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?"
Check out http://jakarta.apache.org . All of projects are under Java and they are highly sophisticated open source project. Also some of http://xml.apache.org projects are under Java too. So I say not maybe highest usage but sophisticated apps are written under Java and most of them are open source.
Never learn by your mistakes, if you do you may never dare to try again
I develop radar software and I'm writing it in Java. This is done for cross-platorm compatibility though, not just because I want to run it on Linux.
..then you're not in the fucking industry.
simple as that, really. it IS heavily used(along with others).
I was surprised to learn that Java is used more than Perl or C++ in projects listed on freshmeat.net.
How many enterprise web application do you know that is written in C/C++? Cause that's where the money is these days....
Write boring code, not shiny code!
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'm hooked on the stuff. If I don't have a cup first thing in the morning the whole day is shot.
I think Java should be free. Down with Starbucks!
Start up a JVM process and you'll find that it makes incredibly heavy use of resources. That's what he means, incredibly heavily used ;-)
Just have a look at the projects hosted on sf.
There are 12588 projects in Java. Right behind the 13922 in C++ and the 13785 in C.
So I guess, Java IS used a lot.
I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
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.
There is no such thing like C/C++! C and C++ are different languages with different standards.
Java is indeed heavily used - in some areas. It's in extreme usage "server-side", and many people develop applications in Java - for servers.
;)
On the client, however, you'll find it far less often. I use a java client when no other alternatives exist. Java has always been an incredible memory hog for me. I don't like using java on the client. It's mostly slow and unresponsive.
Personally I vastly prefer to use C or C++ programs, as they tend to be much nicer to use. In addition, they tend to have the same interface as the rest of the programs in my desktop environments.
"Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
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.
He said "Java is 'incredibly heavily used' in the Linux community", not that it is the "most heavily used language".
A subtle but important difference.
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.
- There are many very great libraries. E.g. OJB is a great database layer and SWT can create nice GUIs. All these Apache Common Tools are also very great and allow quick application development.
- Eclipse is the best IDE I ever saw. The great refactoring features and the hot code replace speed up development immensely.
Sometimes I'm not the own who chooses the plattform of a project. In the last years these projects were allWe do a lot of Open Source work, but by far the bulk of it (especially for enterprise level applications) is done with Perl.
Of course if we were "bigger" or writing "bigger" applications, Java starts to see some advantages, but the biggest hurdle is to actually get a reliably installable version.
Sure, we can download it from IBM, or from Sun, or from Blackdown, but they all have differences of opinion, differences of quality and differences of ideals.
We use Debian for all of our systems, and every other damn software package we run is built and works for Debian, and plays nicely with everything else. But not Java. There's no standard place that it gets installed - to the extent that some packages will successfully identify that you have it, and others won't. It isn't in synch with the libc or libgcc that's current at any point in time. Since I upgraded my laptop to Mozilla 1.7, Java no longer works: not that it was ever particularly reliable.
So while there might be some wonderful advantages to building applications with Java, the general flakiness of my experiences with applications written to use it, means that I can't develop for it, because I can't inflict that flakiness onto my clients.
Partly, of course, this flaw is because Debian's approach to licensing means that something with the shackles around it that all JVM's will have, will never be part of core Debian. In fact though, that's mostly the case for any distribution, even the commercial ones, because they are all depending on open-source licenses for all the rest of the environment, and to be in synch with those, you have to be part of everyone's standard install.
Commercial distros must have to put lots of effort into making their setup work with their chosen JVM, rather than sticking the horse in front of the cart and making their chosen JVM work within their environment.
I sure would like to see an DFSG free implementation of Java, and I don't understand why this entails Sun "losing control" of the standard, and why they are in such a panic about allowing that to happen.
I think the question was about new crafted programs and wether you as a code use java. The question was not wether most installed programs are Java or not, which would be ridiculous.
/. storry? You only need to search on sourceforge or freshmeat to realize that the majority of new projects start in Java.
... Commercial projects are either for the Windows platform, and then likely in Visual C++ or Visual Basic, or they are platform neutral and then they are done 90% of the time in Java.
Why is that worth a
All people I know program mainly in Java and script in Python
angel'o'sphere
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Portable, standardized language and interfaces are what gives Java it's power.
:)
Yeah, because gods know that no other language has ever been portable or standardized.
Unless protected by a strong consortium [...] Java would rapidly fragment into several code forks
Just as has happened with those other highly portable, standardized, cross-platform languages like Tcl/Tk, Perl, Python, etc. (Oh wait, I forgot, there are no other portable, standardized, cross-platform languages, my mistake.) Yeah, clearly, every language that isn't under the rigid control of corporate-owned constortia is instantly subject to massive forking by the dangerous denizens of the dark side. Open-sourcing computer languages makes the baby jebus cry!
Java's embedded documentation [...]
Oh, yeah, too bad the perl coders couldn't come up with something like that years before java even existed! Come to think of it, I think the perl guys borrowed it from lisp! Oh well, it's clearly an advantage of Java and of no other language!
And the best part about using java? It's low-level C/C++-like syntax and data structures means that you get to write many times more lines of code than you would need to to code the equivalent in tcl or perl or python. Why is that good? More money for programmers to write and (especially) to maintain all that extra code!
Java, with the support costs of a low level language, the run-time overheads of a high-level one, and the benefits of neither, is clearly the best choice. Just try it, and you'll be sayin', "Wow! I gotta get me some o' dat!"
Whoops, sorry, was I waxing sarcastic again?
Oh yeah, and all three of those other languages I mentioned have all settled on a single cross-platform GUI toolkit to share (Tk). How many GUI toolkits are fighting for dominance in the java world these days? I stopped counting after three. Boy, that there's some good standardization!
Aaaanyway, I don't want to bash java too hard. I actually think it's a pretty decent language overall. I just get so tired of people who think it's God's Gift; people who usually don't have a clue what else is out there. Java's ok, but it ain't All That!
I totally disagree that Java has absolutely no aspects of a beautiful/easy-to-use language. I think you're neglecting the fact that when Java burst on the scene in '95, it provided a simple means to write cross platform applications in a way C/C++ did not out of the box.
I worked on a satellite system for NASA written in C++ that was originally spec'd to work on five UNIX platforms. Keep in mind this is in the days before Linux became widely adopted... and this system was a major headache because:
This is not to slam C++ in its current incarnation, but to point out that when Java first arrived on the scene, the restrictions and smaller set of APIs made it easy to ramp up developers who could then build cross-platform applications much quicker.
As for your specificpoints, let me explain where I disagree:
-primitive types and associated classes: When I want to store a variable of one the primitve types like int (the ones you use in every class) you have to wrap them into a class (Integer) which has no way to change the Value later. So everytime I want to e.g. increment a counter stored this way, I have to convert it back to int, increment it und create a new Integer-Object to store the incremented value back into my container-class.
Primitive types are (IMHO) a bit of a hack in Java, but they behave much like primitive types in C++. Granted, lacking generics (pre-Java 1.5), Java cannot support arbitrary collections of primitives, but consider this: if you want to store and manage collections of primitive types, couldn't you write your own class to either "wrap" the primitive type? I'd also recommend wrapping the Collection you're using to simplify the mutators.
-If I want to compare two Classes I have to use the equals-Method instead of a simple operator-overloading which would enable me to use ==
I can't count how many times I ran into incompatibly defined flavors of operator overloading in "mediocre" C++ code where bugs in operator overloading introduced logic errors that were hard to find.
Inn the case of equals(Object) versus the == operator, consider this: in Java they have two completely different purposes. If you want to compare two object references to see if they refer to the same object, use ==. If you want to compare the contents of the objects they refer to, use equals(Object). Consider the ambiguity and potential for flaws when the operator's behavior could be changed to deviate from comparing references to Objects!
This is a case where I believe that removing a feature from a language makes it easier for developers to avoid dealing with obscure bugs while trying to get an application done.
-When I retrieve an Object from a Container it is a java.lang.Object instead of the type I stored which totally negates the advantages of static typing Solved in Java 1.5 with Gener
Well.. this sort of question will lead to the following answers:
1. I don't use Java because my machine is too slow, I don't like applets, or perhaps they use one Java app and say its ok. (These answers are from people who didn't read and understand the question.)
2. I like Java == Coffee! (These answers are from people who did read it, but were being funny.. thats good..)
3. I don't see Java used in the enterprise at all. We run a pure win32 shop and block Java at the firewall. In fact, we only drink tea to ensure we are not contaminated. (These answers are from a software company in Washington state mainly.. with a few other unfortunate exceptions as well.)
4. We use Java in the enterprise. (These answers are from people who actually work in an enterprise.)
A definition.. the enterprise does not mean your home network.. your school lab.. sourceforge.. freshmeat.. the internet cafe that you swap sysadmin services for free scones.. it means large corporate systems and infrastructures.
I haven't seen any enterprise-class system *not* oriented towards Java in a long time. Even ones not build in a J2EE model have evolved over time to support many of those components to streamline integration and development. Java has a good solid foundation in these areas, and with newer versions of the J2SE/J2EE specifications, it gets to be a richer server and client platform.
As far as Java on Linux.. I think the question should be more focused on the adoption of Linux as opposed to Java. Many places I work run many Java applications, but have requirements that Unix-hosted systems and applications must live on Sun Solaris, IBM, or other platforms. These requirements simplify management, accountability, and vendor management. That is worth a lot. Getting that Linux box online is cheaper when compared to that Sparc box, but the lifetime of supporting and maintaining the box could be higher if you are already supporting a large Sun infrastructure. This is all irrespective of Java.
Probably one of the biggest deals for Linux in the enterprise is Oracle's push and support of Linux for their entire suite of applications, and for publishing effective case stories on horizontal scaling on Linux systems. This benefits Java, as that is the primary language in Oracle-land now, but its a bigger benefit to Linux. IBM's push for Linux and Java is also very effective... (I rate Oracle higher, since they don't have a hardware issue to bring to the table, and are just pushing software.. IBM does push the software in the Websphere suite, but tends to bring hardware as well..)
So.. Linux is gaining in enterprise acceptance.. therefore Java on Linux is gaining.. but I think Java is set and has proven itself. Its Linux that is doing the proving now.
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.
Why the compounding of a task into another task to achieve the same result. Running the scripts I require to run through Java adds another step to running them that I do not require. Therefore it is a solution to a problem that is more complex than alternate solutions that exist to the same problem.
How is that complex?
It is more complex than what I require. Since you do not know what I do, you are hardly in a position to judge. I on the other hand can readily judge whether running my scripts through Java is something that I require. Believe me, its not.
Is that complex?
No, and this is where things get delicious, I'm talking about scripting, you know, writing text files with commands in them that you launch using a command interpreter of some kind. Not running a command prompt that the so called "Examples" of yours show. Its actually more complex to call a script from Java than your poor examples reflect. How about a link to demonstrate: BeanShell Example - Calling scripts from Java
If it is, I think you should be careful about what problems you are trying to solve. Stick to simple ones.
I think that you should perhaps take some of your own advice. I know how to run a command prompt, I know how to run a script, I know how to run Java. Some other advice I would offer would be to actually not insult people in a public forum. You might not be prepared for the consequences.