These are the final results of the Final Approval Ballot for JSR #99. The ECs have approved this ballot.

JSR99

StageFinal Approval Ballot

Ballot durationSep 17, 2002 to Sep 30, 2002

Votes

SE/EE

Apache Software Foundation

Apple Computer, Inc.

BEA Systems

Borland Software Corporation

Caldera Systems

Cisco Systems

Compaq Computer Corporation

Fujitsu Limited

Hewlett-Packard

IBM

Lea, Doug

Macromedia, Inc.

Nokia Networks

Oracle

Progress Software

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

ME

BEA Systems

Cisco Systems

Ericsson Inc.

IBM

Insignia Solutions

Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.

Motorola

Nokia Corporation

PalmSource, Inc.

Philips Electronics UK Ltd

Research In Motion, LTD (RIM)

Siemens AG

Sony International (Europe) GmbH

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Texas Instruments Inc.

Zucotto Wireless

Vote Log

SE/EE

On 2002-09-30 Cisco Systems voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Fujitsu Limited voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Caldera Systems voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Nokia Networks voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Borland Software Corporation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Lea, Doug voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Progress Software voted Yes with the following comment:
IONA votes Yes and looks forward to all JCP members operating in an open standards process.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Hewlett-Packard voted Yes with the following comment:
HP votes Yes and supports the comments of BEA, IBM, Nokia, Oracle and Palm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 BEA Systems voted Yes with the following comment:
Although we are not completely satisfied with the provisions of this JSPA, particularly in the area of early access to Java technologies, BEA is voting YES because this represents an important step forward from today and puts all JCP companies on a level playing field. We look forward to working with Sun and the community to develop a plan which will provide a truly open process and address the concerns not addressed by this JSPA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-24 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM strongly encourages the Java community to move towards a fully open process that is not under the control of any one company, and that provides a true level playing field for all participants.  Regarding this JSR, we do believe that this version of the JSPA could be improved upon. However, we recognize that the proposal is an improvement over the prior version, and therefore we vote to approve it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-23 Apache Software Foundation voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-20 Oracle voted Yes with the following comment:
Oracle is voting YES on the JSR 99 revision of the JSPA.  Although we sought more substantial change, we believe the result of this over two year effort offers significant benefits for almost all JCP participants.  Furthermore, knowing that everyone participating in the process under the new JSPA will have exactly the same rights and responsibilities is by itself sufficient justification for approval.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-18 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ME

On 2002-09-30 Sony International (Europe) GmbH voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Cisco Systems voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 BEA Systems voted Yes with the following comment:
Although we are not completely satisfied with the provisions of this JSPA, particularly in the area of early access to Java technologies, BEA is voting YES because this represents an important step forward from today and puts all JCP companies on a level playing field. 

We look forward to working with Sun and the community to develop a plan which will provide a truly open process and address the concerns not addressed by this JSPA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Texas Instruments Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Motorola voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Zucotto Wireless voted Yes with the following comment:
Zucotto acknowledges the hard work of all parties involved in getting this version of the JSPA to the voting stage. We also agree with comments from others that we have more work to do in order to evolve to a completely open Java community with level playing field for all parties.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-30 Siemens AG voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-29 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-29 Ericsson Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-27 Philips Electronics UK Ltd voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-27 Nokia Corporation voted Yes with the following comment:
I would think that the earlier comments pretty much convey our thinking as well; we wished to have a forum where parties are equal, what comes to rights and responsibilities. We made some progress, enough to justify yes-vote, since the current situation is worse. We wished to reasonably secure any parties rights to implement the specifications - we got some improvement there as well e.g. in the form of independent implementations and separating TCK from RI with regard to licensing. Also JSPA clarity is much better now.
However, there is still much to do in JSPA, for example spec lead's powers, and in the Process side for example - how to make it easy to utilize specification between J2 platforms at the same time addressing specific needs of the target devices etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-26 Insignia Solutions voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-24 PalmSource, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
PalmSource strongly believes that the Java community should move towards a more open process that gives _no_ company more control/power than any other. However, although this JSAP could be improved upon, we do believe that this is a great first step in the right direction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-24 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM strongly encourages the Java community to move towards a fully open process that is not under the control of any one company, and that provides a true level playing field for all participants.  Regarding this JSR, we do believe that this version of the JSPA could be improved upon. However, we recognize that the proposal is an improvement over the prior version, and therefore we vote to approve it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-19 Research In Motion, LTD (RIM) voted Yes with the following comment:
Some editorial nits I noticed...

2B "Subject to Section 10," text uses a different font
3 "Participant Category*" has a division symbol at the end of Category
same problem at the end of "Applicable Annual Fee (initial)", perhaps it is an odd rendering of an underlined colon?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-09-17 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------