[opendtv] Re: OCAP - will it continue to move forward
- From: Bill Sheppard <Bill.Sheppard@xxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:16:32 -0700
Kon Wilms wrote: Bill Sheppard wrote: Kon Wilms wrote: You could say the
samefor 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
extendmiddleware C/C++ in the upward direction with something like Boost,
andits easy to extend it generically across hardware using uClibc and
others.It is not uncommon for these libraries to support a dozen OS
platformsand a dozen hardware platforms at a crack. And direct interfacing
tothe system level/kernel is much easier. So really, your argument is the
much-quoted party line that only impresses the ignorant. Sure, you can
createsome 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
processfor 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.
Javahad 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
areyou 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[1] Consumer
and Mobile Systems Group (408) 404-1254 (x68154) Sun Microsystems, Inc.
--- Links ---
1 mailto:bill.sheppard@xxxxxxx
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
