Slashdot Mirror
How Much Java in the Linux World?
jg21 writes "Java is 'incredibly heavily used' in the Linux community, according to Sun's James Gosling, one of Java's co-creators. Gosling was debating Stanford's Lawrence Lessig, Apache co-founder Brian Behlendorf, IBM's Rod Smith, and others at JavaOne this week about the possible merits of open-sourcing Java vs the market's demand for continuing compatibility. But Behlendorf seemed not to agree. So who was right, how many Slashdotters are also Java users? Is "incredibly heavily used" an overstatement by Gosling, who after all helped create the language and therefore might be biased?"
Hi,
my team is in charge of the technological foundations for all the Internet related apps pushed by our employer. Linux / Apache / Tomcat is used EVERYWHERE for all our online banking and trading systems.
Access to the legacy system is also done in Java.
I also clearly think we're not alone doing so.
I work for a company that produces a J2EE application server and J2EE web applicatons, so I'm pretty much exclusively Java and exclusively Linux. I've been using Java on Linux for work for the last five years.
While I do cross-platform C/C++ development as well, when I need to make sure it's cross platform, I use Java.
Portable, standardized language and interfaces are what gives Java it's power. The community process has provided a reasonable pace of new feature integration, and has abandoned a few implementations that weren't really "ready", much as an orphaned code fork would be.
Open sourcing Java would be a mistake. Unless protected by a strong consortium of members (JCP) or by a strong backer who refuses to sell out to any one interest (M$ platform-specific extensions), Java would rapidly fragment into several code forks and become essentially useless.
It may take time to get features in through the JCP, but it also ensures there are no hastily implemented hacks making their way into the system. Quite frankly, the vast majority of OSS projects which don't come from Linus, Apache, Mozilla, or IBM have proven to be an absolutely disgusting mess of poorly and un-documented code. Java's embedded documentation is an elegant solution to the problem of keeping API manuals and source in sync, but it seems most OSS developers still haven't evolved past the "what, you can't read code?" mentality of the teenage "l33t" programming snob.
OSS means no sanity checks on feature creep, portability verification, documentation verification, regression testing, and all the other enterprise-project aspects of development that make it a useful technology. I've lost track of the number of times I've encountered platform-specific hacks in OSS code that weren't properly #ifdef-bracketed, or which just completely incompatible with other O/S implementations.
In short, Java is critical because it is portable and managed. The fact that Linux is supported is important from a rollout standpoint, but the underlying OS is (and should remain) irrelevant.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I use Java on all four of my main platforms: OS X, Linux, FreeBSD and Windows. I tend to use it for projects that are larger than I would feel comfortable doing in Perl. An added benefit is they are cross-platform, just like Perl.
I started using Java in 1997 on Windows, and it followed me when I expanded into different operating systems.
I really like C, and use it for some work-related and recreational programming, but when the "rubber meets the road" and I need to get something done within a short time frame, I turn to Perl and Java. Perl, mostly for data parsing jobs, and Java for the more "permanent" programs, especially for graphical network clients.
I've been using Java JRE's since 1.02, and they have really grown in power and speed over the years. I have no problems using Swing apps on my 800 MHz iMac or my 1.7 GHz Celeron Linux system. They even run very well on my 533 MHz Celeron running Windows 2000. While they may not have the raw speed of a native app written in C or C++ (especially graphical apps), the performance I get is more than adequate for the job being performed.
No matter where you go... there you are.
about the possible merits of open-sourcing Java vs the market's demand for continuing compatibility
...), several incompatible 3D APIs, incompatible and incomplete implementations (Sun's, gcj, etc.), several incompatible levels (J2SE, J2ME, J2EE, ...), and on and on. Even among Java implementations based on Sun's code, there are wild incompatibilities. C# and Mono are futher incompatible branches off the Java tree. Open sourcing Java could have reduced those incompatibilities because people wouldn't have had to reinvent the wheel just in order to get around Sun's licensing restrictions; something like Swing, for example, would have died its well-deserved death early on, instead of being kept alive artificially by Sun.
That phrasing suggests that open sourcing would have threatened compatibility, but the exact opposite would have been the case: under Sun's processes, Java has fallen apart: several different toolkits (AWT, Swing, SWT,
Of course, why any of this is worth worrying about anymore, I don't understand. Java has failed on all its promises: its promise to become a platform-independent way of delivering applications via the Internet, its promise of becoming a universal client development language, and even its promise of becoming a good server-side development language. Java hangs on in education, but as Pascal shows, that doesn't mean much. And some big corporations with too much money still try to use Java for "enterprise systems", but you can sell those guys anything.