"In particular, we didn't want to have to tell them to get a Java Virtual Machine up and running, because that's not easy, and they're not really a hundred percent compatible."
He seems like an OK guy, but comments like that make me think he made a decision first and then made up reasons later. How hard can it be to make a simple installer that checks and installs Java, many applications do that.
>> How hard can it be to make a simple installer that checks and installs Java, many applications do that.
You'd be surprised how many applications don't do that too. There's a reason why a lot of people say "enterprise software sucks" -- it's usually because the software makers value new features over improving how things work.
It is more difficult than it looks, but then again support multiple Linux distributions with a simple Apache installer is more difficult than it looks as well.
I suspect that this is a function of overestimating the effort on the Java side and underestimating both the demand and the work on the non-Windows side.
They used to be an extremely Windows-centric company.
To a point. Headless stuff tends to work way better than the GUI stuff.
It's kind of the same tune with mobile software -- "Native feels and runs better than everything else". In the case of enterprise software GUIs, it's particularly true.
