Slashdot Mirror
James Gosling On The Sun/Microsoft Settlement
greg_barton writes "James Gosling has responded to the two previous commentaries cited on Slashdot about the Java Dilemma. Some interesting excerpts: "In Rick Ross's 'Where Is Java In This Settlement?' he worries that Sun may have sold out the Java community. We didn't. We have not sold our soul to the Dark Side." and "There's a long thread of discussion on Slashdot 'Two Takes on the Java Dilemma' that is pretty entertaining, from a wow, what are they smoking! point of view. There are voices of reason, and conspiracy nuts.""
Personally I'm surprised nobody is lobbing Big Blue's name around in all these discussions, because I think the Sun/Microsoft deal has a lot more to do with IBM than it does with Sun.
IBM is the only company in the world that could realistically engage in a multi-front competitive battle with Microsoft. And if they were capable of gaining more control of Java (perhaps by a cash investment in Sun, or perhaps even buying them) they would pose a far greater threat to Microsoft than Netscape ever did. IBM's e-business strategy coupled with Java control would be an unstoppable force.
People talk about Microsoft competitors yet they raise company names like Sun, Real, or Netscape. The threat they pose to Microsoft is a drop in the bucket compared to IBM and their e-business strategy. A strategy that is incredibly reliant on Java.
Taking it a logical step further lets assume Microsoft made this settlement not to take *Sun* out of the game, but rather to take *IBM* out of the game. Perhaps the silence on the Java front is because $2 billion is the price to get Sun to walk away from Java. Silently. Could this cause Rich Green to leave in disgust?
Personally I suspect this deal was all about dealing a terrible blow to IBM. I think the one thing Sun and Microsoft aren't talking about is the one thing they ever really cared about in this deal -- Java. I hope not, but the more I read the more sure I become that Sun has done a deal with the devil and Java was the bargaining chip.
Scott McNealy used to always say gravity was on his side. I used to wonder how he figured that since you had IBM, and all the other big iron makers dropping in from above and back then it was microsoft and intel setting up a rockhard floor for him to be squished on.
Sun is now in quite the pickle. Sparcstations arent a contender for the desktop. Their server sales are being trashed by Linux on Intel, and Linux on mainframe.
Their latest play MadHatter looks nice but so does lindows,suse, and redhat. The latter 3 have one great thing going for them, they are one time licenses not perpetual service contracts like mad hatter.
Its no wonder that they paid SCO a licenses fee and are now dissing Linux. Its also no wonder that Bill Joy left the company.
Not that there is anything particularly wrong with having a viewpoint that perhaps GPL-like freedom is not the most important thing to preserve in computing, but Gosling's personal attacks on RMS are a little over the top. He starts off by accusing RMS of redefining "Free" and then proceeds to deconstruct the entire concept of Software Freedom based on the hinge that RMS is essentially a kook.
I respect Gosling as a very intelligent programmer and language designer, but his willingness to engage in personal attacks against others in the Software Community makes me question his personal judgement.
Java does not need to be Free to be useful, but such can be said without resorting to deriding the entire Software Freedom movement, IMO.
I have been pwned because my
I think that there will be little meaningful technological change in either Microsoft's or Sun's products as a result of the settlement. Microsoft did not want to be barred from distributing the JVM while Sun did not want Microsoft to fork Java (like J++ originally tried to). The settlement ensures that both concerns are met. The major surprise to me was the magnitude and nature of the license payments to Sun. I would have thought Microsoft could structure the payments as an equity investment similar to their $100million investment in Apple so as to at least they receive something of more tangible value in return.
ByteMyCode.com: A Web 2.0 code sharing community.
There are Free open source implementations of Java already. Not quite up to the same level as the Sun's offerings yet, but it is difficult to hit a moving target...
while true; do eject; eject -t; done
i'm going to 'have a little faith' and trust gosling and mcnealy. we haven't even seen what Sun's next move is yet hoards of /.'ers are freaking out. lets give these guys a chance before we dismiss them.
smd4985
You might want ot view my weblog post titled Gosling smoking weed..
Gosling makes several errors both on the economic trends of SUN in the server hardware sector the difference between a state machine and a desktop manager and etc..
Also remember that the linux standard survives and thrives under GPL stewardship..a charge Gosling never has completely refuted other to resort to name calling..
You will probalby see more name callign from several sectors at Sun.. sad really.. so much could be solved by stopping the name callign and deal with the real issues such as devleopers worried that because the settlement seem to take aawy 50% fo all java marketing in one fell swoop that java may be waning and etc..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Do we hate Sun this week? Or was that next week?
Maybe they are afraid that James is going to dramaticically increase the amount he is charging them for radiant energy. Personally I think we should all boycott James Gosling as I don't believe he as actually laid claim to the sun by actually going there.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Unlike GPLd software, the Java sources don't come with a viral infection clause that requires you to apply the GPL to your own code
Didn't sell your soul, huh?
"Unlike GPLd software, the Java sources don't come with a viral infection clause that requires you to apply the GPL to your own code." Sheesh! I didn't know that GPL code had a virus! Call USAMRIID! I feel so dirty now...covered with...microscopic...germs. Seriously, though...I think that $2 billion has bought Microsoft a friend for life. Who says money can't buy love?
Is that a "Wow! What are they smoking? Since when were drugs for nerds?" point of view he's talking about or perhaps a "Wow! What are they smoking? Why is their English still mostly intact?" or (most probably) "Wow! What are they smoking? Can I get that here in the States?"
These Java supporters are really shady characters. Corrupting our youth's minds...
True story.
Art doesn't obey the first law of thermodynamics either. Some people put their whole life, unrecognized, into creating art, and when they are long gone, their work is still with us. COMPENSATION and BUSINESS obey the 1st law of thermodynamics, but that is by no means the only driving force behind people.
People think with their feelings and not with their head. My favorite "conspiracy theory" is that Sun sold out to Microsoft to defeat Linux. Right after they released one of the *best* Linux desktops on the market. Go figure.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
So Java seems to be less encumbered than .Net at this point.
(Please browse at -1 to read this comment.)
We have not sold our soul to the Dark Side. certainly not. oh by the way do you know any good ways to get the windows logos off of our foreheads?
The debate between the GPL folks and Java folks will go on for quite awhile, the big point here is that IBM has more people working on Java and Java based solutions that Sun. Sun has lost the momentum in the Java arena in some areas. Yes the JSR process does produce standards, but IMO If I look at technologies like J2ME, the industry is still fragmented. You may be able to build J2SE applications and run them on Windows, Linux, Solaris or what have you and have a reasonable expectation of WORA however J2ME isn't there, after 3 years. So, putting WORA aside the fragmentation in J2ME even with Palm demonstrates that Java becomes a utilitarian application delivery infrastructure that may or may not be ubiquitious.
Palm and Sun had differences of J2ME, Palm works with IBM and viola, J2ME for Palm the way palm wanted it, not Sun.
So, from a technology High Ground, Sun doesn't control Java explicitly, and that's a good thing. Sun's controls on Java do make sense as Gosling pointed out however let's not forget the J2EE 1.2 specification that was held up by a voting member because of EJB 2.0 compliance issues. In this case the JSR voting member had a conflict with voting on the spec while their product didn't adhere to it. So, EJB 2.0 gets held up, which holds up J2EE 1.2. That happened and the company's initials have a B in them, but it's not IBM.
So, while the JSR process isn't perfect, the thought that vendors are most of the JSR participants isn't all bad, unless a log jam occurs. Maybe someday J2ME will be as ubiquitious as J2SE, J2EE isn't quite there yet, but getting there. Let's also not forget the whole JBoss issue, but that's another thread.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
About a third to half of the article you're supposedly responding to consists of Mr. Gosling claiming the exact set of baseless allegations your post brings up to be false. In fact, attempting to refute such allegations appears to have been one of his primary reasons for writing said article.
Did you just not notice this? Or did you not read the article? I'm leaning toward the second, since first off it references nothing in this article whatsoever, and second that's an awful long and carefully-formed post to have gotten FP on. Either you read and type reeeal fast, or you wrote this beforehand and waited for another Sun story so you could grab an early post number and get up to Score:5.
So, at any rate, let's give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you read the article. So is what you are implying by your post that you believe Mr. Gosling to be lying when he explicitly brings up the things you allege and says they are entirely untrue and without basis? Why?
They make money from licensees and from the testing process. That was a big controversy with JBoss. Sun wanted money that JBoss didn't have to certify it as J2EE compliant. Therefore to brand something as a Certified compliant product it has to undergo testing with Sun's test suites. That was one of the issues in Sun's litigation (at least first trial) over the M$ implementation of Java failing the Logo certification program tests.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Gosling really has his head in the sand in regard to the future of Sun by claiming that Sun is platform neutral and has nothing to fear from x86. Sun makes its money by selling Sparc workstations. Simply claiming that Sun isn't tied to a hardware architecture is just silly. Yes, it has made software for the x86, but like Apple, Sun is a hardware company -- all the software (including Java) exists simply to sell hardware. What happens when people realize that Sparcs no longer have the price/performance ratio?
Companies are the wrong place to put trust. They are a nessisary evil that is to be watched carefully to ensure that they do not abuse their power. They are not God, their whitepapers are not to be followed religeously. As always do whats in the best interest of your particular company. Never fall in love with a company or technology, or you will be burned.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
I'm sure James Gosling only wants Java to flourish. But the big catch about the JDK's licence (SCSL) is that it gives Sun a Nuclear Button. Sun has the power to force the Java platform's development to go only in directions they approve. And however pure their intentions are, as a public company they have a legal duty to use that power in a way that makes the most money for their shareholders. If it is ever more profitable to kill Java, for Microsoft cash, say, then Sun will be legally obliged to do it.
Compare this to Perl or Python, where there is no Nuclear Button. No-one has the power to prohibit derivatives. And so Perl and Python developers have a much more concrete guarantee that those languages will still be living languages in 20 years' time. Meanwhile there's no sign of the "fragmentation problem" which James Gosling argues they ought to suffer from being truly Open-Source.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
Sun's signing into Microsoft's Communications Protocol Program locks Sun and Sun customers into interoperating with any Microsoft system on Microsoft's strict terms, conditions and royalty rates. It also denies the possibility that the code using those Microsoft protocols will ever be open sourced.
This raises serous questions. For example, how much longer will Sun be free to distribute and integrate SAMBA with the Java Desktop? Will Sun's signing of the MCPP have a network affect on vendors who have access to Sun's source code -- will they also be forced to sign up to the MCPP?
I understand Sun's attempt to spin "Peace in our time" into "This Was Their Finest Hour"however, if you look where the quote originated from...
We can be truly thankful that Churchill's next action was not to sign a treaty with Hitler, accepting gold looted from occupied states as payment for damages done.Comment removed based on user account deletion
shifts direction almost as often as a political candidate
In exactly what way does Sun "shift direction almost as often as a political candidate"?
But you can't even redistribute unmodified copies of it, which is why no linux distro includes a JVM. To use Java under Linux requires a user to go search it out, download a non-trivial package and install it.
Whaa? I am typing these words into Epiphany on a Gentoo Linux machine. This machine has a fully functional JVM on it. I didn't install this JVM or do any other consious action to put it here. Would you care to explain to me how it got there?
From the article:
Dr. James Gosling is a Sun Microsystems fellow who managed the group that created Java in the early 1990s.
Who is the creator of Java?
Everyone knows it is Gosling, but for some reason Sun would have you believe Bill Joy did it. Why? Sun only acknowledges that Gosling managed those who created Java. So did Gosling manage Bill Joy as well? This makes no sense. If a wookie lives on Endor you must acquit.
I don't think Gosling understands Free Software at all.
He responds to Stallman by saying:
a) The GPL is not free, it has a strong political agenda.
b) Java is free in many respects (you don't pay to use the JVM, you can see the source). Java sources don't have a viral licence like the GPL.
c) Giving freedom to JVM 'implementors' would be damaging to JVM 'users' (Java developers).
I will tackle these in turn:
a) Gosling implies the FSF has a 'hidden' political agenda. Their agenda is about as far from hidden as I can imagine - I don't think he has read any of the documents on the FSF web site. If you don't think the GPL promotes more freedom than, say, the Java licence, you have an extremely simplistic view of freedom. The political agenda is that the GPL strongly tries to promote a whole world of free software - and if you don't necessarily always agree with that part of the agenda, you can do as I do and use the LGPL or BSD licences. The main point is, if you currently want to ship a product based on Sun's JVM code, you need to licence the code from them to do that. If that code were GPL, it would give all of us freedom to work with the code, but possibly mean many users would no longer need to pay to licence the code from Sun (their fear) - unless of course they didn't want to give away their modifications, in which case they would be in *exactly the same* position they are in now, and could continue to pay Sun for a licence with different terms.
b) Gosling switches from Free(dom) Software to free(beer) (Open Source) software. I can use Internet Explorer for free too, but it certainly isn't Free Software. Stallman is most definitely talking about Freedom. I don't care if I can *see* the source code, the issue is, what can I *do* with that code. The Java licence gives me a *lot* less Freedom than the GPL in that regard. Goslings response has no value for the many of us who don't care too much for the Open Source movement.
c) You already have a licensing program for the term "Java" and associated logos and trademarks - we aren't asking you to give those away. As a Java developer, I would still like to see the guarantees of a licensing program - do like every other industry does and say "if you don't see logo X, you aren't getting 'Java'". If you make the JVM implementation Free Software, it doesn't mean you have to let everyone label their products built on that code as 'Java'. And as for any protections for users/developers, this is a myth anyhow. Look at the SWT toolkit (used to build Eclipse) for an example - what happens if it takes off in popularity (it's going that way), what protections do you have then? None.
And although not mentioned, most developers from the Free Sofware world will also view Java Community Process as a farce as well. Look at the lobbying Apache had to do recently to be allowed to implement JCP specs for one example of how this process does nothing to guarantee our Freedom. (I also fail to understand the communities abhorrent reaction to the W3C patent policy discussions, yet the seeming acceptance of many for the JCP.)
Moving into the information age, it is my view that the foundation technology we build our word around should not ultimately be under the control of any single group or corporation. Using Free Software provides me with a number of guarantees that the programs/code I use will always be there for me, and that I will always have the freedom to use, modify, and rely on those for myself or my business. Java, as provided by Sun, does not have those guarantees.
Ok, that's about the luniest conspiracy theory I've heard yet. If that was really Sun's intention, why go through the trouble of building a triple A+ OS? A very expensive endevour to say the least. Especially when they could have simply bought out a vendor. After all, Novell just bought SuSE, the distro JDS is based on, and IMHO one of (if not the) best Linux desktop currently on the market.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
as a professional Java developer that I understand where he's coming from, but I don't agree with him. It's really a question as to whether a "heavy hand" is a better creator of standards vs. natural selection of thousands of people free to make an informed decision as to the right direction to take. If Sun claims that their leadership is the best for Java, why hide behind the CONTROL that they have of it. How do they honestly know that they are the best stewards if people are not free to pursue a different direction. I can see how they want to lead people into their vision of cross platform, which I truly believe in and think will happen, but you can't force it. It will happen when it happens, and I personally believe it will. If "we" need some more time to suffer the shackles of the hardware OS, there is no amount of screaming that Sun can do to bring about this change other than convincing more people of the need for it to happen so that more people bring it about. There are other more subtle ways to draw poeple into their vision while practicing "servant leadership" and actually discovering how and where people want to go before deciding it for them. Microsoft used to empower people with the openness of their architecture compared to Apple or even IBM, but now Linux has taken over that role as MS has started following their own shadow around trying to figure out where they want to go.
Here is the best articulation of leadership I have ever personally seen: Dee Hock on Leadership
Dee Hock has written extensively about the concept of emergent systems and the coming "chaordic" age where we will design systems that incorporate the best traits of chaos and order, essentially order surfing at the edge of chaos. I would say that the GPL better embodies these traits, although Java and it's licensing also exhibits some of these behaviors. Longer term, however, I think the GPL allows for this process much better, regardless of any symantic battles over the word "FREE".
The thing that continually intrigues me about the GPL is how people seem to reject it rather than embracing all the benefits that it provides while also addressing its drawbacks. I think it does have drawbacks (RMS' occasionally overblown ego certainly doesn't help the cause, kind of like Steven Wolfram...great work...horrible attitude). Still, to beat the GPL you have to keep all the good before you claim to throw away the bad.
i started java development back before i had a real consciousness about licensing issues. ever since, i've been hoping we'd see java set free. now that the possibility has all but been removed, i too have turned my attentions to Python.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Some of you may know this already, but for those who don't, RMS and James Gosling had a feud in the 80s over Gosling's Emacs (which was a TECO Emacs workalike). Apparently, there were agreements between Gosling and several other developers to the effect that they could modify and redistribute the source to Gosling's Emacs. RMS decided to base the original GNU Emacs on Gosling's code. Apparently, this happened after Gosling decided to sell the rights to his Emacs clone to Unipress, and bitter legal threats ensued. This seems to have been one of the primary motivations for the GPL. I've never seen Gosling speak or write about the incident since. RMS gave a speech in 1986 where he recounted the incident, and he didn't have a lot of good things to say about Gosling:
That speech also has a few memorable quotes, and I highly recommend you read it. I haven't heard or read RMS referring to Gosling personally since, but I believe that the incident itself has been recalled by him a few times since.
Now for my part of the disclosure: I currently attend the University of Calgary, where James Gosling is the only persona anywhere near to fame that the Computer Science department has ever produced (Theo de Raadt doesn't count, unless your definition of "produce" involves scandal and legal threats).
The above is mostly just hearsay and speculation, and should not be taken as authoritative, except the excerpt from RMS's speech.
In the great CONS chain of life, you can either be the CAR or be in the CDR.
Remember Java is a library. They'd have to go with the LGPL.
Personally, I am a big fun of java and have been for years. I am a big fan of Open source, and have been for even longer. But I can not understand why people see the need for merging the two.
I have serious doubts that Java would continue at its current development schedule if open sourced. Nothing is stopping open source groups from working on a free Java right now. In fact GCJ and Kaffe people have been working on it for years.
Are they anyway close??
How can we tell Sun what to do with their developer time? Why not go donate some time/money/resources to an effort like kaffe.org instead?
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
"Classpath is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License with the following clarification and special exception. Linking this library statically or dynamically with other modules is making a combined work based on this library. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole combination.
As a special exception, the copyright holders of this library give you permission to link this library with independent modules to produce an executable, regardless of the license terms of these independent modules, and to copy and distribute the resulting executable under terms of your choice, provided that you also meet, for each linked independent module, the terms and conditions of the license of that module. An independent module is a module which is not derived from or based on this library. If you modify this library, you may extend this exception to your version of the library, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do so, delete this exception statement from your version.
As such, it can be used to run, create and distribute a large class of applications and applets. When GNU Classpath is used unmodified as the core class library for a virtual machine, compiler for the java languge, or for a program written in the java programming language it does not affect the licensing for distributing those programs directly."
Sun is currently on the special-case "permanently dubious" list, the one that Apple used to be on before they started making the powerbooks out of sleek gray metal and all the /. editors bought them.
This means it isn't a like/hate thing, they just get to oscillate between "view what they have done as no better than dubiously useful and cast aspersions on their motivations" (where they were at three weeks ago, when there were those linux Java Desktop articles) and "blow everything they do out of proportion, declare anything they do that doesn't directly help the open source community to be treason, and pronounce them simultaneously doomed and dead" (where we are this week).
We will be staying in this second mode for at least another week or two, so stay alert for further instructions.
From the April 2, 2004 Sun Press Releases
The first betas I got from them were quirky, as you say. But the most recent release (which I believe became the final one) is very slick. They even have a JDS skin for Mozilla so that it fits with your desktop.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I think the best way to satify everyone (including SUN, those who want to develop JAVA itself and those who want to develop on top of JAVA) is to allow anyone to implement the various JAVA standards (including whatever sun may have a patent on etc) for free with no restictions. But, if they want to call whatever it is that they have made "JAVA", it has to go through the compatibility tests.
That way:
A.developers developing stuff in the JAVA language and against the JAVA APIs can do so and know that their stuff will run on anything labeled "JAVA".
B.developers that want to write JAVA compilers, VMs, class libraries and whatever else (including modified versions of Suns stuff) can do so totally free from any restrictions. But they cant call what they release "JAVA" unless it has gone through the compatibility tests.
and C.Sun retains control over the JAVA name and the JAVA system. The fears of sun that JAVA would fragment and you would get incompatible versions of JAVA wouldnt happen because anything that hasnt passed the tests is not JAVA and cant be labeled as such.
Also, those who want to repackage the Sun stuff without modifying it (i.e. repackage in ) can do so and you wouldnt need to do the different, wierd (compared to how things are normally installed) install for JAVA anymore.
Oh and Sun should have told MS they couldnt distribute, modify, fix or support their broken JAVA VM anymore.
How disrespectful of Gosling to accuse us of smoking drugs for being concerned for the fate of our platform. We invest time and energy developing our skills in Java and we make personal calls on things at work in favour of their platform. Given Sun's poor decisions regarding how open the platform should be we have every right to be jumpy when they make a legal settlement with Microsoft and then fail to reiterate their support for the Microsoft's prime target (the java platform).
Some of the comments were extreme, but position papers like these should not need to be a reaction to community concern, they should anticipate it.
Believe with me, my saplings.
Sun wanted a new computer language. Why? BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD WRITE AN OS IN IT! An OS based on an interpreted bytecode language! Was this moronic or what?
To be fair, Sun's plans included executing those bytecodes natively, on Java CPUs. So from that perspective, they were simply inventing a new reduced-instruction-set stack machine architecture, using knowledge gained from 50 years of CPU evolution. The plan was to create and market Javastations running the JavaOS natively on those Java CPUs, providing cheap dumb terminal remote access to central application servers.
Nothing moronic about that.
They abandoned plans for the Java OS around the same time they realized the dumb terminal market wasn't coming back. They still make and sell Java chips for embedded devices though.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Sun sells out to Microsoft; a few days later a famous Sun celebrity issues a statement that they *haven't* sold out. Typical spin and damage control. I can almost see Ballmer's hand up Gosling's ass and moving his mouth for him like he was Oscar the Grouch.
Let their actions, and the result of those actions, speak for themselves -- NOT this MS-Approved sermon on the mount. Basic Fact: Sun and Microsoft are in bed together... just looking at history, Microsoft and ANYBODY in bed together is bad for Open Source and Free Software. And this is probably bad for Apple, too.
But overall, nice work from Keep-It-Closed-Gosling in trying to turn the FOSS community against itself again.
I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."