It is seeking a middle ground with the previous attempt that compared the entire version string using bit masking; the details escape me.  I've forgotten why split was deemed too high-level?

On simplicity: I wouldn't mind an API that asked 

`isJavaAtLeast(major: Int, minor: Int = 0, epoch: Int = 1)` and `isJavaAtLeast(5)`.

That jibes with the Scala ethos of not buying into every historical fiction in Java.

And no one will complain that their "1.7.0_36b3" lied to them.

+1 for leaving our grandchildren out of it, who may very well prefer the term transcircuitous to cyborg; and also omitting any reference to Gosling's Law, that the rate of progress of major versions is inversely proportional to the square of the sum of LOC + features + open bugs.