From: "David Blair" 

I knew I couple get you folks to talk if I pushed you.

Sorry, but I didn't see Sun as being any more right than Microsoft, and I
didn't think the decision was correct. You want Java? Install it. It's
available.

That's what I've done. But I see no need for them to be included for any
special reason.

"Robert Comer"  wrote in message
news:3efbbf6d$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> I don't think it's good news.
>
> - Bob Comer  for.>
>
>
> "David Blair"  wrote in message
> news:3efbbdbc$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > I'm surprised there's no comment on this good news...
> >
> >
> > "David Blair"  wrote in message
> > news:3efb543c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > > http://news.com.com/2100-1007_3-1021452.html?tag=fd_top
> > >
> > > A federal appeals court dealt a legal blow to Sun Microsystems on
> > Thursday,
> > > tossing out most of a preliminary injunction requiring Microsoft to
> carry
> > > its rival's version of an interpreter for the Java programming
language.
> > > But the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., upheld a
> > requirement
> > > that Microsoft cease distributing certain copies of its own Java
virtual
> > > machine, saying that Microsoft "exceeded the
scope" of a January 2001
> > > license agreement with Sun.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4