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."
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!
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.
"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
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.
I really can't see any good reason for Sun to open Java or Solaris. They won't accept patches unless the copyright is assigned to them, and Sun will have a license that wont allow code from GPL work to enter Solaris or Java and vice-versa. If they really did, I would take it as more of a "We Give-Up" move just before everything falls apart. I personally would hate to see Sun go.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
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
You gotta admire the effort Sun is making to even maintain Java, anymore... Bless their hearts.
Well, nonetheless, if Sun somehow dies, the world still has Solaris and Java at their fingertips. I can't believe they are actually going through with this. I thought that little Microsoft deal would have stopped it completely, but I guess Sun still has a few tricks of thier sleeves. w00t!
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
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.
I think Java is fine the way it is. Open Sourcing it will not bring any improvements and actually might hurt Java.
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
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.
- 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 itThe 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
I really can't see any good reason for Sun to open Java or Solaris.
Me neither. Where the hell is the value in their company? Solaris doesn't have the greatest market share, and I see Java as their biggest strength. They want to give it away why? Don't they have a responsibility to the shareholders?
People run all kinds of Microsoft-made technologies and don't gripe. What's with the shitstorm about Java not being open source?
Who cares?
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
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.
Well, US-based organizations (from Sun to FSF) tend to be more "lawyer aware". But even Linux is moving into that direction now.
This "They won't accept patches unless the copyright is assigned to them" is just the price of doing business in the US. Mostly to have copyrights clear and avoid SCO-like messes. Even if SCO claim is completely without merit (and that I believe so), you need to prove it.
or, as someone said sometimes around 50 BCE said, "the wife of Julius Caesar doesn't only need to be honest" - don't remember the exact term - "she also needs to look like it".
Suppose that someone has some java changes introduced and then, 1 year later, SCO claims it came from their code!!!!
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.
Well, i'm not sure how sun is making a ton of money off of java now. They give the virtual machine as well as the web client away as it is. Maybe it is somethign to do with thier java desktop wich I asume won't be gpl'ed. Maybe if "opening the source" will get things runing faster and a little smoother There would be more of an market for thier desktop system.
AS far as running microsoft and liking it? Thats because it is there. Most people won't even look under the hood and care, with java, people are going out ang getting it so they know what is there and more of the people using it are the ones that would bitch about microsoft. The difference is the amount visible to the public. Microsofts users would have more that didn't care where java users would have more that did care.
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.
IF they release it under the GPL, I see this making the open-source world a lot friendlier to Java. IF thy release it under a GPL licence, then KDE/GNOME will integrate java more closely(I.E. standardize).
I think the smartest move would be for Sun to relase Java's source under the plain old GPL, but not let any implementation use the Java trademark unless it meets their criteria( so they can keep Java from fragmenting)
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.
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.
By a strange set of circumstances I found myself, a little over a year ago, sitting in a small room with RMS and a standard-issue complement of corporate Win32 support slaves. A FOSS missionary had brought us all together.
I've been a GNU/Linux user since 1997. At home I am now exclusively a G/L user. Am gunning for that at work.
Yet, when RMS told the gathered geeks and semi-interested bystanders (and I paraphrase) I think one should be willing to use inferior free software instead of superior closed software (/paraphrase) I thought Bull fucking shit.
That was before SCO filed suit. That was before I paid enough attention to what's going down in the patent realm. That was before Redhat sold out freedom for whatever it is they think they're getting in exchange for freedom. (The money ain't worth it, guys. You know in your souls -- if you haven't sold them -- that it ain't.)
I was running Redhat then. I'm running Debian now. It's inferior in many respects. It's maddening in many respects. It's free. I'm free.
People who have more chops than I compile their own custom kernels and their own sets of GNU & other FOSS. That's not just freeom. That's power. That's one future that any user is free to choose.
I'm so grateful to those who code in the name of freedom. I am writing this to you on a computer that's as free as I know how to make it, because of Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds and thousands of like-minded coders.
If, in order to stay free, I have to sign an effing affidavit every time I log on, I will do it.
And I know the coders who believe in what they have taught me to believe in will take the time to certify their code. It's a *very* small price for freedom.
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.
Apache isn't GPLed but that didn't stop most distros from making the Apache the standard web server for Linux.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
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
I can see a good reason, having a real OpenSource license for java would give it a significant popularity and usage thrust. Something they could really use in the battle against .Net
Java to be successful in the long term needs to be standarized and opened like C has been!
--
Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
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.
...a significant popularity. You mean just like Mono, or WindowMaker, GNUStep, DragonFlyBSD? Its a miracle when any piece of software, no matter what it is or what license its under, becomes popular. Simply taking a closed or heavily guarded app or language, remember the specs and Java API's are there for anyone to read, and turning that into an OSS project is not going to make it more popular, but will make it a lot less useful to Sun. If Microsoft suddenly opened Windows tomorrow, would that make Windows magically better then it was today? Would you spend the time submitting patches to a system that you would have to give up to Microsoft?
Java is Sun. While that probably doesn't mean all that much to most people, it does to Sun and everyone whose spent the time and money to certify there apps as J2EE Certified. Sun would have to be smoking some really good stuff to think that giving that up would be a good thing. Java and C were made for very different reasons, C was to be the prefered language for Unix development, so it was stupid not to have it open and standardized as Unix went down the same path, Java was always concieved as something that Sun would keep, leverage it and open it enough that it would be used, but still Sun would have control.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
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
Uh? I thought the whole purpose of this site was to gripe about microsoft products.
sic transit gloria mundi
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.
And in fact it is a nightmare if you want to deploy it on multiple FBSD boxes - and heaven forbid you want to sell a product that depends on it and make clients install it.
Worst. Solution. Ever.
(granted, it is a solution, but it sure blows)
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!
Umm, how are Linus and RMS like minded? Whilst they both support Freedom of software, they're completely different in their philosophies, ethics and favourite programming languages. Saying they're like minded is like saying that Microsoft and the Salvation Army are like minded because they both happen to produce goods and sell them.
Cogito, ergo sig.
Okay, I know, I'm getting off topic. But here's a link telling us how RMS views other FOSS advocates anyway.
Cogito, ergo sig.
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
> 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
So you've gone and confused generics with autoboxing. And we're supposed to listen to you demand someone does templates. Uhuh.
"You know you want me baby!" - Crow T Robot
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.
There are various implementations of Java with truly good enhancements, like real templates, design-by-contract and other good stuff
There are two dangers to this:
1) Incompatible forks. Java is supposed to be "write once, run anywhere". Different implementations of a common standard can be good. Diverging language features can't be.
2) At heart (without the class libraries) Java is still a small, simple, clean, readable, easy to learn language. Enough well-meaning enhancements, and it could end up looking like perl. Ugg.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
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.
Python is at least as portable for all practical needs,
I'm not really a fan of either language but I would say that I've yet to see a Windows machine with Python installed on it while it's been years since I saw one without Java. For web-based applications I would imagine this is a big deal.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Actually, the Java Desktop is a Linux distro running GNOME. That's the only GPL part there is (and it has no connection to Java other than coming with a Java VM).
Why? Just create the package on one of your FBSD boxes (including downloading source manually etc), then pkg_install the resulting package on all of your FBSD boxes.
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
Which is great until you want to have a GUI. Although it's being worked on, GNU Classpath doesn't really support Swing. Of course, it sounds like mostly Java is used for non-graphical programs anyway, but not always. Open-sourcing Java would mean that it could be included by distros and used for desktop apps.
Centralization breaks the internet.
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
> 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.
If I didn't know better, it would seem that Sun is flailing pretty badly at this point.
-- null
Sun has no real value except for the ongoing license revenue from solaris hardware and software.
That's a very big 'except for'. Also, Sun now make a considerable amount of money from selling software services. Oh, and by the way, its 'Sparc' hardware. Solaris is an 'Operating System'.
Linux did its job and forced them into only high end servers
Funny, I thought Open Source was about the pleasure of writing quality code, comradeship between developers, and providing choice. I did not realise it was designed specifically to annoy Sun.
where there is
- much less demand
There is?
- much stronger competition
But I thought you said that Linux was competition at the low end. How could Sun have been supposedly forced into 'only high end servers' without competition?
- commodity high end hardware
So?
- 'portable' dbms systems - Oracle 9 data is the same on aix, solaris, hp, etc
And has always been. Sun have always supported portability. That's why they went for UNIX decades ago and not a proprietary closed system like IBM and HP used to have. Sun got there first. When they started with UNIX, they published open standards for everyone to use, such as NFS. They allowed other manufacturers to use their Sparc designs. Sun realised that competition and portability are good: it means that competitors software can run on your systems.
no connection to Java other than coming with a Java VM
And Sun Studio Java development tools.
And Mozilla with full modern applet support.
And Java security tools.
And Java integration with Star Office to allow database connections and Office component development.
By the same reasoning Java Desktop has no connection to Linux other than including Linux...
Well, i'm not sure how sun is making a ton of money off of java now.
They do it by selling software services.
Sun: "We'll sell you software stuff and services."
Customer: "OK - what will it be written in?"
Sun: "Java"
Customer: "Cool - we already use java, its free, and we can use your software anywhere."
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.
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.
I believe It would be possible to use the Sun Java Desktop without using any Java. You could ignore the Java development tools, use Mozilla without accessing any applets, use StarOffice without accessing a database (which is probably how most people use it at the moment) and I am not aware of the Java security tools. Can anyone comment on how vital these Java security tools are to the system?
Now by contrast how much of the Sun Java Desktop would work without the Linux kernel, the associated GNU tools and GPL'd software?
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?
Friday 4th June 2004
.Net he said: 'Mankind won, Microsoft lost.'
Sun's Scott McNealy squashes idea of Java becoming open source
[PC Pro] 13:07
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.
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.
In February, Eric Raymond, President of the Open Source Initiative, published an open letter to Sun in which he called on Sun to make its Java platform Open Source, describing the company's Open Source strategy as 'spotty' and 'confused'. IBM also published an open letter to Sun with a similar plea.
At a UK conference in March, McNealy joked of such letters: 'They do get looked at. Sometimes with a chuckle.' His comments on demands to open source Java then echoed those he gave at FOSE. 'I don't know what problem that would solve apart from IBM's childhood envy,' he said.
Java is an object-oriented programming language designed to allow the same version of a program to run on multiple platforms without modification by using a Java runtime environment that sits between the Java program and the operating system. Java is the jewel in Sun's crown, as far as McNealy is concerned, because of its pervasiveness. 'There's not one other platform where you can write to it no matter whether it's a cell-phone or the Mars rover,' he said. On rivalries between Java and Microsoft's
Sun maintains that open standards are more important and that it has to retain control over the direction of Java to prevent the creation of different implementations that may be incompatible - something Sun accuses Red Hat of having done with its version of the Linux-based operating system.
This doesn't bode well for the chances of open-sourcing Sun's Solaris operating system. While speaking at the SunNetwork confe
ADVERTISEMENT
rence in Shanghai, China, Schwartz commented: 'I don't want to say when that will happen... But make no mistake - we will open source Solaris.'
However, he said this would be done in the same way that Sun holds stewardship over the direction of Java, which will frustrate many in the open source community.
However, Sun is not entirely against an open source version of Java. It has indicated in the past that it might be possible to relinquish its stewardship position to a neutral governing body that would assure open-source implementations wouldn't 'fork'.
And Sun isn't the only company with the skills to create an open source version of Java. Sun's Chief Technology Evangelist, Simon Phipps, told us in a recent interview: 'Why has no-one else offered to create an Open Source version of Java? Maybe because it's on the 'too hard' list. Sun would support an Open Source version of Java, but it needs a lot of money and time to do so. You can't just flick a switch. Right now Sun has higher priorities in the form of Java 1.5.'
Despite the rhetoric, it doesn't look as if open source implementations of either Java or Solaris will be around any time soon.