Dr. Dobb's Journal May 2001
O pen letters are a curious form of communication commonly addressed to a specific person or organization, but not really intended for the recipient. Rather, open letters are meant to draw widespread attention to an issue of presumably widespread concern. In our corner of the world, one of the most famous open letters was Bill Gates's February 1976 "An Open Letter to Hobbyists" (http://www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp/gateswhine.html), in which he called the practice of sharing software "stealing." But open letters come in all shapes and sizes. Turnabout being fair play, Gates has received his share of open letters — nearly 300, by my count. Then there's "An Open Letter to AOL," from Eric Raymond, "An Open Letter to Mr. Charles J. Roesslein, CEO, Prodigy," from the Linux Journal, "An Open Letter to the Developer Community," from MacHack, "An Open Letter to the U.S. Attorney General," from just about everyone, "A Further Open Letter to the House of Lords" (as if the first one wasn't enough), "An Open Letter to Florsheim," from The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, "An Open Letter to Prince Charles" (from his mum, no doubt), "An Open Letter From Jeff Bezos On the Subject of Patents" (Time's Man of the Year sends, but does not receive, open letters), and on and on.
Two recent additions to the genre include a pair of claws-bared missives from Microsoft and Sun. Microsoft launched the first volley just before Sun's announcement of its Open Net Environment ("Sun ONE") approach to web services that goes head-to-head with Microsoft's .NET framework. In an effort to "help you to make more sense of Sun's announcements," Microsoft PR flack Chuck Humble released an open letter entitled "Questions Sun Should Be Ready to Answer About Web Services." The letter (see http://www.ddj.com/articles/2001/0105/0105z/0105zs1.htm) proceeded to ask rhetorical questions such as "If Sun is embracing Web Services (XML-based interactions between systems), does this mean they are abandoning EJB and RMI as the glue between systems?" and "Why is Java any better at processing XML than any other language?" or "What is Sun's story for supporting multiple programming languages?" and "How is this announcement not a belated and vaporous response to Microsoft .NET?". You get the idea.
Sun didn't waste any time getting out its even cattier "An Open Response to Microsoft" (http://www.ddj.com/articles/2001/0105/0105z/0105zs2.htm). To Microsoft's question: "If Sun is embracing Web Services (XML-based interactions between systems), does this mean they are abandoning EJB and RMI as the glue between systems?", for instance, Sun came back with "Chuck, your questions underscore how a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing — one that leads to mixing apples with oranges." To another question, Sun responded "Whew! Take a breath, Chuck. It's clear the lack of oxygen is fogging your logic."
With all the bickering, you almost miss the point that web services — modular applications that communicate with each other and can be integrated with other web services using open Internet protocols such as HTTP and XML — are shaping up as the next big slobber knocker in the software arena. The Windows versus OS/2, Borland C++ versus Visual C++, or Netscape versus Internet Explorer wars will pale in comparison to the coming web-services battles. Microsoft, for instance, appears to be betting the farm on .NET, if what's about to happen with Visual Basic is any indication. Forgetting that developer transition from Visual Basic 3 to Version 4 took years, Microsoft is turning Visual Basic 6 upside down with its upcoming VB.NET. The new version will have different forms and run-time engines, both of which will be incompatible with previous versions. Properties have new names or disappeared altogether, and features like threading have been added. When a company is ready to lay the corporate cash cow on the line as Microsoft seems prepared to do, you know it means business. Not to be left out, here's my first open letter:
An Open Letter to Microsoft's Jim Allchin
Hey Jim,
Are you out of your mind?
Sincerely, Jonathan
Allchin, vice president of Microsoft's Platforms Product Group (aka Windows), told American lawmakers that freely available open-source software is, well, un-American and stifles innovation. According to Allchin, "Open source is an intellectual-property destroyer...I can't imagine something that could be worse than this for the software business and the intellectual-property business...I'm an American; I believe in the American way," he babbled on. "I worry if the government encourages open source, and I don't think we've done enough education of policymakers to understand the threat."
Let's see. Freely sharing information is bad and will destroy the country. Right. But what Allchin really seems to be begging the government to do is give Microsoft a helping hand because he apparently believes the company can't compete with open source in open markets. As you'd expect, Microsoft spinmeisters kicked into high gear, explaining what Allchin really meant was that the GNU GPL constrained innovation and that he really, truly, sincerely loves open source. Sounds like just the time for another Chuck Humble inspired open letter.
Jonathan Erickson
editor-in-chief
jerickson@ddj.com