Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Distributing IBM Java Runtime and Tools
gac writes "The press release today notes: 'Under the agreement, Red Hat will license and distribute IBM's Java Runtime engine, Java Virtual Machine (JVM) and the IBM Developer Kit for Linux, Java Technology Edition. IBM's JavaTechnology will be distributed with the Red Hat Linux Operating Systems (OS) Enterprise Edition. Red Hat will provide worldwide support contact for users of the IBM Java Technology as they create and deploy Java-based Internet solutions on Red Hat Linux.'"
I do note that IBM has VisualAge COBOL, but where are the Qt bindings?
Which one of the COBOL environments provides a metaobject protocol? (Just as CLOS - Common Lisp Object System has, as does C++ as does Guile with GOOPS
Hmm? Hmm? Inquiring minds want to know...
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
"but even more so I'd like to see java 2 in browsers"
I agree. I don't think that Microsoft will lead the way. But if enough of their competitors updated their VMs we might see web sites supporting newer versions of Java. I find it a bit of a pain not being able to use Swing 1.1 (well, I could, but the JAR files are just too big to place on the web server).
Excuse me? Although I have little desire to get into an argument with a coward on here, but I'm speaking from cold hard experience, and several months of fairly heavy benchmarking and evaluation of a half dozen platforms for servlet and EJB-based applications on a number of servlet engines and application servers on the various platforms.
Blaming Java for Linux's inability to handle large numbers of threads stinks of Linux evangelism at it worst. How long have you, Mr or Mrs Anonymous Coward being using Linux? Eight years like I have? How many commercial rollouts of services using it have you done? Dozens like I have?
The fact is, regardless of your opinion on the Java threading model and the way most Java applications are written, that Linux is not a good match currently for running enterprise class Java applications. And it most certainly is because native threads (being one-to-one mapped to processes) are too heavy-weight. Tweaking the scheduler helps, but most certainly doesn't fix the problem.
If you've ever written enterprise applications in Java, you'd know that the choice as how to use threading isn't always in the control of the application writer. Its tied to the application server and the web server, or servlet environment.
The one point you were correct about was the need in Linux for a more robust kernel threading model that isn't process-bound as it currently is. Until that time, no matter how good IBM's JVM is (and it IS that good), the vast majority of enterprise applications are going to run notably faster under NT. Shipping IBM's JVM with RedHat under the guise of making it an "enterprise" platform, however, is asking for more pseudo-Mindcraft tests to run and show how much faster Java applications are on NT than Linux.
RedHat would be better spending some of its millions hiring kernel hackers to find a solution to the threading issues, THEN Linux could really compete in the enterprise application marketplace.
This is a good thing. The IBM JVM is far and away the fastest on Linux. But it still (unfortunately) sucks compared to the IBM JVM on NT. That's not IBM's fault, but rather the threading issues dealing with the Linux kernel.
Bundling it is good, but its definately not "enterprise" ready. On identical hardware (ie dual boot) its at least 40% slower than NT at moderate load using the JRun servlet environment and Apache 1.3.9. I hate it when I end up having to host an application on NT instead of Linux -- its rare -- but the area of Java is definately a weak point.
The work IBM's been doing to optimize the scheduler looks promising though, but it can't replace the benefit of having ligher-weight threading in the kernel.
IBM has committed to supporting Java 1.2 on all of their strategic platforms. They consider Linux as one of those platforms. A number of other moves they've made (I wish I had the URL's handy) corroborate this statement. They haven't really released a 1.2 JVM for any platform, let alone Windows and their own OS's. This is because, as I said above, they do more than add bells and whistles. There are research teams in Texas, Japan, and Israel, I believe working on various aspects of the JVM technology.
Most of what they initially need to do is move their original improvements from the 1.1 series into the 1.2 reference they get from Sun. They've made some huge improvements to the JDK. For example their GC work alone is pretty impressive. Give them time... 1.2 will be out.
Sujal
PS. Most of this is coming straight from IBM dev rel folks at a Java Briefing Day. There were more than a few folks interested in Linux, and they mentioned all of the issues in that article that made a previous story and then some as items they'd like to work out in the future for linux.
politics, food, music, life: FatMixx
The term you wanted was ADD ONE TO COBOL GIVING COBOL. Of course, it was also locally known as Oh! Oh! COBOL! and I Object to COBOL.
Disclaimer: I'm not a COBOL programmer. Life's too short.
Does anyone know if the new Red Hat Enterprise Edition supposedly carrying this IBM Java stuff will include (as standard) those kernel performance tweaks published by that IBM research lab the other day?
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
Basically, you're saying you trust Sun's roadmap, over IBM's.
That's fine.
However, given Sun's recent track record with Sun (removing it from standards consideration for example), I don't trust them.
IBM has shown itself perfectly willing to make money USING Open Source software, rather than by denouncing it. I trust them.
Sun sits there and wonders why everybody else is wasting their time with Linux. Everybody else sits there and wonders why Sun isn't doing anything while they reel in the mula. As much as I might dislike Java some days, I think this is good for both RedHat and IBM. IBM gets to have support done by someone who knows Linux, which makes them look good. RedHat gets more support contracts, which makes them have more money to fund developing more Linux stuff.
Does anyone else see the irony that IBM is making the bucks (minus licensing fees?) from Sun's Java technology on Linux, which Sun thinks is a waste of time 8^)
-Matt
-Cheetah
The following is taken directly from IBM's web pages:
VisualAge for Java Version 3.0 includes an Early Adopters Environment providing support for Java 2, formerly known as JDK 1.2. Developers can start now to build and deploy selected applications that target the Java 2 platform, taking advantage of Java 2 features such as improved security, portability, and advanced user interface controls.
It appears you are partially correct, as it looks like the JDK 1.2 support is beta at this point. The place I work is a fairly large IBM customer, so we get a lot of stuff fairly early.
You are correct up to a point. IBM never got broken up, but it was forced to make some concessions to the government to avoid that. Interestingly in the end IBM chose to break large parts of itself off (the spinoff of Lexmark, the sale of Rolm to Siemens, etc). Not being able to replay history with different scenarios, it is hard to say that IBM ever would have changed had they not had to live under the DOJ's scrutiny. Also the industry has yet to prove that it can force Microsoft to change their ways like it did with IBM, so I am not yet ready to think that DOJ action against Microsoft isn't necessary. Without the DOJ keeping IBM fighting on another front in court, would the industry have been able to break from IBM's grasp?
Count me as someone who would be happy if Microsoft could/would choose to clean up their act on their own, or that the industry could force them to do so without requiring government action. But until that happens, I hope the DOJ continues to fight them.
Does this package from IBM include their fast VM?
I don't know about the fast VM, but this article describes a way of patching the Linux kernel to speed up performance of a VM. I guess it would be up to Red Hat to include that patch in their package.
As far as someone claiming that IBM is dumping all their support on Red Hat for their Java tools, it looks to me that Red Hat would only be providing support for the IBM software that is sold by Red Hat not all IBM Java support under Linux totally.
Do this don't do that Can't you redesign.
They've been promising support for 1.2 for quite a while now. So far no 1.2. That alone is enough reason for me not to use it. I don't see why anybody developing serverside Java would want to limit himself to just the 1.1 API. The 1.2 API is so much richer in functionality.
Therefore I don't share the enthousiasm about IBM's vaporware. Of course they've got a lot of good stuff as well (especially aglets, XML, san Francisco, etc.) but as far as I can see it IBM's choice of not supporting 1.2 is a marketing driven decision, not a technologically driven decision.
As for their Jikes compiler: many people don't seem to realize that compiler speed is not so much an issue in Java since there's no linking phase as you have in C++ (this causes even minor changes to take a long time to compile). Because of that you can incrementally compile your system (i.e. you recompile only the changed classes). For this reason Jikes alledged compilation speed is not a very compelling argument to me. And since other comments on this story have hinted that the quality of Jikes' compiler is not so high I don't think I'm missing much by not using it.
Jilles
IBM is struggling to redefine themselves as the "service company". Now they let Red Hat do the support for them. I suspect IBM's just trying to benefit from the current media hype surrounding Red Hat and anything around it. Once the hype is over, IBM will grab the support back, I bet.
Go to this page, it's exactly what you're looking for.
To sum it up, 1.2 for Windows, Linux is supposed to come in Q1 / Q2 2000, 1.3 following soon. It is already available for AIX and OS/400.
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2426 221,00.html
It says that RedHat will be the first to licence and distribute the tech, but does that mean that they're the ONLY one who will? Call me paranoid, but I'm getting images of even greater differences between distributions and possibly what is known as 'unfair advantages' here.
I guess the part about 'open standards and community source technologies' hints towards open source, but as we all know, big companies *cough*SUN*cough* doesn't nessecarily (sp?) mean the same when they say open source as the rest of us do.
-
I don't think people realize exactly how much effort IBM is putting into Java. I work for IBM, and have access to the internal Java sites and source code. IBM is doing a complete rewrite of Java. The programmers cannot have even looked at Sun's code, because IBM is afraid that anyone who has seen Sun's code may produce code that infringes on Sun's copyrights. So the IBM Java programmers (theoretically) have never seen any of Sun's source, just the specs. Pretty damn impressive. Plus the IBM jdk is much faster and more reliable than Blackdown's (I can consistently produce a seg fault with Blackdown's native thread 1.1.8 while IBM's has no problems).
Is there anyone producing an open source java variant for linux ??
If not, why not ?
Why would Red Hat include a non-open source product in their main distribution ?
Or was that all smoke being blown by Young until it was convenient to release closed source products that he feels add value to RH's products ?
Open Java for linux !
Anyone care to venture an opinion regarding the quality, speed of these tools vs. the JDK from Sun (the one they ripped from Blackdown)?
Does this package from IBM include their fast VM?
illegitimii non ingravare
Please, all members of JDC, go here and cast your votes to have Sun release this software. We are up to 2703 votes so far. It took 4551 votes before Sun released the Linux version, so we're almost there, right? ;-)
(However, I am well aware that the release of the Linux port was due in large part to the excellent folks from Blackdown.)
You must be registered in the JDC (Java Developer Connection) to vote. Registration is free and quick, so if you're a Java developer or just have a general interest on FreeBSD or Java, please go sign up and vote!
Anyone interested in doing an unofficial port please mail me at javadrew@spammerslovehotmail.com (obviously remove the "spammerslove" :-).
Viva Java 2 en FreeBSD!
--
I like to watch.
It is not just PR, IBM is becoming quite different compared with what they've used to be 10-15 years ago. They are still in a process of defining themselves though.
VisualAge does not support Java2. Websphere does not support Java2.
This is obsolete information. WebSphere 3.0 and Visual Age for Java 3.0 have support for Java2. We just got our CD's for the 3.0 versions the other day and will be upgrading from the 2.0 versions in the near future.
From the VisualAge web site:
Java 2 and Linux Support
VisualAge for Java Version 3.0 includes an Early Adopters Environment providing support for Java 2, formerly known as JDK 1.2. Developers can start now to build and deploy selected applications that target the Java 2 platform, taking advantage of Java 2 features such as improved security, portability, and advanced user interface controls.
In response to popular demand from developers, IBM is providing VisualAge for Java for the Linux platform, underscoring IBM's commitment to supporting customers on the platforms they choose. With VisualAge for Java support for Linux, developers will be able to quickly build, test and deploy 100% Pure Java applets, applications, JavaBeans components and servlets on Linux. VisualAge for Java on Linux is available at http://www.ibm.com/software/vadd.
Drinking will help us plan!
As the joke goes...
[
See, Sun decided to be really clever and drop the standard practices used for software versioning It goes like this:
Get it? By dropping the number before the decimal point, they can fool you into thinking it's a whole new version! After all, there's no way we can convince our employers to pay for a software upgrade from 1.1 to 1.2, but 1.1 to 2 must be something big. (But JDK is free, so...? Nevermind.)
Eventually Solaris and Java will have to start using Apple's roman numeral software versioning, because you can't have Java 10. Because Java 10 would be JDK 1.10, which is technology from the Dark Ages (1997!!). My hunch is that they'll start using the "Street Fighter" versioning system, so by 2002 we'll have Java 2 Turbo Alpha Hyper. Capcom managed to survive for five years like that.
--
I like to watch.
I'd like to point out that IBM has recently done an excellent job of grabbing good PR where it used to be terrible. There was a time when IBM was as hated as Microsoft is today, and now even the "underground Microsoft resistance" doesn't have too much bad to say about IBM. I imagine it stems from their underdog status gained during the development of OS/2. Or, it could be their lack of unfair business practices.
Does this IBM VM come with source code? I'd love to get a look at that.
-------- "All I want in life's a little bit of love to take the pain away" --Spiritualized
I've run the Blackdown 1.2 JDK and the IBM 1.1.8 JDK and there is no doubt the IBM version is faster. Granted, it doesn't "know" how to do as much, but even considering that factor, the 1.1.8 JDK kicks solid ass.
Sujal
politics, food, music, life: FatMixx
IBM makes lots of noise about supporting Java but what they never mention is that they're supporting an OLDER version of the language. None of IBM's JVM's support Java2 (JDK1.2+). VisualAge does not support Java2. Websphere does not support Java2.
Java2 has been out for quite a while and the fact that IBM still doesn't support it doesn't give me any confidence that they will stay current in the future. How long will it take for them to support 1.3 or the version after that?
Some parts of IBM are doing some really cool things with Java, an example being the Jikes compiler. If you look closely, however, you'll notice that the only parts of IBM doing CURRENT java stuff are research projects. All the products that IBM plans to make money from are using an OLD version of Java. Admittedly, they're still working on the product and are making it faster and more robust but they're supporting the wrong version of the language.
Hearing that IBM will distribute their VM's with all the major linux distros doesn't make me overly happy. Why do I want another Java 1 VM?
If all the distros are going to be providing a version of Java then it should be a CURRENT version. The Blackdown Java2 VM would be a much better choice IMO.
IBM seems to be set to render Sun irrelevant to the future of Java...They are making the right Linux moves as well as good moves in the Java & XML front. I can't wait to get a IBM's JDK on my linux box. :)
Oh happy day...