Slashdot Mirror
Sun will Open Java's Source
bckrispi writes "An announcement from Sun spokesman Raghavan Srinivas indicates that, contrary to what we've heard in the past, Java will be Open-sourced. "We haven't worked out how to open-source Java, but at some point it will happen," Srinivas said."
I doubt Sun will ever open source Java. If it happens at all it will be after Sun goes chapter 11 and is bought out by IBM.
This is an excellent boon for open source software. Even if we only get small portions of it, having open-source Java can only benefit the community.
Thanks, Sun!
i guess this is good news of the OS community :)
so, java and solaris will be open source, and hardware will be free. so basically we'll be paying for our work?
How will this benefit Java?
Sun just announced that they have just created a new gaming division which is expected to release it's first title "Duke Nukem Forever" in the near future. The title will run exclusively on Unix systems including Solaris, and the Java Desktop, but may later be ported to other operating systems when the source as well as all artwork is released to the public domain. When asked how Sun can possibly give away every product they own and still make money, Scott McNeily made vague indications of revenue possibilies from their recently patented method of solidifing plazma in deep subterranean lairs.
Open source JAVA, the world gets more and more open, one program at a time.
"We haven't worked out how to open-source Java, but at some point it will happen," Srinivas said."
When I heard this earlier today I thought the same thing, this is a non-announcement.
The Java community is split over whether open-sourcing Java is beneficial.
.com name,
200+$ /month for the hosting plan, and about scores of thousands $ for a 2 pages legal agreement. It shouldn't be that hard....
I will probably be marked troll on this one, but I have to ask:
How in the world can you be split over something like that?
I mean, people will basiclly poke at the code and report you bugs.
Other developers will request tons of features that they will point how easy are to be done.
Everyone will be happy.
It's not as if they are charging people for using the pure java language right now.
However, others, including Sun, believe the main hurdle and concern is the future of the Java brand and compatibility.
So, they are planning to be constantly changing the language then? What are they smoking?
We haven't worked out how to open-source Java -- but at some point it will happen," Srinivas said. However, he noted "it might be today, tomorrow or two years down the road".
Well, you start with a 19$
Not to be a cynic, but "at some point" they will "somehow" figure out how to open source Java?
And at some point I'll somehow figure out how to make a million dollars while sitting at home playing my Playstation, too.
I fail to see how this qualifies as news.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
One of the most annoying parts of installing Java on FreeBSD via the ports, is having to stop and accept the license agreement.
I really hate Dan Patrick.
I really hope they do open source java. it would let OSS improve the VM. it would make it evolve faster and allow more people to improve it.
Java is nice and all, but I still prefer that my programming languages be managed by a standards organization.
I guess I can understand the fear of losing the "write once, run anywhere" mentality, but if that's one of the main attractions to the language doesn't it stand to reason that people won't really veer to far off?
"And The Geek Shall Inherit The Earth" --Jeff Darlington
Let me be the first to say: I hope to god Eric Raymond doesn't try to take credit for this. For those of you who don't know, ESR wrote an open letter asking for sun to Open-Source java. He wasn't the first, by a long shot. And IBM also asked for the same thing. Given ESR's tendency to take credit for just about everything though, I'm sure he'll claim that this was his doing...
That said, I hope java doesn't end up fragmented. One of the really nice things about java is that despite a few problems, it's very portable. I've never personally had a problem moving my code from one machine to another. I hope we don't end up with lots of different "distributions" of java. While Linus has managed to keep the Linux kernel mostly whole, That has a lot to do with his political skills. Lots of OSS projects end up fragmented.
I also hope this isn't an instance of sun trying to save some of their technology from being destroyed as their ship goes down. Sun has been struggling, and I hope they pull through and continue with their leadership in the development of java.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Great, now we can try and have people use Java on linux more, since non-open-source was one thing people were opposed to over Mono.
Instead of waiting two years, do it now when it counts most. If Sun feels some degree of uncertainty, then test the waters by open sourcing selective parts of the JDK - especially the parts of the Java libraries that are widely perceived to be neglected.
The true source of java has been known for many long years now: "The best Java coffee is grown on the far eastern end of the island on five estates established by the Dutch government." Evidence.
warmest regards,
Juan Valdez
Open sourcing programs makes sense. People can then look at the code and make any changes to the code that is necessary for them. I've done this many times myself.
But programming languages? All you need to know is right there in the API. If you open source a language, it's no longer really a language anymore is it. And that's the point. Java does what it does so well because Sun made it that way. When you open source it, you open it up so someone may fork it or whatever. Will Java really be improved when someone decides to add PERL (Practical Example of an unReliable Language) to it?
You gotta admire the effort Sun is making to even maintain Java, anymore... Bless their hearts.
It's not nearly as big a deal as open-sourcing, say, Solaris, simply because it's not going to wreck a primary revenue stream for Java.
I've wondered for a while where Sun makes money from Java, particularly enough to recoup what they spend on it. I can't imagine it affects sales of Solaris boxes that much.
The problem with this is that it could cause people to make incompatible forks of Java. What I mean to say is that Microsoft could make a .Net version of Java that is not compatible with everything else.
.Net you get all the native widgets without a 3rd library in there. Plus, you can do something like System.Window.Form.Whatever. Shit I don't do .Net, you know what I'm talking about.
Not possible, you say. Who would use it.
Well, whats the most vulnerable part of Java -- its the UI. Swing apps are pretty good already, but not quite comparible to a native app. Well, thats the first thing that will change. And people will like it because it feels like a native app.
What for, you say. Just use SWT.
Well maybe, but with
Call me paranoid or even a conspiracy theorist, but what if Microsofy is behind this? What if Microsoft, as part of their settlement with Sun, asked them to open-source Java so that they could embrace and extend it, and pollute it as they tried to before?
How much do you want to bet that Java will be open sourced under a BSD-style license, and not the GPL.
This space left intentionally blank.
One of the major java design points was write-once run anywhere. Now, I know that scores of you will say this is total BS, and I agree with you in principle. However, I've graduated into the wonderful world of J2EE development, and let me just say that the J2EE world is much better about this sort of thing.
I mean, sure websphere crashes all the time and is slow, but at least I can drop my WAR file into any J2EE compliant container and it does its business.
However, if Java is open-sourced GPL style, we open the possibility of forking which is totally bad news. That is to say, purposeful incompatibilities between VMs is bad news. I've heard the idea kicked around that Sun should require compatibility testing similar to J2EE to qualify for the Java monicker, and I think that's a pretty swell idea. If you want to create your own forked version of Java, then call it StarBux or something, just make it obvious to us developers that you are not standards compliant and at least we'll have no one to blame but ourselves when others can't run our stuff.
Of course, the coolest thing about open sourcing Java will be increased presence on the Linux platform. All I need now is warcraft III on Linux and I'll have no reason to use Windows ever again!
I think Java is fine the way it is. Open Sourcing it will not bring any improvements and actually might hurt Java.
With how people say that the Java VM is very fast compared to others, maybe now devs of other languages like Java (Python, perl) could learn from this source code and make their interpreters better.
Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
And if Microsoft is behind open-sourcing Java for the purpose of embrace-extend-extinguish, IBM won't allow that....
This will be a great thing for Sun and the open-source community, but only as long as the source is licensed under a non-restricting license. I don't think that is going to happen though. If it happen, all I can say is "rejoice!" :)
Does that mean that finally, 10 years later, my amiga 1200 will finally have support for not only frames but java too? :)
I remember the browsing frustrations I had in my last years on that platform, at one point we were in advance for just about everything possible, then lost to 3d gaming, then 16bits audio, then lost all the cool hacks like running a multi-line BBS routed through both telnet and dialup at the same time without even being a programmer, to being a slow about to die dog exept for playing speedball... Oh well.. better late than never I guess..
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
*Laugh*
... only to give it away to the open source community.
I'm sorry.
I can't believe that an organization would put so much time, effort, and money into a product
Open source.
Maybe when we all give up on Java and move to the CLR.
Cheers,
-- The Dude
It will certainly increase its adoption, especially in the open source world, thus fulfilling its original purpose: write once, run anywhere.
-jim
We'd thank you, Sun!
Java will be in good hands!
Let's assume this isn't horseshit fed to the masses to keep using Java technology.
(eg. like dressing up in a Penguin suit while handing SCO a paper bag full of money under the table.)
From a business point of view, what's the point?
Mono is nearing release 1.0 and is a very attractive platform for developers. Releasing Java open source 3 years ago would have screwed Microsoft hard, but now I'm not so sure.
I still think open sourcing is the best strategic move for Sun, but I think they have no clue on how to exploit it. They will probably do something silly like release it under the IBM CPL since that's what their competitors are doing.
The best move for them is obviously to GPL it, and use a Trolltech style licensing model. GNU Classpath will naturally get in the way. (again, should have did it 3 years ago).
However, the COO, Johnathan Schwartz recently teased in the media that they might release Looking Glass, Sun's new 3D desktop widget toolkit as open source. I've seen it, it looks great.
If they GPL'd that as well, Sun might have a chance at getting a serious revenue stream happening.
I doubt this will happen though. Sun will keep withering out of fear and inertia. It's the nature of the beast.
Duke Nukem Forever. LOL+n!!!!!
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
1 to 3 years mean-time between bug reports and fixes. What a failure. You'd never see that if Java were open.
- Determine conditions that Sun is sure of it finds acceptable right now for released files
- Throw release files & those conditions on some big-iron ftp/http server under Sun's control
- Make public announcement (& hopefully survive being
/dotted ;o)
- Inlude in conditions the option to submit patches to Sun
- Include in conditions the option to publish patches to everyone else
- Give selected regular patch-submitters limited write-access under strict additional conditions
- Relax those conditions as time goes by, and you see the source base evolving nicely
- Move source depository elsewhere, to make that big-iron ftp/http free for newer, more interesting projects
Just my suggestion for how Sun could do itMr. Srinivas, tear down this wall!
"Leisure is the mother of philosophy" - Thomas Hobbes
it's a palindrome. now figure out why I posted this. it's not off topic.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The reason they don't know how long it'll take is likely due to licensing agreements, patent royalties, and other little issues encumbering the code, on top of the normal burocracy.
Inevitibly, in large organizations with large projects, some manager attempts to (and often succeeds in) shortcutting the development time by licensing or purchasing some outside code or technology. I would be surprised if Sun's implementation of Java was completely developed in house and/or completely owned without exception by Sun. They have to vet all the code and modules to be certian that they have the right to release Java. I doubt they'll release the unencumbered parts before it's all ready.
Further, there are likely to be patent and legal encumberances to the code which may prevent immediate release. It could even be that people along the line have said, "I'll patent this technique later, for right now it's a trade secret." There may yet be code in there which they can capitalize off of by patenting, while allowing for usage within java without charge.
And, of course, they have to make sure the company lawyers and accountants are satisfied with whatever terms they release it under. They may even wait until the SCO thing blows over if they really want to use the GPL (Unlikely).
So don't hold your breath. The ideal outcome would make one able to compile it for platforms which it does not yet run on natively and stable.
-Adam
Remember that java isn't just the jvm or the class library source. It also includes JSSE, java's encryption framework which probably can't be open sourced (comercial restrictions, export laws, legal liabilities of possible changes to shipped trusted certificates...). I am sure there are other pieces that are sensitive as well. You wouldn't be able to use SSL out of the box with a JRE that didn't have a JSSE implementation.
"So you call this your free contry, tell me why it costs so much to live?" - Three Doors Down
are there any "success stories" of proprietary software going open source? i guess the definition of "success story" is subject to opinion.
Success for the releaser? (Sun)
Success for the community?
Of course the opening of Java's source will be neat for "the community," but it doesn't seem like a very smart business move for Sun. There might be some temporary benefits in publicity, but no real benefits in the long run. Atleast if they keep it closed, they'll retain some control, and have the ability to possibly make money off of it.
...Which seems impossible to me.
However, i'm sure they know this, and that's why it's not being released now, and it probably never will be, unless they somehow conjure up a way to release the source and retain complete control of it.
I would be happy if they just opensourced the virtual machine so distros can include it instead of me having to jump thru hoops getting it installed and working. Aslo this might allow different distro's to tweak the VM so it can run smoother and faster on thier version of linux while still supporting the develope once run anywere model. I'm not sure what else is in sun's java offering, I asume there would be an aplication server, a developers ide and maybe some other stuff.
Sun is giving the VM away as it is, It would be nice to have it gpl compatable so it can be used right after an install.
Screwing up the formatting on /.?
Oh no.. please don't register multiple dummy accounts and moderate me to hell!! Nooooooo!!! Damn you JBoss...
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Does this mean that I can finally just "emerge sun-jdk" and get the damn Java without having to give a pint of blood at sun's website?
I can't wait! Forget open source, *that's* what I'm looking forward to!
On that note, did Eclipse just get broken in Gentoo portage? The dir seems to have disappeared, confusing emerge.
Poor JMF; it's all but abandonded by Sun -- and the reference implementation pretty much only works on Windows for anything other than simple audio. IBM seems to be doing more development on JMF than Sun does anymore. The JMF forums are full of questions with very few answers. This would be an excellent library to open source.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
It makes perfect sense if Sun is doing this for the same reason Apple open sources the internals of Mac OS X.
Allowing their users access to the source to Solaris-- even if the license is "poisoned" to prevent it from being mixed with GPLed code-- would help Sun's users. They would be able to adapt the OS to strange fine-tuned uses and arcane hardware, or more easily debug kernel plugins. A shop that might otherwise have gone "well, we like solaris, but we don't want to be limited to sparc and x86, so we'll go with linux" might be dissuaded.
Allowing their users access to the source to the JVM-- even under a GPL-incompatible license-- would do the same. It would allow Sun's users to port the JVM to those few platforms Sun doesn't support yet, or more easily debug JNI software.
This is definitely a benefit for Sun's users. It makes both Java and Solaris more attractive. It makes a lot of sense.
If they really did, I would take it as more of a "We Give-Up" move just before everything falls apart.
Sun refuses to open source Java: Slashdotters interpret this as a sign they are dying.
Sun agrees to open source Java: Slashdotters interpret this as a sign they are dying.
Hmm.
When Jonathan Schwartz spoke at the Utah Java Users' Group he said Java drives a LOT of server sales for Sun. He specifically mentioned embedded java, e.g. in cell phones, as opening new revenue areas for servers. Java licening fees themselves are a drop in the bucket relatively.
It will be interesting to see what kind of license Sun goes with given their oft-given fear of forking Java. Seems to me that something like the Qt license would be the way to go.
Open source "Java" can be had right now.
Constitutionally Correct
Aren't you confusing closed source with closed standards? The Java standards are open -- that's why (for instance) J2EE has such broad vendor support.
[ UNSIGNED NOT NULL ]
Is it really that important to be able to distribute the built binaries for people? Without paying Sun for it, that is?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The regulations clearly state that if you can point to the source you don't need permission from the government.
Java
May 23, 1995 - June 3, 2004
Do any of you ever ask yourselves why now?
Do you trust Sun ? They are excellent at manipulating the media.
Sun is doing this for themselves so they can 'hype' more java news on all the internet news sources(zdnet,cnet,slash) and also pull more people into their language(prosyletize) so that they can cash in.
Microsoft and Sun both proselytize.
If you develop in java, you don't have to pay sun any money. Sun uses what they call a "protected source" license, which basically says, "Anyone can use this, but only we can make changes, or release new distributions."
Open sourcing java wouldn't really hurt them, and god knows java could use it.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
I keep wondering if they mean the java class libraries or the Java virtual machine (which runs those java applications)?
Opensourcing can only help java. It will definetly spread its adoption to be standard on many linuxes.
*cough*Python*cough*
Java is a great language.
And those people who say Java shouldn't be open sourced are ignoring examples of other languages that are Free Software and that are used on multiple platforms. And to repeat what someone has already said, it will be in good hands.
It's not so much about whether or not Java is Open Source. It's about the fact that when Java IS Open Source, then all of those other groups/companies/developers that make OSS products related to Java will push this technology even harder.
.NET only runs on Windows! Choice my ass, it only runs on Windows. If I repeat that again, am I a troll?
It's already working. Come on, C# is borrowed from Java. If you have a hard-on about about M$, then just remember they took the idea and applied it to their own technology. The biggest computer software company in the world has already created products from Java.
And don't forget,
Oops...my original point was that open sourced Java will help to push an industry into more development, very similar to the great amount of work that has come from working with Apache.
No one knows the day or the hour of the coming of source, not even the Sun...
These are just some examples of what Open Source Java could bring, and why forking is good.
----------
Create a WAP server
Now that Sun is in bed with Microsoft (Java Desktop anyone?), it should be a peice of cake for them to release the obsolete JVM code about 11 months from now.
(yes, I know that is an old link; the point is illustrate how far back Sun was getting nailed by MSFT; a quick slashdot search will show more recently how they're still bent over)
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
>even if the license is "poisoned" to prevent it from being mixed with GPLed code
You are getting it wrong, the GPL license poisons other licenses.
Sun would be damn smart to license it under an open source license that prevents it being somehow sucked into a lawsuit by being linked into/with GPL code.
GPL will end up being a legal hammer that RMS/FSF uses to punish those that don't support major forward development for GPL friendly enviroments.
Knowing what we know from the SCO lawsuit bs, I really don't see any reason to license with any license (e.g., GPL) that could eventually be used in a lawsuit to prevent the code from being freely used.
...now I can finish porting Duke Nukem Forever to Java!
Weaselmancer
...sorry. Someone had to say it.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Let's face it: It was bound to happen. After all, if Sun didn't open up Java, someone -- probably IBM -- would have eventually ripped it out of their hands. To quote Eric Raymond, "you can have ubiquity or control, but not both." (Ok, so that's more like a paraphrase than an exact quote, but y'all get the gyst. And speaking of ESR, there's a cool interview here in which he talks about -- and predicts -- Sun's open sourcing of Java.)
In short, it was either do it now or do it later for Sun. And it's better they do it now, when they can still look good, than later, when they'd end up just leaving a seriously bad taste in the mouth of thousands of developers. They're strapped for cash and just signed their soul over to the Borg. Might as well do SOMETHING worthwhile and good, rather than just be a giant flaming ball of gas for news.
Sun has no real value except for the ongoing license revenue from solaris hardware and software.
Linux did its job and forced them into only high end servers where there is
- much less demand
- much stronger competition
- commodity high end hardware
- 'portable' dbms systems - Oracle 9 data is the same on aix, solaris, hp, etc.
Of course, the funny thing is that Java runs quite poorly on Solaris and doesn't even support native threading. In fact, Sun has long since given up writing new system software for Solaris in Java, simply because their own engineers were complaining so loudly about how awful it was.
So, perhaps by open sourcing both of them, Sun is hoping someone else will fix their incompatibilities...
at what point does an irrelevant company lose the ability to make relevant news.
------
[insert funny
All you need is a server in some foreign country with really lax copyright laws (or no interest in prosecuting) and lots of porn.
I don't make millions of dollars with my web-site but it's fully automated. Money just shows up from AdSense. Money just shows up from the occasional subscription (I'm moving away from those and focusing on AdSense). New accounts just show up for Indie-Mail. That's the advantage of running an archival and service based web-site and being a programmer. Whenever I have to do something my first thought is "could a program do this?"
My daily workload consists of checking out the money and updating the spam filter. Every once in a while I have a major update which requires I drive to the ISP and copy the files off of my USB harddrive to the server.
Considering how self-run Slashdot is, it wouldn't surprise me if the owners spend more time playing playstation and counting their money than running the site. Or, if they wanted to, they could.
You just need to find something that people really want that you can automate or that requires very little effort.
Think "pet rock."
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Mono is nearing release 1.0 and is a very attractive platform for developers. Releasing Java open source 3 years ago would have screwed Microsoft hard, but now I'm not so sure.
First you ask what's the point, from a business-point-of-view no less. Then you bring up the legal blackhole that is mono?
The point is not basing your development on a technology owned by a ruthless competitor that has promised to squash you.
The point is having a development environment that is equally supported on multiple platforms by the core designers themselves.
The point is not to have the threat of patent suits looming over you for using an unauthorized and patented language/API/Runtime/Whatever-else-they-patented stack.
If they GPL'd that as well, Sun might have a chance at getting a serious revenue stream happening.
Oh yeah, the money just rolls in when companies GPL software, doesn't it.
Ahhh... Only on Slashdot :)
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
"Java" is trademarked, right? So release the code under some accepted open-source license, and prohibit anyone who forks it from calling their product "Java". I don't think you'd even need to change the license.
AEIOU: open-source anonymous internet currency
Sun open-sourcing their Java implementation is simply ridiculous. I mean, I love open source, but there has to be a reason for it. Open-sourcing an implementation of a compiler has absolutely zero potential win involved -- it's about the least interesting piece of software to open source. If a language is well-defined (as is Java), *all* of the necessary data to properly implement the language is available. There is almost no benefit to anyone from open-sourcing. There are open-source Java implementations already out there. I can't understand how this would help other open-source people.
Honestly, I find it more of a disgrace that the open source world (read: ESR and friends) are begging for a closed-source Java implementation to be open-sourced than producing a *better* Java implementation and showing how great open source is. "Open Source is better", right ESR? Java is patent-unencumbered, and has all the necessary data available. What's stopping you, if open source is really up to snuff?
The only possible thing I could think of would be pure ideology -- that "open source is better". That makes ESR happy. It also lets people crow about how awesome open source is (and then cite things like Open Office and Sun's Java implementation, which are *really* closed source implementations that Sun decided to open source).
But, hey, it's no skin off my back (other than if Sun goes under and "open source" is pointed to as the culprit). I just don't think that Sun should do something like this without some really compelling reasons to do so (other than ESR making fun of how low their per-share price is relative to Red Hat, that is).
May we never see th
The most annoying part of Java on Freebsd is that you are required to build the thing yourself due to all the restrictions. This wouldn't be such a problem but the Java libary gets larger all the time and gets to be a bigger chore just to install it. As I understand it this is due to licensing that only allows the Java on Freebsd developers to release patches with must be applied to the base source downloaded from Sun. If Java used a true open source license then this would no longer be a problem, because there would be no restrictions on redistribution of either modified source or binaries built from the modified version.
And someone allready did.
my other sig is a commando
Although the actual benefits of the move would be questionable, I personally like the idea of working with an open source language, or anything open source. So in my books this would be a good thing.
Assuming that would allow any developers to participate in Java's development, I imagine that the first enhancements would be templates, similar to C++. And before someone says that Java 1.5 already has generics, let me tell you that Java generics are nothing but a simple mechanism to automatically wrap primitive types within Object-derived instances.
There are various implementations of Java with truly good enhancements, like real templates, design-by-contract and other good stuff. It's a pity that Java does not get these "new" capabilities (that other languages have for ages).
3-In fact, there is actually LESS chance of fragmentation when Java lies in the hands of the public, first because it means that no one will start up a competing "openjava", a venture that would almost certainly lead to incompatibilities, and second because, as the example of the death of xfree86 shows, too much central and absolute control over software by a small group will inevitably anger developers and users alike, leading them to search for an alternative.
.Net? Same difference to me, extremely similar platforms with huge amount of duplicated code (Ant and NAnt, JUnit and NUnit, etc.). What you said about the issues with forks is true until someone big enough does it, and we are seeing the result in front of our very eyes.
Say, isn't "OpenJava" called
As for control by the public - Java is already controlled by the public at large through the JCP. I do think opening the source could get some people more fired up about some things though, as the JCP can be rather slow.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
esr says:
``Anyone who believes a vendor is going to give away hardware under a contract that allows the customer to immediately strip off the software and repurpose it probably still hasn't faced the truth about the Tooth Fairy.''
You mean that he does exist and wrote Linux, together with Santa Claus?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
It is really annoying to click through all these licenses to get the sources (and the patches too). I think we can expect the JDK to be better adapted to the ports collection (instant download), if JDK is "open source" (for slashdot users it seems to be equivalent to GPL only, I guess).
I wonder what license they will really take instead of their current "open source" license.
Try SuSE 9.1. It's just about as easy to install as Windows is, it works better, and it looks better too!
No wonder IBM called the dev platform Eclipse!
-- Sig meltdown immine...
This will be a horrible thing. As a java developer I will have to make my java programs work with 10+ different versions of java which means that more resources will be wasted on compatability than improving the actual software that are being written. This will be a support nightmare!
Yes, so Sun has decided to OS Java, a step that they said they wanted to do a while ago, but didn't want to see the language pulled apart while it was immature. Well, if they feel it's time then great. They did start it up, and pay for a ton of development, and do a lot of promotion. Did they benefit? You bet. They are a company, and after all hopeful dreams alone never get you anywhere. BSD, RPC, NFS, Java -- I can't wait to see what they come up with next. The're not the only ones with great solutions, but they have a good track record. Kudos.
I guess it's a step forward, yeah, yeah, someone will say - it's not happened *YET*. BUT it could change certainly several things: 1) every distribution now could distribute JRE without any licensing issues - I guess it's first and main point about Java widespread on Linux boxes 2) Allow changes for others/forks - I guess second is rather risky, but I guess no one will fork Java unless it will be very necessary and pressing. I guess it could be done the same way it worked for Openoffice.org project - one project site, everyone can contribute, submit changes, Sun engineers do the rest. Yes, I guess most of you should understand that isn't that easy to open source Java - Sun clearly see beneficts, but legal team should figure everything out, everything must be sorted out, even code - I asume. So let's just wait for that. And yes, it is about god damned time - for people who don't want to use Mono because of fear from Microsoft.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
myriad already-open-source Java apps, e.g. Pollix Live CD of Java dev tools.
If Sun were genuine about making Java "open source", in the usually accepted meaning of the term, Sun would first have to open up the Java specifications. And that would mean dropping compatibility requirements, publishing the Java specifications freely (right now, the Java specifications are owned by Sun and you have to agree to a restrictive license to even access them), and dedicating their patents required for implementing the specifications to the public domain.
Until they do all of that, it doesn't matter what they do with their source code because you will not be able to do those things that people expect to be able to do with open source software: modify it, improve it, remove useless bits, fork it, etc. In particular, the ability to fork software is an essential part of making something open source, and Sun has been unwavering about the fact that they do not want Java forked.
What you see with Sun now is the death throes of a once powerful company. When Sun still coughs up useful bits of code under a true open source license (like OpenOffice), let's use it. But let's not fall for their grab for industry control through Java anymore.
Sun has been saying that they will "somehow open source Java" since 1996. Has it happened? No. They changed their mind.
Sun has also been saying that they will "somehow have Java standardized by a standard body" since 1996. Has it happened? No. They changed their mind.
Sun like Java being owned completely by them, and they won't change. What they will do is that they will fiddle with the Java source license a little an declare that it is now "open source", just like they created the "Java community process" and claim that it's an "open process".
That said, I hope java doesn't end up fragmented.
You don't have to worry: Sun isn't going to give up control. They are going to keep Java proprietary, and they are not going to "open source" it in any sense anybody other than they themselves would recognize.
I also hope this isn't an instance of sun trying to save some of their technology from being destroyed as their ship goes down.
No, it isn't an instance of that. Sun doesn't care about "saving some of their technology". It's an instance of trying to appease critics as their ship goes down. But their ship is going down anyway, and when it does, as Sun keeps holding on to ownership of Java, Java will go down with them. Because, if Sun went out of business today, it's the creditors that end up owning Java and dictating what is going to happen with it. Nobody else would be able to make an independent implementation or take over. That's the price you pay for letting Sun ensure "compatibility".
I'm sure if it were the default provider for virtual/jdk then people would use it. I mean, that's the only way Blackdown gets any users, right? ;-)
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
It's already possible to download J2SE sources from javasoft.com. So what's the difference? However I haven't looked through all the sources so far... Is the virtual machine missing? Or is the difference that someone may modify the source and redistribute it?
My point is, a free, forkable implementation of Java will happen -- with or without support from Sun. If free software people could use Sun's classes, the risk of having incompatible versions of Java (because of subtle differences in implementations or because some classes haven't been implemented yet) would be lower than it is now.
Besides, having a complete and free Java environment perhaps could keep some free software developers away from C#/.Net
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
> I disagree that "most" closed standards fall out of use. Many survive.
:) JAVA is the only language with a corporation full of lawyers threatening to sue anyone who releases an implementation they don't like.
Outside the IT world you have a point. But name ONE major IT standard that is still relevant that is a) closed and b) not a microsoft 'standard'. I exclude MS because they are a convicted monopolist and have certain unfair influences on the marketplace that has permitted them to maintain closed standards for a little longer than everyone else.
Networking standards are the obvious example where closed has been the kiss of death. Closed information services were crushed by the Internet, all non-IP network protocols are now in legact maintaince mode. How many email systems are left other than SMTP/POP/IMAP? Instant messaging is the one holdout because Jabber couldn't get their act together to the point where every ISP became expected to host a Jabber locator server just like they host a mail/dns/news/etc server.
File protocols are rapidly converting to open, with the notable exception of MIcrosoft and their Office formats. A host of closed graphics formats fell to GIF, JPEG and PNG. The myriad audio and video formats have all but collapsed to WAV/MP3/MPEG/AVI/WMV/OGG. Even the MS standards are fairly open (for MS tech) with the exception of rights restricted flavors of WMV. MP3 and MPEG are artifacts of a day when RAND licensing was considered open.
JAVA must open or face a decline. It is the only current language with any real restrictions on implementations. Anyone is free to write a C compiler, and many do in school. Anyone if free to rewrite Perl, but would be daft to try.
Even worse, with the current situation Linux distributors can't include a JVM (Sun's or IBM's) in their collection, even those who are willing to bundle closed apps, so no JAVA app can ever be a core app in the Linux or BSD worlds, and considering the state of affairs in Windows land it isn't likely to happen there either. That Sun can't see that widespread, unfettered distribution of the runtime is a plus for all Java advocates doesn't bode well for a real Open Source release of the JDK.
But anyway, JAVA the language probably has a future but JAVA the emulator/VM really doesn't. Sun can slow the evolution down through skilled lawyering but native compilation similar to what GCC is now doing is the future, one where JAVA is just another language and source gets compiled to native code and depends on the normal system libraries.
The only reason for the emulator was to allow closed source apps to be semi portable, but as closed source becomes less of an issue there will be less and less reason to pay the emulation penalty of the JVM. In the Open Source world portability is achieved with GNU autoconf, not by compiling all code to run on a mythical platform which is then emulated on whatever host it happens to be running on today.
Democrat delenda est
When there's no firm plans, does it really matter what they say?
xix.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
When I have the Python/Pyrex/C hybrid?
Python is at least as portable for all practical needs, and far more expressive.
Python is already Free Software, so why use Java?
> I think they're worried about someone forking it.
/usr/lib with the rest. When programmers decide whether to use the bundled crossplatform graphic toolkit or use java bindings to Win32/Qt/Gtk/wxWindows/SDL/etc. When Python programmers are deciding whether to use Tk or Swing. Or in a bumper sticker size phrase, when Java is just another OO language instead of a religion.
Oh bull. How many incompatible forks of C++ are there? Not all compilers implement all of the latest ANSI standard but are all working toward compliance as fast as they can lest they lose relevence in the marketplace. Ok, how about Perl? It has been GPL from the start of it's life and there has been exactly ZERO forks. Python? Nope, no evil forks there. How about the granddaddy of them all, C? Yes, but the ANSI standard keeps pulling them all back into line, so it hasn't been a problem. Every time C shows its age the compiler writers start innovating and the good ideas get standaridized.
Sun is still trying to think of a way to make JAVA a cash cow and is afraid that if they Open Source it that when they have the "Ah Ha!" moment that it won'y work because they opened it.
And anyway, the idea of compile once, emulate everywhere is not exactly a great one if you live in the OS/FS world. Won't bother me a bit when Java becomes just another language that GCC compiles to native code and it's bundled libraries are sitting in
Democrat delenda est
2. Release product under a new restrictive open source license
3. People complain about license
4. Rerelease it under the GPL
5. Programers spend a year making the code worthwhile
6. People complains about how poor the opensource developement model works
7. Really cool product emerges too late to make a big impact in the market at large.
I don't mean to sound ungrateful.. but perhaps it would be smarter for companies to use open source earlier on, not as a last ditch effort. Java has been pigeoned holed as a very large plug-in for web browsers, which Flash has done a lot better with. If they are going to see Java as a big application platform, open source is necessary and not as optional.
Sun just did this to see the relevent feedback on osdn/slashdot/other related forums ;D
A QT style license that requires purchasing tools and rights from Sun for commercial use, while allowing free software (under an acceptable license) to be developed for free would be the best idea in my opinion. I'm sure there will be great debate at Sun over how profitable this will be, but in the long run this is definitely the way to go.
It will happen two weeks after the release of Doom. :-)
This is hybrid-source not open-source. Please use the right term for the right software.
"Fighting terrorists with millitary might is like killing a mosquitor on your Dad's forehead with a rifle."
either way, this strange brew, is good for you, & freely distributable too.
about g*dd*mn time??????????????
Why the hell do you feel the need to censor yourself saying goddamn? Dumbass.
Sun does seem to be on a hiding to nothing, however that should not distract developers from being wary of this sudden influx of hybrid source that the old cash for code companies seem to be trying to foist onto the FOSS community. With their various strange licences (if they are serious, why not use the GPL) their offerings are neither fish nor fowl. I would recommend caution.
My faith is expressed through Nihilism. Do you understand?
Why do I sense so much hatred and ungrattitude against SUN? It has been one of the pillars of UNIX, has given away many technologies that today define UNIX/Linux. Without SUN UNIX would have been irrelevant long ago, and with it Linux would have been just as irrelevant.
Why don't people see the strategic importance of the UNIX world (which includes Linux) holding together and fight against the real enemy?
I do have my concenrs regarding Suns recent "peace" with the enemy, maybe we can no longer rely on SUN, but at least one must acknowledge what SUN has done for the UNIX community.
The lack of historical perspective and irrationalism of many of the SUN haters is shocking to me. It almost makes me think that the enemy has sent inflitrators on slashdot with the purpose to spread division and internal struggle inside the UNIX world.
In this article in which they promise opening up Solaris, They say:
The uninformed on-lookers will only see the statement "Sun warms to open-source for Solaris" which gives them more points.
Next concerning Java, a few months ago they said,
Now they are saying:
Again, the uninformed on-lookers will only see the statement "Sun to open-source Java" which gives them more points.
Summary: They promised to make Solaris become like Java, meanwhile they don't know if at all Java will be open-sourced in this lifetime.
This is what is called hybrid-source: A vapor version of open-source meant only to gain favor with the open-source community and the business world without any active steps or concrete plans to put it in effect.
"Fighting terrorists with millitary might is like killing a mosquitor on your Dad's forehead with a rifle."
The shitstorms are because Die-Hard Linux geeks/distros want to have everything on their computer/CDs under the GPL.
I don't believe you. Do those distros ship without Perl and Apache, which are both not GPL licensed?
IF they release it under the GPL, I see this making the open-source world a lot friendlier to Java.
Open-source != Free. A significant group of people prefers a BSD-like license over the GPL. A GPL-compatible BSD-like license will be usable by both GPL and non-GPL programmers. Most programming language implementations do not use the GPL, and that is probably for a good reason:
Python - BSD-like license
Perl - Artistic
Gcc - GPL (but glibc is LGPL!)
Zope - BSD-like
Php - BSD-like
Scheme - BSD-like
Ada - Artistic
Eiffel - BSD-like
TCL/TK - BSD-like
Furthermore, the GPL may be a serious problem for Sun. Not all Java code is necessarily copyrighted by them. They might have licensed some code from others. With a BSD-like license, they can just keep those parts with their original license. A GPLed Java would require relicensing, which Sun cannot do. Another problem may be patents. Sun owns quite a few Java-related patents and the GPL requires them to give everyone a free license to those patents. That would allow MS to use those patents in their software and even to build another evil Java clone, but then, Sun wouldn't be able to do anything about it. Another patent problem may be that third party patents cannot be used in GPLed software (even though Sun can license it). So Sun might not be able to include some functionality in a GPLed Java.
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
The Java spec and compatibility will be diluted? Surely trademark law was designed to prevent this very problem.
.NET system which has just one lord who can force you further along the upgrade treadmill at a whim. Sun putting their money where their mouth is and truly making an open Java implementation available could be just what it needs.
... right?)
I dunno if Java is a trademark or not, but either with a trademark or a license clause in the distribution, Sun could require that any derivative product that does not conform to the Java spec may not use the word "Java" in its name or in any promotional literature (kinda like a saner version of the BSD advertising clause).
I can't imagine Sun actually depends on the technical specification as a significant revenue source. People despise Microsoft these days more than ever and don't much care to be locked into their
(Come to think of it the spec already is pretty much 'open' thanks to the JCP. So you have to pay Sun for a copy of the spec. You have to pay ISO or ANSI or whoever to the C and C++ specs too
As to
how up-to-date are you on the emulation penalty? With Hotspot, it's pretty slim, and there's an argument that dynamic optimisation is the future.It's a good news despite the uncertainty about when or how. At least it shows that Sun is considering its options with Java and moving in the right direction. OSing Java is the right move, IMHO.
Java is a great technology, even now Java is supported by huge number of OS apps, the sooner Sun does it the better.
Sun executives: "Well, let's open up the Java a little bit. Let's put some of the code under a free license. Nothing important, really, but enough to make us look good."
(A day later in a Sun press auditorium)
Sun spokesguy: (still reading the paper he's been given a moment ago) "...mmm... it says here that we're opening up Java."
Press guy in the front row: "So Java will be open source?"
Sun spokesguy: (reads something from the paper quickly) "Yeah!"
Everyone in the auditorium: "Cool!"
That evening, hundreds of thousands of developers flock to the website and rush to download the whole thing as Sun's Java guys open the download server, joining the celebrations.
The next day:
Sun executives: "Ummmm... what the hell we've done?"
...
Dateline: November 9, 1989
> In the Open Source world portability is achieved with GNU autoconf, not by compiling all code to run on a mythical platform which is then emulated on whatever host it happens to be running on today.
... I've spent days over such porting).
...
Um, which platform do you use - it wouldn't be Linux x86 which pretty much all gnu software has already been ported to would it? Autoconf is good at getting things mostly right, but there are still various tweaks to get something running on a platform it hasn't been built for before (I know
All the Java I've written seems to run fine without modification under MacOSX, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris
If autoconf is the route to native portability, I think I'll stick with the current JVM model and get some work done, thanks you.
Yeah, baby. I'm going to divorce her and marry you. Just keep sleeping with me.
What if... they want to stop any open Java project.
If they announce a GPLed version of Java al developers will find no sense in working in a diference openjava. Now they live in FUD. Sooo, they may just spread rumours to keep have for a longer period,
We need more info and we need it soon.
IMHO, it would be best for dun to dual license Java under the GPL and their own license (like Trolltech does to QT). That way Linux distros and KDE/GNOME can hav it their way, while Sun can still include it in Solaris and such.
#include "sig.h"
I'm sorry, but are you under some impression that being involved in the free software movement is morally and ethically akin to fighting against slavery, for civil rights, for world peace, or some other ACTUAL NOBLE cause? Its hard to tell but it sounds as if you actually believe any of this OSS stuff actually matters in the long run.......
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
There's also GJC, The GNU Compiler for Java which takes Java source or byte code which it can compile it onto a native executable. It can also compile Java source into byte code like javac does.
If Java goes Open Source, you'll end up with 1000 different versions, from 1000 different vendows, and you'll never know what's up.
Plus, you won't be able to use any nifty extensions, since you're not sure they will be there on the customer's machine.
Look, I know you're going to say "look how well Mozilla is doing" (and it is doing well), but this is a radically different thing. Mozilla just has to be internally consistent, render HTML, and support plug-ins. The JRE is half of your application, with a million dependencies between the two halves.
Sorry guys, but this will really set Java back.
-- ac at work
If I didn't know better, it would seem that Sun is flailing pretty badly at this point.
-- null
Interesting rhetorical slant on GPL vs. BSD, one I hadn't heard before. Folks friendlier to GPL would probably call it "sharealike" rather than your wordier construction, but you have a point - the GPL does say that not sharing your enhancements to what has been shared with you is bad.
However, I think you meant to say with respect to the BSD license that it is the "NOT sharing is not theft" license, or more appropriately the "Refusing to share even when you have benefitted directly from others have sharing with you" license if you want to be fair rather than merely interesting.
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
"We haven't worked out how to open-source Java..."
...and these people get paid HOW much? ;)
Well, see those collection of files that you edit when you want to update Java? Yeah, those.
Slap a GPL on it and let us have 'em. Simple!
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
From the article: ...
.NET's common langauge runtime, available on some BSD-esque platforms, of course.) The definitions of open source are pretty broadly scattered. We've got everything from shared to GPL to MPL to public domain, with everything in between. The importance of this announcement, which still has no hint of a timeframe, is -- to [nearly] quote one of my ex-presidents -- "Depends on what the meaning of open is."
"We haven't worked out how to open-source Java -- but at some point it will happen," [Sun's Java technology evangelist Raghavan] Srinivas said. However, he noted "it might be today, tomorrow or two years down the road".
However, others, including Sun, believe the main hurdle and concern is the future of the Java brand and compatibility. The main fear is that Java technologies could be forked and the "write once, run anywhere" attraction to Java will be lost, making use of the programming language and platform less attractive.
Doesn't this sound an awful lot like why Microsoft decided to release Rotor as "shared source"? (Rotor is the "open" release of
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
What about being able to write powerful server applications? What about providing a means of creating compiled, dynamic web pages that have the power of Java and aren't dotnet? What about the extensive libraries provided when writing such applications?
You probably overlooked that when you were whining about how your code on Windows didn't port easily to a '85 mainfraime.
That you have to use a few extra wrappers to talk to STDIN isn't a big deal, considering that you can also use the stream classes for so much more. STDIN isn't where lots of data is grabbed, so stop whining and add the extra line of code.
Sun's CEO Scott McNealy has squashed hopes that its Java programming language could be made open source, and cast a shadow over Sun COO Jonathan Schwartz's statement yesterday that the Solaris operating system was to go the same way.
n ew s/news_story.php?id=58628
At a news conference during the public sector technology showcase FOSE 2004, McNealy said he couldn't understand how open sourcing Java would solve anything.
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/?http://www.pcpro.co.uk/
We should remember that when you read all the "we might Open Source Solaris" articles we've seen, what they are talking about has nothing to do with Open Source as we know it. At best it is some kind of Microsoft Shared Source scenario, but probably it's just smoke and mirrors. Remember, Suns major partners this year have been SCO and Microsoft.
So when they now say they might "Open Source" Java, I don't see any reason for ESR or RMS (or anyone else for that matter) to get excited.
To be honest, this is really not too much fun, anymore. My new goal, after years of making my living as an app. developer in whatever envrionment the boss darned-well-wanted, is to get out of app. dev. and into simulation/modeling/graphics or something lower-level. Don't know how I am gonna do it. Well, I do have a clue in that I am getting a CS degree, concentrating, eventually, in simulation modeling and/or anything dealing with stuff under the hood. I'll probably finally learn enough to actually do something worthwhile right about the time I retire (5-10 year), but then I'll be in a position to do what I want -- have some fun and maybe some consulting. It's good to have a goal. (Sometimes, I'd like to shoot the guy who introduced me to my first mini-computer...) Ah,well. Lessons learned well are lessons well paid for. Cheers.
Open Source is nice, but not necessary for most Java users. How many Java programmers are complaining, "Man, I could write the program I want to write if I could just change the source code for Java!" However, an Open License would be great. The primary drawback to writing a program in Java is that the runtime engine has to compile the program on the fly. There are programs to compile the program for specific operating systems, but they are required to inculde the entire Java runtime library set due to licensing restrictions. So, if you don't use something like port IO or Swing graphics in your program, it has to still be included in the executable. An open license would allow a Java programmer to compile an executable that is small and fast and generally competitive with a similar C/C++ program. That solves the complaint that I normally hear from Java programmers: "I could write that in Java, but who would use it since they have to figure out how to install the runtime engine, get the classpaths configured, and then open a command prompt or teach their system to figure out a .class file should be run by Java?"
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
Create native, cross-platform GUI applications
Create native, cross-platform GUI applications, revisited
Not compile once, run everywhere, maybe write once, compile everywhere, but that is Java, GPLd with a GUI.
However, I think you meant to say with respect to the BSD license that it is the "NOT sharing is not theft" license, or more appropriately the "Refusing to share even when you have benefitted directly from others have sharing with you" license if you want to be fair rather than merely interesting.
The thing is, I think that his wording of "sharing is not theft" versus "not sharing is theft" was deliberate.
Only one word is different between these, and that word is moved, not altered. I think he was trying to highlight the similarities between the philosophies between these two licenses when it comes to Open-Source. The differences in wording are significant, but the ideological difference is actually quite subtle, and I think that is the point he's trying to get across by using the most similar possible wording.
It also seems to neatly sum up what goes through the minds of people who choose one license over the other. A person who chooses the BSD license wants to share his code, while a person who chooses the GPL wants to ensure that his code is shared. In that light, he's being quite fair.
The most fusterating thing to me is that everyone in the industry, who knew, knew that Sun either had to open source Java (and solaris to a lesser extent) or effectively get killed.
Unfortunately, ESR knew this too and so publically demanded that Sun open source Java just so he could take the credit for it. While it was a shrewd move on his part, I also think it was rather untrue to peoples nature and cold.
IMHO, he has always been taking credit for the success of GNU/Linux and open source on the grounds that his corporate lobying brought the movement into the "main stream", when in reality market forces were going to propel it to the top anyhow. If anyone deserves credit, it is RMS who understood from the beginning that freedom is important, and an end in itself - the rest is juat a matter of people using it to improve their lives.
mod thread up, please.
Given PCPro's article: Sun's
Scott McNealy squashes idea of Java becoming open source !
Sun's situation with Java is really reminiscent of AT&T's situation with Unix and C.
One could make a good argument that the excellent portability of C is because of AT&T retaining tight control of it for so many years. Many people learned the language and there were many applications written for it, so by the time more compilers were written for it, and later, when it was standardized, no one wanted to break anything.
In other words, the existing mass of programs keeps C stable and reasonable. If language changes different enough (or innovative enough) come along, they are put into a new language derived from C, and given a new name (like "C++" or "Java").
Is Java at that point now? Is there a big enough mass of Java code out there to keep the language stable without Sun's help?
Regarding open source Java and with characteristic bite, Scooter says 'I don't know what problem that would solve apart from IBM's childhood envy,' (Stupid free reg required.)
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach him to eat and he will fish forever.
You assume that when Sun says "open source", they mean "Open Source", as in the OSI definition.
I think Sun won't do that. They will either formally put an open source license on the code but keep control of the source through their numerous patents and the proprietary specifications, or they will simply pick a license that makes the source available put imposes restrictions on you that are incompatible with the OSI definition.
And the reason why Sun won't let go of Java is because they know that the instant they do that, they will lose control: I suspect so many people in the Java community are tired of Sun's "leadership" and poor technical decisions that an independent version of Java would take over instantly from Sun's version.
PS: Since when is X unable to autoconfigure a monitor? I've never had this problem.. I conclude that you're trolling.
Just because you have never had this problem (I have had this problem more than once) doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
One anectdote doesn't provide evidence of something _never_ happening. Who is the troll now?
LGPL-like with one caveat, if you make modifications, your modifications must pass Sun's Java compliance test suite.
This restricted open source gives Sun what it wants (Java will remain WORA), and give Open Source advocates enough to start contributing to Java. One possible contribution that would satisfy this license is for a Parrot-JVM bridge to be built. Another is for the SWT to be packaged with the JVM.
Sun doesn't make any money off J2SE - they make money off the J2ME and J2EE. GPLing (or so other real OS licence) a meaningful core set of J2SE would create real value for Sun by making Java a standard part of more distros and more OS projects. ("A meaningful core set" might well turn out to be all of it, but that's a long discussion :-)
Gnome, for example, might feel real pressure to reconsider their plans to heavily use Mono if Sun made such a move.
They are not going to absolve you of the licensing requirements. So, you have the source code, it doesn't mean that it's going to be free to use it with anything other than your personal use. Try to use it commercially and you WILL get wacked by them. I think it's a low blow to the term open-source and an underhanded technique to make themselves look 'better' than their competition.
"Me, I pretty much code in assembly. Takes longer, sure, but when you're as L33t as myself (and i'm God, it doesn't get much more L33t then that) you might as well just optimise the hell out of everything." - God, when asked about programming language of preference
Look out this fall for his flagship product, H34V3N, a product comparable to N1RV4N4, but with a western focus.
The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
"Certainly these latest statements from Scott McNealy..."
Poor news source. The article is misleading, meaning that McNealy said this long before (months?) the Raghavan Srinivas' comments. Apparently, Sun's position is changing.
Or maybe I'm speaking too soon. This sounds almost like a campaign pledge to me.
My sig is as boring as you...
FOSE was in April. Old quote.
Good point. There was a GPLed player but it died out. The source is still available but won't build on a modern platform and only supports version 4.
So yes, it is an example of a closed standard thriving, but apparently the OS/FS folk don't hang out at the lameass sites that depend (not the use of DEPEND) on flash enough to need to scratch that particular itch. Because while I bothered to install it on machines for our library patrons and did my laptop in the process of testing it, this workstation is an AMD64 and can't run it. I have never felt deprived by a lack of Flash support, nay I enjoy the lack of crapola and usually don't bother with Flash.
Democrat delenda est
Given the latest Sun outbursts about "open source", I don't think they mean what the article implies they mean. (This is likely redundant, but today I was busy and I didn't get a chance to post when the article was fresh. Sorry. Skipping your daily dose of /. can have bad health effects, let me tell you.)
Back in 1989, Micosoft bought 20 percent of a up and coming Unix vendor named Santa Cruz Operation run by the Michels brothers. This helped to keep the Unix community splintered and allowed Microsoft to capture customers that were confused and unhappy with the various proprietary versions of Unix in the marketplace. A Divide and Conquer strategy that was effective in increasing Micosoft's bottom line.
Now, Microsoft has settled with Sun for around $2 billion dollars and Sun is suddenly announcing the open sourcing of Solaris (when Jonathan Schwartz himself stated 4 months earlier that Solaris would remain proprietary) and now possibly Java. Sounds like Microsoft has yet again purchased a "divide and conquer strategy". This time it will be for the open source community.
Microsoft strategy: Let's see how we can distract developers and customers in the open source community from Linux by offering up Solaris and Java. Sounds like Sun (like SCO) is simply a pawn in Microsoft's strategy to dominate the future of operating systems.
Excellent points!!
After 5 years of Java development I have decided to move on to something outside of Sun/Microsoft's influence.
>But JIT is STILL interpreting in the same sense perl code is interpreted (even if there are utils to compile perl as well), the code is compiled on the fly as it's loaded and then executed. AFAIK JIT compiling is really just an efficient method of interpreting.
.class files, for later execution when you run that Java program. These bytecodes are not just chunks of text from the source code; they are also not processor-native. They are instructions for an imaginary CPU (the Java "virtual machine"). Compare this to Perl, in which you usually compile from source each and every time you run the program.
.NET uses JIT compilation too, and it works similarly: you compile to files full of MSIL bytecodes, and treat that as your compiled program. When you go to run it, the .NET JIT compiler turns those MSIL bytecodes into native instructions which are run.
.NET) security model. The verifiers that check your code for adherence to the secur
No, this is incorrect.
Perl 5 initially parses the source code into an in-memory parse tree that is not processor-native machine language, nor is it bytecodes. It's a pre-parsed tree structure of tokens from the source code. The Perl 5 interpreter then executes this parsed tree.
The Java compiler bytecode compiles Java source code into Java bytecodes and typically writes them to disk in
It is possible to compile from Perl source to Perl bytecodes for later execution too, but I haven't seen anybody actually bother with this. Even if you did, what Perl does is to re-constitute the parse tree from the bytecodes, and then it interprets that.
The classic Java interpreter then treats these pre-compiled Java bytecodes as the program, emulating the imaginary CPU in software by calling functions that are part of the interpreter to handle each of the bytecodes.
According to O'Reilly's Programming Perl, Chapter 18:
"Pass 4: Code Generation
This pass is optional; it isn't used in the normal scheme of things."
and
"Please be aware that the code generators are all extremely experimental utilities that shouldn't be expected to work in a production environment. In fact, they shouldn't even be expected to work in a nonproduction environment except maybe once in a blue moon."
Yes, it's possible to generate native code from Perl source, but they way you do it is to first generate C source code, and then run that through a C compiler. In general use, though, Perl is parsed into a tree of in-memory tokens, and those are then interpreted.
This is not at all the same as what a JIT compiler does. The JIT compiler in Java encounters a chunk of bytecodes (which were previously compiled from Java source code), transforms them into a chunk of processor-native instructions, and then runs them. It doesn't run the bytecodes; if they say to add X and Y and store them in Z, a JIT compiler creates code that would do that, and then the VM runs that native code. The main drawback with a JIT compiler is that compiling from bytecode to native code adds a bit of a lag. Multiply this across a big application, and the lag is pretty serious. The benefit is that if you call that chunk of code 100,000 times during a program, the first iteration is delayed while the code is JIT compiled, but then the 100,000 iterations of that code are done by native code, so overall it's faster.
The HotSpot compiler (once experimental, now a standard part of the Java VM) has a few performance tweaks, including a sort of hedged approach to interpretation vs. JIT compilation. Basically it interprets the code the first few times and keeps track of how many times the code is called. After that, it JIT compiles it. The idea here is to make sure that it's worth the overhead of JIT compiling.
By the way,
One big reason why compiling to native code and caching that is not done is that it breaks the Java (and
If you are thinking long-term, then it doesn't matter. If Java stays closed *and* people still use it, eventually an open-source clone will emerge and supplant it unless it is opened up. Sun will have shot itself in the foot and lost control anyway.
Thinking even longer-term, does anyone plan to still be using Java 50 years from now? I don't, so seems like it's a non-issue from that point of view, too.
Wonder if they were pressured by the open source projects like Mono..
Just say no to license servers!!
Now, why didn't I think of that? It seems Sun's creation of "write once, debug anywhere" needs a little help from the community. I knew the day would come when people realized that Java wasn't the panacea Sun pushed it to be. Sun created something they just couldn't sell to the community for the long haul. The same will happen with C# soon enough. Open source will kill this language for sure.
.NET are too sheek at the moment and too easy to sell. Time to stop creating "better" languages and start creating better programmers.
If most programmers just learned how computers and memory really worked, we'd all stick with only a handful of useful languages (ie. C, C++, Pascal), and software would just work better. But in a world of 6 month programmer training schools, this won't happen. Languages like Java and