Sun will Open Java's Source 584
bckrispi writes "An announcement from Sun spokesman Raghavan Srinivas indicates that, contrary to what we've heard in the past, Java will be Open-sourced. "We haven't worked out how to open-source Java, but at some point it will happen," Srinivas said."
Yeah, by IBM. (Score:1, Insightful)
Boon (Score:4, Insightful)
Thanks, Sun!
Not much of an announcement (Score:2, Insightful)
When I heard this earlier today I thought the same thing, this is a non-announcement.
opening questions (Score:3, Insightful)
I will probably be marked troll on this one, but I have to ask:
How in the world can you be split over something like that?
I mean, people will basiclly poke at the code and report you bugs.
Other developers will request tons of features that they will point how easy are to be done.
Everyone will be happy.
It's not as if they are charging people for using the pure java language right now.
However, others, including Sun, believe the main hurdle and concern is the future of the Java brand and compatibility.
So, they are planning to be constantly changing the language then? What are they smoking?
We haven't worked out how to open-source Java -- but at some point it will happen," Srinivas said. However, he noted "it might be today, tomorrow or two years down the road".
Well, you start with a 19$
This is news? (Score:5, Insightful)
And at some point I'll somehow figure out how to make a million dollars while sitting at home playing my Playstation, too.
I fail to see how this qualifies as news.
Bah! Tell me when it actually happens! (Score:5, Insightful)
faces of a coin (Score:3, Insightful)
I really hope they do open source java. it would let OSS improve the VM. it would make it evolve faster and allow more people to improve it.
ANSI/ISO (Score:3, Insightful)
Not sure how? (Score:2, Insightful)
I guess I can understand the fear of losing the "write once, run anywhere" mentality, but if that's one of the main attractions to the language doesn't it stand to reason that people won't really veer to far off?
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Boon (Score:1, Insightful)
Do it where it counts! (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of waiting two years, do it now when it counts most. If Sun feels some degree of uncertainty, then test the waters by open sourcing selective parts of the JDK - especially the parts of the Java libraries that are widely perceived to be neglected.
Re:In other news (Score:0, Insightful)
Here you go mods, feel free to mod me up, up, and away for this little gut buster:
In Soviet Russia, Duke Nukem Forever is already released!
Re:opening questions (Score:4, Insightful)
I think they're worried about someone forking it. What they ought to do is release the Java code under the GPL but not give up their trademark on the Java name. That way, forked versions can't call themselves Java unless they meet Sun's existing compatibility criteria.
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Java is not open-sourced and falls out of use like most closed standards eventually do.
2. Java is released as open-source and they lose control of it.
3. Java is released under a pussyfoot-shared-source-with-lots-of-restrictions
Overall, it doesn't look like Sun can win with this.
Not really that big (Score:5, Insightful)
I've wondered for a while where Sun makes money from Java, particularly enough to recoup what they spend on it. I can't imagine it affects sales of Solaris boxes that much.
Is Microsoft Behind This? (Score:2, Insightful)
How much do you want to bet that Java will be open sourced under a BSD-style license, and not the GPL.
Bad Move (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:opening questions (Score:1, Insightful)
They HAVE BEEN constantly changing the language.
they come out with a new jdk every like 6 months.
and on the web side, you got jsp's, then struts, now jsf's.
Its the number one reason i'm getting out of it.
20something java programmer
Re:Benefits? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:5, Insightful)
Sun own's the java brandname and wants to exploit that, that is there asset. If you want proof, look at the sun java desktop which has not the slightest thing to do with java.
If turned over to the open source crowd java will be powerful and popular in no time. That means the word java will be used all the time, making sun's brand more powerful.
Re:In other news (Score:5, Insightful)
People often don't realize how expensive/lucrative Enterprise Support is compared to the cost of H/W and S/w. Companies charge as much as 29-35% of the product cost as support per year and support is never discounted. i.e companies give away s/w and h/w worth a million and charge say 290k per year in support.
Support/services is often the number 1 consideration in purchasing.
So, I would not be surprised if sun's net revnues do not decrese after they opensource all of their s/w, including OS.
Besides, why does Sun want to fix a bug for which there is no revenue tied? Sun might rather fix an obscure bug from a paid customer than fix the most popular bug. By opensourcing Java/ or OS, they will be opening a new maintenance channel for their platform while still making the same service revenues.
In our company, Sun support team is respected and our IS claims it is worth all the cost.
Re:Wow, this is huge news! (Score:5, Insightful)
1-There are numerous examples of open source programming languages that have remained centralized and unfragmented, like Perl and Python.
2-Because java depends on a uniform standard and VM, any attempts to split off or fork the source tree will die miserably due to a lack of compatibility with the massive pool of existing code and classes.
3-In fact, there is actually LESS chance of fragmentation when Java lies in the hands of the public, first because it means that no one will start up a competing "openjava", a venture that would almost certainly lead to incompatibilities, and second because, as the example of the death of xfree86 shows, too much central and absolute control over software by a small group will inevitably anger developers and users alike, leading them to search for an alternative.
Honestly, this is slashdot. You people should have more faith in OSS.
Re:opening questions (Score:4, Insightful)
The fear of a fork is what keeps the community split. A truly open source Java would have no restrictions against someone taking Java and extending it in a way that's incompatible with existing Java (remember when Microsoft tried to do that?). It would completely undermine the idea of Java as a stable universally-compatible platform to build on.
Compile once, run anywhere (even a fedora box) (Score:5, Insightful)
It will certainly increase its adoption, especially in the open source world, thus fulfilling its original purpose: write once, run anywhere.
-jim
Sun's Open Source Java mini-HOWTO (Score:2, Insightful)
- Determine conditions that Sun is sure of it finds acceptable right now for released files
- Throw release files & those conditions on some big-iron ftp/http server under Sun's control
- Make public announcement (& hopefully survive being
/dotted ;o)
- Inlude in conditions the option to submit patches to Sun
- Include in conditions the option to publish patches to everyone else
- Give selected regular patch-submitters limited write-access under strict additional conditions
- Relax those conditions as time goes by, and you see the source base evolving nicely
- Move source depository elsewhere, to make that big-iron ftp/http free for newer, more interesting projects
Just my suggestion for how Sun could do itWhy it might take some time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Inevitibly, in large organizations with large projects, some manager attempts to (and often succeeds in) shortcutting the development time by licensing or purchasing some outside code or technology. I would be surprised if Sun's implementation of Java was completely developed in house and/or completely owned without exception by Sun. They have to vet all the code and modules to be certian that they have the right to release Java. I doubt they'll release the unencumbered parts before it's all ready.
Further, there are likely to be patent and legal encumberances to the code which may prevent immediate release. It could even be that people along the line have said, "I'll patent this technique later, for right now it's a trade secret." There may yet be code in there which they can capitalize off of by patenting, while allowing for usage within java without charge.
And, of course, they have to make sure the company lawyers and accountants are satisfied with whatever terms they release it under. They may even wait until the SCO thing blows over if they really want to use the GPL (Unlikely).
So don't hold your breath. The ideal outcome would make one able to compile it for platforms which it does not yet run on natively and stable.
-Adam
Re:ANSI/ISO (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:opening questions (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:5, Insightful)
There is enough OSS built around Java to keep it alive in the OSS community and popularity as a whole is right across the board.
They do have real concerns about losing control. Usually, without too much hassle, Java can live up to its write once, (test and then) run everywhere. Will this be so if there are forked projects?
It would be great to get the OSS community in on improving Java but I can see why Sun want to remain in control.
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:3, Insightful)
Me neither. Where the hell is the value in their company? Solaris doesn't have the greatest market share, and I see Java as their biggest strength. They want to give it away why? Don't they have a responsibility to the shareholders?
People run all kinds of Microsoft-made technologies and don't gripe. What's with the shitstorm about Java not being open source?
Who cares?
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:1, Insightful)
Sun Benefits? (Score:3, Insightful)
However, i'm sure they know this, and that's why it's not being released now, and it probably never will be, unless they somehow conjure up a way to release the source and retain complete control of it.
jvm (Score:5, Insightful)
Sun is giving the VM away as it is, It would be nice to have it gpl compatable so it can be used right after an install.
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:3, Insightful)
This "They won't accept patches unless the copyright is assigned to them" is just the price of doing business in the US. Mostly to have copyrights clear and avoid SCO-like messes. Even if SCO claim is completely without merit (and that I believe so), you need to prove it.
or, as someone said sometimes around 50 BCE said, "the wife of Julius Caesar doesn't only need to be honest" - don't remember the exact term - "she also needs to look like it".
Suppose that someone has some java changes introduced and then, 1 year later, SCO claims it came from their code!!!!
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder, with something as big as the whole Java world is right now, if you're not right.
Take an OS, for example. Look at the difference between OS X and Linux. Linux is going in every which direction but has more potential than just about anything on the planet.
Apple, however, took Free BSD and put a super nice wrapper on it. They've got managers who keep developers focused and executive officers who keep managers focused. Often, the open source community has a very narrow and selfish view when it comes to certain things. Like, why make software easy to install, like OS X? No need- any Linux user (present or future) is smart enough to compile his own software, resolve dependencies, etc.
A person has to ask- could the OSS community ever have produced a gem like OS X? Could it have produced Java? OSS has the skillset, some of the sharpest folks on the planet. But who is keeping them coordinated? Who is the CEO with a single, cohesive vision?
Don't get me wrong on OSS here. It has produced cool, big things like the Linux Kernel, Gnome, KDE, XFree86, etc., etc. All wonderful pieces of a puzzle that just doesn't seem to fit together quite as well as they need to when it comes to building a complete OS platform.
Open source, public source, or shared source? (Score:3, Insightful)
Allowing their users access to the source to Solaris-- even if the license is "poisoned" to prevent it from being mixed with GPLed code-- would help Sun's users. They would be able to adapt the OS to strange fine-tuned uses and arcane hardware, or more easily debug kernel plugins. A shop that might otherwise have gone "well, we like solaris, but we don't want to be limited to sparc and x86, so we'll go with linux" might be dissuaded.
Allowing their users access to the source to the JVM-- even under a GPL-incompatible license-- would do the same. It would allow Sun's users to port the JVM to those few platforms Sun doesn't support yet, or more easily debug JNI software.
This is definitely a benefit for Sun's users. It makes both Java and Solaris more attractive. It makes a lot of sense.
If they really did, I would take it as more of a "We Give-Up" move just before everything falls apart.
Sun refuses to open source Java: Slashdotters interpret this as a sign they are dying.
Sun agrees to open source Java: Slashdotters interpret this as a sign they are dying.
Hmm.
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
AS far as running microsoft and liking it? Thats because it is there. Most people won't even look under the hood and care, with java, people are going out ang getting it so they know what is there and more of the people using it are the ones that would bitch about microsoft. The difference is the amount visible to the public. Microsofts users would have more that didn't care where java users would have more that did care.
actually, (Score:5, Insightful)
It will be interesting to see what kind of license Sun goes with given their oft-given fear of forking Java. Seems to me that something like the Qt license would be the way to go.
Re:In other news (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
IF they release it under the GPL, I see this making the open-source world a lot friendlier to Java. IF thy release it under a GPL licence, then KDE/GNOME will integrate java more closely(I.E. standardize).
I think the smartest move would be for Sun to relase Java's source under the plain old GPL, but not let any implementation use the Java trademark unless it meets their criteria( so they can keep Java from fragmenting)
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:3, Insightful)
Wha..? Java is not a closed standard. See the Java Community Process [jcp.org]. Sun's implementation is closed. I disagree that "most" closed standards fall out of use. Many survive.
2. Java is released as open-source and they lose control of it.
Well, the Linux kernal is open-source and yet Linus maintains quite a lot of control over it. No doubt Sun's people would still have a lot of control because they're the most familiar with it, and it is/was their baby. This happens with a lot of open source projects.
3. Java is released under a pussyfoot-shared-source-with-lots-of-restrictions
Unfortunately I think that we'll see something like this. Rebellion? Well, no, people are using it now under its closed paradigm. Many people will use it regardless of its closed or openess (or varying levels in between).
Re:ANSI/ISO (Score:5, Insightful)
Explain to me why we need ANSI or ISO?
A colleague of mine insists that
Explain to me how this is better than the JCP?
The JCP is already slow enough. The last thing Java needs is some bloated organization like ANSI or ISO to get involved.
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:3, Insightful)
If I may:
gcj, kaffee, jikes, etc. (I don't remember all the one's that I encountered.) Notice, though, that c, c++, Fortran, python, and Ruby (among others) haven't forked. At most there are dialects with extensions to the core language, or differing libraries. Well, unless you consider Objective C to be an incompatible fork rather than a separate language.
Open Sourcing java is just more PR . (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you trust Sun ? They are excellent at manipulating the media.
Sun is doing this for themselves so they can 'hype' more java news on all the internet news sources(zdnet,cnet,slash) and also pull more people into their language(prosyletize) so that they can cash in.
Microsoft and Sun both proselytize. [washingtonpost.com]
Re:Bah! Tell me when it actually happens! (Score:3, Insightful)
When they release it, then perhaps the license will cause it to be news, or one sort or another. I.e., it won't necessarily be positive news. Remember, this is the company that came out with the SCCCL license.
You're not thinking. (Score:5, Insightful)
Open sourcing java wouldn't really hurt them, and god knows java could use it.
Re:Not really that big (Score:3, Insightful)
java or the JVM? (Score:5, Insightful)
Opensourcing can only help java. It will definetly spread its adoption to be standard on many linuxes.
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not what Sun wants.
Re:What's the problem, exactly? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:4, Insightful)
Java to be successful in the long term needs to be standarized and opened like C has been!
It was bound to happen (Score:2, Insightful)
In short, it was either do it now or do it later for Sun. And it's better they do it now, when they can still look good, than later, when they'd end up just leaving a seriously bad taste in the mouth of thousands of developers. They're strapped for cash and just signed their soul over to the Borg. Might as well do SOMETHING worthwhile and good, rather than just be a giant flaming ball of gas for news.
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
Java is Sun. While that probably doesn't mean all that much to most people, it does to Sun and everyone whose spent the time and money to certify there apps as J2EE Certified. Sun would have to be smoking some really good stuff to think that giving that up would be a good thing. Java and C were made for very different reasons, C was to be the prefered language for Unix development, so it was stupid not to have it open and standardized as Unix went down the same path, Java was always concieved as something that Sun would keep, leverage it and open it enough that it would be used, but still Sun would have control.
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sun's Java Class Libraries are very nice and full featured, if Java was open-sourced, I'd see Mono and Java merging together quite nicely. Write in whichever language is most comfortable, and call whichever API does the job the best.
I see this as a good solution for Sun which is seeing developers leaving for
It will be beneficial to Java in the long term. (Score:2, Insightful)
There are various implementations of Java with truly good enhancements, like real templates, design-by-contract and other good stuff. It's a pity that Java does not get these "new" capabilities (that other languages have for ages).
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:4, Insightful)
1996 called. They wanted to know why you're compiling from scratch as opposed to using a distribution and its package manager. (*cough* Debian, Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, Connectiva, Slackware, hell even Gentoo *cough*)
Tooth Fairy (Score:3, Insightful)
``Anyone who believes a vendor is going to give away hardware under a contract that allows the customer to immediately strip off the software and repurpose it probably still hasn't faced the truth about the Tooth Fairy.''
You mean that he does exist and wrote Linux, together with Santa Claus? [linuxworld.com]
Good thought (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wow, this is huge news! (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean, more fragmented than it already is with Sun, Microsoft, Apple, Kaffe, gcj, Latte, Jikes, and so on and so forth all providing their own implementations?
``One of the really nice things about java is that despite a few problems, it's very portable.''
Oh yes. About as portable as C, Python, Fortran, ADA, Pascal, Common LISP, Scheme, PHP, Ocaml and a plethora of other languages.
``I've never personally had a problem moving my code from one machine to another.''
You lucky bastard. You must never have moved your code developed with a modern Sun JDK to a machine using Microsoft's VM. Or an old (1.0.x or 1.1.x) Sun JVM, for that matter. Or tried running AWT code on pretty much any of the open source JVMs, which are kind of your only choice if your machine is not x86, PowerPC or SPARC, or the operating system is anyting besides GNU/Linux, Solaris, Mac OS, OS X, or Windows.
Java is a dream that never came true:
1. Write once, run everywhere is a myth, because you need a good VM and class libraries, which are only available for a few platforms.
2. The official distribution is bloated to the top and runs slow even with JIT compilation. Java programs use lots of memory. This makes Java unnatractive even if you can guaratee it will work on your target system.
3. GUIs in Java are a nightmare. AWT can be a bitch to code for, lacking many useful components. Swing uses "pure Java" widgets, which are slow and don't fit well with the native widgets on your system. SWT ought to be better, but is not included in the distribution, so if you want it, you need more bloat.
4. High performance apps are out. GUI apps are a nightmare. What's left? Simple command line utilities? Nah, much better written in a different language. Whomever heard of multi-second startup time for hello world, and BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in)); before you can do something useful with standard input?
Oh yeah, it runs on cellphones. At least, the very much scaled down J2ME does. But don't expect good performance, and don't expect software written for some cellphone to run on yours. It's the same story again.
Java has failed.
Re:opening questions (Score:3, Insightful)
1. The most important question: WHY would anyone fork it? Where are the 'hundreds of forks' of Perl and Python?
2. And just who the hell will actually use an incompatible, impopular Java fork, that isn't even legally allowed to be called "Java"?
3. How's forking Java and making it incompatible any different from creating your own language with incompatible but similar Java-like syntax? (other than that under the hood it's based on Sun Java, but nobody cares about that)
Closed standards (Score:5, Insightful)
Outside the IT world you have a point. But name ONE major IT standard that is still relevant that is a) closed and b) not a microsoft 'standard'. I exclude MS because they are a convicted monopolist and have certain unfair influences on the marketplace that has permitted them to maintain closed standards for a little longer than everyone else.
Networking standards are the obvious example where closed has been the kiss of death. Closed information services were crushed by the Internet, all non-IP network protocols are now in legact maintaince mode. How many email systems are left other than SMTP/POP/IMAP? Instant messaging is the one holdout because Jabber couldn't get their act together to the point where every ISP became expected to host a Jabber locator server just like they host a mail/dns/news/etc server.
File protocols are rapidly converting to open, with the notable exception of MIcrosoft and their Office formats. A host of closed graphics formats fell to GIF, JPEG and PNG. The myriad audio and video formats have all but collapsed to WAV/MP3/MPEG/AVI/WMV/OGG. Even the MS standards are fairly open (for MS tech) with the exception of rights restricted flavors of WMV. MP3 and MPEG are artifacts of a day when RAND licensing was considered open.
JAVA must open or face a decline. It is the only current language with any real restrictions on implementations. Anyone is free to write a C compiler, and many do in school. Anyone if free to rewrite Perl, but would be daft to try.
Even worse, with the current situation Linux distributors can't include a JVM (Sun's or IBM's) in their collection, even those who are willing to bundle closed apps, so no JAVA app can ever be a core app in the Linux or BSD worlds, and considering the state of affairs in Windows land it isn't likely to happen there either. That Sun can't see that widespread, unfettered distribution of the runtime is a plus for all Java advocates doesn't bode well for a real Open Source release of the JDK.
But anyway, JAVA the language probably has a future but JAVA the emulator/VM really doesn't. Sun can slow the evolution down through skilled lawyering but native compilation similar to what GCC is now doing is the future, one where JAVA is just another language and source gets compiled to native code and depends on the normal system libraries.
The only reason for the emulator was to allow closed source apps to be semi portable, but as closed source becomes less of an issue there will be less and less reason to pay the emulation penalty of the JVM. In the Open Source world portability is achieved with GNU autoconf, not by compiling all code to run on a mythical platform which is then emulated on whatever host it happens to be running on today.
Forking JAVA (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh bull. How many incompatible forks of C++ are there? Not all compilers implement all of the latest ANSI standard but are all working toward compliance as fast as they can lest they lose relevence in the marketplace. Ok, how about Perl? It has been GPL from the start of it's life and there has been exactly ZERO forks. Python? Nope, no evil forks there. How about the granddaddy of them all, C? Yes, but the ANSI standard keeps pulling them all back into line, so it hasn't been a problem. Every time C shows its age the compiler writers start innovating and the good ideas get standaridized.
Sun is still trying to think of a way to make JAVA a cash cow and is afraid that if they Open Source it that when they have the "Ah Ha!" moment that it won'y work because they opened it.
And anyway, the idea of compile once, emulate everywhere is not exactly a great one if you live in the OS/FS world. Won't bother me a bit when Java becomes just another language that GCC compiles to native code and it's bundled libraries are sitting in
Re:It will be beneficial to Java in the long term. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this now the standard plan? (Score:2, Insightful)
2. Release product under a new restrictive open source license
3. People complain about license
4. Rerelease it under the GPL
5. Programers spend a year making the code worthwhile
6. People complains about how poor the opensource developement model works
7. Really cool product emerges too late to make a big impact in the market at large.
I don't mean to sound ungrateful.. but perhaps it would be smarter for companies to use open source earlier on, not as a last ditch effort. Java has been pigeoned holed as a very large plug-in for web browsers, which Flash has done a lot better with. If they are going to see Java as a big application platform, open source is necessary and not as optional.
Re:It will be beneficial to Java in the long term. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are two dangers to this:
1) Incompatible forks. Java is supposed to be "write once, run anywhere". Different implementations of a common standard can be good. Diverging language features can't be.
2) At heart (without the class libraries) Java is still a small, simple, clean, readable, easy to learn language. Enough well-meaning enhancements, and it could end up looking like perl. Ugg.
Re:Don't fear the fork (Score:3, Insightful)
This is EXACTLY what MS did with Visual J++ and their own JRE. This is exactly what Sun fears about open sourcing Java.
If you want a KDE specific version of JAVA, create the appropriate Plug-in/Replacement classes for the AWT/Swing. The current JAVA jre spec DOES indead allow that. Or if you are particularly brave, create new packages such as org.kde.*. The advantage of this approach is that it would run with ANY implementation of JAVA, not just the Sun, or Custom KDE JRE.
A good example of this is WABA, a Java Like language/platform for Palm OS and Pocket PC. It uses its own set of packages (waba.*). However, the best part is, because its built on JAVA specifications, software can be developed and compiled on ANY JDK (I have tried Sun Forté, and Visual Café). This is just by adding the appropriate waba package for Java. This clearly demonstrates the pure power of Java.
Although Open sourcing Java is good, I do understand their fears of forks. And it has happend befor e(MS VJ++)
Re:This is news? (Score:3, Insightful)
JIT's compile the bytecode into native code on loading of the classes. althoguh thsi could create a small dely on loading the classes, once loaded performance is often very good. I have created some processing software on Java, which i foudn performs almost as well as equivelent C code. In fact i foudn that if we were to code in C++ with all the "safeguards" in managed languages such as C# and Java, performance of Java is sometimes actually better than C++.
A JIT is provided with JRE, however, the JIT can be replaced (on Windows it is a DLL, and the Java Control applet allows you to switch between different JITs, which may perform better in different cases)
Finally there was a product called TowerJ, which takes Java source or Bytecode, and compiles it into a native executable, and althoguh the final product will definately NOT be write once run everywhere, previous tests shows it stonking all over most JREs and even giving C++ a massive run for the money..
Re:Forking JAVA (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a good example. The language is the easy bit, it's the standard libs that are important. How many libcs are there? Have you ever tried moving code between glibc, BSD libc and msvcrt (the libc used by Windows)? All of them have slight incompatibilities which require (often minor) changes, and the C standard library is several orders of magnitude less complex than the J2SE class libraries.
Re:Boon (Score:5, Insightful)
- If they use the "sharing is not theft" BSD licence, then someone conceivably could take Java, modify it just enough to make it incompatible with the old version, and release their modified version -- let's call it EvilJava because I can't think of anything better -- closed-source. By writing plenty of code that only runs on EvilJava, someone can effectively usurp control of the market -- this, presumably, is the "nightmare scenario" Sun is keenest to avoid.
- If they use the "not sharing is theft" GPL, then nobody can release a closed-source modification. Somebody could conceivably write a "JavaTwoPlus" incompatible with plain old Java, but it would necessarily be GPL. We have to assume that GPL automatically means cross-platform, since there would be nothing to prevent Sun themselves from porting JavaTwoPlus to any other platform for which a version of GCC exists.
- If they go for a Pine-like licence, then nobody will be allowed to release modified binaries to the general public -- whether EvilJava or JavaTwoPlus -- in such a way that they could be confused with the "official" Java. Anyone wishing to create an improved Java would be confined to releasing patches for the source. As wonderful as this looks in theory, it's a nightmare in practice because of the problems it creates for distributors. Some Linux distros already don't include Pine, precisely for fear of running afoul of its licencing terms {You typically have to modify any source package ever so slightly to get it to work with your own distribution; that's what the configure process is about. The actual Pine licence doesn't make it clear that such modification is permitted. Even if the University of Washington turns a blind eye to some distros putting out a patched pine, there is nothing to say that one day it won't start coming down hard on distributors}. Sun presumably wants Java to be distributed widely, so should word the licence very carefully if following this route -- there is a real risk of alienating distributors.
The question boils one of balance between code integrity and the benefits of Open Source. BSD doesn't assure code integrity or cross-platform-ness. Pine-like assures integrity but impacts negatively on distributability. GPL blocks any outright threats to code integrity and cross-platform compatibility -- but potentially leaves Sun with hard work to do.All that being said, if Java has enough functionality already then nobody will really feel the need to add anything else -- which, of course, is where the greatest single threat to cross-platform-ness comes from. Those few who do have special requirements which can best be met through modifications, probably will not be releasing their modified Java versions into the mainstream.
Sun has up to now played the role of a protective parent, shielding the child (Java) from the worst elements of the outside, adult world (closed-source vendors who would take a beautiful product and distort it for their own ends). But children do eventually grow up; and after a point, when they have learned the dangers of the world, it becomes wrong not to set them free into that very world -- for all its dangers, it is still a beautiful place. If Sun has done everything right -- or even done just enough right -- then there is nothing to fear when Java makes the transistion from tightly-reined, closed-source child to well-balanced, Open Source adult with an existence of its own that does not depend on Sun.
Why the hatred against our ally?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why don't people see the strategic importance of the UNIX world (which includes Linux) holding together and fight against the real enemy?
I do have my concenrs regarding Suns recent "peace" with the enemy, maybe we can no longer rely on SUN, but at least one must acknowledge what SUN has done for the UNIX community.
The lack of historical perspective and irrationalism of many of the SUN haters is shocking to me. It almost makes me think that the enemy has sent inflitrators on slashdot with the purpose to spread division and internal struggle inside the UNIX world.
An example of hybrid-source (Score:4, Insightful)
In this article [com.com] in which they promise opening up Solaris, They say:
The uninformed on-lookers will only see the statement "Sun warms to open-source for Solaris" which gives them more points.
Next concerning Java, a few months ago they said [com.com],
Now they are saying [zdnet.com.au]:
Again, the uninformed on-lookers will only see the statement "Sun to open-source Java" which gives them more points.
Summary: They promised to make Solaris become like Java, meanwhile they don't know if at all Java will be open-sourced in this lifetime.
This is what is called hybrid-source: A vapor version of open-source meant only to gain favor with the open-source community and the business world without any active steps or concrete plans to put it in effect.
Re:No, not the GPL (Score:4, Insightful)
You are aware that Java is not written in Java? One issue is open sourcing the Runtime Enviornment source code which is java code, the other issue is opening the Virtual Machine which is not. Everyone has been griping about the VM code.
Re:Wow, this is huge news! (Score:5, Insightful)
Autoconf? (Score:4, Insightful)
Um, which platform do you use - it wouldn't be Linux x86 which pretty much all gnu software has already been ported to would it? Autoconf is good at getting things mostly right, but there are still various tweaks to get something running on a platform it hasn't been built for before (I know
All the Java I've written seems to run fine without modification under MacOSX, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris
If autoconf is the route to native portability, I think I'll stick with the current JVM model and get some work done, thanks you.
Re:You're not thinking. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why?
Is Java suffering at all due to lack of demand?
No.
Is the Java licencing restricting its implementation on different platforms?
No.
Is Java on Linux suffering as a result of this licencing?
No - Linux is one of the main deployment platforms for Java.
Is the demand for Java in the job market decreasing?
No.
I fully support open sourcing Java, but it does not take much understanding of the IT industry to realise that Java certainly doesn't need open sourcing - its phenomenally successful.
Re:Bah! Tell me when it actually happens! (Score:3, Insightful)
Now we have two recent announcements of open sourcing Sun's MAJOR software products with a vague "someday" air to them, which *reeks* in that way only a "oh, why use that product when we've got a better version that will be out really soon now" statement can. This is combined with recurring public statements by Schwartz attempting to introduce new memes into the I.T. sector ("open standards vs. open source") that (whaddayaknow!) serve to disparage the GPL, those who use it (Linux), and Red Hat *specifically*.
Yes, it's a public shift in their corporate strategy all right. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Microsoft and Sun have a common enemy that they both know will be the end of Microsoft's dominance and could quite possibly be the end of Sun, period, if they don't work in conjunction to slow it down.
So, indeed, we agree also that this is newsworthy. If I'm not mistaken, we believe it is newsworthy for different reasons. You believe they mean what they say. I don't. I will believe it when I see it.
Java will be open source! Never! Sometime! (Score:4, Insightful)
If I didn't know better, it would seem that Sun is flailing pretty badly at this point.
Re:sun's stock - racing to zero value (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a very big 'except for'. Also, Sun now make a considerable amount of money from selling software services. Oh, and by the way, its 'Sparc' hardware. Solaris is an 'Operating System'.
Linux did its job and forced them into only high end servers
Funny, I thought Open Source was about the pleasure of writing quality code, comradeship between developers, and providing choice. I did not realise it was designed specifically to annoy Sun.
where there is
- much less demand
There is?
- much stronger competition
But I thought you said that Linux was competition at the low end. How could Sun have been supposedly forced into 'only high end servers' without competition?
- commodity high end hardware
So?
- 'portable' dbms systems - Oracle 9 data is the same on aix, solaris, hp, etc
And has always been. Sun have always supported portability. That's why they went for UNIX decades ago and not a proprietary closed system like IBM and HP used to have. Sun got there first. When they started with UNIX, they published open standards for everyone to use, such as NFS. They allowed other manufacturers to use their Sparc designs. Sun realised that competition and portability are good: it means that competitors software can run on your systems.
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:3, Insightful)
And Sun Studio Java development tools.
And Mozilla with full modern applet support.
And Java security tools.
And Java integration with Star Office to allow database connections and Office component development.
By the same reasoning Java Desktop has no connection to Linux other than including Linux...
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
They do it by selling software services.
Sun: "We'll sell you software stuff and services."
Customer: "OK - what will it be written in?"
Sun: "Java"
Customer: "Cool - we already use java, its free, and we can use your software anywhere."
Re:You're not thinking. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You're not thinking. (Score:3, Insightful)
Only if there is a full-featured
Until then, its a neat way to develop for Windows platforms, and to experiment with Mono on Linux.
Re:You're not thinking. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not much of an announcement (Score:3, Insightful)
I have nothing against making it easy for end users. In fact, that's exactly what I'm developing: easy solutions for end users. But insults and stereotypes from people like you is EXACTLY what I hate so much!
Re:Yeah, by IBM. (Score:2, Insightful)
Now by contrast how much of the Sun Java Desktop would work without the Linux kernel, the associated GNU tools and GPL'd software?
This Reminds me of C (Score:2, Insightful)
Sun's situation with Java is really reminiscent of AT&T's situation with Unix and C.
One could make a good argument that the excellent portability of C is because of AT&T retaining tight control of it for so many years. Many people learned the language and there were many applications written for it, so by the time more compilers were written for it, and later, when it was standardized, no one wanted to break anything.
In other words, the existing mass of programs keeps C stable and reasonable. If language changes different enough (or innovative enough) come along, they are put into a new language derived from C, and given a new name (like "C++" or "Java").
Is Java at that point now? Is there a big enough mass of Java code out there to keep the language stable without Sun's help?
Re:Wow, this is huge news! (Score:3, Insightful)
While we're getting the credentials out of the way, I started coding in 1979. I've written commercial code in a lot of languages, from C to LISP to Python (just to name a few that cover a good chunk of the spectrum of language types).
The problem with Java on the client is that you depend on the end-user to have things set up 'correctly' on their end. In our case, these are lawyers and accountants and other assorted people who could care less about computers. So if you discover that Java 1.3.1_06 and below has a fatal bug in the networking code, you have to write a workaround for that, since it is untenable to ask your customers to install a new JVM
I'm presently employed on a cross-platform Java application. We have synchronized deployments to 3500 client machines that have to occur over a single weekend, and travel via our WAN to roughly 40 states plus Europe and Asia. The clients know not and care not how the application works. We ship a new JRE with roughly 20% of our deployments. Our application is currently deployed to Linux (client and server), Windows (client side only), and Solaris (server side only).
How is this practical? Our application is over a million lines - the JRE isn't the largest part of the deployment. In enterprise deployments to a heterogenous environment, the key factor is not the size of the JRE, it is the things that really affect the bottom line - maintainability, platform neutrality, performance (yes, performance - Swing is within 10% of C when written properly), etc. I'm not saying Java is head and shoulders above all competitors in these areas, but it is certainly a decent match against the best of them. Every language has it's ideal areas - for my money (and having solved the problem with a number of technology sets), enterprise scale GUI client/server apps is one area where Java is well suited, as are some other languages.
It's a toolkit. If you're having troubles with Java, try some other languages - you may find that others are more suited to your development style or your deployment environment. Java is not a bad language because the JRE is over 10 megs any more than an airplane is a bad form of transportation because it requires an airstrip. The right tool for the job is the key.
Re:Why the hatred against our ally?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Suns past has kept it out of trouble from many for quite some time, but like most companies also do; its time to re-evaluate their commitment. And Sun is not giving enough to make Java grow the way it can. All these people are not asking Sun to give more, they are asking Sun to let their child out in the open where it will interact with others and gain new experiences.
Right now Sun is limiting the growth of Java more then stimulating it. All the kids on the block see it, but like any parent the last one to see it is Sun itself.
There is no hatred; just frustration.
Re:You're not thinking. (Score:3, Insightful)
No. Its about 80-85%. Otherwise, figures for Linux installations and MacOS/X + Windows would add up to more than 100%
Certainly future Microsoft OSes will run
You are confusing desktops with the entire IT market. Java works NOW on almost every OS. If its not installed, its a single click to download and install from java.net. Major computer VARs like Dell are bundling Java with desktops. However, for general use, this is irrelevant. Most java apps are accessed by web pages, and most java apps are deployed on servers: Desktop software is irrelevant to the Java market.
If you believe Java is in decline, you need to open your eyes and look at the real IT market, not the one you want to exist.