[opendtv] Re: OCAP - will it continue to move forward
- From: Bill Sheppard <Bill.Sheppard@xxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:20:54 -0700
[Formatting fix]
Kon Wilms wrote:
>Bill Sheppard wrote:
>
>
>>>Kon Wilms wrote:
>>>You could say the same for the Java VM being dropped on a system where
>>>C/C++ libraries already exist and are well defined.
>>>
>>>
>> <>Except that:
>>
>> 1. this would provide no binary compatibility, making distribution of
>> enhanced programming across a diverse range of devices difficult
>> if not impossible, and
>
>Nonsense. Surely you jest.
>
>
>Nearly all STB hardware has C/C++ hardware device drivers. For I/O and
>other functionality, what isn't available in standard libraries is
>widely available in cross-platform libraries. Its easy to extend
>middleware C/C++ in the upward direction with something like Boost, and
>its easy to extend it generically across hardware using uClibc and
>others. It is not uncommon for these libraries to support a dozen OS
>platforms and a dozen hardware platforms at a crack. And direct
>interfacing to the system level/kernel is much easier.
>
>
>So really, your argument is the much-quoted party line that only
>impresses the ignorant.
>
Sure, you can create some library portability. But if it's C/C++ you've
still got to recompile the code based on the underlying hardware
platform, and that means delivering a binary application over the
network to a diverse range of devices becomes exponentially more
complicated (and hence expensive). Plus the fact that "direct
interfacing to the system level/kernel is much easier" also means that
crashing the system or accessing hardware apps ought not access is much
easier, too.
>> 2. the cable industry has made it very clear that security is a
>> paramount concern, and C/C++ applications provide far, far less
>> protection against (intentionally or not) errant code than Java code
>>
>>
>
>Nonsense. The Java VM runs on top of OS's built on C/ASM/C++ code.
>
>
Right. And the certification process for Motorola and Scientific
Atlanta to ensure that C/ASM/C++ code is reasonably secure and bug-free
is so onerous (read expensive and time-consuming) that it's virtually
impossible to develop third-party applications for these boxes, and why
so few applications beyond EPG and VOD have been developed in the US,
versus the UK and elsewhere where virtually every program has some form
of interactivity available to the consumer and generating hundreds of
millions of pounds of revenue for Mr. Murdoch.
>As for security, my previous employer was in the business of smartcards.
>Java had no place there.
>
And JavaCard now accounts for over 96% of the smartcard market. You
couldn't have proven my point any more effectively!
>Let alone the fact that Tom Dick and Harry aren't going to be running their
>'rogue C' applications on a STB -- it is in 99% of cases a flash ROM.
>
>
How are you going to deliver the application allowing you to vote for
your favorite American Idol in flash ROM? The whole point of MHP and
OCAP is to allow for the efficient development and secure delivery of
third-party applications.
Regards,
Bill
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sheppard Industry Marketing Manager
bill.sheppard@xxxxxxx Consumer and Mobile Systems Group
(408) 404-1254 (x68154) Sun Microsystems, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
