;

see also Gosling Dir. ¶¶ 24, 25, 28; Gosling, 12/2/98am, at 55:5-11

(any Java program, if written properly and properly compiled into

bytecodes, should run equivalently on any properly-designed and

141

implemented Java virtual machine, regardless of the underlying platform

is); Gosling, 12/10/98pm, at 21:8-14 (describing the JVM as an

adaptor).

ii. Sean Sanders, an executive with Novell Corporation, testified: “The

Java virtual machine is essentially yet another software layer that allows

people to run Java-based applications and to help them -- provide

them the tools that they could use to yet build and develop and to -- for

optimization of any other Java applications that they might want to

develop.” Sanders Dep., 1/13/99, at 188:18 - 189:15.

iii. The District Court for the Northern District of California described the

Java architecture as follows: “Sun's JAVA Technology is a so-called

‘class-based’ language in that its functionality is determined by the Java

classes available to the programmer. Therefore, new functionality

requires developing new Java classes. Programs written in the Java

programming language are compiled into intermediate instructions called

bytecodes or Applets. These bytecodes or Applets are then

‘interpreted’ by another computer program which emulates a

hypothetical CPU called the Java Virtual Machine. The Java Virtual

Machine translates the Applets into instructions understood by the

specific computer CPU on which the Java Virtual Machine is running.

Therefore, a specific interpreter or virtual machine is needed for each

computer CPU on which the Java program is run.” Sun Microsystems,

Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 999 F. Supp. 1301, 1302-03 (N.D. Cal.

1998) (citations omitted.).

58.2. Because Java offers alternative APIs, applications written using standard Java

programming tools and class libraries can run on any operating system for which there is a Java virtual

machine. The widespread adoption of a cross-platform Java programming environment could reduce

computer users’ dependency on the Windows operating system.

i. As Gosling explained: “As more new Java-based programs are developed,

distributed and used, new operating systems may be developed to take

advantage of the existing body of Java-based software. In other words,

potential developers of new operating systems and hardware platforms need

not be deterred by the absence of platform-specific programs for their new

systems, so long as there is a JVM available to enable existing Java programs

142

to run on the systems. This may give new operating systems and hardware

platforms a chance to compete in markets previously dominated by a particular

vendor." Gosling Dir. ¶ 29; Gosling, 12/10/98pm, at 28:20 - 29:2 (“Once the

APIs that developers develop to are ones that are realized on many different

operating systems, then those operating systems can compete with Windows.

And that would lead to sort of a lesser -- lesser role for Windows in that they

would have to compete with these operating systems on the merits of the

operating system rather than on the lock that tends to be inherent in the APIs

and the binary compatibility.”).

ii. Soyring explained IBM’s rationale for supporting Java: “Primarily because the

value that it provides to IBM’s customers and the value it provides to IBM. As

you probably know, IBM has a variety of operating systems, primarily four

different ones. Many of our customers have many of these different -- several -

- one or more of these operating systems installed. It’s less expensive for them

and less time-consuming for them to be able to buy one application or one

software product that they can buy, maintain, and support but run it on different

operating system platforms.” The success of cross-platform Java would

enhance the ability of other operating systems “to compete.” . . . What drives

demand for the sales of operating systems is the availability of applications.

And if there is a large install base of Java that’s consistently implemented, what

it does is create an economic opportunity for commercial software developers

to be able to develop a commercial software application using Java and then

make it available to sell and be run on many different operating systems rather

than just on one.” Soyring, 11/18/98pm, at 54:8 - 55:10; see also Soyring Dir.

¶ 28 (“The Java technology from Sun is designed to allow Java-compatible

application programs to run on a wide variety of different hardware and

operating systems. This would provide users with the benefits of increased

number of applications and would reduce the cost of ISVs of developing

applications for multiple operating systems. This characteristic of Java also has

the potential to undermine the Windows application advantage . . . .”).

iii. Barksdale testified that “the cross-platform benefits of Java, allowed for the

development of software applications that were directed more to the Internet

than to the desktop, and thus had the potential to serve as a partial substitute

for the Windows OS as a development platform.” Barksdale Dir. ¶ 15; see

also Sasaki Dep. (played 12/16/98pm), at 31:24 - 32:7 (explaining that Java

has the potential to level the playing field among operating systems).

iv. Dean Schmalensee readily acknowledged that cross-platform Java technology

poses a competitive threat to Windows by potentially rendering underlying

143

operating systems less significant: “Sun’s Java poses potentially serious

competitive implications for Windows. . . . If Java achieves its advocates

ambitions, operating systems would become less important in the marketplace,

and the important standards would come to be determined by Sun, which

vigorously defends its control over the Java language.” Schmalensee Dir. ¶¶

141-142; see also Warren Boulton, 11/19/98pm, 31:8-12 (concluding “an

increasing number of users may be able to simply do without Windows

entirely”).

2. Microsoft recognized the Java threat

59. Microsoft understood the threat Java posed to its monopoly power. Java offered ISVs the

ability to create a robust set of cross-platform applications that might reduce the applications barrier to

entry.

59.1. Java provided software developers with a platform to create applications that

could run on different operating systems and hardware platforms.

i. Eubanks testified: “One of the great things with Java is that when you create a

Java application, it will run on any machine that has a Java virtual machine.”

Eubanks, 6/16/99am, at 68:11-20.

ii. Gosling, whose responsibilities include working with numerous application

developers and who himself has a career of experience as a developer, made

clear that Java’s theme of “‘write once, run anywhere’ was terrifically attractive

to developers. Developers want this more than just about anything you can

imagine.” Gosling, 12/3/98am, at 32:10-12.

iii. Soyring testified: “‘Write once run everywhere’ . . . has been the holy grail of

programming for many years to be able to write an application once and then

run it on many different operating systems or hardware platforms, and we find

that Java is a technology that most closely approaches this by a long distance

versus any other technology, and we have been able to successfully

demonstrate with a set of our clients that it is possible using the Java technology

to write an application once, compile it once and then run that exact same code

on a variety of different operating systems, giving our customers the choice to

choose different operating systems and different hardware platforms.” Soyring,

11/18/98pm, at 51:18 - 52:6; see also Sanders Dep., 1/13/99, at 186:20 -

144

187:3 (stating that Java “provides the benefit of an application-running

environment that would allow people to run applications independent of any

kind of operating system or cpu type of restraints they may currently be

facing”).

iv. Barksdale testified that “Java allows software developers to write cross-

platform applications that will run on any operating system, increasing consumer

flexibility and ease of use, while reducing development costs associated with

writing an application and then porting it to run on various different operating

systems . . . . The Java programming technology solves the platform

dependency problem that has so long plagued software development.

Programs written in Java can be run on any platform that has a Java virtual

machine and Java class libraries, which Navigator does.” Barksdale Dir. ¶¶ 15,

83.

59.2. Microsoft recognized, and continues to recognize, the competitive threat that

Java poses to Windows by providing an attractive cross-platform programming environment that could

erode the applications programming barrier to entry.

i. Dr. Warren-Boulton summarized the evidence of Microsoft’s perception of the

competitive threat posed by Java: “Microsoft has, almost from the beginning,

recognized that the clearest threat to that monopoly power is the emergence of

Java technologies combined with an independent browser market. Their

response to that threat has been to attempt to take that technology, and instead

of making it multi -- cross-platform, has been to transform that technology into

a technology that is Windows-specific so as to prevent the emergence of a

large stock of applications that could be used on any operating system . . . .”

Warren-Boulton, 12/1/98am, at 19:24 - 20:8.

ii. Dr. Fisher, similarly, summarized the evidence that Microsoft treated Java as a

significant competitive threat to Windows. Fisher Dir. ¶¶ 204-207.

59.2.1. Microsoft executives have throughout the past four years treated

cross-platform Java as a serious threat to Microsoft’s operating system dominance.

i. In a June 1996 e-mail to Microsoft executive staff, Paul Maritz focused

on the need to “fundamentally blunt Java/AWT momentum and to re-

establish ActiveX and non-Java approaches as a viable strategy for

145

structuring software.” The reason Mr. Maritz provided for this

objective was to “protect our core asset Windows -- the thing that we

get paid $’s for. While Java per se is not the problem, if everything &

everybody moves to Java as a language, then it will be so much more

easy for AWT to become the API, and Windows is damaged.” GX

42, at MS6 6010347 (emphasis in original); see also GX 473, at MS6

6006237 ("Java. Gaining as scripting language . . . Class libraries

define 'API.' Becoming the 'brand' for software components.");

GX 504, MS98 0169096 (Maritz writing that:“Java. Sun’s goal is: --

Java class library/runtime = new OS API -- leverage this new API to

replace Windows by JavaOS.”).

ii. In August 1996, Bob Muglia wrote: “When a Java developer writes to

AWT, they are writing to Sun APIs, and their application can be easily

run on competitive platforms." GX 466, at MS6 5003781; see also

Muglia, 2/26/99pm, 10:5 - 11:22 (by offering an alternative platform,

Sun could get developers to write to the Java platform and not to

Windows, and therefore the applications that they wrote would not be

focused on Windows).

iii. In September 1996, Adam Bosworth sent Bill Gates and others an e-

mail discussing Java. Bosworth noted, “I think it is important to

understand that Java is not just a language. If it were just a language, it

would not be a threat to us. We would and could easily just build the

best implementation of this language and be done. It is, however, much

more. It is an alternative to COM. . . . Java is on Unix and requires no

dealing with setup, install, de-install, or anything else. Thus it is really

easy to understand how a system for dynamically authoring Web pages

on the server that depended upon Java objects rather than COM ones

would have wider appeal.”Gates responds: “This scares the hell out of

me. Its still very unclear to me what our OS will offer to Java client

applications code that will make them unique enough to preserve our

market position. Understanding this is so important that it deserves top

priority.” GX 983, MS7 032895.

iv. In January 1997, an internal Microsoft analysis described the “platform

challenge” posed by Java: “possible emergence of a set of APIs and

underlying system software that lead to a lesser or no role for

Windows.” GX 51, MS7 005534.

146

v. In a February 1997 e-mail to Jim Allchin, Mr. Gates again addressed

the cross-platform threat posed by Java: “What will we have that the

Java Runtime will not have? . . . The fact is that applications can be run

on the server against an HTML client. . . . Most applications will have

very little client code in the future. . . . The fact is there will be lots of

machines where HTML/some level of Java is all they will have in

common. Cheap devices and old PCs will be like this. It makes it very

easy for people to think they should just program to this. . . . Lets work

together to find the solution to this. I can say I am more scared than

you are but that is not what will help us figure out where we should go.”

GX 475; see also GX 590 (Gates writing: “Java is the biggest threat to

us and I certainly shouldn't be doing Apple events unless we are getting

some help from us on this.”).

59.2.2. Microsoft’s witnesses in this litigation conceded that Java presented a

significant potential threat to Windows.

i. Gates testified repeatedly that he perceived Java to be a threat to

Windows: Gates Dep., (played 12/2/98am), at 22:19 - 23:1. Gates

stated: “we did think of” Java APIs “as something that competed with

us for the attention of ISV's in terms of whether or not they would take

advantage of the advanced features of Windows." Gates Dep. (played

12/2/98am), at 24:15-22; see also Gates Dep., 8/27/98, at 90:12-19

(DX 2568).

ii. Muglia also testified that Microsoft considered Java a serious cross-

platform threat: “"Although Java was a new and unproven technology,

Microsoft took Sun's claims seriously. . . . Sun has adopted a

business strategy that seeks to transform the Java programming

language into a full operating environment and software development

platform. A key requirement of Sun's strategy is delivering on its

WORA claim -- that programs written in Java, to the Java development

platform, will run without modification on any underlying platform for

which there is a JVM." Muglia Dir. ¶¶ 8, 10; see also Muglia,

2/26/99pm, at 4:8-18 (Muglia believed in 1995 and 1996 that Java

represented a serious threat to Microsoft’s operating system business);

Muglia, 2/26/99pm, at 7:2-19 (explained that the cross-platform threat

consisted of the JVM and Java class-libraries) ; Muglia, 2/26/99pm, at

9:3-21 (explained that: “what they were trying to do was get

developers to write to that alternative platform. So, even if -- even if a

147

developer wrote a Java program and that program runs on Windows,

even in the case where it runs on Windows, it's not written to

Microsoft's programming interfaces. So when I said slide in their

platform, what I meant is that they could, in essence, make what

everything else that our platform did irrelevant, thus enabling to replace

Windows and make it obsolete, so to speak.”).

iii. Maritz also testified: “If successful, software developers could write

programs to run on Sun’s technology, and neither Windows nor any

other operating system would provide significant value to customers.”

Maritz Dir. ¶ 243; Maritz, 1/26/99am, 20:23 - 21:3 (the Java

foundation classes posed a potentially serious platform threat); Maritz,

1/28/99am, 59:10 - 60:17, 62:3 - 63:17 (Maritz explained Java is a

form of middleware. Sun’s goal was to provide most of the OS

services through the Java runtime. The browser and Java have the

potential to serve as a virtual operating system.).

iv. Dean Schmalensee also acknowledged the cross-platform threat Java

poses to Windows: “Sun would like ISVs to write pure Java so that

their applications can run anywhere, in principle. Microsoft would like

ISVs to design applications that would run on Windows. It matters to

those companies what choice the ISV makes, assuming it’s a good

application.” Schmalensee, 6/22/99pm, at 23:23 - 24:7.

v. Slivka also testified regarding the Java threat: “my recollection was that

this cross-OS Java platform stuff that we were attempting to do with

AFC, he [Bill Gates] was very unhappy with that.” “He thought that

was a big threat to Windows.” Slivka Dep., 9/4/98, at 367:13 - 369:3

(DX 2591); see also, Slivka, 1/13/99, at 735:13 - 736:4 (“All this

comes back to Windows and the threat, you know, Sun's very direct

threat to our Windows platform, and the success of Windows on the

client. So, this seemed like if the library space fragmented, the ‘write

once, run anywhere,’ I guess, actually is what Sun called it, that would

be a lot less probable . . . I guess the end was to protect the Windows

franchise, not to defeat the ‘write once, run everywhere.’”).