Slashdot Mirror
McNealy Answers: No Open Source Java
comforteagle writes "Sun CEO Scott McNealy has finally answered the long awaited question that has been on the minds of open source and Java developers. Will Sun open source Java? No. He stated today that Sun sees no solution solved from open sourcing Java that isn't already addressed."
When pressed about his decision, Scott McNealy admitted, "Well, we were going to open source Java until we realized that the phrase 'open source' is really more of a noun than a verb."
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
If you don't open source it, how can we fork it?
But seriously folks...
God strike me down for saying it, but he's right. Java as a core language is fine. It's libraries are decent. What's more, it is infinitely extensible through the addition of third party libraries.
Why would you need an open source Java?
I have been pwned because my
http://gcn.com/vol1_no1/daily-updates/25400-1.html
"Go open source with DB2 and then you can tell me what to do with my assets," was McNealy's response to IBM
I bootleg Fizzy Lifting Drinks.
Look at perl for example. Do you think it would be where it is today if it were closed source? It would probably be some hack that about 2 guys use. But no, it's on the standard distribution of just about any UNIX-like OS out there, and many websites use mod perl with Apache to get some great results (including /.)...
Imagine where Java would be if it were open sourced. I think that most desktop software could even be developed for Java and run the same on any platform. No more Microsoft monopoly. You could buy a program and run it on OS X, Linux, Windows, or whatever. How? By being open sourced, it would probably become so efficient and powerful that nobody would want to waste their time natively compiling stuff for this system or that.
Yeah man, he's making a big mistake.
Though he claims to see no solution that would be solved by open sourcing Java, is there harm in doing so? If not, it seems to me that they may as well open source it, perhaps there is something to be gained that they cannot predict. Who knows?
The Java Community Process is a great forum for Sun to pretend to solicit outside views on the future of Java.
It doesn't need to be open source to be good.
It is sad that they don't want to open up java, but really, in the end, it comes down to business strategy. And at this point in time, it just doesn't make good business sense for Sun to throw away their last trump card.
...people might figure out how to do crazy things like decompile it. Oh, wait.
Karma: Bad. Mostly because the only moderators that notice me are conservatives.
Sun has quite a history of inventing new interfaces, then abandoning them because competing open standards achieved more traction in the marketplace. If they're not careful, C# will do exactly that.
So once again the question comes up... Is Sun a hardware company or software company? They sure aren't doing hot in either arena...
what is the reason for open sourceing java? The source code is avalable (through a restrictive licence, but it is there). Byte code is an open standard, so it is possible to create your own vm.The only real thing that is required are all the extra classes.
There is more to open-sourcing something than just the benefits of doing so. Has he thought at all about the penalities for not doing so(like a million pissed off geeks)?
I can already hear the 'a million pissed off geeks didn't help Dean'...
There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
most of us won't be able to afford it.
-- Lemmy
How would opening the source up benefit Sun ? It would obviously benefit the open source community and give Sun their respect, but Sun is out to make profit, and even in the long run I don't see how they can make more money. Besides, Sun knows java best, granted, open source developers could make improvements but people are going to use java regardless. Only until a new bit-code type programming language with the cross-platforming capabilities of java and a substantial amount of users, will Sun consider releasing the source. Sun is out to make money, not win friends, and I don't think they will loose many customers because they aren't releasing their source.
If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
We are all free to use one of a dozen open source Java virtual machines (GCJ, Kaffe, Jikes RVM, etc) and the GNU Classpath java libraries. So what's the problem, exactly?
> Sun sees no solution solved from open sourcing Java that isn't already addressed."
It's true that getting smart people to use it
instead of blackdown doesn't really solve anything,
for us anyway, he's right.
Maybe if they had opened it earlier; but we ain't
gonna run closed source shit on our 'puters so fuck
'em.
In the other world, there's Novell who seems to be doing a lot of OSS-hugging lately. I believe SUSE's YAST is going open along with a few of Novell's very own formerly closed-source stuff. Sure, they may not be opening up the keys to the kingdom (not sure if they are or not) but at least they're visibly cooperating with the Open Source community.
SUN still contributes to OO.org stuff so we can't really rip them on that. However, they remain at the very least lukewarm to OSS. They offer Linux because their customers ask for it, they say. They package a Java Desktop where the word "Java" seems a bit out of place...I think banking on name recognition more than anything else. They killed off the cobalt servers. Just not very Open Source-friendly as far as their PR campaign seems to be going.
Open Source Java? A stern no is the answer. I guess they'll still need to hang on to something while the boat sinks. Might as well be a cup of strong hot coffee.
I wouldn't open source something this valuable when M$ is still standing.
Let's face it if M$ can release their own nasty versions of java before, they can do it again.
You remember this from your SATS... (not you, specifically. in general)
The Tick:Spoon as Open Source Movement : ?????
oh, yeah. fork.
I'm all for open source software (although i'm not batty enough to use it exclusively), but sometimes its nice to have an official guardian, even if they do some boneheaded shite.
Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
Unix will be back. Really, it will! Everything is beautiful! Don't worry! Be happy! Customers will return to Solaris one day! After all, if schwartz said it, it must be true.
and even scott is a believer:
The "fad will wear off, and big business will come back to solaris".
Sun, don't worry, everything is great. Everybody else should wake up and smell the java.
Does it look to any one else like Sun is just trying to hold on as tight as they can to the last thing they realy have. I mean from there point of view if they release Java to the comunity what is there clame to fame anymore, at least currently?
As much as I'd hate to admit it, this is probably a good thing.
We would probably end up having a dozen versions of Java out there, and various "java distributions" - and there would be no particular standard. There would be a pseudo-standard enforced by Sun, and say, IBM - but there is nothing to stop Microsoft to go ahead and make a non-standard version of it and popularize it.
Okay, now Java is not going to be Opensource - but does that preclude IBM contributing to Java in any way at all?
Sun's refusal to open up their technology to anyone who wants was seen as a big win for MS as they forged forward to counter-sue Sun over the Java technology....
Yeah, I'm really bored.
-]Phreak Out[-
One of the big problems with Java is the license. Here are some issues that real people have faced:
1.) RedHat couldn't put a JVM in their desktop OS w/out including the Java license in anaconda and having the end user agree to it at install time. As a result, RedHat couldn't set up Netscape and Mozilla to run Java applets seamlessly and out of the box.
2.) FreeBSD couldn't include Sun's JDK in the ports tree out-of-the-box. An admin pays $$$ for cut CDs or spends time to download ISOs so that they don't have to do a network install. When they find go to build Java on FreeBSD they are told by the ports tree to go "agree to Sun's license and download the JDK from http://java.sun.com/blah/blah/blah". Not only is it annoying to have to download an extra component that isn't included on the ISO, it leaves a poor taste in the admins mouth for Java. And come on - admins are the last people developers want to irritate.
I can understand Sun's position with not open sourcing Java. Although relatively uninformed on the topic, I don't see any prevailing reason to make it open source - there are open source implementations of the JDK other than Sun's - go with them. But for cripes sake change the farking license.
It is a sad sad statement that I, as an enterprise java developer of 6 years, am unable to get applets to work appropriately on my Linux desktop.
Do it for da shorties
C# is open ??
Why more people don't understand this I do not know.
i am sorley dissapointed.
Open sourcing Java would allow more updates of Java on the less common platforms. Imagine having a full J2DK 1.4 on your Zaurus, or the unix-ish J2DK within Cygwin. Currently neither is available, but both would be within a few months at no cost to Sun if Java was open sourced.
Even if not GPLed, it'd be worthwhile to Sun to half-ass an opensourcing of Java. Make it so that no one but Sun may distribute it for profit, but anyone may modify and recontribute changes to Sun. People will complain, but no more so than with Apple's license.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Java won't save Sun and McNealy will ultimately take it to the grave with his company.
Why do people think making something Open Source is unanimously good? Indeed, in this case I think Open Sourc-ing Java would be a bad move. Java has a slew of sattelite ecosystems and things that are portrayed as "technologies" themselves. I think Java desperately needs a backbone on which those entites can rely on for stability. In fact I think this is why Java is a little too popular. Now days you cannot get a Java project without being required know J2EE, JNDI, JABC, JDEF, JJJ, and fifteen other acronyms. The whole thing has become an exercise in marketing. Now factor in the coup de gras of different permutations created by Open Source people and you're thuroughly confusing the situation.
Incedentally, isn't it strange how the Java API can evolve so much and yet despite the holes in POSIX no one has even considered changing it.
By all means, ask for x86 support. But DON'T KILL SUN. Now is not the time to ask for Java to be open sourced. It would be a good thing, however, to extract from them, some promise that as Java evolves, some earlier version can be open-sourced.
McNealy's wrong. Open source Java is knocking at the door. And worse yet, it will run on Mono not a JVM!
well, that settles it. nearly everyone using linux will have parrot (once its out) for perl6. and now, we'll be using mono for the strong typed languages. unless java becomes free (not beer) it wont end up on distros and wont end up on joe users computer when linux pwnz the desktop. computers are fast enough to use perl and python for pretty heavy tasks, and i think thats going to be the easy way to make desktop apps in the near future, unless mono kicks more ass than i think it does (and i hope it does)
Given IBM's participation in Java, I wouldn't be surprised at all if a lot of the proprietary code in Java is actually owned by IBM and Sun doesn't have the right to open-source it. And yeah, if IBM is actually prodding Sun to open up Java source while they actually own the rights that prevent Sun from doing so, and Sun can't even mention that because of the license, that would be somewhat ironic, no? I guess some vestiges of the old IBM live on...
The way I look at it, this was Sun's ticket to having Java become synonymous with Linux... (wouldn't it be nice to say where there's Linux there's Java?)
.NET, on Linux the 'Java' desktop will be powered by Gnome+Mono, configuration tools will continue to be written in Python and Perl.
Well, so be it...
On Windows we will use
Doesn't matter to me, but it might to Sun... Well I'm tired of Sun's fence sitting on Linux anyway.
You mean like how Microsoft's fervently and religiously guards their Intellectual Property and their source? It's Intellectual Property that keeps many linux distributions from including non-open software.
An open source Java would be good for some people (like me) and bad for other people (like you)
Unless Sun's VM is 100% open source, Red Hat won't ship it. Heck, they purged pine. So if Sun used an "almost open source" license it wouldn't solve the problem.
Let's all use .net, instead!
That'll show them.
Note for the sarcasm-impaired: Move along, now.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
If sun followed the linux model - and key engineers at sun reviewed each change and made sure that it was ok to add to the release, and followed through everything openly, then it would work.
Your argument doesn't hold water. Where are all the forks of linux? Just because its a language does not mean it will fork and fracture. Perl isn't forked to hell. Nor is python. Nor are many open source languages.
If sun truly believed in open source (and I don't believe they do), then this would be a great step forward for them.
And McNealy's challenge to IBM to open source db2 is silly too; sun makes no money from selling java licenses (duh, they're free), where as IBM does make money from db2.
C# and MSIL have a free implementation. Whether this qualifies those technologies as "open" or not depends on your definition of "open."
...no Open-Source SUN Java.
People being impatient have already generated GCJ and Kaffe working on open-source implementations of Java. Neither are yet as complete as the 'full' Java, but are in progress.
Is there a 'standard' for the Java language itself, in the same way that there is for "C#"? If not, could it be because Sun doesn't want to make it easier for Open-Source folks to create a complete implementation?...
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
The Future of OSS Desktop Development, Part II is a current discussion of the blog debate between Havoc Pennington and Miguel de Icaza regarding Havoc's initial essay on Mono, Java, and the Linux desktop.
also worth a read is Rasterman's (lead developer of the Enlightenment project) comment.
educate yourself.
peace
We are left with no other option go with.NET
Are you people missing the whole point of Java? It is a uniform, write once, run anywhere standard. Well, it is meant to be, and if you look at the hundreds of incredibly diverse platforms it runs on, it is doing a damn fine job of it. How can that be achieved with everyone pushing and pulling it in their own directions? M$ is doing that with C#/.net, they control the libraries, so it is effectively USELESS to anyone except them, get it? C#/.net is USELESS. Which do you think is more open, C#/.net or Java? Come on, get real, the current Java development process is the ideal one to achieve its goals. There is nothing stopping anyone from extending the platform in a completely open, peer-reviewed process. The very thought that Sun is trying to control that is ridiculous. Do you want a transparent, open, agreed expansion of Java, or do you want a hidden, surprise attack, forkathon splintering of the whole platform. Sun is your friend people, they have given you a great treasure, and now they're trying to ensure that it retains its value.
This is -1, Flamebait.
(It's just waiting for an itchy reply about security flaws and non-standards compliance and other Microsoft insanity.)
What is the business case for Sun open sourcing Java? Try as I might, I can't think of any strong reasons for it.
One might argue that open sourcing the JVM and/or the Java standard libraries might be useful to allow people to create their own distributions for their specific platform, rather than doing a complete rewrite. I can see that being useful for platforms that aren't a priority for Sun.
The question is, though how would Sun make money from any of this (mind you, I doubt they make any money from it right now). Can anyone explain how Sun could benefit from open sourcing Java?
If Sun suddenly dies (as many have been doing in the industry), who is left to maintain the code?
Don't say "Oh that won't happen." We've heard that before -- and it did. The question now is alot of their code "who's going to maintain/support it?"
--
# Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
$Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
You forget the fact that companies that have vested interests in killing Java *cough* a certain Seattle based company *cough* could use this against Java.
.Net? Microsoft has everything to gain by killing it - it would only more people to use their platform.
I'm NOT starting a flame war here - but Microsoft does not really consider Perl or Python to be a serious contender as Java.
What do you think really inspired Visual Studio
Right now, Java gives people the freedom of platform - if in any way killing it or changing it in a way that makes it beneficial to MSFT, they WILL do it.
So, why doesn't IBM goes open source with their own Java implementation, if they are so eager to have an open source Java system?
This signature intentionally left blank
If we the people see fit, why not just take it? Why not just declare java a public property and ignore any copyright claims? Property rights exist only insofar as they promote the health of our culture. If Sun ever presses their claims to the point of our inconvenience it would be a small matter to just take java. Same with any other so called 'intellectual property' for that matter. What law can bind the entire net-population?
I've been working in an all-Java shop for close to 5 years now. One of the big headaches with Sun is the unenthusiastic response to some of the more obscure problems/bugs in the core API (especially around socket handling from what I've seen). Sun gives them low priority because they only affect sophisticated applications (touching rarely used parts of the API) where workarounds might be available. Man, there's a pointless stack trace dump in the HTML parser that's been annoyimg me for at LEAST 3 years. Some of these bugs have literally been out there for years. That would never fly in the open source community.
Of course, I can see their point of view also. Java is Sun's creation and giving it away does lose them a shiny badge of honor, since they wouldn't be able to market Java success as their own. And, open source APIs tend to advance so quickly that not-so-old APIs become obsoleted and incompatible. Open sourcers tend to be up to date with versioning, but this can become a big problem in corporate settings where a customer demands Java version X.1 for their environment, but your product ships with Java version X.2 (or vice versa). Java has essentially been backwards compatible since it's inception, disregarding the new classes.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
The parent is right. Other languages don't become fractured. That's because they have standards, often international ones, not because they're not open. If Sun were worried about fracturing, they'd submit java to a standards organization (like ANSI). But they haven't. They want to keep complete control over Java. They can change it whenever they want and keep the source.
Notice how TrollTech released a new free version of Qt Windows just about the time that KDE got their win32 port of the X11 source into a really advanced state? Not that it does much good on the ActiveX side of things, but I digress.
Or how about OpenMotif coming out just about the time the Hungry Programmers got LessTif pretty much finished?
I'm guessing that Java will be open sourced to the point where the distros can carry it...when and if the pressure from the free swing implementations and the GPL native java implementations mature, and the pressure from MS C#/dotNET and Mono efforts really start to gain momentum.
That's fine, Mr. McNealy. Go ahead and ignore the competition. But history has shown you're gonna lose control of java completely, sooner or later. By waiting, all you do is waste the time of the developers working on Mono, C#, Gnu java, Gnu Swing, etc...when they could be improving your product for free, and all the while poking a sharp stick in the eye of Bill Gates. This is a missed opportunity.
Still, you have to like Mr. McNealy. I think it was Linux expo 2001 when I heard him describe the merger between HP and Compaq as "...a head-on collision between two slow moving garbage trucks". That was prety damn funny. He's got his moments of leadership and clarity, so I guess that's why he heads up Sun Micro.
Holding back technology from the masses, hoping that the EU decision will help you come up with some type of closed model for domination (if that's what you are doing) is not quite as funny.
What is the real goal here? Maintaining enough control of the platform to insure a set of MS-compatibility libraries will be guaranteed to work with it, somehow restricted to your licensing schemes, without having to worry too much about the criticism of GNU/Hippies?
Sometimes, I like to unleash the power of the Sun... Oh wait different product, my bad.
What problem could possibly be solved by letting people contribute their time to help build Java?!?
Open Standards Portal
Like I indicated in another post, there is nothing to stop Microsoft from having their own "windows-only" forked version of Java.
Nothing but the Department of Justice & the Federal Criminal & Civil courts.
If I recall correctly, Sun sued Microsoft in Federal Civil court over the question of Windows-centric forks of Java, and the Clinton Justice Department probably filed a friend of the court brief in that civil case. Again, if I recall correctly, the question of Windows-centric forks in Java also played a role in the Clinton DOJ's so-called "anti-trust" lawsuit against MSFT [and Sun probably filed a friend of the court brief in that case].
So much for freedom to innovate.
I can't really see what Sun has to gain from open-sourcing Java either.
The open-source community is more than capable of building it's own Java clone e.g. Kaffe and supporting Java technologies e.g. gcj if it wants to, and Sun have every right to hold onto their Java implementation, if they feel it best suits their business goals.
I know I am quite happy using the Java packages provided by Sun and IBM, and agree with McNealy in that IBM should shut their mouth about open source Java unless they are prepared to open source their technologies as well.
Sun is most likely concerned, and rightly so, about the prospect of IBM pulling an 'Eclipse' on the core JVM.
IBM is a ruthless, anti-competitive mega-corporation, and it is easy to forget that in light of the SCO debacle etc., where they are portrayed as the good guys.
I dont think the community at large has any real stake in this particular battle - The Java standards are open, we are free to implement them in whatever way we see fit. If you want to see open source Java, then support the open source Java efforts like Kaffe, and leave Sun alone.
Normally, i'm quite a Sun-detractor, but I think in this case, they are being unfairly beaten up on about an issue that is quite clearly a non-issue.
If you want Java you can get it for free, and if you want to implement a VM that runs Java code, you are also free to do that, supported by detailed information and specification by Sun.
I doubt most of the people baying for blood over this issue would have any interest in improving Java were it to be released as open source, and it's not like there arent plenty of existant open source Java-related projects that couldn't do with your help anyway.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
Remember the recent lawsuit over this exact issue of MS "extensions" of Java? In January 2001 MS settled that suit. Companies don't settle suits they're likely to win. Making Java open source would simply void the settlement. Check out this site: http://java.sun.com/lawsuit/
McNealy is a wise CEO not to give the competition the tools to destroy his company.
So, I guess the .NET C# competition is already contained by, by, by what?
Someone else has provided links to the discussion from Havoc Pennington on the future of the Linux desktop. Havoc is discussing the alternatives. And none is very satisfactory. Open-Sourcing Java would have a catalystic effect and would solve OUR problem. But, maybe Scott just doesn't care because he is thinking he has finally found a way to dominate the desktop market and we are supposed to sit-down, wait, see and applaude!
Achille Talon
Hop!
Nailing Jesus to the cross, E-I-E-I-O.
We're gonna show him who's the boss, E-I-E-I-O.
With a whack-whack here
And a whack-whack there
Here a whack, there a whack
Everywhere a whack-whack
Nailing Jesus to the cross, E-I-E-I-O.
more people will use .NET than Java if Java is not open source ...
He claims to be a wizard, I'm suprised that he didn't cast a spell on McNealy.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
wow, avoid the one thing that could save your technology..
:) :)
this is where techno geeks and business geeks differ; techno geeks would rather see thier technology/ideaology live than make a profit.
mods, please forgive the spelling errors and disconnnectedness - i'm a tad unsober
Guns don't kill people -- people kill people.
But the guns seem to help a bit. (apologies to Eddie Izzard)
Oh Lord. How is this Insightful? The Linux desktop was this ][ close to becoming irrelivant. Novell and Sun (of all companies) have revitalized the Linux desktop with SuSE and the release of the Java Desktop. Now, I agree, the name is stupid, but having installed many of Linux distrubutions in the past, I'm happy to spend the $50 to see what Sun's attempt looks like (granted, it's YaST2, but hey).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that, they've impressed the hell out of me. Redhat's been trying for years to do what Sun did in probably months.
I guess it remains to be seen how secure their distribution of a distribution ends up being, if people take it seriously enough, that is.
Sometimes it's nice to pay to play. And for this price, more power to them!
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
I just have to answer this one, considering the actual source of VS.Net:
What do you think really inspired Visual Studio .Net?
Answer: Delphi.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
This religous fervor business is nonesense.
Esp. considering sun is running their $100 java desktop off of morphix/knoppix (a project spawned from one of the so called "religous fervor" distros.)
I say, "Good move McNealy. You have just driven yet another nail in Sun's coffin".
Anthony Papillion
Advanced Data Concepts, Inc.
"Quality Custom Software and IT Services"
And I speak from experience on Netbeans . After spending significant time developing a module because Forte was not going to open source it. After significant effort duplicating the functionality in Netbeans because we did not have that capability, after rewriting most of the code from scratch with some refactoring previous efforts... they open sourced the project.
My wasted time... A lost project...
Don't get me wrong I still think Netbeans is a fine project but just goes to show consistency in making dumb decisions.
Also, I do think IBM has more to gain in this than Sun has.
Big blue is the enemy of my enemy but that does not make it my friend.
I sent Scott an open letter on behalf of NeoOffice.org nearly one month ago and haven't yet heard a response and no discussions are ongoing. It's really a straightforward request for myself and a few other OOo volunteers, and we can't even get publicly snubbed! I wonder what Eric Raymond and IBM have that we don't...
ed <---the ninth insignificant wonder of the world
It's called GNU Classpath with Jikes or some other OSS Java implementation. Unlike .NET, the java APIs can be cloned without legal problems as long as you write your own code. Yeah, it's a lot of work. But it's definetly possible. And with GNU classpath the hard part is already done.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
get behind Kaffe? ... or Blackdown? ...or something else?
This is allowed under the Java Community Process, etc. It would be an open source Java based on the JCP.
Wouldn't it?
Scott Carr
Monday: Open source Java
Tuesday: Forked
Thursday: Enormous whirling clusterfuck
Saturday: Start on new language
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
There is something that really suprised me: /. readers, are far from unanimous about Open Source.
/. is part of OSDN, right ?
Apparently, quite a lot of you do *NOT* believe in Open Source.
For some of you, Open Source is only about forking, and works only for small projects.
Are you using Linux (kernel) everyday? Mozilla at least, I guess? GNOME, KDE? eMule? Whatever else fucking (not negligible) open project?
But what the fuck?!!
(*Open Source* Development Network)
Has GNU been completely misunderstood? Does everyone completely disagree with www.gnu.org/pilosophy ???
Is everyone only temporary supporter to Open Source (not to speak of Free Software...), ready to buy SUN Java Desktop ASAP?
I hope it isn't the case. But please, say it!! Those Java related discussions give me the feeling that either it's only a bunch of Sun zealots (hear those shoutings during LookingGlass presentation...), or... we have lost.
Regards. Fucking best regards, guies.
I would have thought J2EE?
Wouldn't the same logic apply to Linux? If not, why not?
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
I've developed in relational databases since inception (dBase II), including all major commercial databases today. I can tell you, I am SO glad DB2 is not open source or attempting to be the Universal "run anywhere" database of the world. It is very behind the times due to it's extensive legacy customer base. The only benefit it has is performance on IBM hardware.
Open Standards Portal
Bad analogy? *Shrug*
How does disabling java in your browser more secure? Last I checked Java Applets are in a sandbox and cannot hurt the system.
Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
... but what about playing alot nicer with the OSS Community? How bad would it be if you start working proactively with the OSS community when it comes to development with/of Java ?
Are you saying that Sun is grasping on to Java like a sailor grasps on to wild storms? I don't think that's possible to grasp on to a storm...
Oh wait I see! You're saying that in wild storms, sailors grasp on to Java, because sailors appreciate a programming language with built-in garbage collection, you know, to guard against leaks! Last thing you want in one of those wild storms is a leak. I got it now..
"It's Dot Com!"
Mark my words: is Netscape/Mozilla all over again.
.NET and the once dominant Java sees its market share shrink, Sun will be left with a minority proprietary platform.
.NET runtime and SDK by default on all desktops, Linux distros will have Mono too, but thanks to Suns moronic License, Linux distros will not ship Suns JRE/SDK by default.
In the next years, where a lot of people move to
Windows will ship with the
Who loses here?
Only at the last moment, will Sun (if it still exists) Open Source Java as a last resort, but by then it will be too little, to late.
That is, if IBM does not re-implement Java from scratch and sets it free first, making Sun completely irrelevant.
Java is not a revenue generator for Sun, and they could exercise control by trademark/certification plans, so I don't see what they lose if they Open Source it.
Sun is going the way of the Dodo, with IBM, MS and Linux handing them their asses for lunch.
adl
My boring ramblings
Personally, it's no surprise to me that Java will never be open sourced -- as far as I can tell, McNealy is doing his best to drive the company into the ground.
J2EE is a actually a rip-off of late 90s Microsoft technologies ASP, MTS, ADO, etc.
McNealy is the Eisner of the IT industry. He's spinning on the semantics of what people are saying and not getting why they want what they want and accordingly he's risking everything that he has.
There are numerous licenses in existence that would allow Sun to maintain their closed source product that probably would not be against RedHat policy.
.so file into your browser (rarely do the already compiled .so files line up with your browser version), put out a dozen or so different sub releases (JDK 1.4.2_03 build 13? come on...), and then watch with confused looks on their faces as Flash takes over the world of client side GUI development.
I think the crux of the issue with RedHat is that:
a.) Sun wants you to download Java only from Sun
b.) RedHat wants to redistribute Java via the RedHat end user license.
The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. I don't understand why Sun can't just let "other people" (RedHat, FreeBSD, etc) distributed their binary code without checking in at Sun.com first.
As a java developer who earns an income based upon Java's success, I really want to see Java succeed on the desktop because it opens up more development avenues for me and other java developers. And I think that Sun has an interest in java succeeding on the desktop as well (their Java Desktop would seem to indicate this). With technologies like Flash that are so nice looking, so easy to install, and lots of times already integrated on your platform - you would think that Sun would be doing __everything_in_its_power__ to help foster the growth of java on the desktop.
I would think Java would be out there lobbying Dell and Compaq pumping them to install WebStart on their desktops. Or put in an up-to-date JRE into IE. Or . . . put in a stinking applet viewer into the Mozilla that ships with the Linux distro most commodity users install.
But they don't. Instead they sit back, come up with a dozen or so mime-types that represent a Java Applet, make it prohibitively difficult to install the correct
Come on Sun. Wake up! I want java to succeed on the desktop as much as you do. You guys clearly haven't figured out how to make Java pervasive - maybe us assclowns at home can figure it out. Just give up the EULA rights to Java so that one of us can figure out how to do, patch it into a vanilla distro (like Fedora), and let you reach the end users you've failed to reach since you came up with applets years ago.
There's nothing like knowing a solvable problem exists that you can't even begin to troubleshoot because some asshat lawyer somewhere wants you to sign their EULA instead of the one from another company (which is frequently the same stinking one).
Do it for da shorties
Do you know what you are talking about? C# was inspired by Java, sme part of the .Net framework was inpired by the J2EE, and visual studio is a visual development environment, how could it have been inspired by a server platform?
Write boring code, not shiny code!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Not that it'll convince any industry titans, but this is due to the fact that we've (mistakenly IMHO) focused as a community on the business and engineering benefits of open source software rather than the precepts behind free software. Maybe open sourcing Java won't accomplish anything -- but freeing it will.
"You can never have too many elephants on your team."
I always thought Sun's Java implementation not being open source was a mistake from the start. Really, Java was supposed to work consistently everywhere, and the more platforms it runs identically on, the better. Right? Why the heck not share the source?
So I say "whatever". If they don't care it doesn't run properly on my OpenBSD server, don't matter. Or on my Axim. Or on my toaster, refridgerator, whatever. But that's alright, eventually I'll get Mono working on my OpenBSD box.
Ozwald
The link to the real news story, from the link in the posters writeup gave me the scoop. That's just wrong. Why not skip the osdir site and just send us to the freakin news story?
Oh, it's got "O'Reilly" up there in the corner .... that MUST be it.
Call me a troll, call it offtopic, I don't really care. But linking to a wanna be slashdot is fucked up.
Sun does make money from Java. They license certification tools so that people can claim 100% Pure Java Certified and use the java logo. They make money from licensing the source code, they make money from licensing distribution rights for the JRE and JDK.
While you can distribute the JRE, you can only do so if you aren distributing it for the purpose of running your application.
You cannot distribute the JDK unless you pay for that right.
Open Source Java DAO Generator
well that means that we will just have to stick with the free and open source alternative; C#. Yeah, if you dont know already, MS's C# source is available here on their website. It says a lot when you can download the tar ball for the MS program and just type make on your favorite OS and not for the competetior..
Though, i dont really know what benefit would come out of open sourcing Java..
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
...and their Java implementation? Seems as though they have a pretty tight relationship with Sun and are able to include their own version of Java in OS X without any problems.
If parrot gets advanced enough.. Would it be technically feasable to create a java compiler to output parrot byte code instead of java byte code? It would seem an Ideal solution..
I confess my breif look at the Parot leaves me thinking its going to take some work, but it might be worth it. Getting Parrot cross platform (windows) might be a stumbling point. But if parrot is a robust enought VM it might work well.
Just a thought..
You know, as I recall McNealy was once part of a group that worked on an OS somthing that started off at bell labs, and had lot of help from some univeristies.. like UC Berkly.. as I remember. I I think that OS started off well but then slowly died under corprate intrest pulled it apart. Then an Open Source clone started floating around..and started pushing on the older OS.. finally kicking its ass. So why should be surpised that Scott is screwing things up again.. its done it before. I suggest that we just code around his little problems as we did before. I suggest we write an Open Source clone.. and we call it LAVA.
Oh yes, Sun is just _great_ for Linux. Right. Just look at what they did to Cobalt - they bought up a company that made a decent product for its market, and failed to provide timely updates and significant new products in the line. As such instead of building on a name that was just starting to great traction and a certain bit of respect, they let it whither.
No, I doubt Sun is doing the Linux community such a big favor with the Java Desktop (as I understand it it's basically a reworked version of GNOME...) Sun hasn't exactly been a rousing success in the desktop market - they stuck with CDE for a long time (it has its fans, but I'm not one of them), and now is shipping a rather stock install of GNOME, at least with Solaris x86. Big deal - I'm not looking to Sun to "revitalize the Linux desktop". Novell on the other hand, just might make a nice enterprise bundle with its trusted server products (though as I understand are losing market share) and a decent client based off SuSE.
IMHO, Sun likes to dip its feet occasionally into Linux, but I won't be surprised if it pulls out just as its getting started (like Corel did).
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
In fact, I'd say Mac OS X is a model Java platform. And, of course, it's the most popular of the BSD's. You're pretty off on this one.
I foresee Apple stepping up to the table.
Screw Java! Although I do like it, it is too limited as a base platform. I would recommend to look at Parrot and forget Java. Java is not that far from .Net, if you ask me.
.Net is a more futuristic platform, but it is certainly "evil." Mua, ha, ha!
With the Java platform, you only have one main language. Thus, for what it is worth,
Parrot has all the calories and none of the fat!
-ajam
I wonder how many people that think not open sourcing Java is a good thing also think that "choice" in desktops is a good thing. Think about it - KDE, Gnome, and Java are all frameworks. Gnome was never a "fork" of KDE, but basically have to choose one framework over the other for development. Also, you can't say that well my gnome apps run fine in KDE and vice-versa, but there's probably nothing that would forbit you from having two different Java forks on the same machine too.
Just a thought.
among other things, i develop webapps using servlets and velocity for a living. are there good cross-platform OO alternatives? any recommendations?
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
that most of the complaints about a non oss version of java come from linux users complaining that its liscense is what is hindering the growth of java. Of course this makes sense that linux users would want something open sourced.
But..MY GOD THIS IS RIDICULOUS.
To suggest that Java not being open source is its biggest hinderence to widespread acceptance is just plain stupid.
#1. Java being open source or not has no affect on its license. you could change the distribution license and solve the problem. #2. The thought that being automatically distributed on linux would promote widespread use is just plain dumb. I mean come on. First of all linux is nowhere near the #1 operating system on the desktop, and it really isn't even the #1 platform on the enterprise. But even if it was I can't imagine that having to go to java.sun.com to get a copy of java as part of your installation is not that big of a deal. I mean there are much more difficult problems when installing linux, Like getting the thing to work with my DAMN VIDEO CARD. If I need java I will download it just like if I need eclipse or struts. Seriously! This is just silly.
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
Nice troll. Java Desktop is just RedHat 8 with a different background.
The real desktop inovator is Xandros.
No open source java?
This is about as sad a day as I learned that Windows wasn't open source.
Nobody cares. Posers program in Java. Go ahead and mod me flamebait, but you know it's the truth. Nobody programs in Java that cares about performance and security. It's better for the community that poser languages that don't really offer anything substantive not be open source.
From all the replies on this topic, I get the idea that java is floundering. Is everyone leaving java in droves for .NET/C#? Just curious. It seems that everyone's in a state of confusion -- what happened to cause this? (I've been coding exclusively in c, c++, and perl for quite some time now and haven't kept up to date with what's going on in the java front -- although I'll be programming a JFC/Swing interface to a distributed application I'm developing shortly.)
Yes, Microsoft Java. Exactly.
.Net/C#/Mono infecting Linux than Java not being distributed with it.
No, there is no reason to OS Java. None at all. If a distro has a problem distributing it, big f-ing deal, find something else to complain about where it will make a difference, like SMB.
If someone really wants a JRE or, a developer wants a JDK, then nothing is stopping them - cept maybe no Internet connection - from downloading it. So, the whole distro thing doesn't hold any water in my book. I've never not been able to d/l a particular JDK and in fact, I have the source to the whole JVM and class libraries for reference. Yes, source, for free..
So Sun has done a very good thing to M$ by, like the poster said, taking them to task on polluting, yet another, language or app. And yes, C++ has much complexity and fragmentation, so Java and the JSR are fine by me.
Plus don't forget, Java's biggest strength is on the server. By simply not including a JDK in a distro for server developers is a moot point. A JDK can take from start of download to java -version a whole 5-10 minutes, tops! I don't see how that's a problem.
So can we drop this whole thing now? We should be worried much more about
I see no reason to even bother using Java anymore. It's been a royal pain where PHP and Python have not been. Open sourcing it may have breathed some life back into it, but ... well ... that didn't happen as I see.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Switch to Pike.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Java is open in a way that we can only dream of windows being open. It's not controlled by a single entity, it's APIs are excellently documented, and anyone can build a functionally identical replacement.
Ultimately the reference compiler, VM and supporting libraries are not open source - but they are just the reference ones. Nothing stops people from making a truly open source version ala blackdown.
Sun's rate of 'new features' has been more methodical enterprise-paced than the typical open source project, but it's coming along. Check out J2SE1.5 it's got strongly typed enumerations, generics, an extended for syntax and various other much appreciated features.
I think a very stable reference platform is one of the best things Java has going for it. Ever tried to get a perl script with more than 2 or 3 dependencies to run on your webhosts box...?
...based on liberal open source licences
Is it some kind of private fork of GCJ? Or does it work like Kaffe?
I'm confused.
I guess you could reverse-engineer kissme or SableVM, if you had to... but why bother making or using a proprietary JVM, when there are so many good (and improving!) free ones?
Evan Prodromou | evan@prodromou.name | http://evan.prodromou.name/
Just like there are dozens of incompatible versions of Python and Perl right?
As long Sun didn't OS-it under a BSD license I doubt MS would touch it with a very long poll, doubley so now that they are pushing their own CShit
Funny you should mention Python and Perl. These two open source projects have plenty of Microsoft involvement through ActiveState.
Microsoft knows how to use open source when it can benefit, even when the GPL is involved. It's pretty easy to fork a project to add Windows specific features - it just takes funding. Microsoft would surely have done that with Java two years ago if Sun didn't control the license.
I'm with McNealy on this one. It's his product, and he can do what he likes.
Java has ALREADY been forked. For example, check out Waba and SuperWaba.
Signatures are a waste of bandwi (buffering...)
While you can distribute the JRE, you can only do so if you aren distributing it for the purpose of running your application.
Could you clarify this claim a bit? Last time I checked the JRE license file (and the readme.txt), it was permissible to redistribute JRE as a part of your product without paying any royalties.
Java is dead. Needed to be said.
It is silly for McNealy to go on about incompatible versions produced by open-sourcing Java, when Sun itself is quite capable to being incompatible with itself.
I work in a dept packaging software tools for internal distribution in a large enterprise, and we have found that just about any non-trivial Java application needs to be shipped with a particular JVM. As often as not, using some other JVM (even a patch version change) makes the app misbehave subtly.
Write-once-run-anywhere means write once run anywhere you have exactly the same JVM version and platform. There is no way opens-sourcing Java could make this worse. More likely the opposite, as there would be more people who could find and fix bugs.
I repeat: Java is dead. Open-sourcing would have been its last change. Now it is gone.
Put down the crack pipe. How the fuck are you supposed to put mmx instructions in bytecode. The great thing about the JIT is that it can optimize the code for whatever platform it's running on and that has nothing to do with the bytecode.
Actually, the latest major version (1.4.2) is, but they always release it at least a month after the binary release. But the major problem is that they never release the sources for the bug fix versions (1_4_2_01 to 1_4_2_04).
I read this as SUN forbidding Debian to package their JVM in a Debian package.
do not distribute additional software intended to replace any component(s) of the Software
This would mean Debian wouldn't be allowed to ship with gcj, Jikes RVM, JRockit, Kaffe or whatever. To me it sounds quite unreasonable for SUN to want to be able to veto what can go into Debian.
defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises or results from the use or distribution of any and all Programs and/or Software
So SUN wants Debian to pay their legal fees? Silly Debian for not wanting to do that.
To me these terms sound quite unreasonable, I know I wouldn't want to adhere to them if I could decide what went into Debian.
Installed the Bubblemon yet?
What?? I really don't get how something so baseless can get modded up :(
As it is, getting enterprise level applications running together in Java is not an easy task - bring in more forks and incompatibility and you will kill the language.
Yeah, right. Just as that finnish hobbyist hack called Linux is not usable at all for the enterprise. That Linus guy never should have open sourced it ...
Actually LISP has most of the goodness of Java without the encumberance of any of the awkward and ill-concieved (mostly due to backward compatability) libraries that Java does. Add decent threading and decent network communication to Lisp and you'd make it as appetising and Java is (At least to me.)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
If by product you mean your OS that you built no. If you mean a java application yes.
The point is you can distribute it with your application provided your application needs it to run and does something useful. You can't create a "Hello World" application and use that to justify installing distributing the JRE in your OS.In addition you can omit some files that are marked optional to decrease the size of the jre part of your distribution. You can also include certain parts of the JSDK including the server VM and the java compiler (javac) The latter is good if you'd like to distribute your application in open source form and provide a tool for users to compile it if they've made changes.
You can see the full JRE license here
There is a new compression feature in 1.5 that will be able to compress the JRE into a really small file. Though the 1.5 JRE looks like it's going to be a lot bigger than 1.4.2. I don't do much client side development so I've never had to worry about it.
Open Source Java DAO Generator
Okay, look. There just isn't any point to having an open source Sun JVM.
.NET? To a barely-operable Mono or the much-hated Microsoft? I don't think so.
* The specs are open (the big problem with MS is that they work hard to make it a pain in the ass for anyone to make compatible software).
* The specs are all that should be needed. There is *tons* of open source software out there that is RFC-compliant. Guess what? The RFCs don't come with free, public domain reference implementations. They just describe a standard. For *decades*, people have been quite happy with a nice open standard. Who needs the source?
* Sun's JVM is good, but not great. There are lots of people working on JVMs out there -- there is *no lack* of open source JVMs. There must be at least thirty JVMs out there, not counting variations produced by a single company. AFAIK, IBM's JVM is the highest-performance thing out there (for Linux at least) and if we're demanding that something be open-sourced based on the fact that it's really good, I'd like to see IBM open-source theirs.
* It works fine. We have had no problems with the current system. Sun has not tried to leverage their JVM to screw people over, and I don't see how or why they'd do so in the future.
* There is no good alternative. What are people going to threaten Sun with, switching to
* There is a good set of tools to support Java out there.
* There are open-source alternatives that will probably take over eventually anyway. GCJ is slowly moving along. Why, aside from some kind of symbolism, do people care about using Sun's JVM? Just let GCJ get up to speed and get nice native-code Java builds. Instead of trying to beg for favors from Sun, why not work on GCJ? Sun probably spent more developing the language, docs, and marketing Java than they do developing their particular JVM implementation, anyway.
Given a choice between having Sun's JVM open source or not...yeah, sure, I'd prefer to have it open source. But if I really can't stand using a closed one, I can download Kaffe or one of the other JVMs on freshmeat. I'm not going to avoid Java because one JVM happens to be closed-source. If I avoid Java, it would be for high resource usage and issues with the language, not for some silly political issue.
May we never see th
Interesting. And yet Sun tried (and was successful for a little while) to force MS to include the JRE with every copy of windows.
What was going to be the "significant and primary functionality" that was to go along with it?
Personally, if I was in their shoes, I'd beg every Linux distro (and Apple if not the case already) out there to at least include the JRE. I'd even ask them to dist. the JDK and netbeans. If every other operating system on the planet included Java except Windows, I think it'd make life much tougher for the Redmond boys.
Alas, they leave all the promotion and innovation to IBM and then bitch about it and threaten to take their ball home...
I've just spent ages learning J2EE with JBoss. I'm watching .NET very closely, specifically Mono, My next UI will probably be Mono (Java is utter crap for this), and will probably start making smaller server side projects in it as well (Its an absolute joy to do SOAP stuff in which is the only way to go now IMHO). When its mature I'm dumping Java.
1) lots of performance optimizations - there's plenty of room for performance gains in Java. Java performance varies widely from platform to platform. More eyeballs on the code is a good thing.
2) lots of bug fixes - that lame-assed bug that's driving you crazy on one of the platform implementations? fix it and submit a patch. Security holes could be identified and fixed. More eyeballs on the code is a good thing.
3) ports of Java to new platforms - I would imagine that being able to install Java on legacy OS's would be a huge boon to Sun. They would get more Java penetration into the enterprise market. I'm sure there's some Commodore 64 freak out there who desperately wants to write Java apps for his antique. :)
Also, no one around here seems to understand that Open Source does not necessarily equal FREE. There are many fine commercial products out there with restrictive licenses that are open source e.g. Resin. Sun could open source Java without giving up their licensing rights.
I also don't buy the argument that Java would fragment from too much forking. Smart engineers stick to standards because deviating from standards almost always ends in huge amounts of pain and suffering.
The source for Java is available.
If you are not a developer then this means squat.
But if you are ( and I am ) then that is alright, we can see what is going on.
Unless of course you want to pilfer the code and call it your own, then you are in violation.
Oh and BTW, Java IS written in Java.
How else are you going to provide java.lang.Object ?
Hmmmm.......
Proof in the pudding that Sun is company that only changes when its dragged along kicking and screaming, instead of being at the forefront of new ideas (e.g. IBM). This will eventually be the companies downfall. Did you know Sun don't have a free JRE for Pocket PC? Did you also know that they have a finished version for the OS "Captain America" and won't release it? (Allowing Microsoft to get another foothold in another OS/dev market). Open source would have helped this, and there's been petitions for this JRE to be released but they still refuse. See this for more details Open letter to Sun for a Pocket PC JRE
Seriously, where do you people get your information from? MS licensed the right to distribute Java technology plus some other stuff. Then they violated the licensing agreements by bastardizing their jvm so that most people that developed java apps on windows wound up with non portable code. So they sued MS and they won 20M.
Part of the deal was that Windows could no longer license java. But that doesn't mean that PC's won't come with a JRE. It just means that MS won't be putting them on there. Sun is working with people like Dell, HP, IBM to include the Sun JRE and plug in in the base system.
Apple already includes Java and have contributed back some neat features that will be realeased in 1.5.
All these linux people wanted to bring down MS as the top desktop os. This was not going to happen so all the fud comes out about sun and solaris and java because replacing unix is at least more feasable than replacing windows. IBM wants sun to look bad because sun's been leading in the midrange unix market and their high end servers have been eating into IBM's mainframe sales.
The internet's economy isn't built on a whole bunch of 486dx2 debian boxes on someone's cable modem.
Open Source Java DAO Generator
Visit Swing Sightings for Swing desktop apps.
Why would you need an open source Java?
Is not there a risk, that Sun one day will change it's license-policy for Java and start asking (huge) amount of money for (newer versions) of the Jdk packages, a bit like SCO does today? Thereby creating a problem for all thoses enterprises that have build applications on top of it? Either they pay the money or they are stucked in a dead-road.
Except for some extreme cases (cell phones, embedded hardware, etc) where Python won't do, why would you want to use Java where Python applies?
Python is a far more productive language than Java, even if it executes slower. For the small parts of code where execution performance is an issue, you can use Pyrex or C or hell, even Java. But why use Java for the larger part of the program?
Also note the Python VM is smaller, lighter and starts up more quickly.
Even in terms of portability/compatibility, it seems that Python is better on many platforms (Windows, GNU, and a few more).
They license Sun's code.
Seattle based?
Amazon?
Starbucks?
Space Needle Incorporated?
MS is in Redmond, sir, quite a few miles from Seattle.
If IBM released the source code for DB2, they would obviously lose a bunch of licensing revenue.
If SUN released the source code to Java, their licensing revenue would go from zero to zero.
I fail to see how the two are comparable.
Installed the Bubblemon yet?
If he claims to be a wizard let him go ahead and produce a killer java alternative. Only cheap talk and copying we get from the open source people.... I have said it many times open source is destroying the software industry. Ask HP, IBM, CA, SAP, ORACLE and many other supporters of the open source for the code of their crown jewelleries and you will get a plain NO. Why, because they know open source is a dangerous business ideology..
That is, by the way, much like the current situation. If you want to make a Java program and you want to distribute it on Linux, you better make sure that it works with GCJ. A very good open source JVM would instantly kill off lesser JVM's like kaffe and reduce the horrible fragmentation that Java suffers from right now.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
... one of the main guys who invented java is now working for m$ and created .net.
I heard this, and I'm able to believe that it's true.
But has anyone some serious proof that this true?
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I use Linux and a lot of open source stuff. The open source model works okay for some things. However, I think the success of Linux has caused people to lose their perspective. A lot of open source advocates speak like open sourcing a project is some kind of guarantee of innovation, fast development, reliability, etc. In fact, if you look at the reality of the great majority of open source projects, you find something quite different. Imitation is much more common than innovation, development is usually a lot slower than commercial models (though with more frequent incremental releases), serious problems with dependencies, etc.
Java is a huge, complex technology with some very thoughtful and high quality design aspects. There isn't much in the open source world that comes close to it in quality. What benefit is there to the risk of open sourcing it?
I feel now that .NET will be more dominant in the future with this course of action..
Yeah! I'm glad Israel is such a good country. They go after the evillest crippled blind old men in the world. Why arrest someone, who could perhaps get away in his wheelchair (assuming he can see where to go) when you can blow him and seven other people away with missiles from a gunship!
I'm not unhappy to see sun strangle Java. As soon as they wimped out on actually getting a base language standardised I was wary of it. I'd prefer not spending time learning an infrastructure that is dependant (to whatever extent) on a sole vendor with it's own commercial agenda for what the language must do.
I'd be ecstatic if I didn't see the main winner from their maneuvers being microsoft.
The real reason Sun isnt open sourcing java is because C# isnt open source and yet its still gaining ground.
You know why that is? The IDE - Visual Studio.NET. All the useless VB6 developers lap it up like kittens. What has Sun got? NetBeans?
And Sun knows it too. Java Studio Creator is their next gambit, not opening the java source under the GPL.
I think the main reason to push for .NET is so when enough people are using it. They can redesign their OS and have it work on 64 bit platforms, and hopefully make a better product over time. But if they did that now with limited .NET development then microsoft would be vulnerable to competing OS's because people will need to get new software anyways. So by getting people to develop software in .NET when they do make the big jump then people will have software that can work on both platforms and not allow microsoft to loose the monopoly. Sure they dont people to use java because then it is super easy for people to switch to a hole slew of different platforms. But .Net is cross platform enough for their use. .NET is only 75% evil compared to 100% evil
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
He stated today that Sun sees no solution solved from open sourcing Java that isn't already addressed.
Don't we usually solve problems, not solutions?
This naswer from McNealy should surprise no one. McNealy has never been a fan of or actively cooperated with any initiative that didn't give Sun a proprietary edge and hopefully, some control.
Do people remember the "Open SPARC" fiasco. SPARC was going to be open. Anyone could build systems that were compatible and run Sun's OS. Well, such systems got built. Resellers started carrying the systems because they were eqyual to SUn's and cheaper. McNealy closed done the initiative.
Remember how Sun fought against Motif? It did everything it could to kill it (except share its technology) and then "discoverd" and adopted Motif when more than 50% of its customers had switched to Motif, rejected Sun's solution and were demanding Sun provide support.
Remember how Sun's attemp to control UNIX, with its AT&T deal forced its competitors to form the Open Software Foundation and actually cooperate (for a while).
Remember that Sun built an x86 verison of its OS and was selling it. As the Intel platform became a serious server challenge to Sun's proprietary hardware, Sun dropped the product.
Get the idea? Expect no cooperation from McNealy. And, if he ever seecooperating, be VERY, VERY, VERY suspicious.
Not just that, but lets wait right until he's just left a holy building after completing worship. It'll be great I tell you!
Check out this site:
SwingWT
Most of java is already available as GNU software. If you really want an open source java, it's not that far off. SWT from IBM is open source, and the library I mentioned above allows you to compile any program natively with gcj and deploy it on a target platform.
"I know some distros and die hard GNU people dont like it just because its license but most people dont care about that and dont even ave a problem buying software when its warranted."
FUD!
Hard GNU people don't have a problem buying software when it is warranted.
I am quite happy to buy software, if it is FREE SOFTWARE. I have stopped buying non-free software however.
Stop confusing one meaning of free with another. If you go to the GNU site, you will see that the free they promote is not the no-cost one you refer to.
And what is to stop MS from buying SUN or just JAVA and end of lifeing it? Laws? They can be changed or overcome. Where will java programmers be then?
Free software, compete on better service and ability, not on incompatible software.
A Nony Mouse
This whole thing is so over blown. For once I agree with McNealy. If there were anything MS could do to kill JAVA they would do it. Why the rest of the open source software community doesn't recognize what is going on is beyond me.
Forking JAVA would spell death to the portability. MS would have their fork the first day, don't you think?
IMHO the OSS companies ought to embrace JAVA. It is the best defense preventing against Visual Basic, or visual anything, from taking over the world. It is also portable.
But if VB wins, what will Linux do then? Ask MS to port VB to Linux? That ought to be interesting.
tb
The company I work for develops and maintains a computer retailer online shop for another company.
When we first got into it, the website was a awfull mess of ASP pages.
The reimplementation we did enhanced on that with embedding microsoft vm java code via COM bridge into the ASP pages.
That worked better.
Than we refactored that solution to a jsp custom tag based framework running on windows / sun jdk. Later we switched to linux / sun jdk.
With minor corrections (replacing a secure random provider, and a ssl-handle) it runs like charm on linux / ibm-jdk.
So I really don't think your point about imcompatibility is valid.
while (!asleep()) sheep++
Sun, learn from your mistakes. There was a time when Java's license prevented abuse by Microsoft, but that time has passed. C# is Microsoft's new approach to "embrace and extend" Java, and the only effective way to counter it is to make Java fully open-source now, before C# inexorably crushes Java. The writing is on the wall yet again -- don't let Java die the same lingering death that NeWS suffered!
.Net:
Sorry to be blunt here but I really get annoyed at people who just don't look at the market and think their little part of the world is right.
Currently the Enterprise Software space lines up as follows
Java:
SAP, Oracle, IBM, Peoplesoft, WebMethods, TIBCO, SeeBeyond, BEA, Sun and LOADS of ISVs
Microsoft
And in the Mobile space
Java:
Nokia, Ericsson, Sony, SAP, Oracle, IBM, Motorola, Symbian and LOADS of ISVs and handset people.
So with Java not being open-sourced, but running the Java Community Process... by which ANYONE can get involved in the future direction of the standard, propose modifications and have them incorporated.... err and how is this worse than Linux ? Java has managed to get 95%+ of the enterprise space, and last year 50% of phones sold ran Java, that is 1/4 billion devices. 98% of smartcards run Java.
For you to say that MS and C# will have to win if Java isn't OSSed then I'm sorry but its this sort of small minded view on the market that helps MS get to the position it is in.
The JCP is IMO the strongest OSS tool on the market, the standard is open, implementations can be open and there is a validation mechanism to make sure everything fits.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Java currently has several core implementations
Sun, Blackdown (OSS), IBM
J2EE has several implementations
SAP, Oracle, IBM, Sun, JBoss(OSS), BEA etc
J2ME has several implementations
Sun, SavaJE etc etc
How come there is only one Linux Kernel that is recognised ? Is it because the JCP with its reference implementations and verification kits creates a more open environment than Linux can hope to.
Lets put it this way... why is 802.11b/g etc successful ? Because its open source, or because there is an OPEN STANDARD with defined compliance kits ?
Java is like 802.11 & Ethernet... a success by being an Open Standard. Its only the implementations that should be OSS, like Blackdown and JBoss already are.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
"and the release of the Java Desktop"
Written in what languages? Oh yeah, C and C++ mainly.
Consider this: MS ships a free, open-source Java compiler & JVM, which has a built-in preference for calling .NET shared objects. The compiler is
open, the JVM is open, but unless you own a legal
copy of the .NET libraries, you can only
run on Windows.
Reimplementing .NET is approiximately as hard as finishing WINE, and notably harder than maintaining Samba. So MS gets to lock Java execution to the
Windows platform...
Exactly what we don't want.
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
The Visual IDEs pre-date Java.
I have developing in Java for 5 years and using linux for about 2-3.
I'm not a hardcore linux person and I have always found Java **EASY** to install, and a lot easier to set up then many thing linux
This debate is not about any great injustice or even any great hardship.
Its about GPL/OSS ( devotees ) wanting to have every last detail line up in being able to ship Java the way they want.
Its a *minor* nuisance at best and for that price we get a decent language that is a strong competitor to M$ that is not bastardized.
There are plenty of more worthy open issues to get anal about in GNU/OSS/Linux.
Steve
Just shutup already and spend the 5 mins downloading Java, will ya?! I mean why is that such a big f-ing deal??
If you want to see it succeed so much, then just download it and keep developing with it. And maybe join a JCP task or even, dare I say, start one to deal with these licensing issues. Ghasp!!!
I just can't understand this mentality. I've been using Java for as long as it's been out on Linux and I've never been that inconvenienced by having to take 5 mins to download and install.
And honestly, applets suck and have for, oh, about 7 or so years now! So why do we even care about them anymore, i.e. the stupid Netscape/Mozilla JVM plugin. NO ONE WRITES APPLETS ANYMORE! I don't care much for Flash, but face it, it looks better and frankly, is installed on way more computers than Java.
So, give the applet thing a rest and focus more on the server side. That's where the Sun shines.
It's what Microsoft wants.
Microsoft creates a clone of java and names it c#. Then put all its efforts on vb.net and make c# free, open source, standard...
If you want to use cutting edge you had to choose vb.net (Gate's language) over c# but you still can se c# over java.
Now sun cannot make java open source. They need money from licensing and they need java but also need community.
The only solution that I can images is to sun use the same solution that they already used in j2ee. There are several implementations of j2ee either commercial or open source but all of them license it from sun. Sun get money and everybody have a compatible solution.
Also if we want to make java dominate language of Linux then is it will be native or always we will need JVM?
If today we can solve this problem then we can have the best combination. A complete language with a flexible OS and end of Microsoft.
Why would you need an open source Java?
Okay, here's the little horrors that could be fixed by the open source community that Sun keeps missing:
(1) There is no shared virtual machine. Each Java app has to run within its own vm which takes a large chunk of memory. I currently have 3 java desktop apps running (DBVisualizer, Eclipse, and JEdit) with 512M memory almost eaten down to under 100. If these 3 used the same VM they could (a) share resources, (b) have almost no startup time, and (c) take half the memory.
(2) JNI is horrible. A better C/C++ integration model needs implemented. The entire wrapper writing is painful and difficult to maintain on large projects.
(3) Its not modular. The thing loads everything and five kitchen sinks to put up a hello world dialog window. Updating the VM requires a complete reload.
(4) Swing and AWT are clunky GUIs. SWT is a push in the right direction but since IBM created it Sun wont bundle it. Compare NetBeans to Eclipse and you will see how stuborn Sun is when they have been proved wrong.
(5) Sun keeps rewriting open source project ideas into the Java core. Unit testing, XML, logging, you name it there were already projects out there that where doing great and Sun decided to come up with their own solution rather than import these projects. Thats just stupid.
(6) Mozilla needs Java free. Mozilla could than bundle Java into the browser and we wont have to keep installing the stupid thing every time we update the browser. On Linux installing java functionality into the browser requires creating symbolic links to poorly named files.
(7) KDE and Gnome need java. If it came with the install we could get more Java desktop apps to quickly integrate with these desktops.
I could go on and on and on....
Well, let me put it this way:
Yes, there are existing efforts at making a Free Software JVM/Java implementation - notably GCJ and Kaffe - and it is perfectly legal to do so. However, the big problem is reimplementing the whole Java API. Java has probably one of the biggest unified API's ever. Creating a compatible and stable implementation is not only a massive job, but also such an effort will be forever playing catch up! GNU Classpath is an admirable effort, relied upon by pretty much every GPL Java implementation, but just look at all the core stuff missing from the API!
If Sun GPL'd all its API, we could have a functional 100% free Java implementation right now, and they could still keep their own JVM tech proprietary, maybe sell it as a high performance option or something. Also, think of the improvements and bugfixes you'd get with thousands of people hacking on the class libraries?
As for forking the language, I think Sun could use its existing Community infrastructure to help tie development together and prevent this. Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, etc are all open languages, yet forking is not a problem with them! As for Microsoft somehow doing evil stuff with Java - they have C# doing a good enough job at eroding Java already!
Another advantage to opening Java would be that distributions could include it in the base install. As it stands, if you want to run Sun's JVM, you have to go to their website seperately and download it. Even their download procedure itself can be a pain (especially on a server)!
Other people have blamed distros themselves for "religious" attitudes, but the fact is they simply aren't allowed to distribute JVMs, without at least adding all kinds of EULAs etc to the installer.
In my opinion Sun should:
If Sun opened it up, Java could become the base language of GNOME as detailed here. Think of how cool it would be to use a well established, modern language to write GNOME apps? And Sun would get even more of a foothold with their language.
The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.
fork and fracture. Perl isn't forked to hell. Nor is python
I was under the impression that both Perl and Python supported special features that are only available on certain operating systems. Some for Win32, some for MacOS X, some for POSIX.
If you try to run such code on the "wrong" platform, it won't work. The language might be technically OK, but the application written in it would be broken and forked.
It's a dilemma: there's value in having a language and its libraries platform independent, and there's also value in having a language with platform-dependent libraries that help you get something useful done.
Which is better? I don't know. I wish I didn't have to choose between the two, that all the useful things could be done independent of platform.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
I would be willing to subscribe for that feature.
RedHat couldn't put a JVM in their desktop OS w/out including the Java license in anaconda and having the end user agree to it at install time.
I'm sure that's not true. Apple doesn't make me agree to a Java license when I install Mac OS X. Red Hat wouldn't have had to have a separate Java license, either.
I run a web server on a pumped up 68k Mac using NetBSD. It's the only machine I have available for this use. I'd love to run a few simple JSPs on it, but that won't happen because there's no JRE for my platform. If it were open source and I could compile my own runtime, the situation would be different.
Even if someone gave me an old PII-200, my wife would nix the idea of having the big loud thing sit in the corner of our home office. My Mac is small, with a small power supply and cool processor. It has adequate specs to run a capable, albeit slow, application server if it were possible.
Maybe my machine is obsolete, sure. But the point is that even if Java is the king of cross-platform computing, it doesn't mean jack if there's no runtime for many platforms.
Constitutionally Correct
GNOME-Java won't exist because GNOME is GPL-licensed and Java is propietary-licensed.
It's that there is not GNOME-Java for Sun's Java Desktop Linux, HAHAHAHAHA.
open4free
Sorry, but the spec of the JSR, the Reference Implementation and Test compatibility kit are both available at NO CHARGE for organisation !
This was asked by Apache Group to make them build fully compatible solutions that can compete with comercial ones (see the famous Tomcat and the newby Geronimo).
All the Java Standard Platform specifications (aka J2SE) are available in such a way ! So why is FSF not investing more time in making Classpath (http://www.classpath.org) project fully compatible ?
Because then we will have a first class GPLed Java compatible platform that "restricted license" linux distro such as debian could deliver without any problem !
Everything is there and all we lack is motion from the FSF & the opensource community.
I'm personally just as glad Java is dying. Too many lousy, incompatible implementations. One good free software implementation would have done wonders for it. Fortunately good languages like Perl and Python exist and are actually cross platform, unlike the overhyped Java.
Unbeknownst to readers of the press release, a followup correction shows that Scott McNealy really said, "Sun sees no solution solved by using Java." More at 11...
Yes both Python and Perl have modules that only run on one platform or another. Of course, there are Java libraries that likewise only run on one platform or another (like the JavaCOM libraries). For the most part, however, "porting" Python or Perl software consists of installing Python or Perl on the machine in question and copying over the files.
As an added bonus Python and Perl run on a lot more platforms than Sun's JVM. Python and Perl, for instance, are well supported on all of the BSDs, and Java isn't. So much for Java's touted WORA abilities.
So how much profit does Sun make from something they give away for free?
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
If anyone wants to, they can sign up, download the Java source, and start a port to their platform. The only thing standing in their way is ideology.
Since the open source community is so powerful, how come there is no open-source statically-compiled write-once/compile-everywhere (or run-everywhere) programming language with a set of decent cross-platform libraries to cover any needs that encorporates all latest coding tricks ?
I say we must stop bitchin' about Java and make up our own stuff. Companies are quick to embrace quality open-source stuff (I know it because the DoD is secretly moving to Linux and Linux-based tools).
I've heard of some companies having these misguided policies. I guess .NET would have an advantage there.
overrated? it's not even rated yet!
The Visual IDEs pre-date Java.
Yes, and the sky is blue. Do you have a point, or is that just a random statement?
Write boring code, not shiny code!
What is this? Solving solutions back into problems?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
he has other problems to worry about than this.
like making hardware the runs.
their hardware sucks for what you pay for it.
they are no longer a preferred vendor where I work because they have had so many failures.
McNealy is a dinosaur - he still is thinking in the 90's - sun needs new leadership.
they need to look at openoffice and see where that has gone - why can't they do that with java. I recommend openoffice to everyone and I have never heard one complaint. openoffice and java would become the new standard and would rock!!
NET is only 75% evil compared to 100% evil
So would that qualify as "Quasi-Evil"? <Dr Evil Expression>
I came from Cobalt. I work on Java Desktop System now (and that means I put enough identification to need to be PC right now :). I won't comment on the Cobalt bit since I might tend to agree ...
... I think we deserve the right to customize it to our needs in our products, especially since we put the patches out there just like any good citizen.
... we are looking to make it viable for the first time to corporate and SMB markets (in an abstract way it is meant to do for the Linux desktop what Cobalt did for the Linux server, though without the hardware).
... growing pains absolutely (and some nasty product puberty-like pains at that) but death throes? No.
A few things to remember:
* Sun is one of the biggest contributors to GNOME
* There is alot more than just reworking of GNOME. The first release didn't show that well (it was meant as a pilot preview not as a "this is it, we're done, love us" version) but upcoming releases will show a lot of benefits to the admins.
* Sun isn't looking to ""revitalize the Linux desktop"" for you specifically
* Comparing Novell's server stuff to Sun's Java Desktop System is like comparing Microsoft's server stuff to Novell's Ximian/SuSE products. Apples to Oranges.
* The GNOME that you've seen on Solaris was only the beginning of GNOME on Sun products. It paved the way for Java Desktop System in the sense that it proved it a viable environment for Sun. It is by no means in a complete phase. Can't say more, would get in trouble.
* The day Sun pulls its feet out of this Linux pond is the day I have to look for a new job. I haven't updated my resume in a few years now. I'm pretty well tied in to knowing if Sun is only teasing with Linux, we're not. I understand where this impression comes from, having execs say things that are decidedly not in Linux's favor (though you need to realize that even though we're serious about Linux in the case of Java Desktop System, Sun makes real money off of Solaris now and has to appease those customers, too), but it is not a realistic perception.
I wouldn't make that last statement if I didn't believe it. I -knew- Cobalt was going to go down fast a few months into the Sun purchase of Cobalt. It was quite obvious by attitudes inside even though we as a group fought the good fight. I don't get those same feelings on Java Desktop System
The risk AISI is fragmentation of the Java platform -- the specifications for the language, the JVM, and the library APIs. Conflicting versions of these would spoil platform-independence right along with supplier-independence and many other things. So it's in almost everyone's interests to keep a single specification. Through the JCP, Sun lets everyone have their say in them whilst keeping them fairly stable, which is working well AFAIK.
What you're talking about is the implementation of that platform, and here I may be right with you. I don't think multiple implementations -- provided they implement the same spec -- are any bad thing. Sun could no doubt help by making their compatibility suite more freely available, but AFAIK they're not doing anything to stop other implementations. I don't see too many issues with their open-sourcing their own implementation, either -- again, provided that they could ensure it still implemented the same spec. Maybe they could do that by making the compatibility suite strictly-licensed (disallowing modifications) and requiring it to pass any implementation calling itself 'Java', even their own?
(Maybe much of the discussion hereabouts stems from people confusing these two aspects when they talk about 'open-sourcing Java'?)
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
the "interest of the community" is the sum of the "individual beliefs". Your phrase is, therefore, contradictory in terms.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Let's say there was a fork, Sun holds the trademark to the Java name so said fork could not promote itself as "Java." If it did, it would have a lawsuit on its hands that is a guaranteed loss.
If it forked, it would become some other language, and people could decide to use it or not based on its merits.
This has already happened, in the form of a forked up language called C#. Now as for the merits...
Study everything, you'll find something you can use - Jason Bourne
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You mean Starbucks wants to kill Java? Those bastards. Oh, wait, you mean a Redmond-based company. Never mind.
And why could they not do this if they open-sourced Java and kept the trademarks on the Java language? hint - they could, since the "Open Source" refers to Copyright, not trademark. Anyone could implement the language, but you could only call it Java if you passed the tests. If not, call it what you will.
In terms of IBM open sourcing DB2, I doubt it, since they make money SELLING LICENSES for DB2 (although they could surprise us, given all the other stuff they've open sourced).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Why does the core java standard need to be open
.NET, or PalmOS.
Because, right now, there is only a single Java implementation and its derivatives and because nobody can create an independent implementation without Sun's approval. At this point, Java is just a proprietary platform, more encumbered by patents and copyrights than Microsoft Windows,
I know some distros and die hard GNU people dont like it just because its license but most people dont care about that and dont even ave a problem buying software when its warranted.
No, they don't like Sun because Sun lied to them about making Java an open standard when Sun originally wanted support for Java and because Sun keeps misrepresenting what Java and the Java licenses are. They also dislike Sun and Java because the platform is stagnating technically--and that's because people can't modify and improve it.
And if you think that doesn't matter to you, think again. Sun could not have pulled off Java's success without a lot of good will and volunteer work, but people aren't going to make that mistake again. At this point, Java is just another proprietary platform, and a stagnant and bloated one at that.
Java has had a good run, but both technically and in terms of licensing, its days are numbered. Move on.
You're trolling, aren't you.
Microsoft cares infinitely more about Linux than Java, and that's hardly fragmented at all (except in the tiny-embedded space, and not even that muhc there).
I've personally heard someone rather high up in microsoft say that they're not afraid of any corporation competeing with them, because they know all the techniques to compete there. It's the GPL that they care about, because even if they do buy the company, the software's still out there and the original team can keep working on it.
" Microsoft offered Anders Hejlsberg a signing bonus of $1.5 million and stock options. Microsoft doubled the bonus to $3 million after Borland made a counter-offer. Hejlsberg left Borland in October 1996."
Or, as about.com puts it: MS's .Net IS Borland's Product
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Question, do you think a joe average user cares about whether it is Java running, or do you think Joe cares that it works?
if LimeWire does not work, joe_avg_usr will complain. period.
The current fractured state of Linux is it's wealth and it's downfall. I, personally, think it's just its wealth. It means, while Win is only one (or 5), a good sysadmin for some enterprise (or a good system engineer) will chose correctly a system for any specific usage. He can choose Debian Desktop or UserLinux Desktop or Java Desktop for all his desktop workstations, something else for its servers, and even non-linux-but-free-software solutions when adequated (p.ex., OpenBSD for a firewall, NetBSD for an embedded appliance, etc etc etc)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Refering the thing you said about the relationship of NeWS and X11, I want to add some points (AND GOING TO GET A SCORE OF 5).
I need to say that I was not a person watching X11 taking over NeWS just because I was 1 year old at that time. But here, I think the situation is different. The comparsion you made are close-source NeWS and open-source X11.
But now we have two to compare, one is java, source-opened, and one is C#, source-closed. You actually can download the source of Java, but you wouldn't be able to get a part of C#'s code legally.
In another point of view, to the comparsion you made, NeWS and X11 are application level programs. Now we have, Java, as a programming language. You would not make a self-maintained python out there, right? Even a programming language is open-sourced, it should only lay on a standardized level, but not a open level. Take a look at C and C++. They are so open, but nobody is likely to change any parts of the code of the compiler of them.
Despite of that, we could have Java opened. We have the language structure opened, so GCJ is possible just as jikes from IBM. You would have them working with your current java applications, but you wouldn't if the standard is expanding. If the stardard is opened, the undesirable effect would scare all developers because of incomplatiable versions of different implentations of Java standards (or other things). So the result of opening the standard of Java to something like Python is different, we trust Python Fondation as a leader of Python standard, but IBM would not trust Sun as a leader of Java technology. IBM wants to be the leader just as Microsoft likely wanted to be. We see that happening, like Eclipse and Websphere, are now not compatible to the implentation made by java (Javabean). So if java is open-sourced, java would burst by this way.
Also, Java is not likely to be standardized like C and C++. IT is expanding by Sun and Sun's JCP, which is a board for expanding. Although the final desidion is made by Sun, but it is the same for making a change in Python language.
OK, should you find that there is a/are mistake(s) in my reply, please answer it as soon as possible.
Thank you.
Java is crowbar by which they leverage
other people into their game, if they open source they lose the ability to leverage.
What sun is doing is they are trying to do what Microsoft is doing with Windows with Java. Java has the potential (in their eyes) to be a development and operating platform, and that's why they continue to develop and support it.
I've had this discussion with neonewbite programmers and users, what is the difference between an operating system on a real machine and an object oriented language that works atop a virtual machine? If you look at smalltalk, the language was the operating system. Its just that people have gotten so detached from the concept they think of an operating system as a seperate thing from a executing application, its the same thing.. Applications can be seen as plugins running atop a more massive application that gives the plugins access to the hardware.
So why does Microsoft want to kill Java? If you have the ability to think abstractly you will know why, if you are too detail oriented, you will remain clueless.
Just say no to license servers!!
It is far less stringent, as it doesn't need to contain all the anti-MS clauses.
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The comparsion you made are close-source NeWS and open-source X11. But now we have two to compare, one is java, source-opened, and one is C#, source-closed.
Java's source is available, but it's not "open source", which is the whole point of the debate. While C# source code isn't available, that's really not the point. X11 was appealing because it was open source -- free software in every sense. C# won't gain traction that way, but via Microsoft's usual bag of dirty tricks. My point was to address the impact Sun's behavior has on these products with serious competition. The exact nature of that competition isn't relevant.
In another point of view, to the comparsion you made, NeWS and X11 are application level programs. Now we have, Java, as a programming language.
NeWS, X11, Java and C# are all "application-level" programs by virtue of the fact that they all run in user space, outside the kernel. At the same time, they're not applications at all -- you don't launch one, use it, then exit. All of these are platforms which only exist to enable applications to be run on top of the platform. They have no intrinsic usage value of their own without having applications designed to run on those platforms. Whether or not the platform is a programming language with a runtime system (as NeWS, Java and C# are) or an API with a runtime system (as X11 is) doesn't particularly matter. (Yes, part of the NeWS platform is a programming language -- specifically, their extended dialect of PostScript.)
As for standardization, Sun and JCP do have standards for Java, and test suites to verify them. Unfortunately, those test suites aren't free for anyone to just download and use. As for international standards bodies, maybe someday we'll see an international Java standard, maybe we won't. Again, it's irrelevant to this topic.
Yes, it's possible to have alternate Java implementations. That's a good thing. But having the Sun reference implementation available as a true open-source project would be a much better thing, and just might make the difference between Java defending its dominance or possibly losing out to C# in the long run due to Microsoft's "embrace and extend" practice...
OK, should you find that there is a/are mistake(s) in my reply, please answer it as soon as possible.
Sorry, didn't see the responses right away!
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay