Feeds

Java pet store hit ‘planned by MS’ – memo

Dog eats Dog

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

A drive-by shooting at a pet store last week was planned by Microsoft, reckons Java expert Richard Öberg.

Police say rival gangs based in Redmond, Wa. and Mountain View, Ca. have a history of trouble, often favoring pet stores to exact their retribution.

But Öberg, who issued a withering critique of The Middleware Company's benchmark last week, has now obtained an internal Microsoft memo on the subject. And he reckons The Beast's clawprints are all over this hit.

"As we have seen, Microsoft's involvement in this matter goes far beyond just providing a test lab and reimbursing travel expenses," he writes, here.

"They are the initiator of this whole project (as described in the TMC FAQ), have cheated to the point where their code does not even comply with the basic rules of the test, and have obtained the results of this report far ahead of its official publication. Since I believe most of my readers are quite intelligent, I will let you draw your own conclusions about what all of this means," he adds.

In the memo, Microsoft's Gregory Leake describes a marketing flurry to coincide with the publication of the benchmarks.

I'm not convinced that this is unusual. TMC didn't receive money directly from The Beast, and has vowed to rerun the tests. A campaign isn't sinister - but simply good marketing by Microsoft.

On the other hand, we wouldn't know about the "hospitality" without Richard's counter-offensive, which encouraged TMC to explain the tests. It will revisit them, it says.

What Öberg does establish is that Microsoft wrote its .NET Pet Store for speed, while Sun wrote its Pet Store to show programming techniques. We really do need a neutral party to establish some transparent benchmarks for this kind of exercise. And blow me, there already is (almost).

If .NET is going to succeed, it's going to have to win on something more than performance. And if J2EE is going to prosper, it's going to have compete on something other than scalability. Case closed.

Next? What's that? Well, just cut the baby in half. ®

Related Stories

Pet vs Pet: .NET 'trounces' Java
Pet vs Pet: MS opens .NET benchmarking wars
Sun shuns MS 'gutter' benchmark challenge

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Microsoft WINDOWS 10: Seven ATE Nine. Or Eight did really
Windows NEIN skipped, tech preview due out on Wednesday
Business is back, baby! Hasta la VISTA, Win 8... Oh, yeah, Windows 9
Forget touchscreen millennials, Microsoft goes for mouse crowd
Apple: SO sorry for the iOS 8.0.1 UPDATE BUNGLE HORROR
Apple kills 'upgrade'. Hey, Microsoft. You sure you want to be like these guys?
ARM gives Internet of Things a piece of its mind – the Cortex-M7
32-bit core packs some DSP for VIP IoT CPU LOL
Microsoft on the Threshold of a new name for Windows next week
Rebranded OS reportedly set to be flung open by Redmond
Lotus Notes inventor Ozzie invents app to talk to people on your phone
Imagine that. Startup floats with voice collab app for Win iPhone
'Google is NOT the gatekeeper to the web, as some claim'
Plus: 'Pretty sure iOS 8.0.2 will just turn the iPhone into a fax machine'
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.