Java Fallout: OO.o 2.0 and the FOSS Community

Joe Barr writes "Bruce Byfield has an interesting look at the 'fallout' between OpenOffice.org and the free/open source software communities because of their reliance on Java in the latest release. As he says, "It seems a decision based largely on practical considerations -- and with a disregard for the consequences for both the rest of the free and open source software (FOSS) communities and the future of OpenOffice.org itself." This is an issue that is not going away."

Comments

who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares if it's using a non-Free java or a non-Free toilet paper? As long as it DOES THE JOB, it's good enough for me.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is that toilet paper gets thrown away after use.

If your corporation builds infrastructure with it, you're stuck with it a LONG time.

Consider all those foolish companies who built infrastructure on VB6 now that Microsoft is cutting off support for that platform

Had they picked an open source platform it would be much less disruptive for their business.

Free as in Java may be OK for hobby use, but has no places in my company.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

But its not good enough for the FREE SOFTWARE MOVEMENT

Re:who cares?

[TheWanderingHermit]

As much as I wish I could be a purist, I have to agree with this simple statement. I started my business on softare that originally used Abiword and was controlled by Perl (Abiword was only called from the command line through Perl), but when OOo reached 1.0, I converted, which meant I had to learn Java (which I don't regret), and I had to base the entire program on Java and the Java interfaces with OOo. And, unlike command line purists prefer, my software is used in the real world, by real people who pay good money every month for my company's services (and I don't mean some measly 29.95/month -- they're paying enough to expect an easy to use program. I can't run it on Blackdown, or other forms of Java that don't have a GUI.

If OOo changed, I, and I'm sure, thousands of other developers, would have to re-write a ton of programs. Such a change would make me seriously re-think OOo, since it would make me wonder when they'd do that again.

I know we all make jokes about how those of us on Slashdot don't have lives or girlfriends, or have poor social skills, but it seems to me those who are pitching a hissy fit over this need to get their heads out of the ground, look around, and try living in the real world for a change. Instead of complaining about their bosses and cramped cubes, maybe they should try to run the business and find out just how hard it is to make sure they have an income if they insist on staying purists.

I don't see how anyone who has had to make decisions based on what customers want and will pay for could seriously expect a product like OOo to dump Java. People like that are the real 100% geeks, like Harold on Red Green, who have no life, no girlfriend, and no concept of what it's like to interact with the rest of the world.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then use a warezed version of MS office if you don't care about the principles of free software.

Re:who cares?

[temojen]

If it requires non-Free java, the requirements to install it cannot be distributed with it. This adds a step to the install process, and prevents it from being included with distributions that don't have sun-jre distribution agreements with sun microsystems.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not true. It's the distros themselves that decide not to the distribute Java with their free ISOs, and they only include it on their commercial solutions.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

If people make ridiculous comparisons. When was the last time you wiped your ass with a word processor?

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I use a warezed version of MS Office? Free software is about speech not price. Free software CAN have a price, and OOo has one if you want (you can buy Star Office).

Your reply does not make sense. The fact that I want to use the BEST TOOL FOR THE JOB does not mean that the best tool can't be free/Free, or fully commercial.

In either case, I don't have to warez anything. I have the right money to buy anything I want, I just want to use whatever works.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and again: who cares about the "free software movement"?

I am a simple COMPUTER USER.

I care not about politics, especially when it comes to bits and bytes. If the software I need costs money, I will just buy it. If it happens to be Free/free, even better! But I don't care about any "movements" and "religions" or "politics".

As a computer user, these are the last things I care.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is because of people not thinking like yourself that we have a large variety of free software available for our computers. It has not always been like this and it might not be so until eternity. The fight for freedom is a continous effort, as history has taught us numerous times. Should we accept that what was once a viable alternative consisting of entirely free software slowly becomes more and more amputated as only non free software exist for performing many tasks? I for one think this is an important issue. An interesting read might be The Free Software Definiton.

Re:who cares?

[lukewarmfusion]

I agree with your points. And the grandparent's point as well. If you want to compete with MSOffice (or any of the other packages that are leading over OpenOffice.org) then you have to get market share. Ordinary consumers couldn't care less about whether it's open source, built on free-as-in-Java, etc. They want it to work. They like the free as in beer, but if it doesn't work (at least as well as MSOffice for whatever they're doing) they won't use it.

Re:who cares?

[TheWanderingHermit]

Perhaps it's a process. Sun's considering opening up Java. Maybe some of us, who live in the real world, are open to being part of the process of seeing things open, instead of hiding behind our keyboards, not having to make decisions that effect a companies bottom line.

There are many shades of grey between the black and white you paint it to be. Perhaps if you had more real world experience, or had to do more than sit in your cube and piss and moan about your boss -- like having to make real decisions about how to keep the company's income continuing -- then you might understand that.

Re:who cares?

[aldoman]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?

PythonGTK is nice, but still nowhere near VB6 (look at the complexity of the runtimes). There is a few 'fringe' programs but to be honest you have to get much closer to the bone to do anything on Linux. Even Mono is still lacking true click and drag programming.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but there is some areas where Linux still is 'lacking' vs Microsoft/Apple/Sun/whoever, and of course it'll get fixed, but suggesting that people who built CRM suite in '97 would be better off now if they had chose a non-existent Linux/OSS solution is a bit silly.

Re:who cares?

[madscientist003]

I think you hit the nail on the head with your distinction of the hobbyist and corporate markets. Asking "who cares?" is obviously indicative of being a personal user who does not have any concern for the licensing issues involved in corporate adoption. The author of the article is right on with his assertion that OpenOffice is one of the seminal applications in the road to more widespread adoption of free desktop alternatives, and I find the scariest part about this situation to be the lack of communication taking place. This has to get resolved, and sooner rather than later.

Re:who cares?

[TheWanderingHermit]

I'm not disagreeing with you -- I have to say I wasn't even thinking in terms of market share (I have a business that doesn't have to worry about advertising, market share, or most of the marketing stuff most businesses have to face -- I am VERY lucky!). I was just thinking in terms of income. I could have saved a LOT of time by writing my software so it is all command line based, 100% open, and using something like Blackdown. But that would mean my customers wouldn't even use my service (and no, most of them don't have someone else to turn to). I directly improve their bottom line, but if they had to keep looking up references and using the command line, they'd drop it, or I'd spend hours a day on the phone for tech support (my clients hardly ever need to call me for tech support!).

I was thinking more along your point about ordinary customers. That's where, to me, it's not even a market share question. It's about whether anyone will buy or nobody at all. Yes, OOo can go for 100% open source, but I'm sure using Java for many functions saves months of programming time over C or C++, and lets them put out a better product.

Another point: Life is a process. Sun is talking about opening Java. The purists here are like people in PETA -- especially the ones that threw a fit and said the city of Fishkill should change its name because it had violent conotations, then later found out kill means stream, and that's where the "Kill" came from. These people are so full of anger and frustration, they have to take it out on others, so they hold everyone to a really stupid and high standard, so they can always criticize others for not meeting THEIR standards.

Open source is a process. Have any of these purists thought about what a BIG step it is that Sun is even considering open sourcing Java? It's a big step. It's not perfect, but it is a big move in the right direction. It won't get there overnight, so it is important to understand that it is more important to be a supportive part of the change than someone pissing and moaning because it's not exactly what they want -- instead of trying to help the process along.

Re:who cares?

[madscientist003]

And your point is well-taken, but the beef of this argument is with the corporate sector who have serious licensing issues to consider before they even evaluate some alternative application (much less an alternative desktop platform).

For personal users, this is likely a non-issue. For those involved in the creation and maintenance of distributions, or those looking to advise a switch to an alternative corporate office suite, this debate is quite important. It's not a matter of paying up for software that isn't free. It's a matter of how the free software movement should cope with having a flagship application not being completely free.

Re:who cares?

[SunFan]

I saw a mention of OpenOffice.org + GCJ in another forum. If this is true, doesn't this make the whole debate moot?

Re:who cares?

[Zocalo]

Had they picked an open source platform it would be much less disruptive for their business.

How so? It's not like the VB6 DLLs that your infrastructure is dependent upon are going to go away. Sure, there are not going to be any more security patches, but equally there are probably not going to very more exploits either, if any. (Based on the premise that few crackers are looking for bugs in discontinued code - when was the last exploit specifically targetting Windows '9x for instance?) Besides, unless I'd had a third party write the application and had no access to the VB6 source, then I could still update the code to a newer version of VB, or even .Net, even though it might be a lot of work.

It's just as possible to get into exactly the same state with an open language as it is a closed one. If the developers all move on to other projects and the language whithers on the vine, unless you have the ability to update the language code on your own then you are in the same position as with the VB6 example. Development languages evolve, and sometimes that means that older code breaks; I've seen this with closed (VB), open (Perl) and "in-between" (Java) based code - open or closed makes no difference.

Yes, having access to the source is a better option, and it does leave more doors unlocked than the closed source alternative, but I don't think it's anywhere near as critical as you believe.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

"As long as it DOES THE JOB, it's good enough for me."

Good for you, then.

It is not good enough from me, though.

See you in free market.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, you do realize that the vast majority of corporations are ALREADY stuck with Java for a long time, right?

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6

How about Java?

*ducks*

Re:who cares?

[citizenr]

>>Who cares if it's using a non-Free java

guess what happends when you want OO on a platform WITHOUT java support (like a pda)

Re:who cares?

[Vile Slime]

I've,

Built corporate infrastructure with Java for about ten years now. I've coded probably a million lines of Java in that time frame.

Except because of the most minor of Java changes on Sun's part I've never had to re-write anything.

My Java programs from ten years ago still run just fine.

Sun has many times declared many classes and methods as being obsolete, but they have never turned anything I use off so that I could no longer use it.

So go ahead, complain all you want, but there are people like me out there that are moving forward a lot faster because they use Java, and there are a lot of people moving slower because they cannot get past ideology.

It's fine by me, my children will eat well because of your ineptitude.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it's a good thing that Java hasn't caught on in the enterprise . . .

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sun's considering opening up Java"

Bullshit!

Sun's TALKING about them considering opening up Java, because that's what open source pioneers and early adopters want to hear. Nothing more.

That's marketing in action to me.

And they are TAKING a product, branding it (OOo and StarOffice) and using it as a market platform for another product OF THEM. Java, that is.

Why do you think Java is more and more embebbed within OOo? Do you really think Sun throwing millions at OOo, OOo's growing dependency upon Java and Java being in fact property of Sun is all mere coincidence?

Re:who cares?

[northcat]

It's attitude like this that's keeping Windows, MS and all non-free software alive and hindering the development of free software. Oh, and BTW, nice karma-whoring.

Re:who cares?

[Timesprout]

What bollox. SUN permits redistribution of its JRE with applications. Many vendors already do this with the JRE version they want to run against to save the user having to download a specific version.

Re:who cares?

[madscientist003]

It's not about what corporations are or are not "already stuck with"; it's about to what licenses free and open source alternatives require a user to agree. For a personal desktop, the issue is largely non-existent. For corporate adoption, it can be much more significant.

Re:who cares?

[teromajusa]

Have any of these purists thought about what a BIG step it is that Sun is even considering open sourcing Java? It's a big step. It's not perfect, but it is a big move in the right direction. It won't get there overnight

Or it might not get there at all. Declining to integrate Java in opensource projects because it is not free enough seems to me like a good way to motivate Sun to make it more free. To blithely accept depenceny on it in opensource projects on the other hand sends the message that there is no problem with the current situation.

Re:who cares?

[teromajusa]

From the article:

By contrast, Red Hat and Fedora prefer to build OpenOffice.org with the GNU Compiler for Java (GCJ), which is not only a compiler, but also a free JRE. This was Red Hat's strategy with earlier versions of OpenOffice.org, and Red Hat engineers are attempting to continue it. Caolan Macnamara, a programmer at Red Hat, has reported limited success compiling earlier developer builds of version 2.0. However, GCJ is not yet a complete replacement for official releases of Java, and adding patches makes the strategy painstaking and laborious at best.

Re:who cares?

[r0dzilla]

Won't blackdown java (http://www.blackdown.org) work with it on linux?

Re:who cares?

[BigGerman]

how is it insightful? Java license specifically allows you distribution of the JRE with your products as long as you dont mess with it and it is required to run your program. Gratis.
This whole page of postings shows how nearsighted and ignorant new generation of slashdotters are: the only non-Free part in Java is the fact that Sun wants to preserve the standard in the language and thus wants to control it. I, personally, would prefer a completely OSS Java but it is good thing as is.

Re:who cares?

[TheWanderingHermit]

I know this sounds flip, and I'm not trying to treat you with discrespect, but...

Do you think they really care about that?

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sun's motivation for producing OO is becoming clear: they want to use it as a platform to push their proprietary Java crap.

Bad strategy. This is why Scott should be fired. He has a great company, great products, and a bunch of great divisions. But he's hung up some bullshit bingo "synergy" notion which foments inappropriate connections. Open Office is worthwhile without the Java crap. Open Office drives the ever increasing move to *nix on the desktop. People *want* to move away from Windows, and they will, and they will run GNU/Linux, but they need to fill in a few gaps on the application front. The goodwill that Sun /could/ (but isn't) create by accelerating this process would certainly put them in position to move a lot of hardware. But they don't get FOSS, and they keep trying to sell software. Stop it. Cut it out. It's a loser, big time. This latest move pisses off even more people. Scott just doesn't have the backbone to stare his software division down, and to make them toe the line. A single out-of-control division is driving the company, and driving it bankrupt.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Consider all those foolish companies who built infrastructure on VB6 now that Microsoft is cutting off support for that platform

Had they picked an open source platform it would be much less disruptive for their business.

The point you have raised - the ability of a company to drop support for a development language - has nothing to do with whether or not that language or platform is open source. Most organisations that use a development language aren't interested in being dumped with megabytes of source code if a language provider either stops development or goes out of business - open source doesn't help.

Java is so successful and popular for commercial development because it is multi-vendor. If you don't want to use Sun's VM and JDK you can use IBM's, or HP's, or BEA's, or TowerJ's, or even GJC. Not all are available on all OSes, but you have a choice, and you are not going to be left abandoned, like VB6 users.

Re:who cares?

[youknowmewell]

Instead of complaining about their bosses and cramped cubes, maybe they should try to run the business and find out just how hard it is to make sure they have an income if they insist on staying purists.

I don't know, Red Hat makes plenty of money by staying purists.

Re:who cares?

[iminplaya]

What SUN giveth, SUN can take away. That should be a good reason to stay away.

Re:who cares?

[nurb432]

A lot of people care.

Many of us dont want to be tied to something non-free, and thus controlled by another party.

"does the job" has a wider meaning to us.

It also limits what OO will run on now. If there isnt a java port that is blessed by Sun, then you 'cant run it here'.

Re:who cares?

[iminplaya]

The problem is that SUN can remove all distribution rights after this really catches on. Didn't we learn anything from mp3.com or that big community created CD database? If you want to use other peoples stuff, fine, but protect yourself, and make sure they can never take it back.

Re:who cares?

[Mr. Slippery]

I am a simple COMPUTER USER. I care not about politics, especially when it comes to bits and bytes.

But politics cares about you. (And not just in Soviet Russia.)

Proprietary software means software that someone can make copyright or patent claims on in such a way as to get the state to use force to prevent you from using or sharing the software in certain ways. That's politics.

Would you buy a power saw if there were some way that the manufactuer could control how you could use it, lend it, resell it, or fix it if it broke?

When you use proprietary software, you have to be concerned with politics; only Free Software takes away political concerns.

Re:who cares?

[codeguy007]

PythonGTK is nice, but still nowhere near VB6 (look at the complexity of the runtimes). There is a few 'fringe' programs but to be honest you have to get much closer to the bone to do anything on Linux. Even Mono is still lacking true click and drag programming.


Are you suggesting that drag and drop programming is a good thing? Maybe it allows for faster implementation but it provides much slower and far more stupid solutions than true programming. I am not even sure that it can be consider true programming.

All those companies that went for the easy way out in '97 deserve to suffer the consequences. They got what they paid for. They getting what they desire. If you cut corners when you do things eventually you end up paying to have the corners squared off.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

"What bollox. SUN permits redistribution of its JRE with applications."

No, it doesn't. I just had to distribute an app that relies on Java and had to read the EULA.

This having been said, an element in the install script for OOo that will fetch the relevant java version (if not already installed) should be allowable. This would still be an issue for those without an internet connection, of course, but some way towards a remedy all the same.

Re:who cares?

[teromajusa]

Maybe not...unless those projects use a different tool instead. If large widely used open source projects started integerating with something like Mono, I think Sun would feel that. Mindshare is important, and I think open source projects have a disproportionately large affect on mindshare.

Re:who cares?

[killjoe]

" Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?"

Python with wxwindows is excellent. There are lots of gui builders for wxwindows and some IDEs to make it easy for ya. I for one think click and drag programming especially the kind built into VB6 is an abomination. It makes for messy code that is hard to maintain and soon degenerates into a mess of spghetti. I also need not mentions the awful error handling of VB do I. It's better to use something like wxwindows or swing that are true MVC frameworks. Even if it takes you longer to code it up front you will save time later in the debugging and maintenance portions of your lifecycle.

If you really want clicky programming there is also rekall for database work and dabo if you want something that mimics foxpro.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a simple COMPUTER USER.

In that case, STFU and watch your betters discuss the issues at hand. That's your role in all of this.

Re:who cares?

[codeguy007]

Proprietary software means software that someone can make copyright

FOSS software is still copyrighted. If someone uses my GPL released code without proper credit or in violation of the GPL, I can most certainly make copyright claims against them.

For that matter I could apply for patent on a software method I use in my GPL code if I didn't want people to use the same method in their proprietary code. Kind like forcing them to use and update my GPL code for that method.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Consider all those foolish companies who built infrastructure on VB6 now that Microsoft is cutting off support for that platform
Had they picked an open source platform it would be much less disruptive for their business.

Microsoft is only cutting off support. It's not like all VB6 apps are going to stop working on April 1st. Look at all the business apps still running COBOL programs compiled with unsupported compilers.

You seem to think that just because it's OSS, it is somehow supported indefinitely. I have used OSS before where the project dried up and the website went away. What are my choices now? Maintain the source myself (have you seen most OSS source code?) or find something to replace it. I find both are equally disruptive to my business.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Custard]

" Even if it takes you longer to code it up front you will save time later in the debugging and maintenance portions of your lifecycle. "

I wish more IT managers understood that... most places I've worked think that whatever gets us 90% done the soonest must be the best. If something costs us 5 minutes now, or 5 hours later, they always choose to wait until later.

But that logic always makes me think of how worth it it is to spend 5 minutes putting on a parachute before you jump out of a plane. Sure, foregoing the parachute will save some time up front, but it's going to make the landing much harder.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Proprietary software means software that someone can make copyright or patent claims on in such a way as to get the state to use force to prevent you from using or sharing the software in certain ways. That's politics.

That also describes the licensing of many FOSS projects.

When you use proprietary software, you have to be concerned with politics; only Free Software takes away political concerns.

This is totally wrong. There are major political concerns with Free Software. Sure, I happen to agree with the politics....

Re:who cares?

[symbolic]

click and drag programming.

"click and drag" and "programming" do not belong in the same sentence, unless you're talking about a specific interface implementation. I'd say that Linux isn't lacking at all in this area. I'm not so sure that "click and drag" programming is something to strive for, either.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

"What bollox. SUN permits redistribution of its JRE with applications."

No, it doesn't. I just had to distribute an app that relies on Java and had to read the EULA.

I have read the EULA. Where does it say you can't redistribute with Java applications?

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're getting a FREE Office Suite and you're bitching.
What a bunch of ingrates.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Purists don't see financial gain as the ultimate goal, but have other ideals and some are willing to live in a card board box rather than to sell out.

I'm gonna be an anti M$ monk and hehe.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you seriously suggesting that one off software built using OSS tools of 6-8 years ago would be in good shape right now?

Re:who cares?

[youknowmewell]

Yes, it's all just bits and bytes.

And how much of your life is affected by those simple bits and bytes every day? How much control do you want others to have over those bits and bytes? How much would you like to have your simple computer habits restricted or controlled? It's a slippery slope.

Re:who cares?

[omb]

Sun will either Open Source Java, or .NET and C# will win.

You can easily argue that short-sightedness, bloat, clunkiness all stems from insularity.

One cannot argue that Java solutions are normally HUGE in terms of code and memory footprint.

Bean and Container architectures further the problem not the solution; nor does it help if much of the code is written by Wizards or IDEs.

This furthers the fallacy that specializing the most general solution is the Enterprise way to go.

I predict this will become an increasing problem.

Re:who cares?

[divec]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have? [...] PythonGTK is nice, but still nowhere near VB6 (look at the complexity of the runtimes).

I use both PyGTK and PyQt (professionally), deploying on Windows and GNU/Linux clients. There is no runtime issue. py2exe creates a standalone executable for Windows. Conceptually it's very similar to VBRUN600.DLL, except that your own extension modules can also go into the executable, so there's no need to leave rubbish lying around the system.

Re:who cares?

[orasio]

Proprietary software means software that someone can make copyright or patent claims on in such a way as to get the state to use force to prevent you from using or sharing the software in certain ways. That's politics.


That also describes the licensing of many FOSS projects. .....

If you are talking about the GPL, the GPL almost doesn't control the way you use the software. It controls the way you share it. Gives you all the freedom as a user, and takes some away as a distributor, compared to public domain. If you abuse your distribution rights, you can lose your usage rights, too.

Re:who cares?

[dingfelder]

While it is not open source itself, Kylix (i.e. cross platform Delphi) is a pretty good option for creating open source code, and kicks the shit out of VB in many areas.

Re:who cares?

[SweetAndSourJesus]

"If something costs us 5 minutes now, or 5 hours later, they always choose to wait until later."

They're probably figuring that they won't be working for that company 5 hours from now. VB is a fantastic tool for creating problems for other people.

Re:who cares?

[fatboy]

Yes, and again: who cares about the "free software movement"?

I am a simple COMPUTER USER.

The whole point of GPL is to empower users.

As a user, you should care if you will be able to freely modify, distrubute and use your software.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all, VB6 has been discontinued by Microsoft. Imagine what would happen if Sun decided as of April 1 to no longer support Java development and to not release it as open source to the world?

Second, you make an excellent example of why using Java is even worse then originally proposed. To use Java as a development building block only enforces the problem of having a non-free license dependency. If it does start getting wide acceptance, there is always the problem of Sun taking the initiative of claiming "all your data belong to us."

And you're still screwed.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are assuming that to do the Right Thing is to do the most Profitable Thing. Sure you might be able to make money faster using Java based software today. But you have to ask yourself, when it's all said and done, and you have long retired, will you be able to say you've done the Right Thing?

Re:who cares?

[TheWanderingHermit]

That's the point. A lot of purists have never been in a position where they had to make decisions about how they can keep the profit margin up.

Yes, they'd be willing to live in a card board box, but it's not the people in the boxes who make the changes. It's not the people who sit in their cubicles and piss and moan about purity, or who aren't the ones making decisions that make the changes. One CEO who has worked his way up, and decides what technology a large company will use will have an effect when he lets a sales person know what he'll buy and what he won't, but one doesn't get that far without balancing the idea of 100% open source with questions like how the bills should be paid.

And my point is that is something most of the purists simply do not understand. You can explain it until you're blue in the face, but it's something they don't want to understand because it means learning more in a field they think they're already experts in.

Re:who cares?

[tacocat]

Actually, the process can take care of itself.

If all the distributions take a stand and refuse to distribute this non-free OpenOffice, then the process will take a natural evolutionary process.

Either Open Office will rescind its decision in order to maintain it's market share, or FOSS will introduce a fork of the application.

Ironically, OpenOffice started from StarOffice which was [mostly] free but purchased by Sun and Open Office was the FOSS version of Star Office (fork) which was intended to be a (duh!) FOSS fork of Star Office.

So here we are many years later with the following scenario. Sun owns Star Office and now Sun is starting to assert a territorial claim into the Open Office fork that was started years ago.

Looking back at the history of Star Office, I would say that Open Office has seriously fucked up on this one and has no choice but to buck up and fix their shitty code decision.

In the meantime, I think it would be extremely important for us all to make a stand on this one and simply refuse any inclusion of Java into the OpenOffice suite as it is distributed by the Linux Distributions at large. If they refuse to remove the Java dependency, then we must consider removing Open Office as a viable product.

It's a matter of doing the Right Thing

Re:who cares?

[aristotle-dude]

Yes they could but that would go against their profit motive. Sun makes money off developers by offering testing suites and training. If they did what you suggested, they would be killing Java as a platform.

I like OSS but stop spreading FUD. How many OSS projects relied on proprietary software to get off the ground? Answer: All of them before the platforms and developer tools were available (GCC, Linux,*BSD).

Bloody hypocrites.

Re:who cares?

[tacocat]

Flamebait I know, but I think Java totally sucks as a client application if you have any alternatives available. I seriously consider anyone with the intention of using Java as a client application to be a borderline idiot.

I do however believe that Java has a very good place in the realms of server applications and applets. But not everything should be fixed with a hammer.

Re:who cares?

[aristotle-dude]

You not doing the OSS movement any favours by spreading FUD like that.

Enough with the damn politics already. United we stand, divided we fall. You are playing quite nicely into MSFT's hands. Do you work at MSFT by any chance?

The OSS movement did not seem to have any problem using non-free tools and platforms to develop the free tools we now use today did they? Why are you all being so hypocritial about it now?

Re:who cares?

[natrius]

Java license specifically allows you distribution of the JRE with your products as long as you dont mess with it and it is required to run your program. Gratis.

I think this license also states that you can't distribute a competing Java implementation. Most Linux distributions won't allow themselves to be crippled by that license, so they don't distribute the Sun JVM.

Many people have cried out that everyone should be more practical instead of idealistic on this issue, but the problems people have with OpenOffice relying on Sun's JVM are practical ones. Since distributions can't package a dependency of OpenOffice, they instead have to work around the Java dependencies, and then package it.

The choice of what language the OpenOffice developers use to develop features is completely up to them, but why do you expect people to not be disappointed that there are new features that they cannot use because of the choices they made?

Re:who cares?

[dbIII]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?

perl,python,C,C++,fortran,cobol,tcl,bash,zs h,sh ,java...

You would think that people would have learned the lesson after compatability was broken with previous versions of VB, so now that visual basic has gone to visual sort-of-pascal then to visual sort-of-java people have problems again. When your libraries are pulled out from under you and you can't compile staticly, what can you do?

One answer is to have a legacy box and let people in with VNC or terminal server or something - if MS had their applications able to run over X (like was possible with an add on to NT3.51) it wouldn't be a huge problem.

I think what people like most about VB is the IDE more than anything else - I can see how after spending years with that vi would be scary.

Re:who cares?

[chris_mahan]

Exactly, they could.

If 900,000,000 computers out there "require" java because their users use OOo, and Microsoft has bit the dust in bankrupcty court, and Sun decides they're going to charge a $4.99 fee 'to cover distribution expenses', then, my friend, people would pay and pay.

and that would be a few billion dollars.

And most people would think that 5 dollars wold be completely understandable and reasonable.

And that would certainly not go against their profit motive.

Re:who cares?

[hattmoward]

I know it's not necessarily a perfect match (not working on Windows being a major flaw), but you should check out Gambas.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you suggesting that drag and drop programming is a good thing? Maybe it allows for faster implementation but it provides much slower and far more stupid solutions than true programming. I am not even sure that it can be consider true programming.

This is retarded. Who gives a rat's ass about whether you deem it as true programming? If playing with blocks accomplishes the task well, does it matter if you feel the need to make yourself seem smarter by calling it "not true programming"? Last I checked VB was the beginnings of the MDA paradigm (Model Driven Architecture) and there is nothing inherent in MDA that makes for stupid solutions. I will admit that this paradigm tends to be only strong for frontends (with decent connectivity options to a backend model) and when a user can work within the tools given, but these restrictions are far from preventing many applications from being able to be written in VB6 or similar styles.

You may not want to develop this way, but it doesn't magically become unviable because you don't have to worry about memory management. Don't worry, there are plenty of applications that either need a backend that VB and the like cannot handle well or entire applications that don't lend themselves to VB.

Re:who cares?

[dnoyeb]

Yes, kind of like MS just did for VB6. Many of us java folk don't like java 1.5, but Sun is removing the ability to get at the older versions. Not so forcefully yet, but they have never done that at all before.

I program exclusively in Java because I love the language. But you do have to recognize, people and companies do the most horrible things when they believe they are not getting their fair shake...

We need to keep the pressure up on Sun thats all. I dont want to see java open necessarily, but I do want to see it free as in speech.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

And if hell freezes over, we can pump up the cold air instead of running our current refrigerators/freezers.

Re:who cares?

[cheesybagel]

One thing is allowing third parties to interface using Java. Another is to make it a requirement for the default codebase. GTK+ allows Python programs to use it, but is not written in Python for performance reasons. Same thing.

Heck, it is not like OpenOffice.org is so fast and lean that it doesn't hurt to port it to Java. A little bit here, a little bit there, it is just feeding the monster. It needs a diet.

Re:who cares?

[cheesybagel]

There is no Sun JRE for Linux PowerPC, or ARM, or FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD you name it. Distros have switched from XFree86 to X.org for less.

Re:who cares?

[cheesybagel]

DLLs are binary, and binary compatibility is not forever. Neither are Diamonds BTW.

Re:who cares?

[cheesybagel]

Not all JREs are alike, despite what you may hear.

Re:who cares?

[dubl-u]

Are you suggesting that drag and drop programming is a good thing? Maybe it allows for faster implementation but it provides much slower and far more stupid solutions than true programming. I am not even sure that it can be consider true programming.

The problem with tools like that isn't that they aren't really programming. (I agree; they aren't.) It's that people mistake one for the other because for simple projects the results look the same. Because of that, marketroids shamelessly sell low-end, user-targeted tools as equivalent to real code written by professional programmers.

All those companies that went for the easy way out in '97 deserve to suffer the consequences.

True. On the other hand, there are an awful lot of VB apps, Access apps, Perl CGI scripts, and shell scripts that are just fine for the people using them, and always will be.

The problem comes when people try to push tools like that beyond their limits. And no matter how much warning you give that your quick little hack will need to be replaced eventually, people forget that because it *looks* solid. My favorite solution is to make quick hacks look like quick hacks. It's a shame all VB apps don't look like that.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Talk is irrelevant. Actions are all that matters.

Sun's actions are disturbing.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hear, hear.

Re:who cares?

[TheWanderingHermit]

I don't see what your comment has to do with my post. My point is that someone who has to make decisions about more than just, "How do I make sure I use ONLY 100% pure FOSS" will realize that it isn't that simple. It's a lot easier to be a purist when it doesn't get in the way of paying the bills AND when you're not responsible for maintaning a business's or departments income so you don't have to start firing people.

Yes, sticking with 100% FOSS is nice, but there is room in this world for all types of software, and I, for one, would rather maintain my business's income than have to look someone I know and have worked with while we built things up and tell him that I can no longer pay him, but it's okay, because we're using 100% FOSS, so I'm sure he won't mind losing his (or her) job.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have a company? Right, you're a joke. People who actually run companies might have other considerations besides those raised by your weak analogies.

Let's all dump Java and rewrite all our applications in Perl, right? I'm sure that won't disrupt anyone's business.

Re:who cares?

[arose]

As you said GPL only covers use so even if you break the GPL and lose the right to distribute you can still use the software.

Re:who cares?

[cheesybagel]

You are comming the typical political mistakes. Looking at words instead of actions.

Action: Sun settles with Microsoft.

Action: Sun releases Solaris under an Open Source library, adds Linux binary compatibility and derides Linux.

Action: Sun tries to integrate their business divisions further by bundling Java development tools in their new PC desktops running Solaris.

Action: Sun programmers pollute the OpenOffice.org codebase with Java requirements.

They hold the license, they hold the code, they control API version releases and the process. Shades of Wine.

No cheese for you.

The approaches are to either:
1a) Fork.
1b) Remove Java cruft, put OOo on a diet program and make it faster.
1c) Release.

or:
2) Make a new suite.

or:
3) Help an existing suite.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Effects affect. Affects do not effect.

Re:who cares?

[Heretik]

Yeah? What if Microsoft gobbles up Sun at some point in the future? Then all your Java code is useless. That'd be fantastic eh? You'd also probably be fired if you work as a Java developer - then your kids wouldn't be eating so well.

The point is you have absolutely no guarantees whatsoever. The fact that your old code still runs is nothing more than a happy accident.

Re:who cares?

[FatherOfONe]

Yeah OR RedHat like SuSE could just include Sun's JVM and have all these issues go away. But for some reason RedHat hates Sun. Way to go RedHat! Forget what your customers really want! It is absolutely brilliant to attack Sun, fight them tooth and nail and ignor the company that runs around 92%+ of the worlds computers. Yep you could crush Sun out and then own say another 1% of the worlds computers.

I have to complement you on another fine move. Changing your pricing and support constantly over the last 4 years. Brilliant! It was nice to see the cost of supported RedHat go from $70 to $1,500 to $2,500 then down to $700 then down to $350 a year.

Signed
Microsoft

Re:who cares?

[aristotle-dude]

What is the purpose of software? To help man perform a function. It is not designed to further a political manifesto. It is not art either. Software is a tool. End users don't give a rat's ass about what license software is under as long as it:

-performs the function properly.

-is reasonably priced with some support and free minor updates
or is provided free of charge without limitations of use.

None of what you mention affects/hurts the end user (remember, the purpose of software is to serve a user) except for your threatened consequences.

1a) Fork. - is a childish response in this case and is a detriment to the end user and may result more bugs and limited functionality.

1b) Remove Java cruft, put OOo on a diet program and make it faster. - Again, a childish response for "political" reasons. There is nothing wrong with Java and it does provide excellent cross-platform support.

2) Make a new suite. - Really offers nothing to the end user and only serves to feed developers egos. End users will have more compatibility issues and less features.

3) Help an existing suite. - This is probably the most sensible response. If you disagree with the direction of the project, don't let the door hit your ass. End users can end up with a choice of robust office suites.

Honestly, if the end user is the least of your concerns and "politics" are paramount, perhaps, you should consider another hobby instead of inflicting your "issues" upon the rest of us by splintering a project based on language choice.

Look around, there are many java based OSS projects out there. RMS is "not" Jesus. You do not have to follow his word like gospel. Learn to think for yourself for crying out loud.

Re:who cares?

[jmorris42]

> how is it insightful?

Allow me to explain.

> Java license specifically allows you distribution of the JRE with your
> products as long as you dont mess with it and it is required to run your
> program.

No it doesn't. That license is a complicated bitch, go read and understand before you open your piehole. For example, NO non-commercial linux distro has been able to find a way to include the Sun JRE. I know, I looked into it for White Box Enterprise Linux (a RHEL rebuild). It just can't be done. So when OO.o 2 becomes standard, it would have to exit my distribution. Of course since I'm a RedHat Rebuild and RH is a 100% Free Software believing company I expect they are already desperately redoubling their efforts in the GCJ dept, otherwise THEY are going to be forced to dump OO.o. While using Java might have made life a little easier for the OO.o devels it is going to make life a living hell for the distros and end users.

This is why Java has zero place anywhere near a Free Software OR Open Source operation. It ain't Free OR Open. Too bad a lot people were too stupid to read the fscking license before they invested so much in Java they now are forced to willfully ignore the problem.

Btw, this is EXACTLY the situation we would have been in had another certain band of morons had their way with ignoring the problems with a certain C++ toolkit that wasn't Free Software. Instead certain clueful people started a competing free version way back when it was a lot easier, and forced that certain C++ toolkit to now also be Free Software.

I suspect that replacing Java will, in the end, prove as futile as freeQt was, but replacing OO.o is a goal that is achievable. Gnumeric and Abiword are already fairly far along, as is KOffice.

Note I mean Java the platform. Java the language is pretty much just abother language that GCC can munch and most of the libs will eventually get GNU replacements. But Java the platform is a lot more than just that whch is why I doubt a 100% Free Software drop in replacement will ever happen so long as Sun opposes it.

I just hope Red Hat doesn't get tired of spending millions correcting the mistakes of shortsighted morons who keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again.

Re:who cares?

[cbr2702]

Distros have switched from XFree86 to X.org for less.

And that is a far easier switch to make.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not insightful, it is pure unfiltered bullshit from someone who has no clue as to how businesses work.

You make it sound like all those companies are now in a bind and rushing out to replace vb6. Guess what, you are wrong. Microsoft is not releasing new versions based on vb6, that is it, no global catastrophe as you predict.

VB6 code will continue to run - and that is a good thing since it is undeniably the most used language, followed closely by COBOL. Guess what? COBOL is also not going to have any new versions anytime soon either.
Your lack of understanding of these simple facts, and the moderators who feel you are insightful, are why OSS can't get a foot hold - too many of you have your head in the sand and do not grasp even the simplest concepts.

Re:who cares?

[!Squalus]

"Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?"

How about REAL Basic from Real Software in Austin, Texas?

That's a real competitor (sees pun - decides to duck and run as tomatoes fly).

Have a nice day.

Re:who cares?

[aCapitalist]

I care not about politics, especially when it comes to bits and bytes. If the software I need costs money, I will just buy it. If it happens to be Free/free, even better! But I don't care about any "movements" and "religions" or "politics".

I think we take our freedom a lot more seriously than many around here if they get their panties in a bunch over bits and bytes.

The extremists over at the FSF are a miniscule minority compared to the overall open source crowd - and not even the same group.

http://linux.omnipotent.net/article.php?article_id =12503/

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sun SELLS A COMPETEING PRODUCT WRT OO (StarOffice), they would LOVE OO to play chicken with them over Java. They win either way.

Re:who cares?

[nametaken]

And your point is well-taken, but the beef of this argument is with the corporate sector who have serious licensing issues to consider before they even evaluate some alternative application (much less an alternative desktop platform).

I'm confused. Java jres and jdks are free as in beer, and in some implementations, as in speech (right?). OO.o itself is free in both respects (right?). How is it less viable than a totally closed option like Microsoft's Office?

I'm really not trying to be an OO.o "zealot", or flame the other posters, I'm just confused about why using java is a problem.

Re:who cares?

[killjoe]

If I had mod points and if I could give them to one post, I would give them all to yours.

Re:who cares?

[Ogerman]

Yeah? What if Microsoft gobbles up Sun at some point in the future?

Then we'd all switch to IBM's JVM, silly. And everyone would start working overtime to get the various Open Source JVM's and GNU/Classpath up to where Sun's reference implementation had been. You act as if "Java" is a program rather than a language. You do realize that there are literally dozens of JVM's and Java compilers right?

Re:who cares?

[mcc]

The problem is that SUN can remove all distribution rights after this really catches on

And if they did this I am sure IBM would be more than happy to step in and let their VM be used in its place.

You have a choice of compliant JVMs. This is a good thing.

Re:who cares?

[andreyw]

Then don't use PythonGTK. Sheesh. It's not like you don't have any other options available. Use WxWidgets (or whatever they are called now) or, *gack*, native win32 stuff in your python code. No problemo. That said... VB is a really really really horrible "language." I've had to deal with it, unfortunately. Might as well use Brainf*ck - at least it's consistent. :-/

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

So go ahead, complain all you want, but there are people like me out there that are moving forward a lot faster because they use Java, and there are a lot of people moving slower because they cannot get past ideology.

And because you're stuck with a primitive and badly designed language like Java, I can "move forward" at least an order of magnitude faster than *you*.

It's fine by me, my children will eat well because of your ineptitude.

Java code monkey calls others inept. Film at eleven!

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ya , but you'll get much faster.

Re:who cares?

[jadavis]

It's not programming, it's interface design. Programmers just happen to spend a lot of time doing it. If you're one of those unfortunate programmers, you would really appreciate a drag-n-drop interface. After all, for "real programming", which is pretty much math, it makes sense to write in text. However, for interface design, it makes a lot of sense to do it visually.

Re:who cares?

[tigersha]

For that matter you can download the source off Sun's JDK from their website too. Thats how it get run on BSD.

Re:who cares?

[Vulcann]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?

Borland Kylix. Runs cross platform COMPILED code and is a helluva lot better than VB6 ever was. Since it has Pascal under the hood it also has one of the fastest compilers in the world. They have a free version too last I checked.

Re:who cares?

[timmarhy]

i've worked in and coded vb6, it's a POS. i don't care if it's unsupported, business's SHOULD be rushing to piss it off and go with a decent language that allows them to run a decent OS.

Re:who cares?

[oxygene2k2]

sun jre can be built on freebsd (been there, done that), and most likely on netbsd and openbsd, too.. after all, you can get the source.

ppc or arm are different issues, as the JIT would have to be adapted

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

And with python, you have XRCed and wxGlade. Both write XRC (xml) files for a nice GUI/code seperation.

Re:who cares?

[statusbar]

A.K.A: "Write Once Run Everywhere", right?

Java really is: "Write Once Run on Win32, Linux i386, Mac OS-X, Solaris". G++ with GTK-- provides better portability...

--jeff++

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

'I've, Built corporate infrastructure with Java for about ten years now.'

Not many people have good memories on slashdot, the average age being about seventeen, I know. But, Mr Bluffer, in 1995 java didn't exist as such. It was called 'Oak' and not much good for anything that you could build 'corporate infrastructure' with.

Re:who cares?

[-brazil-]

Your memory is apparently not as good as you think it is. Java was released as Java in early 1995.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Java really is: "Write Once Run on Win32, Linux i386, Mac OS-X, Solaris". G++ with GTK-- provides better portability...

Oh, there's a decent GTK on Mac OS X now?

Re:who cares?

[-brazil-]

Let's stop the FUD and get concrete. Here's the relevant part of the actually quite short and easily understandable (relative to other legalspeak) license for Java 1.5:

B. License to Distribute Software. Subject to the terms and
conditions of this Agreement and restrictions and exceptions set
forth in the Software README file, including, but not limited to
the Java Technology Restrictions of these Supplemental Terms, Sun
grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license without
fees to reproduce and distribute the Software, provided that (i) you
distribute the Software complete and unmodified and only bundled as
part of, and for the sole purpose of running, your Programs, (ii) the
Programs add significant and primary functionality to the Software,
(iii) you do not distribute additional software intended to replace
any component(s) of the Software, (iv) you do not remove or alter any
proprietary legends or notices contained in the Software, (v) you only
distribute the Software subject to a license agreement that protects
Sun's interests consistent with the terms contained in this Agreement,
and (vi) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from
and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts and/or
expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any
claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises or results
from the use or distribution of any and all Programs and/or Software.

So WHERE EXACTLY do you see something that forbids redistribution or makes it impossible for a "non-commerical" Linux distro, other than license fundamentalism? Why do you think a commercial distro would not have to worry about such things? Debian's statements on the topic are pretty stupid, based on paranoid misinterpretation of the license terms. Finally, what about the option of, if you dislike Sun's license terms, using a (gasp!) OTHER Java implementation such as IBM's?

Re:who cares?

[toriver]

G++...

Now, why is there C++ on so many platforms when AT&T, the maker of C++, did not port it to those platforms? Could it possibly be because the OSS community made their own implementation instead of whining to AT&T about opensourcing theirs?

Why should the relationship to Java be any different? Hell, even Mono (the C#/CLR/.Net implementation) is more complete than any of the OSS attempts at making a Java implementation.

Is the OSS community secretly satisfied with the status quo of leaving Java implementations to the industry? (Read: Sun, Apple, IBM, and a few others.)

Re:who cares?

[-brazil-]

That's pure FUD. Every Java distribution so far has come with a license that says it's free, indefinitely, and can be redistributed for free. Sun can NOT retrocatively change these licenses to include a license fee. It's no different than the GPL in that respect. Do you also say that one should not use GPLd software because the GNU guys may "decide they're going to charge a $4.99 fee"?

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Not all JREs are alike, despite what you may hear.

Having used Java since it started, on a wide range of platforms, I can say that these days, all things labelled 'Java' JREs are indeed alike.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

If you are talking about the GPL, the GPL almost doesn't control the way you use the software. It controls the way you share it. Gives you all the freedom as a user, and takes some away as a distributor, compared to public domain. If you abuse your distribution rights, you can lose your usage rights, too.

Use was only one of the aspects mentioned. There was also copyright and politics. Also, FOSS is more than just the GPL!

Re:who cares?

[Majix]

The license doesn't forbid distribution, but the terms are such that no Linux distributor will agree to them. Look, this license has been picked apart by the legal departments at Red Hat and Debian, and others. The distributions are not now, nor in the future, distributing the JVM. That's all there is to it, you're not going to change Red Hat's mind. If GCJ and Classpath does not get the job done, look forward to OO.o being demoted across a whole lot of distributions.

The sections (i) and (iii) in particular are very problematic to Linux distributors. They will not give up their rights to patch the software, as it leaves them entirely at the mercy of Sun. A distributors job is all about taking software, patching and integrating it. That already kills it for Red Hat, but then (iii) states that you can't ship any replacements for the software. Where does that put GCJ and Classpath, which Red Hat has spent a ton of effort on. Can Python be considered a competing component? Mono with JKVM certainly could be. As if that wasn't enough, (vi) requires the distributor to idemnify Sun. No wonder almost no one redistributes the JVM. Do you seriously think Red Hat would open themselves up to such an attack, with the way Sun has openly declared their hostility towards RH several times. They don't need a JVM that bad, they'll drop OO.o altogether before they indemnify Sun.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kylix is clearly not OSS. However there is a project (Whos name escapes me right now) who are striving to create a Kylix compatable environment using FreePascal and various other components. They're not doing a bad job, I hear.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the developers all move on to other projects and the language whithers on the vine, unless you have the ability to update the language code on your own then you are in the same position as with the VB6 example.

Not at all. In the OSS situation, you can pay someone to maintain the OSS code base for you. I don't think Microsoft would be so forth coming, even if you did have several $million to even get them not to hang up on you, laughing.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

The JVM is only inlcuded in the commercial, non-downloadable versions of SuSE. SuSE specifically removes it for the community images they distribute online. Red Hat makes all of their software available for download online, and also has a long history of including no software that is not open or free.

You also don't see other distributions picking up the JVM for inclusion. The JVM license is simply too restrictive.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

The OSS JRE's and class implementations just arn't suitable for use with OO.o The non-oss JRE's can't be distributed by people who have a problem with that sort of thing E.g Debian. OO.o's reliance on Java forces people to choose. It can't ever be a truly free solution under it either runs on an OSS JRE or drops Java entirely.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?

Gambas Staf.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but you can't help but watch 'em. Kind of like the crazy guy at the bus station.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

I like OSS but stop spreading FUD. How many OSS projects relied on proprietary software to get off the ground? Answer: All of them before the platforms and developer tools were available (GCC, Linux,*BSD).

Don't talk fucking shit. Before those commercial tools everything was Open. Commercial software as we know it didn't even exist for the first few decades of computing. OSS was here first; the companies just came along and tried to take our toys home with them.

Re:who cares?

[frost22]

you've not even understood the problem.

Sun's Mantra with Java is "we support Windows, Linux, MacOS and Solaris, everbody else can go to hell". And Go To Hell means not only no support, but they make your life miserable as best as they can. The harassment a BSD user gets when trying to install a bunch of servers with Java is annoying to a point where you avoid Java wherever possible.

So if you user Java in your project, this is a slap in the face of everybody not on that list.

This may be acceptable in controlled environments, where Java support is assumed to exist everywhere, but for a Open Source project it is offensive and inappropriate.

Just say no to Java.

Re:who cares?

[DaliborTopic]

Yes, you may be with a lot of luck able to build it, but it's not 'Java(TM)'. It hasn't gone through the compatiblity tests, it hasn't passed them for sure, so what you're running is worse than running Kaffe. At least with Kaffe and gcj you are not falsely lulled into an illusion of 'running the real thing', when in fact you're just running something, that maybe, under the right alignment of stars, behaves like a comaptible Java implementation. Quite probably it doesn't though.

My experience from dealing with Kaffe on several dozens of platforms, is that there are an awful lot of quirks that occur on all sorts of bizarre systems that occur nowhere else. That's what life is like when you build a VM on C, instead of taking a more platform-agnostic language. And Sun does C as well, for all I know about their code.

If you don't account for those things, by running an extensive regression test suite, and verifying that the things work as they should according to the specification, you've won nothing, except an illusion of compatibility that may come to bite you in the rear later.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:who cares?

[frost22]

because Sun made sure only the sun JRE is allowed to be called Java.

And "wide Range" is probably something miniscule like four.

Re:who cares?

[DaliborTopic]

Your Java license can be terminated at any time. See http://www.jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/jsr/ tiger/JRE1.5.license.html

" 9. Termination for Infringement. Either party may terminate this Agreement immediately should any Software become, or in either party's opinion be likely to become, the subject of a claim of infringement of any intellectual property right."

Worst Case Scenario: Company A owns the rights to JRE. Company B sues company A for some claim of infringement of IP. Company A per JRE license immediately terminates all licenses to JRE to limit their liability. A settles with company B out of court. A offloads the cost of settlement current JRE customers by charging a certain amount for re-downloading the JRE with a current license. Conveniently, terms of the settlement could include passing on the list of registered JRE users to company B, so that B can go after those still violating their IP rights without having downloaded the new 'uninfringing' JRE for a small sum.

Oops. Is it likely? Who knows. Sun has been target of funny lawsuits before (see Kodak). So far they have not passed the costs on to consumers. But if they continue to be under fire by weird IP claims, chances are they will have to do a cost analysis, and cover the settlement costs somehow. The JRE license certainly explictely allows the JRE licensor to terminate the license even before a lawsuit to protect their interests.

cheers, dalibor topic.

Re:who cares?

[PurpleXanathar]

Wow! and if the government rules OSS to be illegal ?

That could happen, it's not like they've never made stupid (or simply, malicious) choices in the (false) name of security, or in the (false) name of progress, or in the (guess it ? false) name of capitalism or in the (probably false) name of (anything you can think about). [this is not an attack to the US government - any gov't of the world do wrong and stupid choices in IT field]

Or maybe in a couple of years we will all be using my own Purplet-OS where the EULA explicity prohibites coding in Python..

There will always be some improbable scenario where all else fail, and no choice is future proof.

BTW I remember a Visual Basic like tool which was OSS, at the time I was trying Slackware 2.0. I can't remember its name.. probably because it doesn't exist anymore. Good luck I didn't code in that language back then!

Re:who cares?

[PurpleXanathar]

Portability is not a strict requirement to an Open Source project.
Infact this aim for 100% on every platform in the world is something that's keeping OSS back.

Are you sure all Windows, Linux and MacOS (that is 99% of the world) users are happy to have some features missing (or simply come late) because the author has to support SomeBSD version -sqr(2) running on a Zylog Z80 processor so that Joe the hacker could run OOo on the eprom of his scsi controller ?

The scream of many OSS supporters is "Evolve or Die". Let's say that to old hardware and less used operative systems too.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

because Sun made sure only the sun JRE is allowed to be called Java.

This is common Slashdot FUD, and is nonsense. A JRE can be called Java if it passes the compatibility tests. For example, HPs Java has no sun source code in, yet is called Java. There are other clean-room Java implementations that are also called Java - because they passed the tests.

And "wide Range" is probably something miniscule like four.

Windows 3.1 (IBM's 16-bit version), Win95/98/ME/XP/2000, Linux(RedHat/Debian), Solaris(2.6-2.9), Apple(OS 9/OS X), PalmOS, WinCE, DOS, Mobile phones...

Re:who cares?

[-brazil-]

but the terms are such that no Linux distributor will agree to them.

Untrue. SuSE does include Sun's JDK 1.4.2 in their distribution.

They will not give up their rights to patch the software, as it leaves them entirely at the mercy of Sun.

That's bullshit. There is no fundamental necessity to be able to patch software to include it as a binary.

(iii) states that you can't ship any replacements for the software. Where does that put GCJ and Classpath, which Red Hat has spent a ton of effort on. Can Python be considered a competing component?

That's what I meant with "paranoid misinterpretation". The point of the clause is to assure that people don't distribute patches, which might result in incompatible JREs. If they didn't want true replacements for the JRE to exist, they could easily prevent parallel implementations - instead, they encourage them.

Re:who cares?

[FatherOfONe]

Yep I being the customer and PAYING for software don't really give a rats ass about the underlying details. All I know is that SuSE provides one and RedHat doesn't. RedHat and SuSE charge about the exact same amount to me for their product. Both appear to work great, the only core difference is that SuSE took the extra effort to help their customers out. RedHat uses excuses.

Re:who cares?

[aldoman]

To all those people who suggested Gambas, I knew about it and that's what I meant when I said 'fringe' programs.

Gambas sadly has little to none real support, no Win32 compatibility and it's missing a lot when it comes to widgets/components (think database connectivity and the like).

It does look promising though...

Re:who cares?

[SillyNickName4me]

> You make it sound like all those companies are now in a bind and rushing out to replace vb6. Guess what, you are wrong. Microsoft is not releasing new versions based on vb6, that is it, no global catastrophe as you predict.

> VB6 code will continue to run - and that is a good thing since it is undeniably the most used language, followed closely by COBOL. Guess what? COBOL is also not going to have any new versions anytime soon either.

You are wrong there.

You can still get uptodate COBOL compilers that run on modern platforms and from multiple sources.

You can no longer get VB6 from its only source, and after a while you will have the situation where you can either run on an outdated operating system or not run VB6.

That my friend is where the difference lies and why your example is invalid.

Re:who cares?

[AaronLawrence]

It's not like the VB6 DLLs that your infrastructure is dependent upon are going to go away
No, but Microsoft might just find it's "too hard" to support them in Longhorn, or whatever other new product they produce. Suddenly, everyone using a new computer can't run your programs.

Re:who cares?

[MadChicken]

The Lazarus project.

http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/

This reminds me, I haven't looked at this for a loooong time.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the C++ standard is stable, public, patent unencumbered, only changes every decade or so, is controlled by more than one company. Not like Java which is a moving target, is controlled by a single company.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Not at all. In the OSS situation, you can pay someone to maintain the OSS code base for you.

I don't believe the average company could afford to pay the number of developers who would be needed to maintain the code base for a major development language. This is all very well in principle, but in reality it is not an option.

Re:who cares?

[cheesybagel]

Java provides lousy cross-platform support. Even G++ with GTK-- works on more platforms than the Sun JRE. If you are going to talk to me that you can use other JREs, other people have mentioned already that OpenOffice.org *explicitly* depends on the Sun JRE as of now.

Using Java was what was childish. I prefer C, but if I am contributing to a C++ project, I donate code in C++. If I am contributing to a Java project, I donate code in Java. I do not try to force a project that is in C++ to have Java code in it as well. It is 100% stupid. It means you are creating islands in the codebase that some developers will not understand and increase the chance for bugs. Interfacing with external third party apps written in other languages is one thing, writing your code in several languages is another.

If OOo has bugs it is because it is so big and bloated. People have complained of OOo being slow and a memory hog before, now they are seemingly porting it to Java. Java is a memory hog even for small apps. Java is unsuitable for large desktop apps.

If you want Shareware, use Shareware. What makes OOo special is the Free Software license, which enables portability and a level playing field, not that it is free beer or inexpensive or whatever.

You may not care for "politics", but politics care for you. You have a tactical vision, but seemingly lack a strategic vision. You need to see things in the long term, the next decade at least, not just this month.

I am thinking for myself, perhaps you should try thinking sometime too.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mobiles phones huh? Try reading this news item by Carmack on that.

Re:who cares?

[Xiaran]

I don't believe the average company could afford to pay the number of developers who would be needed to maintain the code base for a major development language. This is all very well in principle, but in reality it is not an option.

The average company couldnt afford to do this I agreed. But the good thing about OSS is that if someone drops the ball, someone else can pick it up and run with it. Say VB6 was completely OSS. If microsoft drop the support, and another company(say IBM) see a lot of clients a screaming. They may take the code base a fork a version for them.

Re:who cares?

[orasio]

1 - I was commenting on the "use" part of the comment. I wasn't jujst disagreeing with the poster, I was pointing out an issue, that use is not limited by the GPL, and distribution is.

2 - In a completely unrelated issue... Of course FOSS is more than just the GPL. FOSS is another useless blanket term that doesn't help understanding either free or open source software.
Free software is one thing, it has to do with freedom, especially the freedom of the user, every user. The GPL has something to do with free software.
Open source is about technical stuff. It's non trivial to differentiate OSS from free software. OSS is usually nice for developers, but doesn't assure anything. You only have the warranty to be able to look at the software.
Using one term to talk about free and open source software doesnt help anybody. If you are talking about free software, you don't need to say it's open source, because there are few exceptions that aren't open source. If you are talking about non-free OSS software, Free/OpenSource is not correct, and it's misleading the reader.
Anyway, it's either useless, or incorrect.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

The average company couldnt afford to do this I agreed. But the good thing about OSS is that if someone drops the ball, someone else can pick it up and run with it.

This is a very good point.

Re:who cares?

[orasio]

No, you can't (From http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html )

4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Free software is one thing, it has to do with freedom, especially the freedom of the user, every user.

No it doesn't, unless there is some specialised meaning that has been adopted by some developers.

To most people, 'Free' means zero financial cost. If you don't mean what most people mean, use another word.

If you are talking about non-free OSS software, Free/OpenSource is not correct, and it's misleading the reader.

I was talking about open source ('look, here is the source code!') software that costs nothing. Using the English language, that is free, open source. If you have more specific terms, use those (e.g. GPL, BSD license etc.).

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Mobiles phones huh? Try reading this news item by Carmack on that.

Yeah, sure - I'll take one person's comment as typical experience of an entire developer community!

But, this is irrelevant. The relative optimisation of JREs on different platform has no bearing on the completeness of the libraries or JREs.

Re:who cares?

[OrangeSpyderMan]

Maybe it allows for faster implementation but it provides much slower and far more stupid solutions than true programming.

To be frank I am not a big fan of VB - but there are many cases where having a real short implementation time is what takes the biscuit. I recently came up with a fairly simple program for a one off migration, and chose to do it in VB, simply because it meant that I could deliver something that would do the job in under a week. While it may have taken 4 hours to run rather than 2, and would be harder to maintain afterwards - it allowed us to get the job done and move onto more exciting things - "real programming", if you will :-)

Re:who cares?

[arose]

From clause 0:

Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.

If you receive a copy from someone who can distribute it you can use it.

Re:who cares?

[iminplaya]

Take a tiny peek into the history of GIF and jpeg(amongst others) to see what can happen if we let ourselves get taken in. If you're looking for a profit motive for doing this, think about this, if we allow our software to become contaminated, and with software patents looming, everything we ever make will become illegal. Then SUN and IBM and the others will finally be able to get back to business as usual. They will have gotten rid of all those OSS "commies". Granted OSS can and will exist as a hobby, but it will no longer threaten the corporate enviroment. Through attrition the present day OSS projects already on line will be replaced with proprietary machinery once again and we'll be back where we are "supposed" to be.

Re:who cares?

[Mr. Ghost]

IP lawsuits are not restricted to Sun. FOSS is just as likely to have IP lawsuits as Sun (possibly more likely due to the fact that companies can see the code and recognize where their employees may have lifted it and copied it into the "open" software).

Re:who cares?

[orasio]

You are right.

Re:who cares?

[orasio]

I was talking about open source ('look, here is the source code!') software that costs nothing. Using the English language, that is free, open source. If you have more specific terms, use those (e.g. GPL, BSD license etc.).

OK
Nice way to defend your point, redefining terms in the middle of a discussion.
Look at the title of this page. Then RTFA. They are using a term that is becoming frequent, and is incorrect. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

Re:who cares?

[DaliborTopic]

IP lawsuits are not restricted to Sun.

Sure. So? I didn't make that claim.

The parent claimed that Sun's JRE licenses are 'free, indefinitely', I showed him wrong by pointing out how the license allows for revocation in specific cases, that's all there is to it. :)

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:who cares?

[nametaken]

But.. the version that shipped with Fedora runs on an OSS jre. What's wrong with that?

Re:who cares?

[Mr. Ghost]

Java is not a memory hog if you are an experienced Java developer any more that C/C++ is a huge source of memory leaks if you are an experienced C/C++ developer.

For most applications client side or server side Java can achieve performance measurements similar to C/C++.

Using Java was what was childish

This is a rather reactionary statement. OOo already has certain functionality that is available only if you have a JRE on your machine. This is a model that the application is following, functionality will have a JRE dependency.

If you are such an advocate for a Java free OOo why don't you get yourself and some of your friends to rewrite the portion of the app that has a Java dependecy and submit it to the OOo project. I am sure they would be appreciative of the extra developer effort and resources.

You are slamming developers who are donating some of their own free time to develop an application. It is also a very good application.

Also if you have a problem with the Java dependency of certain functionality either switch applications or don't install a JRE and don't use those pieces of the application that require it.

Re:who cares?

[kannibal_klown]

True. I laugh when I hear people freaking out: it's not like there's a clock counting down to April 1.

However, many companies do react in a similar way. I'm aware of some companies that have VB6 programs they've developed in-house that they're looking at re-writing specifically because of this. Their reasoning is if it's not supported then who knows how well it's going to run on Windows a couple of versions down the line. Also, if they run into some major problem they may be SOL.

Personally I'd put money on Java lasting a while. Between Sun and other vendors, even if Sun decides to drop support for Java there'll be enough support around to keep apps running for a while. It's too wide-spread to simply die all at once.

Re:who cares?

[BBlackmoor]

To blithely accept depenceny on it [Java] in opensource projects on the other hand sends the message that there is no problem with the current situation.

I work on several open source projects. I use java -- in fact, I prefer Java. There is no problem with the current situation.

Re:who cares?

[SillyNickName4me]

> Portability is not a strict requirement to an Open Source project.

No, it just used to be an unforfilled major selling argument for JAVA. Besides, portability is not a requirement, but a big advantage to have still for open source software.

Re:who cares?

[SillyNickName4me]

> and they keep trying to sell software. Stop it. Cut it out. It's a loser, big time.

While I agree with your analysis of SUN, any financial analist looking at things will spot Microsoft and conclude that selling software is not a loser, its a big time winner.

Re:who cares?

[SillyNickName4me]

> I work on several open source projects. I use java -- in fact, I prefer Java. There is no problem with the current situation.

This article that I wrote quite some time ago is still as valid as when I wrote it.

You may not have a problem, but who are you to decide for others that they don't have a problem? So stop claiming there is no problem just because you don't happen to have one.

Re:who cares?

[jmorris42]

> They don't need a JVM that bad, they'll drop OO.o altogether..

Exactly. Unless GJC can be brought to a level where it can support OO.o 2.0 easier than bringing Gnumeric/Abiword or KOffice up to snuff they will ditch OO. And good riddence, it sorta works but that is about the best anyone has ever said about it.

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, there are not going to be any more security patches, but equally there are probably not going to very more exploits either, if any.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

It doesn't mean what you think it means.

No. It doesn't mean what you think it means. To your average manager, describing Java as 'free' makes perfect sense, as they pay nothing for it. The average developer or manager does not care what 'free' means in the elite high temples of the open source gurus. Their business need pay nothing for Java and they can re-distribute for free with their applications. What else could they possibly want? There are no practical restrictions on what they realistically want to use it for. That is all they need to know. They don't want to read the fine print of the GPL. If they did read the fine print of the GPL, they would be as scared of it as they would be of any Sun license.

Re:who cares?

[frost22]

A JRE can be called Java if it passes the compatibility tests.

Hmmm... Name one I can install on FreeBSD. Name one truly open source. Heck, just name one I can run on Windows or Linux. No, dying superserver environments don't count. Nor do funny mobile phones.
As for HP, well, did they actually implement the whole jre, or did they do the binaries and get the class libraries from Sun ?

Re:who cares?

[frost22]

The scream of many OSS supporters is "Evolve or Die". ... say that to ... less used operative systems too

Had you said that to Linux a few years ago, too ?

You make me f** sick .... telling us BSD users to let our OS die just because you want to justify Sun's useless, stupid, fascist policy on Java.

gosh!

Re:who cares?

[Decaff]

Hmmm... Name one I can install on FreeBSD.

FreeBSD Java:
http://www.eyesbeyond.com/freebsddom/java/i ndex.ht ml

Heck, just name one I can run on Windows or Linux.

Windows:
Sun's JRE: www.java.net
IBM's JRE (on IBM's PCs) - www.ibm.com
Check BEA WebLogic for Windows: www.weblogic.com

Linux:
Sun's JRE: www.java.net
IBM's JRE: www.ibm.com
BEA (as above).
Blackdown: www.blackdown.org

No, dying superserver environments don't count.

I have no idea what you mean by this.
Nor do funny mobile phones.

I don't understand why you call these 'funny'. They are going to be the major client interface to the internet and applications.

As for HP, well, did they actually implement the whole jre, or did they do the binaries and get the class libraries from Sun ?

They implemented the binaries clean-room and used Sun's class library source. However, Sun allows full open source implementations:

http://news.osdir.com/article491.html

"The current java license allows *anyone* to create a clean-room, open-source, royalty-free version of java. So, why hasn't IBM (for example) made their java implementation open source? Why does it have to be Sun?"

What I don't understand is why you are asking these questions on Slashdot, as the answers are easily available to anyone with a web browser and access to Google?

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Being also a paying customer, *and* giving a rats ass about the details, I care that the RedHat version I use is freeley distributable. As in Hello BSA, goodbye BSA...

And am thus not a Suse user.

Shoka

Re:who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

And in violation of lots of licenses if you try to use it for anything real.

That's why I originally said it's fine for hobby use - yes, you can play with Java. But once you start doing real work on it, you need to consider things such as licenses.

Re:who cares?

[PurpleXanathar]

Then this means using less evolved tools to develop, just because developers always have to support some other systems. Also this doesn't push Kaffe and other OOS JVMs to develop! Having all *BSD users cut away from using OOo is a major push to develop a compatible JVM for BSD systems.

Re:who cares?

[quorn]

1 million lines of code in 10 years
100 000 lines of code in 1 year
48 lines of code per hour

I think that's pretty good going.

Re:who cares?

[BlueCodeWarrior]

Who gives a rat's ass about whether you deem it as true programming? If playing with blocks accomplishes the task well, does it matter if you feel the need to make yourself seem smarter by calling it "not true programming"?

I care if it's not 'true programming' because things like VB have made computers what they are today.

The 'dot com' boom was one of the worst things ever to happen to computing.

It brought a ton of people to computers that don't actually give a shit about computers, and only care about making a quick buck. Do they care about the art and science that is computer programming? Hell no! They just want to turn a dollar, and it's why we have so many problems on the web today.

Fuck VB, and fuck all the people who got into IT because "it pays lots of money."

Re:who cares?

[tigersha]

Yes, but. If Micosoft buys Sun and refuses to support Java do that back door will still exist. If Microsoft stop supporting Office (because in an alternative universe IBM buys them) then that back door will NOT exist because the source is nowhere.

If Sun stops with Java nobody is going to give a damn about their source license and keep opn running their legacy systems at least.

Re:who cares?

[orasio]

As I told you, read the slashdot blurb of the discussion, and read the article.

In the article, FOSS means free software (in the sense of freedom) / open source software (in the sense of OSI-compatible).

In slashdot, FOSS means exactly the same.

In your discussion with your managers, FOSS can mean whatever they want it to mean. When you post to slashdot, whatever you post will be interpreted 1 - according to its common meaning in slashdot, 2 - according to how it's used in TFA, or 3 - according to its usual english meaning.
That's because communities have their own way of communicating, and that includes different meaning for the same terms, in different contexts.

If in your ignorant management world, FOSS means free (as in "no cost") open source software (as in whatever you want it to mean), you should explain that, but before you use it, so when for example, I read you, I know what you mean by that.
There is another world, where manager are not ignorant, and when you say something is free, they ask what the actual cost is, and so you can talk about the risks in developing for the free as in "no cost" java platform, or the risks with GPL software, or the risks of using closed freeware, or special offers from a proprietary software provider (like: you get 20 visual studio .NET licenses for free, but you have to buy from me the rest of the software, and the databases for your lab [actual story]).
Even managers are not that dumb, they understand there is something hidden behind "free" stuff. Those that do their jobs try to understand what "free" means in every case.

Re:who cares?

[frost22]

Hmmm... Name one I can install on FreeBSD.

FreeBSD Java:
http://www.eyesbeyond.com/freebsddom/java/index.ht ml

Sometimes you want to yell in frustration.
That one is a port of the Sun JRE. And it is source (diffs) only. And Sun does absolutely everything in their power to prevent those folks from making this easy to install - they are not even allowed to automate building it from source.

This is exactly the shit that gets me up in arms.

What I don't understand is why you are asking these questions on Slashdot, as the answers are easily available to anyone with a web browser and access to Google?

because those answers are not answers at all, and are mostly fake or misinterpreted by Sun apologists like you.

Re:who cares?

[Heretik]

Sure, "java-like" things would exist, but everything that is actually "Java" would surely die.

Ever consider that maybe we shouldn't have to waste years of man hours to reimplement something that already exists, and it sooo close to being truly free software?

Open Office and Java integration makes me nervous

[saskboy]

The only virus I've ever had infect my Windows computer was Java based, installed due to a flaw in 1.4.2 and some website I visited I suppose. I don't feel any better about Java being integrated in some way that I don't understand with Open Office, than I do with Word using Macro files, or offering VBS integration perhaps.

Easy Solution

[bigtallmofo]

Just re-write everything in Visual Basic. That should make FOSS advocates happy.

Re:Easy Solution

[peasleer]

I pray no one moderates that +1 insightful.

actually, what kills 'office' programs

[Anonymous Coward]

is there lack of a command line interface that I can script with bash

Re:actually, what kills 'office' programs

[Anonymous Coward]

You should try KOffice then. Complete command line access to DCOP exported interfaces.

the 'good enough' argument

[chris09876]

Lots of people say that this doesn't matter; as long as OO.o works well, who cares about what free or un-free components it uses. The article does an excellent job outlining the real issues here.

Although it's true that functionality is important, at what cost? Using java not only adds dependencies, but dependencies that some parties are uncomfortable with. Corporate adoption may be slowed, as OO.o isn't a completely "free, fully functional" product anymore. Some of the core features (wizards) require java. Even though a wizard isn't "core" functionality, they're something that people in a workplace would likely need to use.

Either way, this is a good article... it explains the issues in a very clear way.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[fartmasterB]

Lots of people say that this doesn't matter; as long as OO.o works well, who cares about what free or un-free components it uses. The article does an excellent job outlining the real issues here.

Why would anyone read the article when they can just read the headline and make wise-ass comments?

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DogDude]

Although it's true that functionality is important, at what cost?

At all costs. What else is there? Why would anybody develop software, if not to perform a function? The second that other things get in the way of "functionality", is the same second that that software starts to suck. What do you propose is more important than functionality?

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Tim C]

Corporate adoption may be slowed

Don't be silly; Java's free as in beer, and plenty of places are already using it (or at least asking for it) on the server side. Besides, if they're replacing MS Office, why the hell would they worry that Java is or isn't Free? It's a lot freer than what they have...

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[mmkkbb]

You're taking that whole sentence out of context. The additional functionality or ease of development or use provided by Java bears a cost, which may or may not be acceptable to the end users.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you propose is more important than functionality?

Trolls that aren't WEAK.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

Corporate adoption may be slowed, as OO.o isn't a completely "free, fully functional" product anymore.

Yes it is. It costs nothing and it is fully functional. The truth is that use of Java is more likely to speed corporate adoption, as Java is the de-facto language for corporate server-side development. It has a good corporate reputation.

Few companies who install Open Office care about the technicalities of FOSS. They like Open Office in the same way as they like Java - it allows a choice of workstation OS, and it gives portability.

For FOSS advocates, the issue of Java integration into Open Office may be significant, but the fact is that most people don't care.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

The additional functionality or ease of development or use provided by Java bears a cost, which may or may not be acceptable to the end users.

This is true of any development language, FOSS or not.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[jbolden]

Well then your choice is easy. Microsoft Office is without question the most functional general purpose office suite out there.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DogDude]

You're right. It is. But this context is about possible functionality of OO, not OO vs. MS Office. It all depends on the situation. My point was more of a general point about software, not a comparison (Although I happen to agree. In most cases, MS Office is much more functional than any knock-off, open source or otherwise).

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be silly; Java's free as in beer, and plenty of places are already using it (or at least asking for it) on the server side. Besides, if they're replacing MS Office, why the hell would they worry that Java is or isn't Free? It's a lot freer than what they have...

Yes, but businesses don't switch platforms based on "it's freer than what I had". Staying with MS Office is cheaper than switching -- which would require retraining of users, tech support, file format issues, and so forth.

I'm not sure I'd switch my business to it. I'd have to shoulder the cost of switching, and then when the transition was done it wouldn't even be entirely open-source.

I'd either stay with MS Office, or switch to something that's really open-source (all the way down) like Abiword+Gnumeric.

Why go to all the trouble of switching to a new set of "open-source" programs if it isn't really open-source? If I'm switching for reason X, I'll make damn sure I get all of the benefits of X.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[horza]

At all costs. What else is there? Why would anybody develop software, if not to perform a function? The second that other things get in the way of "functionality", is the same second that that software starts to suck. What do you propose is more important than functionality?

Microsoft said the same thing, relegating security and stability, but that's now come back to bite them in the ass.

Phillip.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[sharkey]

I know I'm asking for it at work, but asking ain't getting. I'm still forced to spend the WHOLE DAY sober, or spend my own money.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Stevyn]

I was thinking on similar lines. I think OO.o is a good product and I can use it without having to spend any money. If Sun wants to use F/OSS Openoffice to help distribute the free but close source java then I can understand it. I think that's why they're doing this in the first place. Java doesn't have any license fees and it's not difficult to install on windows or linux so I don't see the big deal. I think that by them doing this and spreading Java is better than Microsoft doing similar tactics to spread .NET.

There's no free lunch when it comes to a corporation trying to make money. So if all I have to put up with is using java for this pretty damn good office suite, I'll accept it.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

"Corporate adoption may be slowed..." total bullshit. Java comes standard on Mac OSX and most Windows (Dell and Gateway computers). The only one it doesn't come standard on is Linux.

Linux is rarely installed on the desktop. Therefore, this is a non-issue except to zealots who have way too much time on their hands.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

I think that by them doing this and spreading Java is better than Microsoft doing similar tactics to spread .NET.

I think using Java is a positive step. There are Java JDBC interfaces for almost all databases, and almost all large corporations are likely to have Java development skills.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[peachpuff]

"What else is there?"

Consistency, compatibility, support, long-term availability, appropriate licensing, security, dollar amount (not currently an issue with Java), adaptability, maturity, overall quality . . .

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DogDude]

Microsoft said the same thing, relegating security and stability, but that's now come back to bite them in the ass.

If you call being the largest software company in the known universe, and one of the greatest financial successes of our generation being bitten in the ass, then I hope that I'm bitten in the ass, too. Oh God, please, something or someone bite me in the ass!

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[killjoe]

"At all costs. What else is there?"

Security, stability, cost, ease of use, ease of deployment, freedom from vendor lock, ethics. Those are a few just off the top of my head.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[civilizedINTENSITY]

Score 5 insightful didn't RTFA?

Fioretti also points out that, in jurisdictions where requirements for government use require openness, OpenOffice.org may no longer qualify.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Mr. Slippery]

What do you propose is more important than functionality?

Freedom.

Pretend that I have developed the world's most functional word processing program. However, you may only use it under a licence that grants me censorship rights to anything you write. Would you want to buy a copy?

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DogDude]

Consistency, compatibility, support, long-term availability, appropriate licensing, security, dollar amount (not currently an issue with Java), adaptability, maturity, overall quality . . .

All of which are useless without functionality of some sort. You can put diamonds on a pile of dog shit, but all you end up with dog shit with diamonds.

I had a real life example of this this weekend. I installed Win 2000 on a machine from the thrift shop. It worked fine. I had a shiny Ubuntu CD that I had sitting around for a while. It figured, "It's free, it's pretty, maybe it'll help out my business". I wiped W2K and installed. The GUI failed for some arcane reason, and all I got was a prompt when I booted. Essentially, I had a doorstop. So, while it's great that it's free and slick and is open source, etc., if it has zero functionality, nothing else matters.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

The article makes it sound as though the Java creep is somehow "practical"... it's not. Sun is desperate to get the Java platform into as many places as possible -- it knows very well that it will be a future money-spinner when it triggers all its patents and IP and starts raking in money (it will then own and control the "platform" in much the same way Microsoft does today) -- ever wonder why Sun is *so* loathe to open source Java. All the crap about forking is just nonsense. At the moment, Sun's big competitors like Red Hat refuse to ship Sun's non-free Java. If Sun can force it into Open Office, it could force Red Hat to ship Sun's Java... game over.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Forget Java. There are so many long standing serious bugs that it doesn't really matter what it depends on.
Every once in a while I'll download a new version and see if they've yet (since before 1.0) managed to fix fonts spontaneously resizing. Apparently they were too busy drawing new shiny buttons in 2.0. Maybe they'll do some testing for 3.0.

Java slowing adoption? I couldn't give a shit less about Java when I can't make a report that doesn't look like ass.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Fioretti also points out that, in jurisdictions where requirements for government use require openness, OpenOffice.org may no longer qualify.

So you can potentially lose a tiny fraction of users (those who refuse to run Sun's JRE -- can you or anyone give examples of this) but will lower cost of development and maintenance. Sounds like a reasonable, pragmatic thing to do. More engineering, less philosophy.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[peachpuff]

(I don't understand your diamond analogy at all.)

It's false reasoning to say, "Because it's worthless if X is zero, we should always sacrifice other things to increase X." Pick any software you use at work and propose to your boss that you double the functionality by making it incompatible with everything else you use. The answer will be "No."

In fact, it sounds like you weren't able to use Ubuntu because it was incompatible with your hardware or just hard to use--probably because those things were traded off for functionality.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[dr.badass]

Pretend that I have developed the world's most functional word processing program. However, you may only use it under a licence that grants me censorship rights to anything you write.

Such a program could not be "the world's most functional" in any meaningful sense.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Jason Earl]

Yes, but OpenOffice.org isn't aiming for a spot on the server (where Java is entrenched), it's trying to upset MS Office on the desktop, and that's an entirely different situation.

Say what you want, but a large percentage of the folks that are gutsy enough to be rolling out OpenOffice.org are doing so at least in part because they are Free Software advocates. In short, they are pushing OpenOffice.org for ethical reasons, and not for practical reasons. After all, a switch of that magnitude is definitely a risk. Lot's of folks are willing to take a risk on Free Software that they would not be willing to take for "inexpensive" software.

Sun is just being stupid on this front. Java has already fragmented into several mostly compatible forks. IBM has their own JVM, as does Apple, Oracle, Borland, and there are a wide range of Free Software Java-alike systems. Heck, Red Hat and the Debian team are hard at work turning GCJ into a useable (if not completely compatible) system. Already one of the most popular desktop Java applications is IBM's Eclipse, and Eclipse uses the non-pure-Java SWT toolkit instead of Swing.

Sun is losing control of Java, and the best way to reign in the various Java offshoots is to release Sun's JVM under a Free Software license. Freeing Java would completely kill all of the non-Sun Java toolkits, and it would give Sun the Free Software allies it needs to compete against Microsoft's .NET. Heck, right now Mono is doing a better job of enticing Free Software advocates than Sun is.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Mr. Slippery]

Such a program could not be "the world's most functional" in any meaningful sense.

Ok, so you want to define "functional" to include issues of licencing freedom? That's a unusual semantic choice, but if we accept it for the sake of argument, then non-free software lacks important functionality.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

At the moment, Sun's big competitors like Red Hat refuse to ship Sun's non-free Java.

Nonsense. RedHat has been shipping Java as part of their Enterprise Linux for a long time. Other Linux distributions, such as SuSE have also been shipping with Java as part of their Linux products.

This is just anti-Sun FUD.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DogDude]

Well, actually, I AM the boss, and I may very well make that decision very soon regarding a large software purchase. Functionality MUST be the #1 consideration. Now, some functionality may be traded for compatibility, etc., but nobody goes shopping for software with the intention of buying "the most compatible software" or the "Freeest". Maybe the most "compatible" software that does X, but it's got to do that thing, otherwise it's useless.

"Because it's worthless if X is zero, we should always sacrifice other things to increase X."

Why is that false logic? Let's say that I need a point of sale system that processes credit cards and handles orders easily, quickly, integrates with some kind of financial back end, and is stable. You could make the prettiest, freeest, most compatible, fastest point of sale system out there that also happens to blow the user at the same time. But it doesn't accept credit cards. To me, it is lacking major functionality, and has -zero- use to me, no matter what else it has going for it. Nobody could *pay* me to use it.

This is a very common trap that OS people fall into. Sure, it may not do it's intended purpose well, or at all, but goddamn, it's FREE! Like with my Linux install. I like the idea behind it, I like the pretty CD cover with half-naked people, I like the fact that even the CD was sent to me for free, I like the demos of it that I saw, but without a GUI, it essentially has -zero- functionality. Without that functionality, it's about as useful to me as a gold and diamond encrusted buggy whip.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[mydn]

You could make the prettiest, freeest, most compatible, fastest point of sale system out there that also happens to blow the user at the same time. But it doesn't accept credit cards. To me, it is lacking major functionality, and has -zero- use to me, no matter what else it has going for it. Nobody could *pay* me to use it.

I expect that you're users will gladly pay cash.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[clem]

Maybe he did RTFA -- maybe he simply didn't understand it.

Encourage reading for comprehension. Add UTFA to your vernacular today!

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Xugumad]

This is a very good point; people think they want stable, secure software. They don't, what they actually want is cheapish (but expensive enough that it must be good) software that does what they need, plus plenty of things they think they might want to do another day, which is reasonably easy to use. A feeling that they're using the same software as everyone else (and several million people can't be wrong, right?) never hurts.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[rainman_bc]

Yes it is. It costs nothing and it is fully functional.

And where's the guarantee it will continue to be free forever? Any proof that Sun won't pull the rug out from underneath one day, especially seeing as though Solaris adoption is slowing down.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Watts Martin]

First off, Ubuntu Linux has a GUI. I've seen it. In fact, I used it, without doing any configuration at all; I just put in the CD and it came up. Using it as an example of what's wrong with open source software is like using an inability to run Doom III on your PC as an example of what's wrong with first-person shooters: you're abstracting a single-case problem into a denunciation of the class.

On the larger point, I think you're arguing a slightly different point. You're saying that program has to have a certain level of functionality before it's acceptable to you. The other people are saying that functionality is not the only concern. And you're both arguing as if these points are contradictory. They're not.

There's a word processor I used when I used Windows called Nota Bene. In terms of functionality, it's not just better than Word, it dunks Word's head in the toilet and mops the floor with it. It's also aimed at a niche market, though, and it costs more than all of Microsoft Office does. For most people, Word has the necessary level of functionality, and it doesn't matter that there's something else out there with more functionality.

If we allow that, and we then allow that once that has been met other factors come into play in choosing software, there's no reason that "source license" couldn't be one of those factors just like "price" is. If AbiWord gives me the necessary level of functionality and it has a source license I like more than OpenOffice, there's no intrinsic reason why I should choose OpenOffice simply because it has more functionality.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Skjellifetti]

Java has already fragmented into several mostly compatible forks. IBM has their own JVM, as does Apple, Oracle, Borland, and there are a wide range of Free Software Java-alike systems.

If those "forks" aren't 100% compatible, they are not Java(tm). IBM, Apple, Oracle, and Borland pay good money to Sun to make sure that their Java(tm) Virtual Machines pass the required tests in order to call themselves Java(tm). There is no way that Sun has lost control of Java(tm) in spite of what some wishful /.ers want to believe.

Heck, right now Mono is doing a better job of enticing Free Software advocates than Sun is.

Yeah, right. But we can measure the relative popularity. Here are 3435 Java projects but only 60 results for Mono and just 146 results for C#. Heck, we can even throw in the 395 results for .net (most of which have zero to do with Mono or MS's .net) and Java would still have a near 10-1 advantage.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[mmkkbb]

Yes, but Java has some peculiar encumbrances in that it requires installation of additional components that are up to the user.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[HiThere]

You are confusing existence of projects with interested advocates.

Several years ago I was quite interested in Java, and might once have started a project based around it. Now... I don't even consider it. If I did, it would be gcj that I would consider. (Sorry Kaffe.)

I'm not sure why I wouldn't consider jikes, but I wouldn't. And I refused to beta test OpenOffice.org 2 after signing up for it because I wouldn't agree to the Java license.

Now I'm not particularly significant...but I did get Linux installed in one company. And I might have gotten OpenOffice made an acceptable alternative to MSOffice. But I'm not going to try. I won't recommend products that I don't use.

A small sample size proves nothing except that people like me exist. But it does prove that.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[brokencomputer]

I seem to remember moveable type being free. Once they started charging for it, everyone was in trouble and had to migrate to wordpress. You'd think people would have learned their lesson from that, but no.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[HiThere]

There are good and bad sides to most choices. This is one.

Some people will like the Java dependencies. Generally these will be people who already have Java installed and use Java. Some people won't use it because it requires Java (I'm one...I won't agree to the Java license).

By making it a run-time dependency, rather than a compile time dependency, they shape the user base.

This is their choice, their project, etc. I won't blame them for this choice. But I sure won't support them for it either. And I won't use a product that requires an agreement to the Java license. (It's not like I don't have alternatives. I like OO.o, but I'm not THAT steamed about it.)

If it comes with Debian or Red Hat, I'll probably use that version. Otherwise I'll use KOffice or some such.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[jmkrtyuio]

Parent really meant to say wrt to MS attitude concerning security and stability.

"and now it has bitten YOU on the ass"

You are correct, they are still doing fine, though arguably not as fine as they could be.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[perlchild]

it's bit their users in the ass you mean. Did Microsoft had to reimburse anyone due to the security of their software? And how do you measure lost sales over something like this?

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Jason Earl]

Java purists can pretend that there are no functional differences between the various Java VMs, but systems administrators know the difference. Say what you will, but there are issues in moving between systems (even if you are using the same JVM), and there are issues in switching between the various JAVA (tm) VMs as well. This wouldn't be the case if Sun simply opened their JVM. Sun's JVM would simply get ported everywhere. Right now Sun doesn't have the resources to do the job by itself. So Sun ports to Solaris, Linux, and Windows on two platforms (Sparc and x86) and leaves it at that. Everything else is an afterthought.

As far as the popularity of Java among Free Software hackers, I think that it says quite a bit about Java's acceptance that Sun's Java Desktop contains almost no Java. Even worse, a disproportionate amount of the cool new Gnome applications are based on Mono. It is somewhat ironic that a great deal of Sun's hopes going forward revolve around Gnome and the Java desktop, and yet Sun is having such a hard time convincing Gnome hackers to use Java (tm). The Gnome hackers working for Red Hat are busy getting GCJ to the point where it can compete with Java (tm) and the Novell hackers, and a large whack of the Gnome community is busy cloning .NET. This is entirely Sun's fault. Sun chose Gnome over KDE for licensing reasons (among other things), and somewhere along the lines forgot that the folks that started Gnome care so much about Free Software that they thought that KDE's old license wasn't free enough. Free Software hackers want to like Sun, and they want to like Java, but the licensing issue is a big deal to them. Unfortunately for Sun, it absolutely needs the Free Software hackers to jump on board. There's a reason that Red Hat is winning the Linux war against SuSE and the rest, and that is that Red Hat has always been about Free Software. SuSE has always had a slicker distribution (as did Caldera before it went completely insane), but Red Hat was 100% Free Software.

As for using Sourceforge as a measure of Free Software hacker activity, well, that's more than a little flawed. There are a lot of Java programs on Sourceforge, but once you subtract out the text editors, the Java development tools, and the projects that don't even compile Mono is probably ahead. It's also important to note than none of the important Mono applications are hosted on Sourceforge. When you start talking about GUI desktop applications that people actually use Mono is *definitely* ahead.

Heck, I develop in Java for a living (web development), and yet I still don't use a single desktop Java application outside of Eclipse and it isn't pure Java.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[EvanED]

I think this boils down to what you mean by functionality.

Right now, OOo and MS Office are about functionally equal for my purposes. MS Office does stuff OO doesn't, and OO is open source and can be modified. But 99% of the time I'm using MS Office, I'm not using any of MS Office's extra features, and I have next to never modified an open source program (beyond like tutorial type stuff). So practically there is very little difference in functionality.

If MS changes the EULA for Word so that they can censor what I write, that decreases (almost eliminates) the functionality of Word. But if OO decides to go and decrease their dependence on Java, I couldn't care less. I'm gonna have Java installed anyway for other programs, and I'm not gonna do anything to the source at all, so I don't care. I really don't even care if OO changes their licence so you can just download binaries; I'd continue using it if it was the best option. (Okay, to say I wouldn't care is not true, but I wouldn't care enough for it to make me choose another program on moral grounds.)

I suspect at least 80 to 90% of users would fall into this same category.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[dr.badass]

Ok, so you want to define "functional" to include issues of licencing freedom?

Not quite. I meant that a license can impair (or enhance) the percieved functionality of a program. A better term might be "usefullness" or "utility".

In other words:

The function of a word processor is to enable communication.

A program with a license that grants another the right to censor my work would be no more functional(useful) than one that randomly drops letters.

It is, I realize, a somewhat different meaning, but one that I think more accurately describes the reality of how most people choose software.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[peachpuff]

"'Because it's worthless if X is zero, we should always sacrifice other things to increase X.' Why is that false logic?"

Because 'must have some' != 'more is always better'. Food, for example.

Also, you're misunderstanding what I (and the OpenOffice.org people) mean by "functionality." It does not refer to how useful the software is to DogDude, it refers to the range of problems that the software can solve during normal usage. If we expand that range, but at the same time make the software impossible for DogDude to use, we have increased functionality by sacrificing things that matter to DogDude.

All of your examples actually make my point once you realize what the OpenOffice.org people really mean. Functionality has increased and many users are getting rich using an Access replacement, running Ubuntu, and giving their customers blowjobs. But DogDude is left out in the cold because the Java license clashes with his company's policies, he needs an OS that supports his existing hardware, and his users insist on credit cards. Those things have been sacrificed for functionality.

Except the diamond example.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[The Slashdolt]

I have worked in the corporate world for about 10 years now. Developing off the shelf applications for very large companies. Not one time have I heard one of these companies take issue with java. Though I can tell you, on more than one occasion they have taken issue with open source code within our applications. Some companies have gone so far as to say that they would not accept our applications if they contained any open source software. Now, any time we want to use any open source code as a library in our code we have to get it approved by managment, get it approved by legal, and do all kinds of hoop jumping. It is in fact open source dependencies that the corporate world is worried about.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Sentry21]

Personally, the biggest care I have is whether or not I can apt-get install openoffice and have it work. If it works, then OpenOffice is open enough for me.

I don't say this because I think that as long as it works, what does it matter. I say this because Debian has a 'pure' open-source philosophy, and in a lot of ways, it will reflect what other distros may well do. A dependancy on Java is fine, and that can be reflected in the packages - except that Debian can't redistribute the Java packages (last I checked) so it can't distribute OpenOffice very well either.

If it can't be installed automatically, then where does Linux's vaunted compability go?

I think the bigger issue, however, is to get a proper open-source Java implementation working. Once we can get a drop-in replacement that works well (I know this is a work in progress at the moment), then it doesn't matter if EVERYTHING depends on Java, because it's a dependancy we can provide.

So instead of cursing the OO.o dev team, let's curse ourselves for not being ready for things of this nature - and put more emphasis on the GNU java classes and an open-source JRE and JDK implementation (and maybe even improvements to GCJ as well) - and then we'll have solved two problems with one stone.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[metamatic]

If those "forks" aren't 100% compatible, they are not Java(tm).

In the real world, application developers do not restrict themselves to "100% Pure Java" (which is what the test suites test for compatibility with). They also make assumptions, like assuming that the XML processor will be the one Sun happen to bundle in their JRE.

For instance, Azureus runs fine under Sun's JRE, but doesn't run so well under IBM's JRE. I don't know if anyone's managed to compile it with GCJ.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Ogerman]

Free Software hackers want to like Sun, and they want to like Java, but the licensing issue is a big deal to them. Unfortunately for Sun, it absolutely needs the Free Software hackers to jump on board.

Free Software hackers with any common sense and/or pragmatism like Java for jobs where it is the best tool, but they don't necessarily like Sun. The two are not really tied together -- especially considering that much of the Java software developed by the Apache/Jakarta project (and even Eclipse) is starting to run on Free JVM's and GNU/ClassPath. Does Sun need the F/OSS community? You bet.. and they know it by now. If it wasn't for OSS alternatives to some of the awful marketecture specs coming out of the JCP, Java would not likely be in the position it is today.

Heck, I develop in Java for a living (web development), and yet I still don't use a single desktop Java application outside of Eclipse and it isn't pure Java.

Same here. I don't see Java as a language well suited for lightweight desktop app development and I think it's silly that the OO.org developers went with it due to memory requirements alone. On the other hand, Mono/.NET is currently way behind Java for serious business applications. (at least on the backend / middleware..)

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Omnifarious]

Ahh, so you're much more comfortable when you know for certain that you're taking it in the rear. It's an attitude that will get you far, sadly.

Personally, I despise Java (mostly for technical reasons, though licensing issues play their role as well), and I'm doing what I can to fight it's adoption where I work. There are a lot of people who feel similarly to me. I think Java is a mistake, plain and simple. In 10 years, it will be seen in the same light as COBOL (or, at best VB) is seen today.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Ogerman]

And I might have gotten OpenOffice made an acceptable alternative to MSOffice. But I'm not going to try. I won't recommend products that I don't use.

So this hypothetical company is going to continue filling MS's coffers because of your silly purism? Do you quite see how ironic this is? That's like being outnumbered in battle but shooting one of your fellow soldiers because you didn't like the joke he made.

There is almost no question that Java will be fully Open Source within the next 5 years -- either by action of Sun or "Java-like" OSS projects. There will be plenty of time for purism after the MSO monopoly tumbles.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Ogerman]

Say what you want, but a large percentage of the folks that are gutsy enough to be rolling out OpenOffice.org are doing so at least in part because they are Free Software advocates. In short, they are pushing OpenOffice.org for ethical reasons, and not for practical reasons.

Reality check: Most people who are experimenting with rolling out OO.org are doing so on Windows desktops, whether or not it's for ethical or practical reasons. Most people who are doing really huge OO.org rollouts in large companies are doing it entirely for practical reasons.

Sun is just being stupid on this front. Java has already fragmented into several mostly compatible forks. IBM has their own JVM, as does Apple, Oracle, Borland, and there are a wide range of Free Software Java-alike systems.

I agree that Sun is being stupid by not releasing more of their JVM and class libraries as Free Software. On the other hand, it is inaccurate to say that the forks of Java are "mostly incompatible." The situation is generally better than C/C++ compilers, so put it in perspective.

Freeing Java would completely kill all of the non-Sun Java toolkits, and it would give Sun the Free Software allies it needs to compete against Microsoft's .NET.

Yes. And this is even more true considering that .NET works quite well alongside Java and that MS is actively trying to woo Java developers to the Longhorn platform, with all it's proprietary but dazzling client-side APIs.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

except that Debian can't redistribute the Java packages

I think it is more that Debian won't redistribute the Java packages. Other Linux distros do. I like Debian, and their philosophy, but this is a Debian issue more than a Java issue.

let's curse ourselves for not being ready for things of this nature - and put more emphasis on the GNU java classes and an open-source JRE and JDK implementation (and maybe even improvements to GCJ as well) - and then we'll have solved two problems with one stone.

Well said. All this pressure for Sun to open source Java is in reality pressure for Sun to open source their source for their Java implementation. There is nothing to stop a OS version of Java being developed.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

You are misinformed, RedHat does not ship Java. Or rather, they don't ship Sun's Java. RHEL3 had absolutely no Java support out of the box, and RHEL4 has the GCJ and Classpath platform.

RHEL contains NO non-free software. That includes JVM's, ATI or Nvidia display drivers, the Flash player, MP3 codecs, Adobe Acrobat, etc.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, ass bites YOU!

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DaliborTopic]

If I did, it would be gcj that I would consider. (Sorry Kaffe.)

gcj is pretty excellent, and the Kaffe devs are incorporating components from gcj into Kaffe in order to make it easier to have a Kaffe-on-Gcj mixed runtime (and to create interfaces for them in GNU Classpath). It will be an interesting year ahead once we have a mixed-mode engine with fast natively compiled class libraries and quick jitters.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DaliborTopic]

All this pressure for Sun to open source Java is in reality pressure for Sun to open source their source for their Java implementation.

Yeah. And one would think that after 10 years of trying to put up pressure on Sun to do something they repeatedly said that they don't want to do, people would finally learn to stop wasting their breath and just go ahead and try to create something better instead of begging to be released of their shackles.

Fortunately, in increasing numbers, they do now. See Mono, see GNU Classpath, see gcj, and see Kaffe.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

You are misinformed, RedHat does not ship Java. Or rather, they don't ship Sun's Java. RHEL3 had absolutely no Java support out of the box, and RHEL4 has the GCJ and Classpath platform.

You are misinformed. RedHat Enterprise does ship Sun's Java. There was an agreement in May 2003 for RedHat to do this.

RHEL contains NO non-free software. That includes JVM's, ATI or Nvidia display drivers, the Flash player, MP3 codecs, Adobe Acrobat, etc.

This is not true.

Let me quote from RedHat's site:

"Introduced in September 2003, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, version 3, includes a broad range of new features:" ...

"Enhanced Java:
Java implementations from BEA and IBM."

You don't need to be shipping Sun's Java in order to be shipping a fully-functional certified Java.

RHEL contains NO non-free software. That includes JVM's, ATI or Nvidia display drivers, the Flash player, MP3 codecs, Adobe Acrobat, etc.

Wrong. Check the 'Extras' CD.

From Linux Planet, Feb 14th:

"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.0--The Enterprise Gets An Update" ...

"The Extras CD provided with Red Hat EL AS features an interesting choice of third-party packages divided into three sections--Java and Java Utilities, Multimedia, and Miscellaneous."

It also includes the Flash player, Adobe Acrobat etc.!

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Say what you want, but a large percentage of the folks that are gutsy enough to be rolling out OpenOffice.org are doing so at least in part because they are Free Software advocates

What planet are you from? The VAST majority of people couldn't give a rat's ass if OOo was "free" as in speach. They are downloading and using it because it is "free" as in beer. They either don't want to spend $$$ on MS Office, were unable to get a "free" copy of it from their buddy, or they are terrified of the BSA raiding their offices and fining them $$$$ so they are using OOo.

As for Java not being "free" as in speach, I couldn't give a crap, and neither do most businesses. Java is "free" as in beer, it is quite polished now, and it is supported by Sun. What more could they ask for?. The first thing I do after installing the OS, on any of my systems, is to install the latest JDK from Sun. This is on Windows, Linux and FreeBSD (sorry, the Mac comes with it's own JDK from Apple).

For all of you whiners out there that don't like the OOo team using Java, teach yourself C++ and volunteer to recode those Java modules in C++. If you're not willing to help, then just STFU.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

Yeah. And one would think that after 10 years of trying to put up pressure on Sun to do something they repeatedly said that they don't want to do, people would finally learn to stop wasting their breath and just go ahead and try to create something better instead of begging to be released of their shackles.

What shackles? No-one is stopping the OS community from producing a quality Java implementation! Why all the pressure to get hold of Sun's code? There are fully-compatible implementations which do not use Sun's code (e.g. HP Java). The OS community managed to make a high quality C++ implementation without having to be given all the source code - what is stopping them doing the same with Java?

Fortunately, in increasing numbers, they do now. See Mono, see GNU Classpath, see gcj, and see Kaffe.

Have you used these? Kaffe has always been slow and problematic. The GNU VM is slow and incompatible. GNU Classpath is incomplete, and Mono doesn't have a compatible modern Java.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Bert64]

Then what will they use? MS Office is even less open. If they then use abiword or koffice etc, then that's a good thing.. More competition is good for the market, and will promote interoperable standards.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

You are misinformed. RedHat Enterprise does ship Sun's Java. There was an agreement in May 2003 for RedHat to do this.

Sorry - it DID ship Sun's Java. It is now IBM's, which is, of course, compatible.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

Yes, but Java has some peculiar encumbrances in that it requires installation of additional components that are up to the user

Such as? The JRE includes the full libraries.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[mmkkbb]

Yes, but not every user installs the same JRE. Last time I installed OpenOffice I had to get my own.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Prothonotar]

I assure you- the least likliest to care about the free/non-free debate over Java is the corporate environment.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

Yes, but not every user installs the same JRE. Last time I installed OpenOffice I had to get my own.

Java is no different from any other set of run-time libraries. If Open Office specifies JRE 1.4.2 or later, that is what you will need, but there are no optional parts - that JRE will contain all the libraries.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[dooling]

> > Although it's true that functionality is
> > important, at what cost?
>
> At all costs. What else is there?

Freedom.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DaliborTopic]

What shackles?

Those of the SCSL, the BCL, and similarly funny non-free software licenses used for Java technology, for example.

There is a difference here: there are people who prefer to beg, and there are people who don't care about Sun any more and hack on a better platform. I'm part of the latter group.

Have you used these? Kaffe has always been slow and problematic. The GNU VM is slow and incompatible. GNU Classpath is incomplete, and Mono doesn't have a compatible modern Java.

That certainly depends on what you do. On some applications (scientific, crypto, nestedvm, ...) Kaffe outperforms Sun's hotspot by a factor of 20 or more. On some applications it performs worse than Sun. That will be fixed eventually, when it starts to matter enough.

Compatibility is a huge marketing bogosity in the Java space, without anything to back up the claims. There are no publicly available means to verify compatibility claims of runtime makers so it's all hot air talk by proprietary vendors. In the words of James Gosling: 'Well, I tested it myself and it seems to work OK for me,' or 'Hi, a bunch of my friends tested it and it worked OK.'[1]

cheers, dalibor topic

[1] Though he was referring to open source projects, the same reasoning applies equally to the non-transparent compatibility claims without proof from non-free runtimes.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

Those of the SCSL, the BCL, and similarly funny non-free software licenses used for Java technology, for example.

Ah, the ones approved by the Open Source Initiative? Hence your description of them as 'funny non-free' is factually incorrect.

Those licences are for Sun's source code. There is no barrier to GPLed implementations.

There is a difference here: there are people who prefer to beg, and there are people who don't care about Sun any more and hack on a better platform. I'm part of the latter group.

I'm part of a third group - those who don't care for the self-indulgence of many open sourcers and are happy to make good use of one of the most powerful development platforms.

That certainly depends on what you do. On some applications (scientific, crypto, nestedvm, ...) Kaffe outperforms Sun's hotspot by a factor of 20 or more.

That would be neat, as I have benchmarked Sun's VM as equal to the speed of GCC for many scientific/math uses. So, you are claiming that Kaffe is 20x faster than GCC? That would be quite an achievement. In fact, I would call it impossible.

Compatibility is a huge marketing bogosity in the Java space, without anything to back up the claims.

Nonsense. (1) there is the compatibility testing, (2) there is practical experience. I can write full-featured server and client apps on Sun's VM on Windows, and deploy using IBM's VM on Linux. No problems at all. Compatibility is absolutely vital.

non-transparent compatibility claims without proof from non-free runtimes

The compatibility has to be proven, or else it is not Java.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[DaliborTopic]

Ah, the ones approved by the Open Source Initiative? Hence your description of them as 'funny non-free' is factually incorrect.

Nonsense. Neither SCSL nor BCL have ever been approved by OSI. They are clearly not open source. Read them, read the open source definition, and it should be obvious that OSI would never approve them as open source.

That would be neat, as I have benchmarked Sun's VM as equal to the speed of GCC for many scientific/math uses. So, you are claiming that Kaffe is 20x faster than GCC? That would be quite an achievement. In fact, I would call it impossible.

Kaffe can use the excellent state-of-the-art GNU MP bignum library for javax.math. Hot-spot is no match for it. By far. By a factor of 1000 and larger on really big numbers, afair from mailing list reports. That's simply because the GPLd code is so much better in that area than anything Sun has come up with so far. Be happy and enjoy it.

Nonsense. (1) there is the compatibility testing

Is there? Really? Have you ever seen the results of a compatiblity test published anywhere so that they can be independently verified? Have you ever been able to verify those claims? Have you ever seen the tests?

The compatibility has to be proven, or else it is not Java.

Sure. I'd like to see proof that Sun's VM passes all the tests. Show it to me, please. :)

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[HiThere]

That's one possibility. Another possibility is that I might convert them to Linux and KOffice (or whatever I end up using).

But I definitely won't recommend products I don't use. If I did, I'd deserve the distrust that I would earn.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Decaff]

Nonsense. Neither SCSL nor BCL have ever been approved by OSI. They are clearly not open source. Read them, read the open source definition, and it should be obvious that OSI would never approve them as open source.

http://www.mail-archive.com/kmself@ix.netcom.com /m sg00035.html:

"Although the OSI promotes the free redistribution of software with access to both source and compiled code, it does not discriminate against proprietary ventures. OSI-approved licenses include BSD, GPL and X11, and the IPL (IBM Public License), the MPL (Mozilla PublicLicense), SCSL (Sun Community Source License) and APSL (Apple Public Source License)."

Kaffe can use the excellent state-of-the-art GNU MP bignum library for javax.math. Hot-spot is no match for it. By far.

I don't believe a word of this. Hot-spot is so good it can use parallel architectures like MMX to optimise math, and even optimise machine code instruction order. See Kaffe/Hotspot independent benchmarks below.

By a factor of 1000 and larger on really big numbers, afair from mailing list reports. That's simply because the GPLd code is so much better in that area than anything Sun has come up with so far. Be happy and enjoy it.

This is total rubbish. Here is proof:

http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/

This is a respected series of benchmarks. On the tests it is actually capable of running, Kaffe rarely equals anything like Sun or IBM Java performance.

Nonsense. (1) there is the compatibility testing

Is there? Really? Have you ever seen the results of a compatiblity test published anywhere so that they can be independently verified? Have you ever been able to verify those claims? Have you ever seen the tests?

Why should I care? I'm not writing a Java VM!

What I get as a consumer is 'Java' VMs that run my code flawlessly. They do. If you want to test Sun's Java, I have provided a compatibility test link below.

Sure. I'd like to see proof that Sun's VM passes all the tests. Show it to me, please. :)

The proof is here:

http://java.sun.com/j2ee/compatibility.html

These are implementations that have passed the J2EE test suite.

If you want to prove it to yourself. Here is the website for some test suites:

http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/ JC Ptools/

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Anonymous Coward]

"First off, Ubuntu Linux has a GUI. I've seen it."

Hell, I'm posting from it.

And I did have a half hour problem with my original Ubuntu X11 install which did not work correctly out of the box as well.

Funny modern Radion video hardware not recognised properly.

Less than three months off the stocks.

Big problem NOT.

Look up which pci id to lie to XFree86 about so it works right. End story.

Guess the grandparent could have saved himself some dosh if he'd tried a bit harder.

Ubuntu Fan

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[laughingcoyote]

There is no "relegating" of security and stability, both are part and parcel of functionality. If software is vulnerable to exploit or is unstable, then it cannot be considered functional.

Microsoft's mistake was not in "relegating"-it was in concentrating on making things LOOK functional to Joe Average User rather then making sure it WAS functional in every sense.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[Ogerman]

Another possibility is that I might convert them to Linux and KOffice (or whatever I end up using).

I gave KOffice a fair shot and there are definitely nice things about it (speed and memory usage for instance..) But KOffice simply doesn't have the file format support that OpenOffice does. The ugly reality is that people still need to read/write MSO document types. Save yourself some time by using OO.org for now and switching to something else later when it becomes available. (hopefully that'll be some sorta rich web app that makes word processing obsolete anyhow! :-)

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[civilizedINTENSITY]

"More engineering, less philosophy." Obviously you are in need of some Marketing classes, and perhaps some Org Theory / Behavior. If it were just about engineering then Unix would have won hands down. Likewise for OS2, or even the Mac.

To suggest that the legal minefield which is the history of IP (sic) can be regulated to mere "philosophy" is blatently ignorant. Take a history class. Realize that business is about a lot more than just engineering. Your "reasonable, prgamatic" stance resembles an ostrich with its head in the sand.

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[HiThere]

For now I'm using OO.o 1.1.0. But things don't stay the same forever. This discussion is in the context of "What if OO.o 1.2 continues to require the Sun Java sdk?"

I don't want to wait until I'm forced to decide in a hurry, and perhaps take Hobson's choice. I'm presuming that KWord will be able to get "close enough". (This is, for me, actually not that difficult, as I don't normally need to read MSOffice documents. Other's have different situations.

For many I advice would be to switch to using AbiWord when you can right now. That will make conversion easier when you need to. Unfortunately, at least some versions of AbiWord aren't that good, so I have generally been recommending OO.o (or NeoOffice, for the Mac users. ... Perhaps NeoOffice will work in other environments, but OO.o 1.1 seems better and with no more restrictions.)

(All that said, I'll admit that I've never stayed with KOffice very long. I've tried it a few times, but it's never had quite all the features I need...that, or the version has been too unstable. Still, it's getting quite close.)

Re:the 'good enough' argument

[civilizedINTENSITY]

AbiWord, Gnumeric (and R-Gnumeric, and R for that matter), Koffice (and Kile, and Kate), Octave, LyX, TeXmacs, etc., are the solution, yes!

Playing into MS hands

[Swamii]

A few years back MS made a lot of fuss about Java while developing an alternative (.NET). In the process, they've planted some seeds such as "Java is neither open nor free!", and "Java is lock-in!", or the confusion surrounding Java on Windows, thanks to the MS VM supporting only v1.3.

I'll tell you all now, I'm a Winodws developer and I write C# code. For us Windows devs, no one uses Java anymore; if you do, it's for support of an existing product. Virtually all new projects are .NET-based or native code. So if you, the open source community, cause more fuss over Java and whine about using it, then Microsoft has truely succeeded in it's FUD plan over Java.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

This has nothing to do with Microsoft and everything to do with Sun, in my opinion. If Sun had the opportunity to be as monopolistic as Microsoft, they would jump at the chance without a second thought.

Simply open sourcing java would be a huge step in the right direction, but they claim they don't want to do that because they are afraid it will fork. In reality, they are simply the kid with the football who doesn't want anyone else to play with it.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[SEE]

Sun's Java is neither Open Source nor Free Software. That's not MS FUD, that's merely a statement of the facts.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[El_Servas]

Au contraire.. I've always wanted to be a 'Liunx' developer.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

The F/OSS community really doesn't care much about this Sun/Microsoft politics that you're refering to. I couldn't care less if the alternatives are Sun-proprietary or Microsoft-proprietary or DEC-proprietary or PeopleSoft-proprietary.

In every one of those cases, as soon as the vendor chooses to stop supporting a platform, I'm screwed.

With that in mind, C# is a far safer choice for corporate use than Java; because at least the ECMA standard C# piece is backed by a standard, so we can be quite sure we'll have C# tools available as long as we need.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Mindwarp]

Just for information, there are plenty of Windows application developers using Java to create new systems within big business these days.

Many financial institutions, for example, are heavily invested in Java technology and using it on a day-to-day basis to create everything from minor utility software to large scale mission critical system.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Tim C]

the confusion surrounding Java on Windows, thanks to the MS VM supporting only v1.3.

I could be wrong, but I believe that MS's Java support (while it existed) only extended as far as v1.1.3, not v1.3. Of course, that's because they lost the court case to Sun, not because they couldn't or wouldn't support a newer version.

For us Windows devs, no one uses Java anymore

That's because traditionally, with a few notable exceptions, client-side Java apps suck. They're clunky, slow, and they look like arse. That's getting better, but it's almost certainly too little, too late. I do Java development on the server side, and I'm learning C#/.NET in order to do Windows client-side dev work (just scratching an itch). I'm not about to ditch Java, I just believe in using the right tool for the job. Now, it's arguable whether or not C# is the right tool, but experience tells me that Java isn't.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Decaff]

For us Windows devs, no one uses Java anymore; if you do, it's for support of an existing product. Virtually all new projects are .NET-based or native code.

This may well be true for you, but it is not true in general. A quick search of Job sites shows that there is a considerable amount of new Java development on Windows, even client-side. There is also a lot of J2EE deployment on Windows servers.

The lack of a straightforward migration path from VB6 to .NET has meant that a significant number of VB developers have migrated to Java. If you are migrating, it might as well be to something portable!

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a software consultant for major financial institutions. It's almost the exact reverse of what you mentioned. Almost no one uses .NET for anything, and especially not on the server end. Almost everything I see is java, both client (Swing, Web based applets, SWT) and server. It used to be mostly on the server end, but now client side is starting to reach parity. In my evaluation of .NET, it's just as slow if not slower than Java. The only places where I would use it would be where I would have previously written a VB application. It's basically the new VB, but with a little bit more prestige so that you don't have to be ashamed of being a VB "non-real" programmer.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Swamii]

That's my point: those that do use Java use it because they are "heavily invested" in it already, as you say.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[jbolden]

Actually Sun terminated Microsoft's license because Microsoft's 1.13 was a forked version of Java which

1) Went against Java's write once run anywhere
2) Was far and away the best Java implementation and IDE at the time

(2) making (1) much worse since Microsoft's Java could easily become the standard.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Swamii]

Really? I wish you could've said that when I was arguing the same several years ago. But all I got back from Java zealots was that I was an "M$ fanboi".

That said, I'm curious: isn't the Java class library source code now freely available and under an OSI-approved license?

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Decaff]

I could be wrong, but I believe that MS's Java support (while it existed) only extended as far as v1.1.3, not v1.3. Of course, that's because they lost the court case to Sun, not because they couldn't or wouldn't support a newer version.

They wouldn't even support standard features in 1.1.3, such as RMI. This is why they lost the court case.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Swamii]

Nonsense. I've been developing Windows software professionally since around 1995, and I can tell you with all certainty that almost no Windows developers use Java, unless it is for an existing codebase. Sure, there are some Java jobs now, and this is primarily because companies heavily invested in Java during the 1990s. But virtually no one is using Java on Windows for client stuff anymore, especially with the VM incompatibilities that exist on this side of the fence.

Go to Windows dev-centric sites like The Code Project, see how many Java articles, content, source code, or jobs you can find, you'll see what I mean.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

client-side Java apps suck.

Cough! Eclipse. Ahem.

Honestly if more people would drop swing and AWT (Sun's half-assed attempts at GUI widget sets), and go with SWT, Java GUI apps wouldn't suck. It's the widget set, not the language.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

If you only want Linux + Windows UI support, then the Eclipse SWT is a good Java based GUI library to build on. It is reasonably quick and looks good.

Otherwise, most "Java" apps are server based with browser (HTML) clients.

Almost no one uses Swing or AWT anymore if they want a professional look and feel.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

Nonsense. I've been developing Windows software professionally since around 1995, and I can tell you with all certainty that almost no Windows developers use Java, unless it is for an existing codebase.

This being slashdot, I assume you don't get out much. I don't know where you are, but I'm a consultant in Washington, DC, and I can tell you with all certainty that around here companies (and gov't organizations) mostly specify Java, Java, Java. (alas, even when they shouldn't be concerned about it, ie a turnkey system). And the vast majority are on the Windows platform, with only a smattering of Sun and Linux.

Go to Windows dev-centric sites like The Code Project, see how many Java articles, content, source code, or jobs you can find, you'll see what I mean.

Um, sorry, but Java developers don't tend to go to platform-specific sites for source code. I highly doubt your one data point can be extrapolated as far as you seem to be taking it.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[shutdown -p now]

The lack of a straightforward migration path from VB6 to .NET has meant that a significant number of VB developers have migrated to Java.

No, it means that most VB developers have migrated to C#. It's still way closer to VB6 than Java, both in terms of API, and toolset provided (Visual Studio .NET and MSDN).

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Decaff]

Nonsense. I've been developing Windows software professionally since around 1995, and I can tell you with all certainty that almost no Windows developers use Java, unless it is for an existing codebase.

Nonsense. I have been developing Windows software professionally since around 1987! I can tell you with certainty that there are many new projects using Java for deployment on Windows. A simple job search shows this. There may not be a large amount of client side development, but that is because most new projects in all areas of development are web-based.

Sure, there are some Java jobs now, and this is primarily because companies heavily invested in Java during the 1990s.

That can't explain new J2EE developments and does not explain the significant migration of VB6 developers to Java:
http://news.com.com/Developers+slam+Microsoft%27s+ Visual+Basic+plan/2100-1007_3-5615331.html?tag=st. rn

But virtually no one is using Java on Windows for client stuff anymore, especially with the VM incompatibilities that exist on this side of the fence.

The only incompatibilities are between MS's VM and others. Most new PCs (around 70%) are shipped with Sun's VM, and the JRE download for the rest is no worse than the .NET runtime.

Go to Windows dev-centric sites like The Code Project, see how many Java articles, content, source code, or jobs you can find, you'll see what I mean.

Well you wouldn't find many there - it is a site dedicated to Microsoft development languages!

Re:Playing into MS hands

[robertjw]

So which GUI library is OOo using? I always think it can be ridiculously slow - esp. under Linux.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

Developers that are purely targeting windows probably have no great interest in looking at Java on the client side as they can specifically code for Windows itself. Doing so does mean that retargeting the code to other platforms is more difficult, and it also means potential brittleness in terms of potential changes to the Windows API. So it may be possible to bang out an application quickly, especially with a rad tool, but it may be difficult to rework.

The intelligent way to do things is to split the presentation layer off and use something OS independent (e.g. Qt, or Java) plus a compatibility layer between the meat of the logic and the OS. (Unless you are doing something specifically windowd oriented like writing a registry cleaner). Although then you have to rely on the compatibility layers and presentation layer library writers to get it right and to have a useful licencing scheme you are potentially insulated against a whole set of changes, and can retarget your application. E.g. decide your tool could be useful by Munich Council? OOps they just changed to Linux? No problem, you are OS independent, just recompile and off you go to sell to Munich.

On the server side java is doing fairly well for serving applications, such as use in JSP, Websphere, and other portal systems.

Java clients can be horribly slow, though. This can be a problem. But I've seen slow ones, and responsive ones, so I am unsure as to whether to blame Java or the programmers. All the ones we've written in house seem perfectly responsive on a variety of platforms.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Decaff]

No, it means that most VB developers have migrated to C#. It's still way closer to VB6 than Java, both in terms of API, and toolset provided (Visual Studio .NET and MSDN).

Most VB developers have not.

From News.com: "Surveys by Evans Data indicate that the number of VB6 developers outnumber the people who have learned VB.Net.". The statistics show that there is little VB6 to C# migration. Most of the migration is to VB.Net, and most still have not migrated. Of those who have migrated away from VB6, many have moved to non-MS languages, including Java, according to many surveys.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Decaff]

Developers that are purely targeting windows probably have no great interest in looking at Java on the client side as they can specifically code for Windows itself.

Absolutely. The poster seems to be confusing developers who are writing code that is intended to be deployed on Windows and developers who are writing code specifically targetted at Windows only.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[moonbender]

The Java class library is freely available as source, I don't know about the license, though. I doubt it's GPL-compatible. That's beside the point though, the Java API source code is available, but none of the Sun J2SE Virtual Machines' is.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that OOo is written in C/C++, it would be hard to blame the GUI slowness on Java.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Fnord]

That's because the only people using java use it server side. JSP, Weblogic, and J2EE are pretty much the way web dev is done these days, both on and off windows.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[omb]

Yes, but only because SUN helped them.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Mindwarp]

Not only are they 'heavily investED' in it, but they are still 'heavily investING' in it. They continue to invest in it not because they have in the past, but because they see significant benefit to investing in it in the future.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[omb]

And interestingly Java client-side's suck as much, or more on Linux than Windoze; you want to know why, it is simple, you either need to keep cranking up a new, virgin, JVM (in which initialization optimization was never a goal) or go the Container route, which is only viable on the server side.

Once you understand Java's history, originally as OAK, all this makes sense, you initialize the JVM once, when the appliance is turned on.

This implies that the JVM should load, on Linux, as a module, and bytecodes should be loaded by the kernel binary loader, calling out to the JVM module --- this would make Java truely native, and focus on optimizing startup. This ammounts essentially to JVM virtualization; suddenly Beans and Containers would become much less intrusive but with a role in managed Web Channels and BL layers.

Finally I despair of the 'pure Java' client side UI layers SWT/Swing/AWT which are all underfeatured, ugly slow and bloated; this is, once again, insularity. Qt, for example, is easily embeddable in Java, and enables quick construction of UIs that dont look like the work of a 3 year old.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[aristotle-dude]

It "is" FUD. The Java language specification is "free" and "open". You are free to reimplement it but you are not allowed to call it "Java" as it is a "trademark" of Sun Microsystems.

Please stop doing MSFT's job for them. The OP hit the nail on the head.

I hear OSS advocate on here all gushing over .NET because they think it is more "free" because MS published just the basic C# stuff and the "Basic" CLR information.

It's a trap. Don't fall for it. MSFT will soon sue the mono project over violated patents and DMCA violations concerning reverse engineering and stolen IP.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

He should be blaming his problems on his slow ass computer and not java. Java can be slow to start up but once it starts up it's okay. It is a bit of a memory hog, but only really matters on old pieces of crap machines that shouldn't be attempting to run it anyway.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Penguinoflight]

A quick search of Job sites shows that there is a considerable amount of new Java development on Windows,

You'll find a lot quicker that the Human Resources bot who posted the job has no idea of what is actually required for filling the position. Most of the time I think they just throw in random keywords hoping to get someone who will lie to their face.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[SEE]

There is an open Java language specification. I never denied it; I never even implied otherwise. I said not a word about specifications or standards. I talked solely about software.

The problem isn't that OO.o is dependent on the Java specification; it's that, because that specification has no Open Source implementation, OO.o is dependent on Sun's Java. And Java, the software product from Sun, is not Open Source and not Free Software.

I'm not saying .NET is freer than Java. I'm not saying Sun is doing anything wrong. I'm not saying the specification isn't open. I'm not saying Mono isn't going to get steamrollered by a lawsuit. I am pointing out the simple fact that Sun's Java is not Free Software, and is not Open Source software. Never has been.

Calling that FUD doesn't change it, no matter how much you yell it, and no matter how many scare quotes you scatter.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a bit of a memory hog, but only really matters on old pieces of crap machines that shouldn't be attempting to run it anyway.

I bought more memory to run more applications, not to run crappier applications.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Trepalium]

MSFT will soon sue the mono project over violated patents and DMCA violations concerning reverse engineering and stolen IP.

Okay, now who's spreading FUD? Violated patents, sure, I can see that happening. Microsoft has patents on a number of things in .NET, especially ASP.Net which mono does implement. However, DMCA violations concerning reverse engineering? Reverse engineering for interoperability is the one thing the DMCA specifically allows for! And stolen IP? Have you seen the Rotor license? It disallows direct copying, but allows you to reimplement from memory anything you learn from the source code.

Geeze. I can't believe I'm actually defending Microsoft on this... The fact of the matter is that both Java and .NET have a number of strikes against them. Don't forget that Kodak has a patent that affects Java implementations, and I'm sure Sun has patents that affect the Java standard as well.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Kadmos]

I'll tell you all now, I'm a Winodws developer and I write C# code. For us Windows devs, no one uses Java anymore; if you do, it's for support of an existing product. Virtually all new projects are .NET-based or native code. So if you, the open source community, cause more fuss over Java and whine about using it, then Microsoft has truely succeeded in it's FUD plan over Java.

So, on one hand, *you* don't use Java but if *we* "the open source community cause more fuss over Java" then *we* would be responsible for MS winning their FUD campaign? So while it's OK for you not to use it, we have to, that's essentially what your saying isn't it? Just who is spreading the FUD again?

In any case I would prefer to think that Java should stand, or fall, on it's own merits. If the OSS community do not like the new direction openoffice.org is taking in requireing Java we can stop using it and, say, fork it so that it *does* meet our needs. The parallels between openoffice.org and XFree/X.org are interesting here...

Re:Playing into MS hands

[toriver]

Was far and away the best Java implementation and IDE at the time
Bullcrap - by definition, an implementation that is incomplete and non-compliant (changes to standard libraries, invented keywords) cannot be the best implementation.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Decaff]

Most of the time I think they just throw in random keywords hoping to get someone who will lie to their face.

J2EE (which is where most Java development is done) is a highly specific skillset, and not just a random keyword (like 'Java skills')

Re:Playing into MS hands

[hritcu]

The JVM source code IS AVAILABLE under the Sun Community Source Licensing. You can try it for yourself.

The SCSL is NOT an open source license (it doesn't give you the right to redistribute modified versions), but still it is much better than closed source. J2SE 5.0 is also available under the JRL (Java Research License) that allows sharing binary-based research distributions of Java.

Sun is preparing a tweaked license for J2SE 6.0 called JIUL (Java Internal Use License), in an effort to show that "the company wants to make Java as open source as possible while maintaining platform compatibility". You can read two recent articles on this topic in infoworld and news.com .

As for the GPL-compatibility, I remind you that most open source licenses are NOT GPL-compatible. Neither the Apache License nor the Mozilla Public License are GPL-compatible and this has not stopped the Apache httpd nor the Firefox widespread adoption in the open source community. Expecting Sun to release its JVM source code under a GPL-compatible license is nonsense. What we can realistically expect in the near future is a license scheme that would allow free redistribution in a company. They make this to please large companies like IBM, that has been complaining for some time now that the Sun JVM is not open source.

However, nobody is forced to use the Sun JVM. GCJ and Kaffe are GPL, aren't they?

Re:Playing into MS hands

[squiggleslash]

With respect, both those seeds came out of the Free Software and Open Source communities too. Complaints about Java continue to this very day. These are legitimate complaints, they can't be dismissed simply because Microsoft benefits.

The major issue right now is that a lot of FOSS people decided that .NET was better so developed two usable free alternatives, with the same degree of effort not spent on "Free" Javas. There are free Javas of course, but the major project, Kaffe, is out of date, and the current efforts going into GCJ and GNU Classpath are late coming. Now that said, the GCJ people are doing something genuinely innovative rather than blindly coping the existing system a'la Mono, so we might end up with something superior at the end of it.

There is, right now, no Free Java. It's coming. But don't pretend that it's FUD to suggest that, as of today, there's no viable way to develop a completely Free system that uses Java. Because, unfortunately, right now that's the case. And Free Software advocates wouldn't be being honest if they supported a "Free Software" or "Open Source" project that relies upon a non-Free element.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[jbolden]

Which implementation / IDE do you think was better? That's exactly what saying they are not the "best" means, that someone else is strictly better.

At that point Microsoft was becoming the majority of Java. You could just as easily say that Sun's Java (as per Netscape) was "non compliant". Further they had all the standard libraries (though some were harder to access) plus a host of new ones which were Windows specific. Finally in terms of speed of execution they were definitely the fastest, the JVM was much better than any other out there on this front.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Anonymous Coward]

You windows developers are the same ones that embraced VB and MFC. I'll take what you say with a suitable dose of salt.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[toriver]

Which implementation / IDE do you think was better?

At that point (i.e. Visual J++ 1.1)? The stable releases of Symantec Visual Café. Remember, they made the JIT compiler Sun eventually shipped with the standard VM.

You could just as easily say that Sun's Java (as per Netscape) was "non compliant".

It was, and Netscape consequently lost the right to use the Java logo six months after the release of 1.1, since they had not upgraded it (like Microsoft they eventually did). That Netscape WEREN'T Sun's best buddies is overlooked by those defending Microsoft's shenanigans.

You really should read the court documents: Microsoft had entered into a CONTRACT and was in breach of the CONTRACT. That's what makes the situation different.

Or do you really like to live in a world where C++ to 90% of developers means Visual Studio?

Re:Playing into MS hands

[mikefe]

So, if java apps looks like arse, do native apps look like pussy?

Re:Playing into MS hands

[jbolden]

I'm not questioning that Microsoft was guilty of breach of contract with Sun. My point is that you are conflating our current view of Java (Sun's cross platform language) with the possible views of Java that existed then (for example C++ without the pointers). To put it another way Visual Studio/J++ was an excellent language and a very good platform specific Javaish language far better than anything else that was available at the time.

Symantic's product was about a year later when Sun started getting very hostile towards Microsoft including Windows specific features (which again I understand but had Sun had a different attitude things may have turned out very differently).

As for C++ I don't like living in a world where the best ideas of programming from the 1970's are forgotten by 98% of all programmers and we are back to using languages that in most senses are less advanced than what was in use in the 1960s. I think both Java and C++ are so/so languages.

However:

1) Visual Studio is a very good IDE
2) Microsofts C++ compiler does a very good job on x86 code
3) .Net offers a pretty good platform specific library of functions.

I just can't get that upset about Visual Studio as a source of evil in the world.

Virtually everything that is wrong with Visual Studio is a direct result of the PC revolution:

a) Simple low level interfaces so that Assembler was viable during the early years (8088..)
b) Inexpensive hardware so that low level languages were used frequently
c) Demand for high graphics performance

If it haden't happened (if say Symbolics machines had won out over Unix boxes) computer languages today would be simple incredible.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[fizbin]

Eclipse sucks less than most java apps, I'll admit, but it's responsiveness is still slow as hell, and the amount of swapping that goes on when I switch to it or away from it is insane. (And silly me, I thought 512MB was a decent amount of ram)

It's enough to drive me back to JDE.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Swamii]

We, the Windows devs, are not using Java because it's a mess on Windows. Some users have the MS JVM, others the Sun, both with incompatibilities and are different versions.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Java client apps don't look like Windows apps, and Windows users generally despise them. .NET client apps, OTOH, look like native Windows apps. .NET is geared for Windows. There are some truely awesome .NET IDEs for Windows, while only a few decent Java IDEs (Eclipse is butt slow!). For us, Java isn't as good as .NET; we're Windows devs after all.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[tom's a-cold]

A few years back MS made a lot of fuss about Java while developing an alternative (.NET).

.NET is an alternative to J2EE, which is a couple layers further up in abstraction than Java. The lower-level correspondences are C# to Java and the CLR to JRE. Still, I think we should look at Microsoft's behavior. They didn't want to make themselves hostage to Sun's proprietary language. Neither should the free software community.

I'll tell you all now, I'm a Winodws developer and I write C# code.

Appeals for pity cut no ice on Slashdot.

Re:Playing into MS hands

[Swamii]

Haha, I assure you I was not appealing for pity, but only stating the facts for the sake of honesty.

And yes, C#<->Java, CLR<->JVM, but Slashbots can't be bothered about details. :-)

Re:Playing into MS hands

[tom's a-cold]

Haha, I assure you I was not appealing for pity, but only stating the facts for the sake of honesty.

Hey, where's the pleasure in life when you can't take a cheap shot anymore? Merely an ironic assertion of my own frequent frustration with the language. The sad, troubled life of a programming minimalist.

Off topic, but...

[Anita Coney]

John Carmack rips Java a new one here.

Re:Off topic, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad carmack has no idea why ping times are large on the handsets, blaming the devices internal fifo buffers and whatnot.

And, he's doing apparently something like the wolf 3d engine on a cell phone, and bitches them being as slow as a 4.7mhz pc. well, did wolf 3d run on a 4.7mhz pc? no. and he really should stop aiming his game at phones that are older than 2 years(by the time he gets his game on the market in full swing they're obsolote so developing them was wasted time).

Re:Off topic, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Linked here this morning, idiot.

Re:Off topic, but...

[The Bungi]

Slashdot, first to bring you the duped article is now proud to offer duped comments as well.

You saw it here first!

Re:Off topic, but...

[deanj]

Correction, he rips J2ME a new one.

The problem with J2ME is that phone companies have been adding their "extras" onto the platform or worse, not making them fulling compliant. Samsung's major HTTP screwup on the A500 is a great example of that.

As for Java being slow... give me a damn break. It's running on a PHONE!

So of the rest of that article, particularly the "no memset" and " the inability to read resources into anything but a char array" so a complete lack of understanding.

Blaming a language on a bad implementation of a JVM on a phone is just stupid.

Re:Off topic, but...

[drinkypoo]

As for Java being slow... give me a damn break. It's running on a PHONE!

he's not talking about it being slow so much as he's talking about the very high latency. Everything apparently trickles through some poorly-serviced queue in J2ME.

Modern cellular telephones have processors over 100MHz. There is no excuse for how slow these tiny Java MIDlets run on them.

Re:Off topic, but...

[Surt]

There is no work around on java to the memset performance problem. Likewise the read resources problem. If these represent major performance barriers to your application, you cannot use java.
Trying to write a high performance game, you'll hit both of these pretty quickly.

Re:Off topic, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ouch! Java must be SO scared now.

Re:Off topic, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

" Too bad carmack has no idea why ping times are large on the handsets, blaming the devices internal fifo buffers and whatnot."

Oh? And YOU know something here that he does not?

Please inform us, then.

If not, STFU.

Re:Off topic, but...

[deanj]

Actually, the latency issue is more of a "JVM and the particular phone that you're using" sort of problem. That's the implementations fault, not Java itself. The A500 from Samsung, for example, for all the rest of it's faults, doesn't have quite the latency problem that people using other handsets seem to see.

Re:Off topic, but...

[deanj]

If you're really working on a high performance game on a handset, the last thing you'd want to do is read resources during the middle of the game, unless of course you're between levels.

The memset argument is laughable. That's got to be the easiest thing to code on earth.

Re:Off topic, but...

[drinkypoo]

Write once, run differently everywhere. I'd have liked to have seen something like BREW come along earlier so we wouldn't be stuck with java.

Re:Off topic, but...

[Surt]

Unless, of course, you're reading resources over the network (ie basically any multiplayer game, which carmack was describing).

Re:Off topic, but...

[deanj]

That's a stupid argument. It's blaming the original authors for something that implementors down the line screwed up.

Brew's been around a long time now. It's just never caught on.

Re:Off topic, but...

[deanj]

Reading status over the network is one thing, reading resources implies something different.

Anyone trying to treat a phone just as they would a full fledge PC has to rethink how to do their apps, because it's just not the same thing. Anyone that would try and shoehorn old techniques using a device like that is bound to fail.

Re:Off topic, but...

[Surt]

To clarify my point, in case the word resources is causing confusion, there is a common need to perform the following activity in games:

(client)
note updated object state
send state over network

(peer/server)
read updated state
update object states

If your network system and objects are set up right in C, you can do this in one memory copy. That's impossible in java, it requires at least two and an extra context switch.

Jesus fucking christ

[Neil Blender]

Free as in not free enough? Give me a break

GCJ?

[ArsonSmith]

Can't these features be ported/compiled with gcj and run as native binaries?

Re:GCJ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the Fucking Article? And that goes to the moderators who thought that was insightful too.

Re:GCJ?

[DrXym]

Possibly, but gcj is not complete and suffers from its own problems. Additionally, it is much slower than the JRE from Sun. Look at the stats to see how various free and not so free runtimes perform. Note that the likes of Kaffe & GCJ run at a mere fraction of the runtimes from Sun & IBM.

Re:GCJ?

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Well, then this is an excellent opportunity to put efforts into improving the gjc - aint it ?

Re:GCJ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Additionally, it is much slower than the JRE from Sun. Look at the stats to see how various free and not so free runtimes perform.

First off, it's not 'much' slower at all. Look closer, at all the benchmarks. It outperforms Sun in some tests too.

Second, certain optimizations were left out of that benchmark.

Third, this kind of pure-calculation-speed benchmark is not a representative measure for Java apps. Almost noone uses Java for pure-calculation tasks. In real-world applications, things like native-call speed end up counting much more. GCJ does much better in those areas.

(Indeed, I've personally run SWT client apps at a comfortable speed under an interpreter, simply because the native calls were fast enough not to disturb the user interface.)

Fourth, most of these benchmarks are iterative calculations, without native calls, and thus exactly the kind of application you'd expect a JIT compiler to do best at.

Re:GCJ?

[caolan]

Yes, been having great success. Since my original post to the gcj mailing lists we've gotten far more working. Crucially the nifty gui access-like front end uses hsqldb and with hsqldb 1.8.0RC9 that now works with gcj. Nearly everything now builds with gcj, e.g. the wizards and accessibility bridge build with gcj 4.0.0. I'm confident that we'll have the wizards actually working properly in week or two.

Re:GCJ?

[Dacmot]

There are several posts talking about how using GCJ and GIJ is still not a good enough option.

What about jikes and kaffe then? Are they incomplete too?

Re:GCJ?

[ArsonSmith]

Hey, quick question about gcj. I'm sure I could look it up but hey this is slashdot. When useing gcj does it run in a VM or as native code? or both? neither? dairy products?

Thanks,

Re:GCJ?

[caolan]

gcj support in HEAD OOo is simply using gij as a bytecode interpreter. Currently I've a trivial patch pending commit to use gcj-dbtool and gcj during buildtime to beforetime compile the java jars used during the build process itself. So during the build process I make use of the gcj native code creation cleverness, but not during runtime as yet. This is the sort of niftyness which gcj-dbtool and gij enable that I'm talking about.

Re:GCJ?

[DrXym]

Actually that site was updated since the email so I assume it takes those suggestions into account.

As for loops, calculations etc. not being a proper measure - perhaps it doesn't matter much for wizards. But that's the thin end of the wedge. They're using it for the SQL database and no doubt would use it for other things too in time if left to their own devices.

As for SWT - I'm sure it can be made to run reasonably. Kaffe claims to run Eclipse though I shudder to think what the performance is like. I have a CVS snapshot of Kaffe on my box so maybe I'll try it. But the fact is that while SWT speeds up widgets, it doesn't do much outside of that. It's very easy to bog Eclipse down in the best of circumstances under Sun Java, so running it under an interpretter would be hell. The same goes for other SWT apps like Azureus which are doing intensive things outside of just showing a few buttons.

While its great to see gcj spurred on by Java encroaching into a critical Linux application, it doesn't mean that encroachment is desirable in any way. If they wanted to make parts of OO scriptable they could have chosen any number of open source engines that could have worked as well. For example Python or Ruby would fit the bill just as well.

Sun has failed with Java.

[Anonymous Coward]

1) It's not write once/ run anyware.
2) It's slow.
3) It's not on every machine.
4) It's dead as a web applet, replaced by DHTML and forms.
5) It's a pig.
6) It's not open source.

A noble effort, kudos for Sun for trying;
but it's just not cool ... and worse, there's
just no real advanntage to using it.

Re:Sun has failed with Java.

[Anonymous Coward]

hey, all what he said is the truth, why did you mod it as Flamebait?

Will this affect Kaffe, Classpath, Mono etc?

[finnw]

I wonder if this will lead to more effort being spent on free JVM clones.
Or even diverting effort from mono.
Could Sun have planned it that way?

Could it work with Java under Mono

[Anonymous Coward]

Kinda ironic that Novell's Mono (with root in Microsoft research) is the most promising free VM these days. Too bad Parrot doesn't seem to have java running on it...

Re:Could it work with Java under Mono

[Anonymous Coward]

Mono has no 'root' in Microsoft research.

And what makes you think that they're the best? Certainly the most hyped, but go look at some benchmarks. The fastest free VM out there is Jikes RVM (with does actually spring from the research division of a major company, namely IBM.)

Re:Could it work with Java under Mono

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure it has roots in Microsoft research - in that the spec that they are implementing to are based on work that came out of Microsoft labs. It's not unlike saying that C++ has AT&T roots where Stroustrup did much of his work.

The fastest free VM out there is Jikes

As far as I know, the Jikes VM is *not* Free Software.

Re:Could it work with Java under Mono

[Anonymous Coward]

God, Slashdotters are the most gullible people on the planet. Microsoft nice! Sun bad!

WTF?

Sun are the good guys, people. IBM is one of the largest companies in the world, and Microsoft is clearly among the most evil. Why are people, here, so impressionable to ever think otherwise?

Re:Could it work with Java under Mono

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't know very far. Jikes RVM is licensed under the CPL, which, according to the FSF, is a Free Software license.

Re:Could it work with Java under Mono

[HiThere]

It's free, and in certain ways better than the GPL, but it's incompatible with it (the "you can't add any additional restrictions" clause).

So you can't use jikes in any project that it to be GPL compatible. (It's an interpreter[virtual machine], so it's never separate.)

Re:Could it work with Java under Mono

[Anonymous Coward]

It's free, and in certain ways better than the GPL, but it's incompatible with it (the "you can't add any additional restrictions" clause).

Correct.

So you can't use jikes in any project that it to be GPL compatible. (It's an interpreter[virtual machine], so it's never separate.)

Incorrect. And the same thing goes for running CPL apps (say Eclipse) on a GPL VM (say Kaffe). When an VM is running code, it is nothing more than 'input data'. You don't think you can run a BSD-licensed shell script on the GPL-licensed Bash? Of course you can. Do you have to GPL your images when you edit them with Gimp? Of course not.

And this is what the FSF thinks, too.

(Oh and Jikes RVM isn't an 'interpreter', that term is used to differentiate VMs which don't have JIT from those who do. And Jikes RVM certainly does have JIT.)

Talk about exaggeration...

[oldosadmin]

"A small but vocal minority.."

Apparently nobody has cared to complain to the marketing people. Not that I want them to, lol.

Java is free, people. Java is probably already on most desktop computers. Sun gave us OOo, and still do 75% of the programming. Unless you're willing to reprogram the Base, HyperSQL, and the other components that require java in C++, then don't complain.

You're getting an office suite, which, while it admittedly isn't perfect, it's definately the best *value* out there.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[SoulOfMyShoe]

"Java is probably already on most desktop computers." Most computers may have some sort of Java libs, but you have to have the Java Runtime Environment or the SDK for OOo. Most computers do not in fact have this. Microsoft packages its own Java runtimes which, as far as I know are incompatible with OOo, and many linux distros don't package it due to licensing issues. I do agree that OOo is a great office suite and the price is great, but it would be a lot more portable and easier to distribute if it did not rely on Java so much.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[SoulOfMyShoe]

Damn, forgot to select Plain Old Text. Just visualize the

tag there, please.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[gardyloo]

You're getting an office suite, which, while it admittedly isn't perfect, it's definately the best *value* out there.

*cough*
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/28/192323 1&tid=185&tid=201&tid=133

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[oldosadmin]

Microsoft no longer has a JRE -- they were forced to stop it, because of the DOJ.

And most desktop computers, windows at least, have sun JRE, because 90% of gaming sites require it.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Homology]

Java is free, people. Java is probably already on most desktop computers. Sun gave us OOo, and still do 75% of the programming. Unless you're willing to reprogram the Base, HyperSQL, and the other components that require java in C++, then don't complain.

Java is not free, and this becomes painfully clear the moment one wants to build JDK/JRE on a non support platform like *BSD. As part of the build process you have to manually go to Sun site to agree to a license (after registering) before you can download needed sources.

Making a free product by introducing non-free base functionality is not the way to go.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no java for linux outside of x86.

THAT is a major problem with requiring java.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[oldosadmin]

There is no java for linux outside of x86. THAT is a major problem with requiring java.

Not to be a troll, but, well, nobody (not meaning OOo devs, meaning *anybody*) cares much about non-x86 linux. I know OOo doesn't have an official build for PPC linux, and I doubt there ever will be.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

" There is no java for linux outside of x86.

THAT is a major problem with requiring java."

Isn't it time you upgraded from your dead processor?

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[sfjoe]

You're forgetting that they are complaining because this is a religious argument, not a technical one. From the article:

"While some OpenOffice.org members expressed concern about Java being used at all, most accepted the argument that these features did not affect core functionality, and were of interest to only a small minority of users."

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[deanj]

And it's a free download, so what's the problem?

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Nixoloco]

nobody (not meaning OOo devs, meaning *anybody*) cares much about non-x86 linux.

Linus seems to care.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

dunno, Power5 seems quite a nice thing to have these days. Not that I can afford one, mind you, what with the prices IBM charges for their servers on the 'low' end ...

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Actually MS was not forced to drop Java at all.

It was more like they did not want to follow Sun license - so they stopped producing it.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Surt]

They can revoke your usage rights at their pleasure.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

What, you did a survey? And now you bless us with your proffesional opinion? Well you're wrong. All the people using Linux on PPCs care, including Linus Torvalds.

And I've never had a problem getting an official OOo for PPC. From my distribution or the OO site it'self. Why don't you go to their site and see what they have officially before you make false statements.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[linguae]

It's not free software. Java may be a free download, but the lengths that a BSD user must take to install it, from agreeing to the very restrictive license to compiling the giant, is just too great. Read this post and this post if you want to know my further feelings about Java and BSD.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[SEE]

Qt was free but not Open Source, too. That was a sufficient problem that the GNOME project was launched in response.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[fupeg]

You better check your facts

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes, the "if you won't do it better then don't complain" post. The staple of the slashdot diet.

It's particularly effective with large projects, because it'll take so long for anybody to actually *do* it you'll have shut them up for 17 years and by then they'll have forgotten about you. For example:

- If you don't like what the president is doing, then get yourself elected and fix it.

- If you aren't going to start a new Space Administration, don't bitch at them for screwing up a simple metric conversion.

- If you don't like the acting in that pr0n movie, then score yourself some hoes and film your own.

And of course, if you don't like this anonymous posting, screw you, it's free, it's better *value* than those sites you have to visit bugmenot.com to look up somebody else's password for. You're not allowed to criticize me unless you make a better pr0n movie starring me, or something like that.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm.. the new machines (last 12 months or so at least) I've seen all have had Sun JRE installed.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

Java is not free

Well, yes it is... it is free in the sense of I don't have to pay for it. Is it free software? No.

It's a lot easier to get your point across if you stop overloading terms. It's free - no, it's not free. That's a hell of a confusing message when both parties understand different meaning for the word 'free'.

So you wanted to argue that Sun's Java is not free software. Correct. However, there are free software implementations of Java runtime -- making your statement "Java is not free" even more confusing and incorrect.

Sun's implementation of Java Runtime is not Free Software. There exists Free Software version(s?) of Java Runtimes.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

Most Windows distributions from Dell, HP, etc. bundle Sun's JRE.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[lexluther]

The comment above, in my mind, is the clearest statement of the issues. As a community it is important that we push the ideals of OSS, however to the extent that we dont produce software that competes with the proprietary alternatives then our user base will diminish, which is the true threat to FOSS, not if OO.o decides to use Java.

At my office we use OO.o and I have used it as a selling point of Open Source in general - Now, if I pull that out from all of the users who are happy, and productive and say "not open source anymore ... try abi-word." they are not going to go for it. To them it effectively evinces one of the strongest arguments against OSS: variable support and instability through versioning and releases.

Finally, Java is a language - it is not like they are bundling the jet database engine. The implementations of the gnu java compiler will only be spurred on by writing *parts* of OO.o in java, and then we have removed the dependency on Sun.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[Anonymous Coward]

> There is no java for linux outside of x86. THAT
> is a major problem with requiring java.

Explain this to me than:
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/interpr eters/k affe-pthreads

and this:
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/g ij

and this:
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/interpr eters/s ablevm

look at the bottom of each of these pagess,
10-11 archs, bitch.

> Not to be a troll, but, well, nobody (not
> meaning OOo devs, meaning *anybody*) cares
> much about non-x86 linux. I know OOo doesn't
> have an official build for PPC linux, and I
> doubt there ever will be.

Who give a shit about official builds when there are
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/editors/o penof fice.org-bin

look at the bottom, 4 archs, bitch.

Fuckers at the oo.org teams should of read:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.htm l

If they'd followed RMS's advice, and deleted Sun' POS java implementation off thier drives and used a free one, there would of been no controversy as oo.org would of been immediatly useable in the free world.

Re:Talk about exaggeration...

[gaj]

That must come as a very major surprise to IBM.

They ship a JRE for their JS20 (PPC based) systems. I don't believe they have released Java 5 for that platform yet, and don't care enough to check right now, but I just downloaded the 1.4.2 packages the other day for use in a version of our product that must support JS20.

GCJ- Linux app packaging

[acomj]

I read this earlier. If they're going to use java, they should at least make sure it works with GJC out of the box. The one Java alsmost all distros ship with.. So redhat et all. don't have to jump through hoops to get it installed.

I sometimes wish Linux had a application packaging system like MacOSX where you have the option of brining tons of libraries with you hidden under a file system pretending to be an app icon. It just works (most of the time). I'm tired of ldd.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[Anonymous Coward]

I sometimes wish Linux had a application packaging system like MacOSX where you have the option of brining tons of libraries with you hidden under a file system pretending to be an app icon. It just works (most of the time). I'm tired of ldd.

Linux already has basically everything you need to build packages that way. The key thing is that Linux already has a way to specify where to find libraries relative to the binary that is trying to load them. Most people who build software for Linux don't know this and stupidly build hard-coded paths into executables and make you change your /etc/ld.so.conf to include every directory on the planet, but in reality this is a total waste of time since $ORIGIN is available and makes this issue totally go away.

Basically, $ORIGIN works like this: when you build the binary and link against the libraries it need, you can put something like -z origin -rpath '$ORIGIN/../lib' on the ld command line. (Note that the dollar sign is quoted and is intended to go into the executable file unchanged.) This means if the binary in /usr/local/foo/bin/foo and it wishes to find libfoo.so, one of the places that the runtime linker (ld-linux.so) will look when it tries to load libraries is /usr/local/foo/bin/../lib, which equates to /usr/local/foo/lib. Presto, it finds libfoo.so and everyone is happy, and nobody had to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or modify /etc/ld.so.conf.

This means you can, if you want, distributed software that all goes into a directory, and that the directory can be put into any location you wish without any configuration changes needed to run it.

As a matter of fact, even if your goal isn't to distributed a package with all its dependencies bundled in, it still should be the default to use $ORIGIN. If you are building binaries to distribute and your install process require the user to use ldconfig or modify LD_LIBRARY_PATH, you should consider the build broken.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[Troy]

I'm not sure you understand the original comment. On the Mac, everything is packaged in a single directory w/a metadata file so that the Finder views it as an application. Double clicking the icon runs the enclosed executible, which in turn has all of the libraries it needs right there.

To install the Mac version of the Gimp, I download it, mount the disk image and drag the app icon to my applications folder. Run it, and I'm good to go (assuming X is running). If I need to, I can still enter the directory and mess with those files....but usually I don't have to.

Of course, there is a convenience vs redundancy tradeoff here. Disk space is plentiful, but a commonly used/prepackaged library having a massive security flaw could cause problems, but nothing 15 minutes of terminal work and some shell scripting couldn't solve (terminal still sees is as a normal directory).

-T

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[the-build-chicken]

they should at least make sure it works with GJC out of the box

Actually, no...if GJC wants to call itself a java compiler, it should make sure it properly implements the spec.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[Anonymous Coward]

I sometimes wish Linux had a application packaging system like MacOSX where you have the option of brining tons of libraries with you hidden under a file system pretending to be an app icon. It just works (most of the time). I'm tired of ldd.

ROX has this.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[Anonymous Coward]

Disk space is plentiful, but a commonly used/prepackaged library having a massive security flaw could cause problems, but nothing 15 minutes of terminal work and some shell scripting couldn't solve (terminal still sees is as a normal directory).

Most of the common libraries are part of Mac OS X anyway -- developers aren't (or shouldn't be) repackaging them in every app bundle. The problem you're describing is much less likely than this makes it sound.

GIMP is a somewhat special case, as it happens to need a lot of libraries that aren't part of the OS.

(I couldn't quite tell if you knew this or not, but I thought I'd comment for the sake of clarity.)

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[fiddlesticks]

> I sometimes wish Linux had a application packaging
> system like MacOSX

where a GUI wrapper around cd / && ls -la *.mp3 cost 20 bucks?

me too.

> (where's the) option of brining tons of
> libraries with you
> hidden under a file system pretending to be an >
> app icon.

OK, that's easy. wait, what did you want again? ldd?

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[Mornelithe]

This may be true on OS X, but it isn't the case on Linux. There are lots of packages installed on my system that contain nothing but libraries that are used by other packages. Many open source projects are nothing but libraries that several other applications build on. Statically linking against many of them could cause headaches later.

For example, a month or two ago I seem to remember several exploits being discovered in xpdf. Instead of just reinstalling xpdf, I had to also reinstall kpdf (which is what I actually use), and any other pdf viewers I had installed, because xpdf cannot be dynamically linked into the other viewers.

Open source software typically makes a lot of use of many small libraries across many applications. I suppose the viability of an OS X approach depends on how you define the "core" libraries, but how exactly do you do that on Linux? Is GTK a core library? What if I'm running a KDE based system?

In other words, I have no doubt that the OS X packaging system works well on OS X, but I'm skeptical that it would be equally viable on Linux. I'm not sure that your average "Apple does this, so let's copycat it with Linux," advocate (I'm not saying you are one) has thought things through in that regard.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[ImpTech]

I think the grandparent's point is that building blocks are already there, and all you'd really need is Gnome, KDE, or whoever to rework their file manager so that it sees apps that way. Define a nice standard way to package the things and get the app developers to buy into it, and you're done.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[Anonymous Coward]

On the Mac, everything is packaged in a single directory

Reminds of DOS...

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[molo]

This is interesting, but it obviously relies on the behavior of the GNU dynamic loader.. so it is not cross-platform. For those of use that use linux in addition to *BSD, Solaris, AIX and HPUX, this is not a real option.

-molo

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[IamTheRealMike]

It does not. It's a part of the ELF specification and if your dynamic linker does not support it, it does not support ELF.

Re:GCJ- Linux app packaging

[molo]

That is interesting. I didn't know that ELF had such a feature. So that makes it supportable for Linux, Solaris, and some BSD versions. More cross-platform, but not for all. I wish AIX and HPUX would modernize. :(

-molo

So what...

[kungfuSiR]

I think that this is being blown out of proportion. The integration of java into the latest version of open office, although a little annoying, is not something that is going to keep me from using it on a day to day basis. Especially considering that all of my computers have java installed anyway.

Re:So what...

[mailtomomo]

"I think that this is being blown out of proportion. The unavaibility of the driver's source code for that Xerox printer, although a little annoying, is not something that is going to keep me from using it on a day to day basis. Especially considering that all of my computers have the driver installed anyway." It's not because it doesn't annoy you now, that it won't later.

What's Wrong?

[dteichman2]

There were some early security flaws, that are now fixed. OK. It is bloatware. Fine, it's slow. Alright, it's a PITA to work with on other projects. Seriously, what's the problem with Java?

Huge files and long load time should turn you off. Java does, in fact, allow for faster development. It also allows for even greater cross-compatability.

So tell me, what's wrong with Java?

Re:What's Wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not free/open source. Well, part of it is, but folks over at classpath/libgcj seem to be having problems with swing and awt still.

Re:What's Wrong?

[CDarklock]

Java wants me to write my code in a "properly" object oriented fashion. Unfortunately, I don't like "proper" OO. I think a lot of problems simply don't work well as objects, and you just end up building a complicated ad-hoc infrastructure with the sole purpose of making your problem look like it's composed of objects.

The flaw in this idea is that the resulting solution does not really represent the problem, so extending it requires you to futz around with that infrastructure that makes it look like objects.

Re:What's Wrong?

[Urzumph]

"It also allows for even greater cross-compatability."

Read TFA. Java doesn't support some of the platforms offically supported by OO.o ports, such as Linux/PPC and FreeBSD. These people are now stuck untill the gcj people have a working implimentation.

Re:What's Wrong?

[jericho4.0]

It's not open source. I don't think that every project has to be OS, but this stops it being used in many dists.

It's not officially available for many archs. PPC-Linux, for example.

Re:What's Wrong?

[dteichman2]

http://www.java.com/en/download/manual.jsp The only ones not supported are BSD and PPC.

I don't see what the big deal is...

[Anonymous Coward]

If they rely on coffee to stay awake to the wee hours hammering out code, hell, I say let 'em drink all they want! Whatever gets the code out, man! Matter of fact, I'm going to have me a big cup o' java right... ...uh, nevermind.

Speed up releases?

[kschawel]

I think the article makes some interesting points, such as:

Some might argue against Schönheit's characterization of C++ as complex or Java as being not slow. However, technical arguments are in many ways beside the point.

What I got out of it is that the Java environment makes it far easier to add features to the current OO. From the article:

Java allows more rapid development of components for OpenOffice.org, without struggling with the complexity of OpenOffice.org's C++ build environment. People complain about releases not being quick enough and when Java is used to make the build environment less complicated, people bitch about it not being open source. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Re:Speed up releases?

[Anonymous Coward]

People complain about releases not being quick enough and when Java is used to make the build environment less complicated, people bitch about it not being open source. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Yes, you can, it's just that the OpenOffice guys haven't figured it out yet.

Have you seen the OOO build process? Have you read the OOO source code? They're the most complex, convoluted, cryptic crap I've ever seen. The code is half German, half English, and full of undefined acronyms. I speak both languages and I don't know what the fuck most of the UHCRAprefixes on HRPEvariable JMWKnames mean. Or when you've got 30 folders, each with a 2-letter name, and no README or anything else to tell you what the secret codes mean.

You don't need Java to make a less-complex build process; plenty of C++ projects are very straightforward to build. Adding Java may have made it easier to add new features, but it didn't help those of us who want to improve existing features. In fact, it made the build just that much more difficult.

I still maintain that the reason OpenOffice is moving forward so slowly is because it's so damn complex, and the number one priority of everybody involved with OpenOffice should be to make it simple enough that more hackers can help out.

If you want the real "can't have your cake and eat it too" problem, it's this: developers complain that there isn't enough manpower, but instead of lowering the barrier-to-entry they're *raising* it by adding dependencies that they know many people (like Fedora and Debian) will have to spend effort just to work around.

Re:Speed up releases?

[Ogerman]

I still maintain that the reason OpenOffice is moving forward so slowly is because it's so damn complex, and the number one priority of everybody involved with OpenOffice should be to make it simple enough that more hackers can help out.

I've seen the code and it's hideous (though slowly improving). It would probably be easier to bring the KOffice suite up to the feature level of OpenOffice.org than to completely re-write OO.org. But OO.org has momentum and corporate backing and KOffice sadly has virtually none. Incidentally, remember how long it took to turn Netscape Navigator into Mozilla Firefox? :-)

Re:Speed up releases?

[master_p]

People complain about releases not being quick enough and when Java is used to make the build environment less complicated, people bitch about it not being open source. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Are you saying that 'open source software sucks'? because the complain you describe is about the quality of open source software, and especially the build environment of C++ based applications. People complain because they wany the easiness of the Java build environment with the openness of C++. In other words, they want the best(?) for free. It does not seem that weird to me.

Re:Speed up releases?

[kschawel]

I did not say it was weird, or even wrong to want the best. I am saying that with this piece of software in particular the C++ is a mess. I personally use many open source programs: OOo, gaim, firefox, thunderbird, filezilla, tinycad, and yet I still use Windows (yeah, yeah...). I don't even know what you are suggesting here. Do you suggest that someone comes up with a new, more open language that is as easy as Java?

Re:Speed up releases?

[master_p]

Yes, exactly that is what I suggest! (I have been suggesting it for years, by the way). Open source software is good, but its level of quality will be substantially increased if the philosophy changes from "I do it because I need it" to "I do it because the community needs it"...answering to the needs of many will make better products possible, because satisfying the majority always assumes much more complicated criteria to satisfy.

FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[The Bungi]

For all the daunting capabilities of the bazaar model and the "explosive" availablity of developer resource that are supposed to be out there, I find it interesting that someone hasn't developed a "trully free" alternative language/platform that rivals Java and .NET. All they can do is copy the big boys (classpath, Mono, the GNU .NET clone and so on) rather badly, and then bitch when someone decides that maybe, just maybe, this is an example of commercial software being far and above where FOSS will probably ever be.

And let's not get started on IDEs...

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[Anonymous Coward]

They have.

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[jbolden]

I find it interesting that someone hasn't developed a "trully free" alternative language/platform that rivals Java and .NET.

There is, and the by the accounts of most people who have used it its better than either one parrot. For example it the code itself takes advantage of the large number of registers on modern CPUs as well as L1 and L2 cacheing issues to make sure code runs much faster than .Net or JVM code. It supports types of record structure reads that aren't available on PCs (only on VMS or MVS) as well as I/O operations that are more Cish for PC, Mac...

The early test languages are Perl 6 and an alternate Python. Also they have: Ruby, Objective-C, TCL and Scheme. Eventually they hope to have the mono languages in particualr Java, C#....

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[Chandon Seldon]

ocaml? python? wxWindows? emacs? Gnome? The Unix/C thing?

I assure you, although the models for some of the FOSS stuff may be a little different from the IDE + Huge Vendor-developed Standard Library model of Sun's Java and Micrsoft's Visual Studio .NET stuff, it's no less powerful or useful.

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[The Bungi]

That's disingenious and one of the common problems with people trying to debunk arguments about why technology X is better than Y. Where is parrot today? Where has it been for the past five years? If it's so hot why hasn't it taken off? Why isn't van Rossum backporting Python to it? Why isn't Larry Wall using it for Perl 6? Why don't I hear about it every week?

Java and .NET on the other hand are here today and already have lots of traction. Arguing that Parrot is somehow 'better' than Java because it is theoretically better architected is pointless.

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[jbolden]

Boy you stepped into it on this one.

Where is parrot today? Where has it been for the past five years?

I gave you the link on the last post. Its on the net like most OSS projects. Today you can (and people do) write Yacc type code in it and it makes for a good virtual assembler.

Why isn't Larry Wall using it for Perl 6?

Parrot is about as official for Perl 6 as it gets. Alison Randel (the project manager for Perl 6) is the author of the reference for Parrot (Perl 6 and Parrot Essentials). The first link on the Perl 6 website is to Parrot development site. The Perl 6 mailing list cover Parrot in every issue.

Larry's official statement of purpose addresses this multiple places, "Perl 6 is the next version of the Perl programming language. The project attempts to address the interpreter, the language, and the culture. The internals of the version 5 interpreter are so tangled that they hinder maintenance, thwart some new feature efforts, and scare off potential internals hackers. The language as of version 5 has some misfeatures that are a hassle to ongoing maintenance of the interpreter and of programs written in Perl. And finally, the entire Perl community is invited to participate in the design and implementation of Perl 6."

I don't know how much more official it can get.

Why isn't van Rossum backporting Python to it?

He is officially supporting it at this point and the python comnmunity is considering a permanent move to the platform. Right now everyone knows the first goal is to get Perl working completely so they are letting the Perl community be the test implementation.

Why don't I hear about it every week?

I have no clue. Probably because you don't follow news on dynamic language development.

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[The Bungi]

Boy you stepped into it on this one.

Yawn. Wake me up when it actually ships, eh?

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[jbolden]

You know people who say nonsense then pretend they've won are rather childish. Try, "I'm sorry you are right. I should have heard of Parrot, it is being used." Also

Parrot is shipping today fuckhead.

Re:FOSS [sic] versions of Java

[The Bungi]

Parrot is shipping today fuckhead.

Sorry. I should have phrased that as:

Wake me up when it's actually stable and mature enough (like Perl, Python, Java, PHP, .NET and so on) that I can base a real live product on it.

Otherwise, and getting back to topic, we wouldn't be having this conversation if the OO.org people had decided to use it instead of Java. It's so hot after all.

Another reason to hate Java

[CorrosiveGod]

I'm not a big fan of Java. I feel like cross-platform programs can be written in a better language and can intergrate into the user's native GUI. The only company that can pull of using Java in Sun. Hell, they've put Java everywhere in Solaris.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

Free, Open Source .NET implementation

Free, Open Source Java - oh, wait, there isn't any. No, really, there isn't. Read 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5.

Fallout?!?

[Otter]

This is an issue that is not going away.

Whether or not the complaints are sensible, I've got to think that if this "fallout" involved more than a tiny handful of disgruntled people I would have heard about it before this.

Answer is contained in TFA

[Flower]

and would have been found in as much time as it took you to post.

Will this make any real difference?

[Snay.Boot]

I cant see this making that much of a difference. Is there going to be a price tag on OOo? Will it actually affect any end-users. I doubt it. The only people this will affect are serious afficondos of the GPL. They are just cutting off their nose to spite their face. OOo is a great suite. I havent tried this new java dependant version, but I cant see any actual practical implications. Oh noes, java is owned by sun!11!!!one!!1! So?

Re:Will this make any real difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft routinely rapes the world of billions of dollars due in part to their vendor lock-in. We are trying to learn from that.

It gets worse!

[Kenja]

I hear that you can only run the software on non-open hardware platforms! It should require a GPLed CRT and CPU to run!

Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[Ars-Fartsica]

Its very fast, featureful, native GNOME integration, and provides excellent functionality. Likewise Gnumeric is an excellent spreadhseet complement which is also fast and native to GNOME.

What would be nice is a ppt reader to go along with them...maybe Evince could be made to read ppt?

As for Java, I am only interested in the subset being promoted by RedHat - the free gcj/classpath variant. Call it FreeJava or whatever, but to me anything else is unacceptable. Come on folks, we came this far insisting on free software, don't give up now over one lousy VM and language spec.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[bcrowell]

AbiWord isn't too bad for typing a letter, but the version I'm using (a fairly recent one) does have some screen rendering bugs. Since it's demonstrated some significant bugginess after a small amount of use (I just use it now and then to write letters), I'd never trust it for a big, important project. KWord is even worse -- it crashes constantly. It's kind of amazing that the FOSS community doesn't seem to have ever come up with a good, solid word processor.

Gnumeric is a piece of junk. It crashed during the first five minutes after I started trying it out.

So OK, let's assume AbiWord and Gnumeric get their bugs ironed out. The thing is, you and I might be perfectly happy with a good word processor and a good spreadsheet, but many people want bloatware that can open absolutely any MS office document, e.g., a .doc file that contains embedded spreadsheets and video clips. OOo was supposed to be a free piece of software that would do that.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[GreyWolf3000]

Gnumeric is a piece of junk. It crashed during the first five minutes after I started trying it out.

Agree about AbiWord, disagree about Gnumeric. Gnumeric is stable does everything I need. I've heard about professors using it to teach spreadsheet classes (instead of Excel) because of it's pretty impressive featureset.

I don't know what distribution and version you're running, but I've built Gnumeric from source many times, and used it on several distributions, and it has always been really stable for me.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[rangek]

Gnumeric is a piece of junk. It crashed during the first five minutes after I started trying it out.

What version? I use 1.2.1 everyday and it works fine for me.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[bach37]

Gnumeric is a piece of junk. It crashed during the first five minutes after I started trying it out.

Gnumeric opens and reads many advanced sheets that OO.o can't handle, especially ones with charts or other advanced componets.
Try it yourself.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[civilizedINTENSITY]

Gnumeric (especially considering R extensions) is by far the best spreadsheet currently out there. Nothing even comes close to R for MathStat. Its more stable, it works, and when AbiWord catches up the pair will be my prefered Office Suite.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[Anonymous Coward]

abiword is useless. It renders horrible and when I save something in it and take it to word or openoffice it often looks different. The features are limited and I have had it scramble and kill .doc files from other wordprocessors. I keep downloading it every so often to see if it is improving, but I always run up against a bug within an hour. I wouldn't trust it with anything more than a letter.

ANW

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[mrchaotica]

It's kind of amazing that the FOSS community doesn't seem to have ever come up with a good, solid word processor.

I disagree -- it's not surprising at all, because until recently it seems to me that the (UNIX-centric, remember) FOSS community abhorred the very concept of "word processors." Why would you bother making a dumbed-down, WYSIWYG, bloated graphical application that encourages using non-semantic markup and wasting time with pointless fonts and graphics when a text editor, markup language (Troff, TeX, DocBook, etc.), and postprocessor is easier (remember, you're already a hacker) and better? After all, it can give you cross-platform professional-quality PostScript output, and the source files are even semantic! What could be better than that?

Personally, I wish the dominant "word processor" was LyX, but that's just me...

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[bcrowell]

Personally, I wish the dominant "word processor" was LyX, but that's just me...
I like the concept of LyX, but the implementation has some serious drawbacks, IMO. I couldn't get it to produce good PDF output, and the widgets are bizarre and don't behave the way I expect.

[...] until recently it seems to me that the (UNIX-centric, remember) FOSS community abhorred the very concept of "word processors." Why would you bother making a dumbed-down, WYSIWYG,...
Scribus is a possible counterexample, although it's really meant as a graphic design and page layout program rather than as a word processor.

when a text editor, markup language (Troff, TeX, DocBook, etc.), and postprocessor is easier [...] and better?
Well, TeX does have some big advantages:

it's free, and not tied to unfree software like Java;

its implementation is of very high quality;

it does a better job of mathematical typesetting than any free or nonfree software in existence;

it has a big, healthy, friendly, helpful user community.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[mrchaotica]

I agree with you about LyX; it's certainly not perfect, and it's buggy on Mac OS as well (last time I tried it, at least). It's still more correct than the likes of Word or OpenOffice, though.

As for Scribus, that's even worse than traditional word processors! The point I was trying to make is that it's fundamentally wrong for the writer to be concerned with presentational details like this, and the program should merely let him get down to the business of writing. All the user should have to worry about is what the parts of his document are -- what they look like is the business of the program. Or at the very least, the presentational details should be handled later as a separate step, akin to applying a stylesheet to an HTML document. I want the editor to encourage the writer to express a quotation as "this is a quotation", not as "this text is italicized with 1/2" indentation." Get it?

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[jbolden]

The proper combination would be Scribus designs the style sheets for use by LyX/Tex/Latex.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[mrchaotica]

Yes, exactly!

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[Anonymous Coward]

Abiword is quite purely useless unless all you're doing is typing letters to grandma that never leave your own computer save printing. Seriously, the project needs to just shut down and the developers need to move to KWord, which actually has a fighting chance of becoming a useful piece of software and competing with OO.org.

Gnumeric? Well, I can't say it doesn't work well, but it will likely never be part of a larger, integrated suite and it doesn't support the OASIS (OO.org) file formats.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[Anonymous Coward]

As the writer, I don't want to have to learn a second language, especially a pedantic one with a huge vocabulary, just to express things about my document.

I use LaTeX quite frequently as a grad student, but I always find myself stumbling over ridiculous "how do I do this" questions.

Word processors let me directly manipulate the formatting without having to know _how_ to specify in text what I want to do to the text or typesetting.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[msevior]

Please let us know about AbiWord screen rendering bugs. We're constantly improving things and our latest version 2.2.5 has tons of stuff fixed as will our 2.2.6 due Real Soon Now.

That said we are a true open-source project. We rely on our users to provides us with feedback and bug reports. We rely on contributors to write code. We accept good patches without you having to sign your code over to SUN. You can compile it form scratch in 10 minutes.

Our next version 2.4.0 due about the time of OO.0-2.0 will have many significant features not available in OO.0 (like an English- grammar checker) plus have a plugin system that allows the embedding of arbitary content in docs.

We have a math-plugin already, we're working on embedding charts for others well, the that people want this stuff, the sooner it will get done. The API is really simple.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[Anonymous Coward]

right on man, i really love AbiWord and will never switch to OO . thanx for your great work.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[Dewin Cymraeg]

My girlfriend (who isn't into computers) started using abiword to write an essay. It messed up her footers and wasted her time.

I copied and pasted the whole thing to OpenOffice and all worked fine.

The moral is: abiword is still not good enough for general use. If it can't handle a 2000 word essay, it's no good.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[bcrowell]

The point I was trying to make is that it's fundamentally wrong for the writer to be concerned with presentational details like this...
It really depends on the type of work you're doing. When I was doing physics research, I used LaTeX (which was what the journals required for electronic submissions), and it was exactly like what you're talking about: I just concerned myself with writing, and the formatting automagically came out the way the journal wanted it.

On the other hand, there are certain types of visual design where you really don't want to work that way. To take an extreme example, nobody is going to do one of those artsy Absolut Vodka ads using LaTeX :-)

In between those two extremes, I've done some free physics textbooks, first using layout-oriented software (PageMaker) and then using software that tried more aggressivle to enfore separation of content from presentation (LaTeX). For that particular application, PageMaker was a little too visual for me, and LaTeX was not quite visual enough.

In either case, it's not realistic to say that the software should "merely let him get down to the business of writing." In the LaTeX approach, somebody has to write the class file. If it's HTML or DocBook, somebody has to write the stylesheet. Those are typically extremely difficult, time-consuming tasks that require a lot of programming expertise. For instance, it took me about a month of full-time work over the summer to create my initial class file for the textbooks I did in LaTeX, and I've put in many, many hours of work since then on tweaking it. For the average person, having no programming expertise, it would have been impossible.

And software like Scribus or PageMaker does give you mechanisms for separating content and presentation. For instance, you have styles that you can define and redefine globally.

Re:Try AbiWord and Gnumeric

[mrchaotica]

On the other hand, there are certain types of visual design where you really don't want to work that way.

True, but that's not writing. I'm talking about the typical things people use Word for, here. Stuff like emails (which is really dumb -- those should be plaintext) and reports, not vodka ads!

In either case, it's not realistic to say that the software should "merely let him get down to the business of writing." In the LaTeX approach, somebody has to write the class file. If it's HTML or DocBook, somebody has to write the stylesheet. Those are typically extremely difficult, time-consuming tasks that require a lot of programming expertise.

That's where the program comes in. The point of the program is to make all that stuff easy, or do it for you (which is why text editors are merely my ideal, not reality). The best examples of the type of program I'm thinking about are LyX and Pages, I suppose, but LyX doesn't have the stylesheet-defining features and Pages is too much like a word processor (it seems to encourage global styles and stuff at first, but I found it really hard to use, and the markup it creates is horrible!). But the "template" idea Pages uses is the right one.

In summary, the ideal "word procssor" type program would have two "modes" -- a writing mode, where it would show straight markup (or maybe "prettified" markup, like coloring the text instead of showing <em> or \textit{ tags), and a style mode, where you can redefine what <em> means, but can't edit the text. This mode would show you a real-time preview of your formatted document. It would also have a comprehensive template library, so that you can start off with good defaults. Finally, its native format would be TeX or Docbook, not some made-up XML (or worse, binary) format like Pages, OO.o, or Word.

Leveraging

[Moderation abuser]

Interesting way to try to make sure Java gets installed on lots of PCs. We're in the middle of a marketing war it seems. What is it about Java ? MS desperately don't want it installed to the point of creating a clone and Sun are desperate to get it installed.

Anyway. If you have objections to OO, what are the alternatives?

KDE: Koffice
Gnome: Gnome Office
Windows: ??????????

Re:Leveraging

[gardyloo]

KDE: Koffice
Gnome: Gnome Office
Windows: ??????????

I think you misspelled "profit!"

Re:Leveraging

[Byzantine]

Well, if you're asking the question seriously, I think it's important to point out that an installable AbiWord binary is available for Windows; a word processor is, after all, the most important part of an "office suite," for most users. A testing build of Gnumeric is also available. I personally don't give a damn if OO.o relies on Java since most of my writing these days is in TeX, but if it's something that concerns you, there are options.

Re:Leveraging

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows:??????????

Uh, I don't know, maybe:

Corel Office
602PC SUITE
EasyOffice
SOT Office
Budgie

and on and on and on...

Does no one know how to use Google or what?

Re:Leveraging

[Moderation abuser]

Are any of those free? Any of them Free? Any of them Open Source?

The answer is mixed

[vkapadia]

From TFA,

"By contrast, Red Hat and Fedora prefer to build OpenOffice.org with the GNU Compiler for Java (GCJ), which is not only a compiler, but also a free JRE. This was Red Hat's strategy with earlier versions of OpenOffice.org, and Red Hat engineers are attempting to continue it. Caolan Macnamara, a programmer at Red Hat, has reported limited success compiling earlier developer builds of version 2.0. However, GCJ is not yet a complete replacement for official releases of Java, and adding patches makes the strategy painstaking and laborious at best."

- vimal

Right ! Plus ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Since a long time there is nothing that prevent you to bring you own OSS JVM !!! This also include looking at the RI (the Sun BM) code and passing the TCK (the stuff that let you put the "compatible" logo and use the brant) for free as long as you are an organisation.

So all the /. FUD about Java is IMHO nonsense, if somebody do not like Sun version, you can go and implement it your own way without any limit but your creativity !!!

This is fact, so plz stop the Java bashing.

Personally, I think Java has helped and is still helping Linux to enter the enterprise market by bringing to competitive solution. And no other solution is doing this better than Java !

So, event if this is not the saint graal, this is one of the best weapon we have to fight the empire ;-)

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[j3110]

Has the open source community been reduced to a large group of lazy, whining bastards? If you don't like the way it is written, fix it your damn self instead of wasting your efforts bitching about it. If as much code was written about the topic as complaints, the issue would have been resolved already.

Anyone with any further complaints, climb the stairs out of your basement and tell your mother.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[phek]

I haven't heard anything so retarded since the last time I heard steve balmer give a speech. How excactly is ".net much more free than java"? Last time I checked, microsoft was not giving away any open sourced versions of any .net compilers without at least purchasing the operating system, so it's not really giving it away, plus its not open sourced. On the other hand, you can freely download jre and jdk from the sun website and though I'm not sure whether that is open sourced or not, there is always the open sourced blackdown java implementation.

So the closest thing I see to irony here is that in order to defend microsoft, you have to be totally ignorant to the everything, much like all of microsofts products.

Ah, fork it...

[nacturation]

OpenOffice.org is released as an open-source license, right? So if they have such a big beef with the direction it's going, then someone can create a fork of the project and put the work into ridding it of this supposedly undesireable Java dependency. Or pick up the codebase, write all the currently java-dependent code in C++ and submit it as a patch.

To me, this sounds like a bunch of politicians and lobby activists trying to make the most noise so that they achieve their respective ideological agendas. As an end-user of OO.o, I really don't care either way as long as the functionality is there. And, afaik, the current Java license allows for redistribution of the Java Runtime Environment so they can't retroactively pull that license and prevent people from doing something they've already granted.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[stratjakt]

As much as the OSS community talks about "oh just fork it", or how there are so many choices, and that's what makes the code strong, well, they're wrong.

There isn't much in the OSS world to compete with OO.o. Just like there's only one Samba, only one Apache, etc..

There's very little "competition" in the land of FOSS, and the various maintainers and developers have every right to bitch about stuff like this if they want.

For years there was XFree86, and that was it for FOSS X window systems. Finally, they screwed with it enough to fork off X.Org, but still, that's just one main project we all wind up looking to.

OO.o was to be a part of the little turnkey linux distro we're putting together for our clients (govt setting), but now we have to rethink it, rewrite it, or find an alternative, to get around potential Java licensing issues.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[sydb]

There isn't much in the OSS world to compete with OO.o. Just like there's only one Samba, only one Apache, etc.. ... There's very little "competition" in the land of FOSS,

Yeah there's only one Samba and there's only one SMB implementation (that I know of) but there are several web servers, Apache does have competition.

As for competition for OpenOffice.org, koffice and gnome office come to mind, they are not as feature-complete as OO.o but they're faster and prettier!

So shut yer pus.

What I hope is that this gives a boost to the two aforemention office suites, and also to the Free java projects.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[SEE]

There was a lot of lobbying of TrollTech over its Qt license and of the KDE team over its Qt dependence, too - and then GNOME was launched. One would hope the OO.o team learned from history, rather than blindly go forward to see it repeat.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[nacturation]

There's very little "competition" in the land of FOSS, and the various maintainers and developers have every right to bitch about stuff like this if they want.

Sure, anybody has the right to bitch about anything they want. The argument against closed source is that if you don't like the way something is done, too bad... there's nothing you can do but bitch to the developers. Ergo, if it's open source there's something you *can* do other than just bitch about it.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[Tsunayoshi]

There's very little "competition" in the land of FOSS, and the various maintainers and developers have every right to bitch about stuff like this if they want.

And the various developers have every right to develop their software as they see fit...if you don't like the new release, get a copy of the previous version's codebase and implement the new features yourself. That's the beauty of open source right? If the developer screws you over, you can fix it yourself or implement whatever features you want as long as you follow the license terms.

If you want the "freedom" of open-source software, quit your bitching when it doesn't go your way. I am sick of all of these open-source users who do nothing but complain when it doesn't go their way.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[Jameth]

The problem is with the redistribution terms in Sun's Java license. It can't be distributed with any competing product, so you have to cut GCJ and any other FOSS Java environment. And, depending on how you look at it, Mono is a competitor as well. Python might even qualify.

Basically, there is no doubt that Mono and GCJ compete with Sun Java, so you really can't include it in a distro too easily.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[nacturation]

So don't distribute OO.o along with the OS. Make it separate. Kinda like how most here think Microsoft should keep their apps separate from Windows.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[Ernesto Alvarez]

As an end-user of OO.o, I really don't care either way as long as the functionality is there.

As a network administrator, I have something against java. A JRE means more software to install and mantain, and it also tends to be a memory hog. Most things related to java (tomcat comes to my mind) do not play ball with certain security features (such as priviledge dropping).

To me as an admin, JRE is just more headaches.

As a power user, JRE is software whose only function is to run software. Considering I have a hardware solution for that (my own PC), it is basically software without "function" (as discussed earlier in the thread.

Now, having a JRE for a programmer makes sense. It allows you to program once and use everywhere. Except it is not really like that, because every S.O. has little details that are important (COM1 vs. /dev/ttyS0). Even with abstraction layers (more overhead) some details are eventually noted (before you flame me, those problems are subtler than /dev/ttySx issues, I couldn't describe them correctly, I'm not a programmer, but I've been seing things in java "made for linux" or "made for windows" at work).

The problem, I think is that most people in the java community have adopted a silly idea that java is meant to be run on a JVM, when the reality is that java (the language) is just one of a lot of languages. Because of that, almost nobody cares to implement a java compiler (I know about gcj, that's why I said "almost"), and almost everybody is depending on a JVM (Sun's or someone else's).

If the java people settled on "portability when it's needed" instead of "portability at all costs", we would probably have at least a reference java compiler and OO.o could be then downloaded in binary form, thus making the fact that some parts are written in java a non-issue.

Re:Ah, fork it...

[wolf31o2]

Two words:
Ximian OpenOffice

Ximian already had a modifed version of OpenOffice 1.x to make it have a nice gtk+ interface instead. Why not do the same thing with OpenOffice 2.0?

Stupid!

[copponex]

Alright, assholes... who's going to rewrite the only major competitor to Microsoft Office because of some possible philosophical nonsense?

It's still open source, right? So fork it and rewrite it as an ncurses emac extension. I'm sure Joe User is really going to fall in love with that one. "Hey guys! We can type up our spreadsheets and text documents and save them in an MS Office compatible format, or learn emacs, lpr, and not work with anyone else because we're not sure if Java is going to be compatible with our philosophical ideals in the future."

You'd think someone around here had heard about the law of diminshing returns. I guess that's refuted with one word: Gentoo.

Is that a fact?

[Anonymous Coward]

Faster development than what?
Java has some benefits. We use it for a lot of projects (in preference to C, C++, VB) where I work. But never where development speed is a priority.
Okay, maybe in applications with complex thread interactions, but you don't write those at all if you can easily avoid it.
In fact I can't think of a popular language that is slower to develop in. Our experience with Java has been pretty negative in that respect.

Two words..

[lrwx]

Fork it

Re:Two words..

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, that's what the OSS world needs, ANOTHER FSCKING FORK!

50 versions of EVERYTHING!

That'll make it all better!

Practical versus idealistic

[ceswiedler]

Here's a case where the FOSS (Free/Open Source Software) acronym doesn't work, because Free Software and Open Source Software are not the same thing.

Practical, pragmatic decisions like using Java are not a problem for Open Source. That's what Open Source is: developing software in an open manner because of a belief that software developed this way is technologically better than closed-source software. It does not insist that every tool (or language) used in the development process be Free Software or Open Source. From a practical standpoint, it is sufficient that the tool or language meets the needs of the developers and is available on the required platforms, and does not appear to be a patent or other legal liability.

Free software on the other hand, insists for idealogical reasons that any software or tool which is not completely free is deterimental to the community. It's important to have respect for this opinion, but it is not a catastrophe for the OO.org team to choose the Open Source route.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[Cyno]

Practical, pragmatic decisions like using Java are not a problem for Open Source.

Maybe so but the end result is no longer Open because it depends on closed libraries/REs. And OSS must not believe that software developed as open source is technologically superior if they're willing to give up access and control of the source code so easily.

Free Software, on the other hand, has a very precise goal which is to make all software in the system open and free. And there are very real legal and financial reasons they want to accomplish this, aside from the obvious technical advantages of having access to code. The FSF does not think any non-free software is detrimental to the community, but rather insists on calling it what it is, not Free. OpenOffice might not be proprietary and closed source yet, but it is not Free if it requires Sun's JRE to be fully functional. Some components are Free and licensed appropriately for approval by the FSF, but not all. So the community will most likely delete the infringing components and replace them with more open source code and move on. In a sense saying, "Thanks, but no thanks" to Sun.

but it is not a catastrophe for the OO.org team to choose the Open Source route.

No this choice is not a catastrophe. But a competing fork built on pure F/OSS software would be. They would lose more community support and have to work harder to compete. That's a one-two punch from the Free Software community, if it happens. Its like trying to make a profit while your market is shrinking and competition is driving down prices (think AOL).

And, as always, we wish them luck. They're going to need it.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[Brandybuck]

Yet oddly enough, OpenOffice is released under a license approved by Richard Stallman as being "Free Software."

Really. It is. Go check.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[Anonymous Coward]

From a practical standpoint, it is sufficient that the tool or language meets the needs of the developers and is available on the required platforms, and does not appear to be a patent or other legal liability.

True. And to me, Java fails these.

Due to its licensing, Java's availablity isn't terribly consistent on Linux distributions, like Fedora and Debian. It's also not making the build system any simpler: it's an additional (and ever-increasing in importance) dependency to install and get working, and if anything it seems to be encouraging people to not bother improving the dismal build system and readability of the existing code, which I consider serious problems with Openoffice.

I'm a user, occasional developer, and open-source (not free software) geek. I have proprietary software installed on my Linux box that I use every day. Using Java in Openoffice is not a "catastrophe", true, but it has serious *practical* issues.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[civilizedINTENSITY]

But long term, the "practical, pragmatic decision" is obviously to "like (stop) using Java". Sun has Free Software in it's crosshairs. Why wait for the bullet to hit, to try to duck?

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[EnglishTim]

But long term, the "practical, pragmatic decision" is obviously to "like (stop) using Java". Sun has Free Software in it's crosshairs. Why wait for the bullet to hit, to try to duck?

You're making the same mistake. the Open Source movement is not the same as the Free Software movement...

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[grumbel]

The problem is that a idealistic problems quickly turn into practical ones. When distros no longer can package things due to licensing throuble, when users have to manually track and download dependencies, when bugs can no longer be fixed cause they are happening in the closed-part of a programm then you know that using a idealistic solution might have avoided you a lot of throuble over a practical one down the road.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[civilizedINTENSITY]

Certainly agreed that Free Software is a subset of Open Source. However, Sun doesn't make either cut. If you go to OSI and check their list of Open Source licenses, you'll see that the Sun Community Source Licensing doesn't make the cut.

That's what Open Source is: developing software in an open manner because of a belief that software developed this way is technologically better than closed-source software.

Well, bubba, Open Source is about more than just seeing the code, its about:

1. Free Redistribution

2. Source Code

3. Derived Works

4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

7. Distribution of License

8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product

9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software

10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral

This is much much more than "From a practical standpoint, it is sufficient that the tool or language meets the needs of the developers and is available on the required platforms, and does not appear to be a patent or other legal liability."

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[civilizedINTENSITY]

Actually the mistake was assuming that Sun's Java, and hence OpenOffice so far as it requires Sun's Java, is Open Source. It is neither Free nor Open, to exactly that extent. That is the point.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[EnglishTim]

By your logic, Firefox on Windows isn't open source, because you can't get the source for the Windows SDK. All the source code for OpenOffice is Open Source, but not all the components it relies on are.

Re:Practical versus idealistic

[civilizedINTENSITY]

"By your logic, Firefox on Windows isn't open source"

Sorry. Nope. Bad e.g., because:

1. I can get the code for FireFox
2. The code is OSI Certified Open Source Software
3. In fact it is even MPL/GPL/LGPL triple licensed
4. While I can get the code for Java...
5. Sun Java sure *ain't* Open, nor Free

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[phek]

Hmm, sorry I think I misinterpreted your statement, but am too lazy to research the context of what you were saying...

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[mmkkbb]

You can freely download .NET compilers from MSDN, and there is the open-source Mono. I don't see the difference.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[4of12]

Pardon my hazy understanding of the subtle issues surrounding Java and .NET, but isn't the major problem not so much about the JVM or the CLR, but all the libraries that applications written in either C# (Windows forms) or Java (com.sun.whatever) tend to use?

Well, that , and that either "standard" is subject to change without notice due either to paranoid-possesiveness "No we won't define an ISO" (Sun) or to gorilla-sized "We are the standard despite the stinkin' standards bodies" (MS).

Two words..

[lrwx]

Fork it.

How dare they!

[grahamlee]

It seems a decision based largely on practical considerations

Silly open source developers - putting practicality and pragmatism above more important things like dyed-in-the-wool political viewpoints. Next you'll be telling me they're all off using these newbie Linux systems, rather than diligently waiting for HURD to stabilise like they're supposed to. Tch.

Re:How dare they!

[Anonymous Coward]

Silly moderators, who think it's "funny" and "insightful" to disparage freedom as mere politics. Tell me, how many astroturfers are here on slashdot, telling where we should want to go today?

Re:How dare they!

[cheesybagel]

Nice joke. But Linux is Free Software.

Re:How dare they!

[grahamlee]

But because Linus uses what I'm sure we all like to refer to as The Satanic Evilness to maintain the revision control, you'll agree that it can never truly be Free. Again, with the perverse developers and their pragmatism. BitKeeper may be better than Free alternatives but that's no reason to go around using it.

Re:How dare they!

[Anonymous Coward]

Next you'll be telling me they're all off using these newbie Linux systems, rather than diligently waiting for HURD to stabilise like they're supposed to.

No, I'm using OpenBSD, the only true Free/Libre Software distro out there. So fuck off, troll.

10 years waiting on a solution

[Anonymous Coward]

. C has shortcomings
. C++ has more shortcommings than C
. Java replaced the C/C++ issues with other issues
. C# / Mono replaces Java issues with newer issues

Sun, IBM, HP, MS should know by now that they can create a modern ANSI/ISO standard based language including standard libraries way beyond stl/iostream that makes solution building easier?

Yes, it would have to be a patent free language with patent free libraries.

Why ??

[pair-a-noyd]

Why use java anyway?
Java is complete shit.
I despise Java and javascript with a passion.
If you want to drop a machine to it's knees, run some java..

Get rid of it..

Also, did OO take care of the printing problems?
They had made access to kprinter an absolute pain in the ass, I ended up going DOWN to OO 1.1 because of piss poor printing capabilities.
I have a myriad of network printers all of them serve different purposes and the more recent versions of OO (whatever shipped with Suse 9.2) wouldn't let me use kprinter without major pains.
I said to hell with it and loaded 1.1

Overall OO is a decent product but it needs some things seen to and they need to dump that damn java. I wish everyone would dump java..

Re:Why ??

[mboos]

Java and Javascript are very different things. Java is Sun's baby, an object-oriented language that runs compiled bytecodes on a VM, while Netscape introduced 'Javascript' as a way of providing client-side scripting. Javascript is not compiled and shares only the 'Java' part of the name and some syntax similarities with the real Java.

Re:Why ??

[pair-a-noyd]

true, but that doesn't excuse the fact that both items in question SUCK...

Both items should be banned from planet earth.

Ubuntu & OpenOffice.org

[Anonymous Coward]

According to TFA, OpenOffice.org requires Java for some accessibility features to work. If that is in fact the case, I can't help but wonder why Ubuntu includes it in the default installation as doing so seems to contradict their philosophy regarding using only free software that is accessible to everyone.

Cabin Fever or Full Moon?

[Anonymous Coward]

For those of us who still believe His message of compassion and peace is important, I ask you:

How's the anger management going?

What's the issue again, I missed it...

[pb]

Now I hate Java just as much as the next guy, (well probably moreso, but anyhow...) but I've compiled and used OpenOffice 1.x many times, and let me tell you--Java is not the problem. OpenOffice is *already* enormous and bloated and slow. It also already requires Java just to build the darn thing, or at least it did when I built it. Whether it depends more or less on Java, I don't care as long as it gets at least two of smaller, less bloated, faster...

So, ok, now that we're agreed that we aren't necessarily talking about a technical issue here. Again, what's the problem. That "Java isn't open source"? Well why don't you ask IBM to open up a JVM for you. Or, better yet, write your own! Java is widely used, readily available, and actually pretty darn open as these things go.

So what's the problem. Ideology? Zealotry? Arcane license disputes? Well, it's nothing that'll get in the way of me and my word processor. Just wake me up if it gets larger, more bloated, slower... :)

Re:What's the issue again, I missed it...

[civilizedINTENSITY]

Also missing: the facts :-)
Its not the JVM. We have that already.

Kaffe is probably the oldest of all open source JVM projects. It is cleanroom implementation of JVM, which means no Sun proprietary JVM source code contamination. Until recently, it did not have JIT... One open source JVM implementation from IBM is Jikes Research Virtual Machine (Jikes RVM).

Rather, its the libraries that are still needed. Here is a link to the 14 JVM's using GNU Classpath

GNU Classpath, Essential Libraries for Java", is a GNU project to create free core class libraries for use with virtual machines and compilers for the java programming language.

Re:What's the issue again, I missed it...

[pb]

Some would argue that the two go together, but yeah, Java (and even a Sun-compatible JVM) encompasses a lot, more than just a program that executes bytecode. Good job bringing up Jikes (and Jikes RVM) though, that's a good example of how IBM is helping the open source Java folks (never mind that they also have a fully functional closed source JVM, with complete, compatible and proprietary libraries).

Re:What's the issue again, I missed it...

[psykocrime]

Well why don't you ask IBM to open up a JVM for you

They already did.

Re:What's the issue again, I missed it...

[psykocrime]

Aarrgh, they moved it. Here is the correct link.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[stratjakt]

The .NET SDK (compilers and everything else you need) is free from MSFT.

For everything else, there's Mono and dotGNU, and plently of fledgeling C# compilers.

Blackdown isn't open source:

We each are dedicated to the professional development of the Java platform for Linux based on the community source concept. We see participation in the Blackdown project as a cutting-edge opportunity for intellectual cooperation between the open source community and the commercial software industry. We each are committed to abiding by the agreements we've made with Sun and other technology vendors. We aim to use their good will to further the cause of independence for software developers around the world. A bridge between the open source community and the commercial software development world is to everyone's advantage, and we would like to exemplify that relationship. We believe that the vendors with whom we partner are committed to the same ideals.

It's a free-for-non-commercial-use linux port of Java. It's stillborn in the corporate world.

They have.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called python.

crybabies

[pavera]

People are just being crybabies. All of the functionality that relies on java is new, and in my opinion non-core. Yes, they need to clean up the menu system so that choices that require java are greyed out if its not available, but 2.0 is worth it just for the ui enhancements and better filters.

Base is a lame Access knockoff that crashes all the time. It won't be stable until OOo 3. And why do we care if we can't use wizards, aren't we always lampooning MS for their endless "wizard to create xyz"?

What now we're mad cause someone used the best language available (to them) to produce some new features? I though FOSS was about choice, but I guess thats only if you pick the language that FOSS condones... You can pick anything as long as its lisp and emacs! Anyway, I'm not a java fanboy, I much prefer python or perl, but java does have its place and there are alot of coders who know it, so now we're saying you can't develop OSS in java.. that's a great stance to take.

Grow up, download the JRE, or don't whatever, I've been running the 2.0 beta since it was released without the JRE and I haven't missed anything, for what I need an office suite for it works great. To be true I did install the JRE to check out Base, but it sucks, and I ditched it after about 10 minutes.

Java isn't that bad

[Hannah E. Davis]

As others have said, this has been blown way out of proportion.

I'm not going to claim that it's my favourite language, nor am I going to pretend that I prefer it to something that's fully free/open source, but it serves its purpose. I'm a computer science student stuck somewhere between first and second year (I switched faculties, so I'm behind), so I've been learning both C and Java concurrently. Because the learning language is Java, I have more experience in that, but I find C more fun. However, I am not going to hop on the OMG! JAVA IS TEH SUCK!!11! bandwagon because it does have some merits. Some were mentioned by the article, but in my personal experience, the main thing that I like about it is its portability. If I'm looking to download a program that doesn't have to run fast, and I want to use it on both my Linux laptop and Windows desktop, I'll look for something written in Java so I don't have to worry about either Mandrake or Windows flatly refusing to run it. The extra (and basically one-time) step of downloading the latest version of Java onto my computer before I can run a Java app really doesn't compare to desperately Googling around for something that will definitely not screw up due to OS issues when I try to install it.

Ok, now... back to the article before I get too far off-topic. If Open Office works with Java bits in it, that's great. I don't use it much anyway, since emacs, vim, or even vi will normally serve my purpose.

Re:Java isn't that bad

[Anonymous Coward]

The extra (and basically one-time) step of downloading the latest version of Java onto my computer before I can run a Java app really doesn't compare to desperately Googling around for something that will definitely not screw up due to OS issues when I try to install it.

Verbing weirds language, or more to the point, it makes ignorance visible. So, STOP VERBING GOOGLE!

Re:Java isn't that bad

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to learn something like Lisp before you lose the ability to think in terms of broader abstractions.

Re:Java isn't that bad

[linguae]

It's not that we hate Java. In fact, I like the language; I play with it using Kaffe

It's the licensing of the official JDK that we hate.

Re:Java isn't that bad

[Blaskowicz]

ROFL!
Do you realize that you're verbing VERB?

What about the not good enough argument?

[LWATCDR]

"Although it's true that functionality is important, at what cost?"
Simple. Every and all costs. I program that is not "functional" is useless.
" Corporate adoption may be slowed, as OO.o isn't a completely "free, fully functional" product anymore."
I guess you are right here. I mean so many companies worry about using Java. I mean it is not like java is "free as in beer". Guess what? A huge number of corporations already use Java for internal development. Those that are not tied to VB or .net are Java shops. This non issue will not slow down deployment one bit.
This is yet another religion war that really means next to nothing. It is right up there with the GNU/Linux fight and BSD vs GPL.

Re:What about the not good enough argument?

[maxwell demon]

"Although it's true that functionality is important, at what cost?"
Simple. Every and all costs.

Well, I have a nice hello world program I could sell you for just one million dollars. It is fully functional (prints "hello world" just fine).

Since you claimed to to take every functionality at all cost, I'm looking forward to getting your money.

Re:What about the not good enough argument?

[LWATCDR]

If I needed a hello world program bad enough it would be worth it. Or I would pay someone to develop it for me. Or I would write it myself. Hence I am would be willing to pay every and all costs for the functional program. But if I need a Hello World program and you offered me a GPL version but it says "Good bye you all" it would be worth nothing to me.

Re:What about the not good enough argument?

[mrroach]

>> "Although it's true that functionality is important, at what cost?"

>Simple. Every and all costs. I program that is not "functional" is useless.

OK, I keep seeing a lot of these posts. They are not helpful and are indicative of flawed (or absent) thinking.

Lets make The Cost more dramatic to make it more obvious that you are not being truthful:

GPP: Openoffice developers require users of their software to kill fluffy bunnies upon using fantastic new features... Functionality is important, at what cost?

LWATCDR (and others, in unison): Simple. Every and all costs.

(Feel free to replace bunny killing with any activity that you might find objectionable) Your statement is, at best, hyperbole. The only thing a rational person can take from it is that there are some costs that would be too high for you, but this one is not. Hmmm, your little truism starts to sound more like an opinion now doesn't it? Now you might have to start explaining why you think your position is automatically non-religious...

Some people may find the cost of the Java license small in comparison to the benefit of features, others might find it large.

-Mark

My take on it:

[erroneus]

Okay after reading TFA, I think there is good reason for concern. I can also see the possibility of additional compiling projects. It's my understanding that since these are Java programs and there are programs that compile Java into binary. So I'm thinking we'll see custom OO.o distros featuring "now without Java dependancies!"

And why not? That's the primary strength of the Open Source movement -- don't like where a project is going? Fork or customize in some way. Ultimately the popularity of the standard package versus the customizations will steer the project in the most popular direction.... in theory. (There are some hard-headed asses out there who, as in the case of XFree86) won't bend to popular demand and a completel fork would result. But the bottom line? The public should have its way if it wants it bad enough.

Sun has a stake in the acceptance and popularity of Java. The motivation behind this should be fairly obvious. It's my understanding that in the future, Java itself will be open sourced and will ultimately take away a lot of the argument that many FOSS people have against this situation. (The other part, asside from the license stuff, is the poor performance... I hate Java performance sometimes...sometimes it really seems to drag.)

Eclipse

[bstadil]

And let's not get started on IDEs..

You are joking Right?

Esclipse

Re:Eclipse

[The Bungi]

You are joking Right?

No. Eclipse is nice but it doesn't hold a candle to Visual Studio. It might, but right now it doesn't.

Even VS5 (circa 1996) is superior to most anything FOSS has ever produced.

Re:Eclipse

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Visual Studio sucks - it does not run on Linux!

Re:Eclipse

[cheesybagel]

The Visual Studio editor cannot even do rectangular cut & paste, like Vim. Last time I checked it didn't autoindent code or integrate easily with CVS either. While Vim does.

Re:Eclipse

[EvanED]

Last time I checked it didn't autoindent code or integrate easily with CVS either

You haven't checked in several years then. VS6 -- which is two released versions behind, and three versions if you count the beta of VS2005 -- autoindents. (I'm almost positive anyway... VS7, the second to latest non-beta version, does at the very least.)

I don't know about CVS, but I do know that at least VS7 integrates with Visual SourceSafe. Probably earlier versions do as well.

Re:Eclipse

[cheesybagel]

I have used VS6. The indenting is not as sofisticated. IIRC it only keeps the indenting as you type. Vim will indent any text block, regardless of how mangled it is, with choice of style.

Besides a nicer UI, I have not found anything that VS and Vim does not, while I have found a lot of things Vim does which VS does not. This is Vim, which is simple and lean. If you go for Emacs, it also has a web browser, e-mail and news reader, Eliza and the kitchen sink.

Once you learn the Vim keybindings, it is *much* more productive to use for programming than Visual Studio. Your hands never have to leave the keyboard and there are loads of mnemonics. Just make sure you get a special reinforced Escape key.

Re:Eclipse

[EvanED]

Don't get me wrong; I'm not trying to say that VS is better. I use emacs a lot of the time for development, sometimes even while in Windows. And I get what you mean by the indenting feature you're talking about; I misinterpreted.

Re:Eclipse

[DoctorPepper]

I second your opinion on Vim! I've used it for quite a while, and find it makes an excellent programmer's editor. Another thing I like about Vim is the incredible syntax highlighting support it has! I do a lot of legacy DOS application support at work, and a large percentage of the programs I edit were written in Clipper. Vim has out-of-the-box (so to speak) support for Clipper!

Re:Eclipse

[Anonymous Coward]

I think there is an option in VS which lets you choose your editor. You should be able to use vim within the VS DE.

Re:Eclipse

[The Bungi]

You're wrong. And even if you were right, I'd have a hard time rationalizing the switch from a full-fledged IDE to a general editor because it couldn't do rectangular selection, which is a feature that I use maybe three times a year anyway. Integration with CVS? I use Subversion at home and SourceGear Vault at work, thanks.

I like and use vim/gvim every day on both Windows and Linux and I love it, but I wouldn't give up the productivity. Writing C code on emacs or vim makes me feel very 1337, but most of the time I need to make a living.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because Sun java isn't free doesn't mean there aren't alternatives out there.

Kaffe,
GCJ,
Jikes RVM,
Cacao,
and
others. .NET has Mono and DotGNU. That's two. So how is it "much more free"?

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[oliverthered]

Or emacs using lisp

Aww... first grammer nazi hit me...

[oldosadmin]

My first grammer nazi reply! I must finally be making it big on /. -- I think I'm going to frame this post.

:-p

Re:Aww... first grammer nazi hit me...

[gardyloo]

My first grammer nazi reply!

*cough* :-)

Re:Aww... first grammer nazi hit me...

[Chordonblue]

I assume you used OOo to post (no grammar checker)... :)

Re:Aww... first grammer nazi hit me...

[Anonymous Coward]

er, that would be a SPELLING nazi...

what's the worse that could happen? think X

[ayembee]

i wonder if this is what happens when projects believe themselves too critical to ditch. similar bad sentiment caused a massive swing away from XFree86, i see no reason why it couldn't happen to OpenOffice. this is an issue they need to get on top of *rapidly* before any serious moves begin in this direction... :-\

Misleading title

[Quinn]

Hell, I thought someone had ported Fallout to Java. :(

What's wrong with Kaffe ? JikesRVM ? Using Java?

[javaxman]

What's the real issue ? Is the real issue simply that Sun wants to retain the right to define what Java(TM) is ?

Given that it's perfectly legal to implement a system like Kaffe, given that it exists, that it can be done if you absolutely must, what is the actual issue with using Java in Open Source projects? Lord knows there are _tons_ of FOSS projects written in Java out there...

If the issue is just the Sun license and the "non-official" status of projects like Kaffe, to that I just have to say, guys, get over yourself. If you don't like the Open Office folks writing functionality that depends on Java, write it in C or whatever your self and contribute it. Seriously.

As far as end users? They don't care what something is written in. They want something that works. To that end, placing yet another installation requirement in the chain isn't great, but at the same time, the vast majority of user installations ( including on Linux ) simply aren't complete without a working JVM anyway, so... what's the big deal again?

practical is not the OSS way

[Anonymous Coward]

"It seems a decision based largely on practical considerations -- and with a disregard for the consequences for both the rest of the free and open source software (FOSS) communities and the future of OpenOffice.org itself."

so, 'practical' is a low priority for open source? bah... damn nurds!

It's time to fess up

[Anonymous Coward]

I see so many comments calling out moderators who make questionable decisions, and the moderators, without fail, NEVER RESPOND!!! Well I'm here to change that! For at least this one.

Yeah I'm an idiot, who couldn't read the Fucking Article. And I modded the grandparent insightful because of the aforementioned idiocy. I'd like to promise that this won't happen again, but who am I kidding?

On behalf of my fellow idiot moderators who committed this atrocity, I apologize for being retarded.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[phek]

thank you for trying to teach me

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[madscientist003]

I understand being burned by a specific application will make you averse to using that application in the future, but I wouldn't shy away from Java as a component of some larger application simply because it caused a problem for you personally once.

The free and open source software community is responsible for making sure bad implementations of important tools are fixed quickly and effectively, and I don't think it's the technical arguments against the use of Java that are the crux of this debate. It's the idea of slowly creating more and more features within OpenOffice that rely on a critical component that is itself not free.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[SunFan]

They should have used .NET, ironically, since it's much more free than Java is.

No freakin' way. .NET is 100% proprietary outside of the meaningless ECMA standards. Is this some sort of troll that completely tricked the moderators?

For what it's worth, Sun will be the largest contributor of OSS code in the world this Summer, if they aren't already.

Don't mod parent down.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a decent, honest question "who cares and why", and lead to an interesting discussion that deserves to stay near the top of the page. Even though the followups show the holes in his though process; many corporations have the same question. Indeed, this is how the whole Java mess got started in the first place - Sun trying to confuse the issue by getting corporations to ask what the parent poster asked.

MOD PARENT UP, because corporate types reading this deserve to see the answer.

No, but...

[benjcurry]

Are there any legit reasons that they didn't use an OSS alternative, like Python? It seems to satisfy all of the issues mentioned in the article...am I missing something?

Re:No, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

...am I missing something?

yes.you.are()
{brackets;}

Re:No, but...

[T-Ranger]

This is just based on reading the article, and some speculation on my part but: There is no "Python database". Yes, there are bindings for a crapload of DBs, but no reasonable ones implemented in Python There are likely more Java programmers then Python programmers, in general. There are definitly more Java programmers then Python programmers at Sun. A bunch of of Java developers actually produced some code. So it very much came down to "show me the code".

Re:No, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

- some things they're using Java for have no Python implementation; an SQL RDBMS, for example

- StarOffice was bought by Sun, and Sun knows Java really well; even if it's not a case of "let's push Java on everybody!", they probably know Java pretty well, and tend to go with what they know

- since Sun works on both projects, I would guess people working on OOo (at least inside of Sun) can get better tech support for Java than I ever could

Re:No, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because significant whitespace in a language is the stupidest idea since make 0.1?

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[kesuki]

ummmm two things wrong there... A. .NET IS Java (1.3) Numerous lawsuits were filed, some lost, some won, but ultimately, Microsoft is still producing .NET

Secondly the very site you link to has links to 15 FOSS JVMs Some of which attempt to ensure full Java 2.0 suport.. (read JRE 1.5)

So what's the issue here? FOSS has a harder time keeping up with Sun's Java development, but because mono was ripped off by a fleet of laywers, FOSS developers can more perfectly implement it?

Oh yeah the problem here is someone is actually using Sun's Java in an Open Source app, which means it isn't FOSS... FOSS is an ideal, and you can build entire distro's off of it, but it's not going to appeal to everyone. I have Sun Java Installed on Debian Oh nooo... IMO your efforts are wasted trying to make the _entire_ open source community embrace FOSS principals. It's a lost cause, because free as in beer will always be embraced by part of the community.

What the heck is the matter now?

[turgid]

Look, Sun makes Java, and it's closed soure.

Java is many things. It is a programming language. It is also a runtime environment in the form of a protable virtual machine. It also comes with a huge class library.

For some reason, that monkey Miguel went and decided to write his own version of M$'s Java clone, C#/.NET, for "Linux" (i.e. Unix-like OSes) to undermine everyone else's work.

Now, you can get branded Java from people other than Sun e.g. IBM. IBM is currently a great favourite of the slashdot peanut gallery.

In addition, gcc comes with a Java-language to native code compiler as well as byte code (to run on the evil, nasty closed-soure Sun (or IBM or whoever's) JVM).

If you don't like Sun, or IBM, or Blackdown or kaffe's JVM, including their JIT compilers which can optimise to exceed the efficiency of statically-compiled code, then you can always revert to gcc's Java language compiler.

However, I'm sure these facts will be conventiently ignored for the sake of a good, heated argument, and many rants.

Re:What the heck is the matter now?

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, Sun makes Java, and it's closed soure.

What's your source on this?

Re:What the heck is the matter now?

[Anonymous Coward]

gcc includes a JRE to.

Re:What the heck is the matter now?

[omb]

Sorry, you have completely missed the point.

The primary complaint is that SUN insist on heavy handed control of Java, and particularly the JVM, now this is not a problem for Redhat or SuSE who, who have re-distribution rights with SUN, but is inhibative for non-commercial distributions, SUN could solve this, for very little cost, by providing certified freely-re-distributable JVM's for all common architectures (ia32, ia64, 86-64, sparc, ppc, arm ...) tarball + sig; with re-distribution allowed with the SUN computed sig.

Most of this work needs to be done anyway, for good commercial reasons, to sell into the embedded markets.

Miguel, perceptively, realizes that M$ had done something right and if you don't realize it there is a convergence of (interpreted) virtualization technologies perl6 (parrot), JVM (groovy) and CLR (C#), and what this really means is that we will be seening much more of interpreted languages [C#, Java, Lisp, Perl, Python] since they permit a much more effective programming paridgm.

If the hype on these issue went away Java would be much more usable.

Re:What the heck is the matter now?

[turgid]

What's your source on this?

Sun's Java implementation is closed source.. Other peoples' implementations are either closed or open source depending. My point is that there's a choice.

Re:Why ?? -less than cluefull

[Anonymous Coward]

"I despise Java and javascript with a passion."

Since you don't realize the two are not even related i would say you are not qualified to comment. So, turn off daddies computer and go back to your after school special.

Gnome Vs. KDE all over again...

[Chordonblue]

...isn't it? Remember how KDE was slammed for their non-free license and what that led to?

No, Stallman won't be happy with OOo - not at all, but at least the vast majority of OSS users will get something out of it.

BTW, OOo 2.0 rocks - just thought I should share.

Free as in beer

[Anonymous Coward]

What a lot of people in the FOSS communities don't realize is that the majority of users just care about "free as in beer", which fits Java and OO.o.

If the FOSS developers don't like it, they can go ahead and fork. It would be interesting to see how far an OOo fork gets without Sun backing. Maybe now RedHat can finally put real resources behind a project and not just the odd developer or two behind firefox and X.

Java, OpenOffice, and FreeBSD, oh my

[linguae]

Read my post if you want to have a feel for how difficult it is to install Sun's JDK on FreeBSD. There are so many twists and turns here that when I reinstalled FreeBSD, I decided to install Kaffe instead to learn Java with (needed for future classes; language use not under my control).

This may be flamebait, but one of the main reasons why I haven't used OpenOffice on my computer is due to these Java dependencies. OpenOffice not only requires Java, but it specifically requires the Sun JDK. Some users may be asking me, "What's the problem?" The problem with that is that there is no binaries for the JDK for FreeBSD 5.x, and that I must agree to a very restrictive license in order to download the sources. Next, I can't compile the sources into a redistributable package (because Sun says so, meaning that for every FreeBSD machine that I have I must compile Java manually, nor give Java packages to others), and I can't even look at the sources without being tainted for life. Finally, the compilation takes an extremely long time to finish.

Don't get me wrong. I like what I've heard about OpenOffice. But as long as OpenOffice is encumbered with Java code that requires the Sun JDK, I'm not using it. How many of you know the BSD story when the BSD developers got tired of AT&T due to its licensing (for those of you who don't know, BSD was originally based on AT&T Unix) and started rewriting the "encumbered" portions of their operating system? It would be great if some developers would do the same with the Java portions in OpenOffice.

To elaborate further, I feel that Sun's handling of Java is a nuisance. Java may be a nice language, but as long as its only really complete implementation of it remains licensed the way that it is, I won't code any open source projects with the Java language, and Java is never going to be a primary open source development language. Why should the code that I write be tied to a non-free, restrictively licensed runtime environment that only runs on the platforms that Sun says that it should run on? Python, Ruby, and even Microsoft's own C# (in the form of Mono) isn't encumbered by such restrictive licensing. Sun's slogan for Java was "write once, run everywhere." Well, it depends on what Sun consists of "everywhere." Since the operating system that I choose to use is considered "nowhere" by Sun, well, I guess that Sun's JDK is going to be "nowhere" near my machines again, and for all of the projects that require this JDK, well, I'm sorry, but I'm not installing them, either.

Re:Java, OpenOffice, and FreeBSD, oh my

[Dystopian Rebel]

Fellow FreeBSD user here.

You can build OO without Java:

make -DWITHOUT_JAVA

Re:Java, OpenOffice, and FreeBSD, oh my

[Anonymous Coward]

FreeBSD is what, 0.001% of all desktops out there? Who gives a flying rip if it's hard to install it on. It comes standard on Mac OSX and Windows boxes from Dell and Gateway. That's probably 70+% of desktop boxes out there.

Get over it you big baby.

Re:Java, OpenOffice, and FreeBSD, oh my

[linguae]

FreeBSD is what, 0.001% of all desktops out there? Who gives a flying rip if it's hard to install it on.

FreeBSD may not be the most common OS on the desktop, but it is used extensively in the server room. As far as I understand, Java is used on some servers as well.

It comes standard on Mac OSX and Windows boxes from Dell and Gateway.

You're right about the Mac OS X part, but as far as I know, Java no longer comes with Windows. Windows users must install the JRE to run Java apps (and the JDK to develop Java apps, too), and even though they must also agree to the restrictive license, the installation is just a binary, so no biggie there.

Get over it you big baby.

Aww, you had to ruin a half-decent argument with that touch of flamebait there. And, for your information, I have gotten over it, because there is nothing for me to get over with anyway. I use AbiWord and Gnumeric for my word processing and spreadsheet needs, and I use Kaffe for my Java needs, all under a really nice operating system (FreeBSD).

Got a problem with that, Anonymous Coward?

Re:Java, OpenOffice, and FreeBSD, oh my

[mlk]

You're right about the Mac OS X part, but as far as I know, Java no longer comes with Windows.

Not Microsoft Windows, Dell Computers. Sun has made a number of deals to get Java installed by default.

Re:Java, OpenOffice, and FreeBSD, oh my

[Anonymous Coward]

You are kidding yourself if you really think FreeBSD is "used extensively in the server room". Only a couple of companies account for almost all of FreeBSD's use outside the hobby market. And even they are switching away from FreeBSD because FreeBSD is missing some important stuff other than Java, like Oracle for instance.

Life is about choices and trade-offs. Face up to the truth. You made your choice. Now accept the trade-offs.

PLEASE!

[greg_barton]

This will be marked as flamebait, but here goes:

Will you people please, please remove the stick up your ass when it comes to Java?

Please?

One of the article's complaints was that "FreeBSD and GNU/Linux for the PowerPC, have no official version of Java." Well, all of the time spent complaining about that has wasted years...YEARS people! The Blackdown folks made Java happen on x86 and amd64 Linux because they did something about it. They applied their minds to working instead of bitching.

Be a proper geek and do the same.

Re:PLEASE!

[HiThere]

Unfortunately, the Blackdown people were bound by license agreements with Sun...so their licenses ended up being no better than Sun's, no matter their intent.

gcj is the developing answer to that...but it *IS* still developing. (If you would read the article, you would see that this is how Red Hat is approaching the problem...or at least has been.)

One wouldn't like to presume that Sun is using features of Java that gcj doesn't yet support for that very reason, but I don't know of any proof to the contrary. And Sun has occasionally made public pronouncements that cause me to be unwilling to categorically decide that there's a differnt reason.

Re:PLEASE!

[cheesybagel]

Think strategically. It is the same problem the Wine people have. They are chasing a moving target. You will will never be 100% compatible with the latest Java from Sun by doing your own code.

Re:PLEASE!

[DaliborTopic]

There is actually a certain amount of ridiculously bad, standard-disregarding, undocumented Java code in OpenOffice.org that doesn't and won't ever build on Kaffe or gcj because it uses some undocumented sun-specific classes. Fortunately, Caolan has done a great job on kicking that cruft out of his build.

Sun is a bit more reserved on those things. For example, some of that hopelessly bad code is in the Applet Sandbox. OpenOffice.org includes its own Applet execution environment, because obviously you need to have the ability to embed applets in your documents. Ahem. :)

We had a brief conversation on kicking out that code, which seems to have been written for Java 1.0 or 1.1 and uses some really, really insane stuff, but Sun didn't feel like ripping out those unmaintainable (because they undocumented, prone to change classes) features. I guess someone at Sun uses them and desperately needs to have applets in their Writer files.

The major trouble with OpenOffice.org's code is that the code base is insanely hard to build. Last time I tried to do it, it took a few days of searching the docs, hanging out on IRC with handholding and all that, and I still ended up beig frustrated with the dumb, undocumented Sandbox code. Sigh.

That being said, Sun has been nice, and expressed a lot of interest in getting things to run on a free platfrom. Unfortunately, refactoring OpenOffice.org to use 'Sane Java' instead of 'Sun Java' could take a lot of time, and would need some dedicated volunteers to fix Sun's bugs first. And some of them are regarded as features by Sun, apparently :(

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

What about BlackDown?

To invoke the opensource mantra....

[otis wildflower]

... if you don't like it, write your own replacement that isn't in java.

One has to wonder when some enterprising group will just take the file format code and bung it into open competitors that don't rely on Java. I would prefer the KOffice suite, but LTIC OO.o had the superior MSOffice format functionality.

Try [binary drivers] and [firmware].

[Anonymous Coward]

"As for Java, I am only interested in the subset being promoted by RedHat - the free gcj/classpath variant. Call it FreeJava or whatever, but to me anything else is unacceptable. Come on folks, we came this far insisting on free software, don't give up now over one lousy VM and language spec."

The irony of the F/OSS community willingly accepting binary drivers/firmware while complaining about Java shouldn't be lost on anyone.

Re:Try [binary drivers] and [firmware].

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right! When did they start accepting binary drivers and firmware? Somebody quick, tell RMS!

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[darkmeridian]

Java integrated into the OS would be a terrible thing. I got a Java virus while running Firefox while visiting a website that trades illegal software. (Yes, I guess I do deserve it.)

Moving to Java is good!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a beginning of a very good trend, IMO. Linux desktop has to move beyond C/C++ development if it is to compete with Windows. .Net is a loss in that regard, since it will never be quite usable anywhere but on Windows.

So, people starting to use Java on Linux desktop is a great thing. Let's move there faster. Linux has to have an answer when the MS world starts writing majority of client apps in managed code.

Would a fork be painful?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm among the ones who would rather lose some features than keep being forced to live with something that's big, slow and unfree like Java.
Did anyone consider a fork possible/necessary to get rid of Java and, for example, use free languages as Python or Ruby to write OO.o tools?

Re:Would a fork be painful?

[Anonymous Coward]

When is a fork ever NOT painful?

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[Eric Savage]

The only time I got in an accident my vehicle had 4 wheels, so now I only drive a motorcycle.

On a more serious note: Do you honestly believe that a homegrown macro language would have been any more secure than choosing a language which they know they can get help from the project sponsor on? I would guess that Python was the second choice, and would have been trendier, but they would be more likely to get integration help from Sun than from the Python crew (for financial/marketing reasons, not because of a lack of benevolence on Python's part).

Fork it!

[Anonymous Coward]

OOo is open source. You have the power to fork it. Why do I hear so much whining and see no fork?

Re:Fork it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because most people on this site are whining crybabies who expect everything to be completely free despite not having a fucking clue how to code themselves.

Perfect is the enemy of Good Enough

[Anonymous Coward]

More Open Source software is written in Java than any other language.

Java is Free enough. If Java had been more free early on, then today, Microsoft would have the dominate proprietary Java implementation, instead of Sun, and it would be specific to Windows only.

Speed up releases?-Speedy delivery.

[Anonymous Coward]

"People complain about releases not being quick enough and when Java is used to make the build environment less complicated, people bitch about it not being open source. You can't have your cake and eat it too."

That's assuming that there are no F/OSS solutions that make the development process significently better. In the context of the majority that program, I agree. In the wider context of programming in general, I disagree. In other words there are solutions that the majority haven't adopted, that the minority are productive in.

My problem with OpenOffice

[mi]

Is their insistence to include everything (and the kitchen sink) into their tarballs. And that includes Berkeley DB, stlport, jpeg, png, expat, freetype, zlib, sablotron, etc.

It truly is insane... I'm grateful, Sun's license does not allow them to bundle in their own Java in too...

Parent is right! This is just F/OSS zealotry

[Canberra Bob]

The usual response to anyone who wants anything included in a F/OSS project is "why dont you do it yourself? The developers do it to scratch their itch not yours"

The developers made a design decision for THEIR project. But oh no, thats no good because it's not what the F/OSS community wanted. Lets get this straight - its their project but they shouldnt use the language of their choice because others dont like it?

They're the developers, they decide what they do with it. Who are you to tell them what they should develop their own product in? So it doesnt conform to YOUR philosophy, so what? Sorry but this certainly smacks of zealotry. If you dont like it then fork it and create your own version of OOo.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Maybe its news to you but .NET is nothing but free.

It may be gratis if you buy the operating system from MS - buts its not in any way free.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[linguae]

On the other hand, you can freely download jre and jdk from the sun website and though I'm not sure whether that is open sourced or not, there is always the open sourced blackdown java implementation.

The Java JRE and JDK may be free as in beer, but it isn't free as in speech. Far from it.

The Java JDK and Blackdown is open source, but it is encumbered. What I mean by encumbered is that it is distributed under a very wordy/legalese and restrictive license; read it for yourself to see what I mean. It's almost like an EULA. To make a long story short, it is open sourced, but it's proprietary, too.

Starting to look like

[iminplaya]

the movement is getting too big to keep it together. Why does every single man made orgaanization suffer this fate? Is it all about egos and public displays of power? Definitely impresses the chicks, eh? That's really what it boils down to here. Everything that we accuse the corps of doing, we are going to do ourselves, apparently. Once again, we are proving that we are all the same in every way...All of us. Watch Animal planet for a week. You will see the exact same behavior amongst the chimps. Oh well At least I can say thanks for giving me all this free stuff to play with.

Welcome to KDE-GNOME Redux

[SEE]

The Qt libraries were free, if not Free, and they made it easier to create an environment and apps that Just Worked. The result was a series of complaints, and when those failed, GNOME. TrollTech noticed that it was losing ground as distros favored Free Software over free software, and finally GPLed Qt.

If OO.o becomes harder and harder to run on GCJ, you're going to see the same thing. Maybe an OO.o fork, maybe a specific effort to create a different Free competitor. But dependence on a non-Free system component is going to create trouble; if OO.o wants to thrive in the long run, it's going to either need to be GCJ-compatible or have Sun open-source Java.

Re:Welcome to KDE-GNOME Redux

[NamShubCMX]

So is it good?

In your example, we got GPL Qt...

Ahahah

[T-Ranger]

After reading TFA, and then seeing this I asked myself: WTF is Caolan Macnamara, anyway? Select, middle button, enter:

Results 1 - 5 of about 10 for Caolan Macnamara. (0.36 seconds)

Did you mean: Caolan Mcnamara

Has OSDL started using /. editors?

Isn't OO.org slow enough without Java?

[BestNicksRTaken]

Maybe it's a Microsoft ploy to make MS Office run faster under Crossover, than OO.org does natively!

Re:Isn't OO.org slow enough without Java?

[PinkX]

there is no need for such a ploy, it already is.

however you can always tweak and play around with the memory use values that OOo has and get better results that what it has by default.

regards,

Re:What's wrong with Kaffe ? JikesRVM ? Using Java

[Anonymous Coward]

The free implementations will probably be several years behind SUN's implementation. by the time you have version X fully implemented SUN has already introduced versions X+1, X+2 and X+3. I need to constantly fetch stuff from cvs to be able to do even the most trivial homework exercises because Swing support is still partly very weak.

I am confused.

[mcc]

So the issue is that OO is dependent on Java, and the purely Free implementations of the relevant Java support is not ready to be a full standin for the vendor-supplied version.

It seems to me that the problem here is that the Free Java implementations are unready and need to be completed. It doesn't seem to me like the problem is that OO is using Java and needs to use something else.

Sun is hurting themselves and Java by not making it easier to include their JRE in a linux distro. But I find it very odd that people claiming to speak for the free software community seem to be taking the tack that OO should go with what is convenient for the Open Source community, rather than going with what is convenient for OO and letting the open source community write the code to make it convenient for them. This seems to be the opposite of the tack open source software advocates usually take. At least, when it is pointed out that open source software is criticized for inadequate interface quality or user friendliness, this is the claim made-- that if nonprogrammers don't like the interface, they should fix it themselves. Well, if programmers don't like OO's apparent dependence on sun-jre, perhaps they could fix GCJ themselves?

Re:I am confused.

[DaliborTopic]

It seems to me that the problem here is that the Free Java implementations are unready and need to be completed.

Hardly. I've looked at the code, and the problem was largely due to OOo using undocumented Sun-specific classes, which can't be implemented freely, because no specifications exist. That's not much different from Microsoft Word using some hidden MS APIs to do stuff and creating trouble for Wine.

It seems that they have cleaned up their act in the udk, though, which was the worst component in OOo.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:I am confused.

[mcc]

Interesting, I did not realize that.

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[Anonymous Coward]

The only virus I've ever had infect my Windows computer was Java based

And if you had gotten this virus through a floppy disk, would floppy disks make you nervous? I assume you got this virus over the Internet - are you planning on pulling your network connection?

I don't feel any better about Java being integrated in some way that I don't understand

Ignorance causes fear. Big deal. You can either accept that this is an irrational fear, solve the ignorance, or bow to the fear. The latter is what you are doing. The other options are far better.

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[owlstead]

Java has a very good security record. Anyway, this java stuff has not to do anything with remote execution, just with application code. The chance that there is a buffer overrun in Java is very small (it would mean a serious bug in the JVM). No software is perfect, but Java has a much better security record than most execution environments out there (compare it for instance with ActiveX).

The problem is that there is little to choose from if you want rapidly developed, secure code. C++ code gets complex very fast, and is difficult to check for memory leaks, buffer overruns etc. PERL and Python are less maintainable. IDE's for Java are getting very easy to use as well. MONO, well, this IS a Sun project...

Sun and Microsoft

[Spy der Mann]

megacompany 1, meet megacompany 2.

Remember the Microsoft vs. Borland Wars?
The Microsoft vs. IBM wars?

After all these years, the world's still the same.

Re:FOSSil

[Anonymous Coward]

"FOSS" is spelled out in gigantic, bright yellow letters on the football field of Henry Foss High in Tacoma, WA. You can see it from like 4 miles away. It's annoying.

Java and OOo portability...

[soullessbastard]

Disclaimer: I am an OpenOffice.org Mac OS X developer and a founder of the NeoOffice project

One of the biggest problems with Java in OOo is the way that it's being used. Probably the largest volunteer developer community outside of Sun is in the porting project which mostly aims to recompile OOo onto other Unix and Unix-like platforms. Part of the portability lure is that the older architecture of OOo made porting easy; OOo itself has its own internal complete abstraction layers for operating system functionality, windowing, widgets, and the kitchen sink. By simply porting those layers, OOo could run anywhere and even the most obscure Unix variant could have access to a MS Office compatible office suite.

Java breaks that. Why? Not all of the platforms on which previous versions of OOo could be built have any official Java implementation (e.g. Linux/PPC).

Now, Java is no longer optional. Java is actually becoming a requirement not only for running OOo. Some of the build tools are becoming implemented in Java. What's worse, many of these newer Java-dependent features and build tools actually require a specific version of the VM in order to be functional (e.g. reliances on libraries distributed with Java 1.4+).

This choice leave platforms without Java in the cold, but sadly it also leaves platforms with outdated Java VM versions in the cold. I only hope this doesn't further cause headache for some of the intrepid 64 bit porters out there since I don't know of any VM that can be safely embedded in 64 bit apps yet.

Porting developers have raised this issue as far back as 2002 and earlier. There's no excuse for the Sun-dominated engineering of OpenOffice.org to have been ignorant of them. Instead of lowering the bar for the build process, the dependencies have just been injected into core functionality! It's sad when the pleas of some of the most prominent non-Sun volunteers to the project get blissfully ignored by the powers that be.

I don't have a problem with using Java for open source software since, after all, NeoOffice/J is dependent on Java. As NeoOffice/J is focused solely on Mac OS X, however, portability isn't one of the NeoOffice/J goals. For OOo, however, portability used to be one of its strengths and is still one of the strongest development communities within the project that doesn't originate from Sun. It's sad to see decisions made that alienate one of the only vibrant non-Sun communities.

While OOo has built a great community of marketing, translation, support, and evangelization volunteers, there is no substantial core developer community outside of Sun. Alienating the precious little that exists doesn't help the situation either. Unless there is serious effort to build up a non-Sun developer community, the project can only be doomed for failure when Sun cuts their development team (or goes out of business).

ed

Re:Java and OOo portability...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, OOo was so portable before, that they dropped the OS/2 port because it was "too much work to maintain." WTF?

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[saskboy]

I've not shied away from installing OO though, I've used it since Star Office, and OO version 1.0. But only time will tell if having some form of Java integration in OO is going to be it's curse or blessing.

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[Jason Hood]

An actual virus or an unknown program that you ran on your system?

How exactly would Java be "integrated" into an OS? Do you mean a DE or a WM?

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an idiotic statement in and of itself. Java is a language; or, in some contexts, a platform. What this means is just that what really matters are applications; NOT Java -- Java does not expose any security faults just by its existence.

And for what it's worth, as a language it is reasonably "safe" WRT appliation development, in that many of problems C/C++ apps have (buffer overruns etc.) do not exist due to code running on managed environment (same holds true for C#, Python, Perl, VB, etc).

As to your Java virus... that sounds like a hoax to me -- Java applets do not have enough access to create viruses of any kind. So the only way for a virus to exist would be to write a full java app that you'd have to execute, just like any other app.

More progress being held back

[bonch]

And once morethe FOSS community illustrates how it kills itself. A free, viable, functioning alternative to Office, and people get upset because it doesn't fit their personal definition of "free" enough.

Get some priorities. Sheesh. Only in this community do these minor issues get blown up into huge flamewars over nothing. "It's not FREE enough!" Who the hell cares, it works and it's free to use!

Re:More progress being held back

[GreyWolf3000]

Get some priorities.

I see 'progress' holds higher priority to you than freedom, but for many of us the reverse is true. You seem to just want an operating system gratis without any concern over the value structure that has created this operating system in the first place.

I'm sorry you don't value software freedom (it's your choice). However, implying that F/OSS software has some manifest destiny to take over the world and that any decision must advance that goal is just silly. Why do we need an alternative to Office then? Because it's expensive? What about Windows? It comes with most computers and I hear these days it's pretty stable.

This is probably the greatest argument I've seen against making Windows ports of free software--people get hooked but learn nothing of the value of software freedom. Without those values, users often adopt a very selfish "gimme gimme" attitude.

And once morethe FOSS community illustrates how it kills itself.

Nonsense. Once more the free software community demonstrates that it is unwilling to stop working until a completely free desktop is available. Many distributions that don't care so much about software freedom are more than welcome to add whatever proprietary junk they're legally entitled to; for those who choose to prioritize software freedom, I hope they also get what they want.

Re:More progress being held back

[bonch]

Wrong. I do value freedoms. What I don't value is building up ideals into entire, untouchable belief systems. You know what those are called? Religions.

Re:More progress being held back

[Balp]

> Nonsense. Once more the free software community demonstrates that it is unwilling

Then start hacking, the gnu java compiler apparently need's some work. The only way is top stop complaining and start hacking. Personally I use Java as front-end for OpenOffice as the C++ stuff didn't work out. I see this as a much better alternative to buying MS Word, or Writer. Until something else comes up. (My time is spend writing a OpenSouce alternative to Suunto DiveManager. An area totally missing open-source code.)

/ Balp

Re:More progress being held back

[GreyWolf3000]

Then start hacking, the gnu java compiler apparently need's some work.

I would, but OOo is not a piece of software I really use. I respect your sentiment though; free software users should be willing to invest blood sweat and tears when these kinds of situations arise.

The only way is top stop complaining and start hacking.

There is a tendency to lump everyone into two categories on Slashdot (and elsewhere)--everyone must be either a Republican or a Democrat, pro Linux or pro BSD, Java programmer or C++ programmer, etc. I'm really not complaining that there are people out there who will be using OOo on top of non-free java--those people don't value software freedom as much as I do. There's nothing inherently wrong about that.

The issue is that many distributions, built on the spirit of free software, refuse to bundle any non-free software into their releases. They have every right to make that decision, and I hope that both those distros and users who are interested in OOo 2.0 start working on gcj.

What bothered me about the post was that it implied that the free software community, which has spent years building its software base and community on a set of ideals, needs to abandon those ideals just so we can take over Windows and Office.

Re:More progress being held back

[Balp]

> What bothered me about the post was that it implied that the free software community, which has spent years building
> its software base and community on a set of ideals, needs to abandon those ideals just so we can take over Windows and Office.

However when we looks back trou history, the situation now with the language Java is the same as the situation when the hacking started on gcc and other tools. GPL is written in the way it it just so that you can take open-source software and run on a real enviroment until you get a replacement. At the moment there looks like there is no replacement for java and the functionality java gives in this application. Then it's better with open/free souce on java that close souce on java. Then someday, hopefully soon the java replacement (being developed) is going to be better and work. For many many years there was no "free" kernel, now we have *BSD, Linux and maybe hurd. That the kernel for so long was missing didn't stop the developemnt of gcc, bash, X. That java still doesn't exist in a free version should be an inspiration to make it better not stop stand back and wait.

/ Balp

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

They should have used .NET, ironically, since it's much more free than Java is.

yeah, and moon is made of cheddar cheese. It's true, I saw it on Fox News.

.NET is also much less mature (as in 5 years behind) than Java at this point, if we are talking about the only Free implementation (Mono). Using that for OOo would be like requiring that Sourceforge be run on GNU Hurd.

It's working on gcj.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope people will calm down once they see this:

http://www.spindazzle.org/green/index.php?p=43

Java for Win/Linux/Mac

[smartsaga]

So people use Java when releasing applications for multiple platforms. What's the big deal? The JRE costs nothing to companies anyways.

Why use .NET to program if you can't get the windows and controls to work on MONO on linux?? GTK runs on Linux and Windows but no Mac support without installing X11. Installing X11 might be a pain for most Mac users, let alone that adds another step and requirement on the Mac side.

Why do people dislike Java so much? Is it because it takes to much RAM when using Eclipse to program or NetBeans??? Is it because it's not easy enough for people to program?? What the hell??

Java it's free, IDEs for development are free, it runs on Macs, Linux, BSD, Unix, Windows, etc, etc, etc... My point is... WTF??? It's like we say in spanish "peladito y a la boca" can't be any easier to develop for multpiple platforms having all the tools.

I say people are just ging nuts over peanuts.

Your multiplatform programing are belong to us... get it??

Have a good one.

Re:Java for Win/Linux/Mac

[mlk]

Java Hate comes three main forms:
Free! It ain't. Some people argue it is "less free" than .net, others say it is more so (anyone can join the JCP for free (beer), is joining the ECMA as easy?) Nor is it, or Sun as OSS friendly as "they should be". With the source code for Java is aviable to download, it does not have a pro-distribution lience.

Slow! Most modern benchmarks (1.4) show Java to be comparitive to native and .NET in most cases (trig being the big downfall at the moment). However many people used it in its 1.0/1.1 days, when it was slow, and refuse to update.
Its not the fastest at starting.

Swing Some people love it, other loth it. Guess which group are more vocial ;)

Re:Java for Win/Linux/Mac

[slim]

Why do people dislike Java so much? Is it because it takes to much RAM when using Eclipse to program or NetBeans??? Is it because it's not easy enough for people to program?? What the hell??


In my case, it's because it's so end-user unfriendly.

I have several JREs installed on my machine, because different applications need different versions of Java.

Trying to get an arbitrary Java application to run is usually a headache: CLASSPATH voodoo, prerequisite classes (often from Sun) you need to find and read licenses for. It's often an hour's work just to get the thing executing.

I have a number of applications whose installers included a whole JRE, partly because they rely on a specific version, and partly because it works around the CLASSPATH voodoo. The disk bloat of this is incredible.

Re:Java for Win/Linux/Mac

[Felonious Ham]

I have several JREs installed on my machine, because different applications need different versions of Java.

I've read this complaint before, but I've only encountered it once: an internal application only works with the MS JRE. I'm not saying you're lying, but I use Java apps a fair amount and haven't seen this problem.

Trying to get an arbitrary Java application to run is usually a headache: CLASSPATH voodoo, prerequisite classes (often from Sun) you need to find and read licenses for. It's often an hour's work just to get the thing executing.

Again, just don't see this happening. The classpath can cause you problems (it's the number one headache of first year students), but for well packaged programs, not an issue. This is exactly the same problem that Linux had before apt-get, that installing any new program sent the user on a never ending quest into dependency hell. If the application is designed at all with the user in mind, all required libs are shipped with the product (the usual examples apply: JDiskReport, Azureus, Eclipse).

I have a number of applications whose installers included a whole JRE

Professional programs almost always include their own JRE, to make installation easier on the user. Smaller projects almost always offer the option of a JRE-less download (if they offer a download with a JRE at all). But again, I run a recent JRE and have never a backward compatibility issue.

I always thought of Java as pretty easy to program in and use, but Slashdot has revealed me to be l33t.

Re:Java for Win/Linux/Mac

[smartsaga]

So programmers/developers/companies are the ones to blame for, mostly?

If an application was not developed the right way then users like me or you can complain about just that. If an application has to include a whole JRE that is because it wasn't planned correctly or the programming was a mickey-moused one.

CLASSPATHs... In this I can see SUN at fault, but also the programmers/developers/companies for not preventing this.

I just noticed that nobody mentioned how to run the damn jar files... There are times when applications like TUGZip, Power Archiver. etc, etc, take over those extensions and you can't jut double click those files and the JRE launch them. I jave seen some .exe lauchers for this, maybe too late now, but what the heck. How do I run a jar file is what most people ask in forums and blogs all around. I know, Java can be the good, the bad and the ugly all toghether. This has created such a bad image of Java for end users. Yes I know how to CLI the jars and run them from the command line, but is it acceptable? I mean it from a practical point of view. Systems, languages, and applications are created to simplify tasks, does Java really accomplish this? I mean it takes care of the multiplatform part of the deal and stuff but programmers have to look out for better implementations of the whole thing.

Your CLASSPATH are belong to us... get it?

Have a good one.

Re:Java for Win/Linux/Mac

[Joe Tie.]

I've read this complaint before, but I've only encountered it once: an internal application only works with the MS JRE.

For me, it's DVArchive - a program to transfer video betwean computer and ReplayTV. Users are pretty much stuck keeping an older version of Java around as Dvarchive chokes on anything recent. Or in using a very old version of Dvarchive which modern incarnations of Java don't seem to have a problem with.

Playing into [ungrateful] hands

[Anonymous Coward]

"That's because traditionally, with a few notable exceptions, client-side Java apps suck. They're clunky, slow, and they look like arse."

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Guess I better stop downloading F/OSS software like these.

http://argouml.tigris.org/files/documents/4/0/argo uml-0.16.1/jws/argouml-en.jnlp

http://www.johnmunsch.com/projects/HotSheet/HotShe et.jnlp

http://my.unidata.ucar.edu/content/software/idv/we bstart/IDV/idv.jnlp

http://www.crosswire.org/bibledesktop/stable/bible desktop.jnlp

http://www.geovistastudio.psu.edu/autobuild/gvstud io-full.jnlp

http://molo.concord.org/software/

[There's a LOT of java software out there]
http://community.java.net/projects/alpha.csp?only= hosted

And the fun thing is that on SuSE, Java Web Start is already set up. Click on the JNLP links and it'll automatically download, and set up (Warning some are large downloads).

Re:Playing into [ungrateful] hands

[Anonymous Coward]

"[There's a LOT of java software out there]
http://community.java.net/projects/alpha.c sp?only= hosted"

http://www.connectandwork.com/external/

Ah crap

[Mad Ogre]

When I read the headline I was thinking "Fallout" the game has gone open source and I could play it on my SUSE box. Dang dang dang.

Target Users

[fupeg]

This is really a matter of target users. If the target users for OO.o were current Linux users and enthusiasts, then they've made a big mistake. However, they're target audience is more likely to be home users or corporate users. In either case, providing a product that is free but is a strong alternative to MS Office has to be their primary concern. If they offer a thin installer that will include a JRE if needed, then this should not cause problems with home users who are willing to subject themselves to a long download time so that they don't have to fork up $$$ for MS Office. For corporate users, including a JRE on the default desktop image used on all the machines, is trivial. The OO.o developers probably stay awake at night dreaming of a Firefox-like revolution and a market-share approaching 10%. Adding features that will appeal to home and corporate users is probably a better way to achieve this than simply trying to appeal to Free Software advocates and Linux users.

J2ME != Java, HTH HAND

[Doktor Memory]

Oddly enough, your cell phone and your 2ghz desktop computer have very little in common other than both being Turing-complete.

Much easier than it seems

[tromey]

Apparently mere mention of "java" makes people go insane.

OO.o 2.0 is already working on free JVMs. FC4 is shipping this, along with Eclipse, Tomcat, and a ton of other stuff. We've got jonas running as well, just not quite ready to ship.

One reason - speed & resources

[ivoras]

OOo 1.1 was NOT a speed demon on any platform. Most people I know who tried to use it on slower platforms (1GHz or less) claim it's slower than MS Word from circa Office 2000. Also, its startup time is really bad on whatever platform.

I tried OOo 2.0 beta on Windows and was unpleasently surprised. There were *no significant changes* in its ugly-ish user interface (other than it finally supports XP skins and Impress has slide sorter as dockable thingy; actually the ONLY thing i liked in OOo2 is more options in PDF conversion - too bad SWF support is stalling) and it's very bloated. Since it requires Java, especially in the database component/client, it's practically unusable - it devours memory and CPU for event the simplest operations.

Now, this is very bad PR. Consider a company with somewhat older computers and OS+Office (e.g. Win98, Office 97 or 2000) wishing to switch to Linux - that scenario is getting less likely by the day (If said company, for whatever reason (faster? smaller?) chooses FreeBSD, it will have even more problems w/java):

• User interfaces on newer Linux distributions are getting waaaay too memory-hungry (ref: a Slashdot article a while ago about bloat in Gnome)
• OpenOffice.org is getting bloated even faster

Unfortunately, OOo is still the only Open-source product out there that can reasonably understand MS Office file formats.

Features???

[Anonymous Coward]

I can live without the listed features - it's not as if 2.x doesn't work without Java. Some wizards, a new database... Purists can live with the lack of a few features which use Java. This is a non-issue.
The Java stuff is there for those who want it; if you don't want Java, nobody's forcing you to use it - OOo2.x will still work fine without Java.
This is yet another troll for Newsforge pagecounts.

All because of HSQLDB...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because they wanted to integrate a Java database, namely HSQLDB, into Open Office they claimed Java was necessary. They should have integrated SQLite instead. SQLite is superior for a number of reasons: 1. it is in the public domain, 2. it is insanely fast, 3. it is ANSI SQL compliant, 4. its memory footprint is 250K, and most importantly, 5. it is written in good ol' C.

Cough *FORK* Cough

Actually, things appear to be much better

[dwheeler]

As noted here and here, it actually looks like there's been a LOT of progress in getting OpenOffice.org to run on open source software / Free software implementations of Java. Perhaps just make "must run on an open source Java implementation" one of the blocking bugs for OpenOffice.org, and don't ship until it works.

Re:Parent is right! This is just F/OSS zealotry

[Anonymous Coward]

People also forget that calling software licensed by the GPL as "Free Software" is a complete misnomer.

The GPL is a restrictive license; it requires that any subsequent modifications also be released under the GPL. That is NOT "free," which is defined as "having no obligations or commitments."

To me, "Free Software" means public domain.

So, yes, Sun's Java isn't GPL or Open Source. But it is free to use and distribute. Nobody really cares much beyond that fact.

Could Sun suddenly stop distributing Java and start charging for it? Of course. But you know what? They won't. Because they are not stupid.

This IT department cares, that's who

[Roadkills-R-Us]

We're not as concerned as a company about whether Java is OSS or not, but we are concerned about ease of rollout. If I need a new JRE to run OO2, how does that impact the 250 or so Linux systems I have to roll it out to? What about my handful of Windows users I'm trying to migrate from Office? Will this version of Java play well with the versions of Linux we run? It's a potential nightmare.

So what?

[ajdecon]

The OO.o people had a decision to make about how to build in the new functionality they wanted, and they chose Java for purely technical reasons. You don't like it? Don't use it! Find something else, or make use of the fact that it is open source and fork it.

But stop complaining about it, or acting like they had some obligation to develop their software according to your philosophy. Their project may succeed, or it may fail because of its supporters leaving it--but be content to let it play out without screaming about it.

the other fallout

[LordMyren]

they forgot to mention the other fallout: the one between the developers and the people who like text to appear as they type.

java is slow - John Carmack, Command Keen programmer.

Free-er solution...

[MsGeek]

Fork OO.o. The source is out there. Create a Free Software-correct fork of OO.o, call it "Free And Open Office" and go to town. Replace the database module with MySQL or PostgreSQL or whatever database you want. Hack out anything and everything that you don't like. F/OSS sees proprietariness as damage and routes around it.

im sick of your logic

[hildi]

up against the wall, counterrevolutionary!

Hah!

[Ranger Rick]

Sounds like Bruce Byfield is offering to do the development himself.

for fun!

[hildi]

and the only thing more fun than writing inpossible to use software, is to scream at other people for not being true to your cause

abiword problems

[Anonymous Coward]

I work with big documents - 500pp. When I load them into Abiword, it takes forever to paginate or something the whole document. I think it also has (or did have) the problem of being able to IMPORT filetypes but not export them again.

With oo.org, I load and I'm just ready to go. I've used oo.org for years and I trust it. Do I want a big, fatter software package? No, but it does what I want without any fuss. I also like OO calc a lot too and my wife uses the presentation program and has no problem presenting the results using powerpoint at conferences.

The bigger problem

[Christoff Ka Sin Chu]

See, you're not looking at the problem correctly.

It's been verified that 99.9% of all OperOffice.org installations are based on Intel/AMD/clones or Motorola/IBM CPUs!

The horror! It's not Open Source!

CC

Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

[1]
The corporations who are behind the making of this software have never had much use for the communist-smelling values of free software, and it has long just been a matter of time before the leverage appeared with which to pull "open source" software into the realm of the proprietary, where real money can be made.
[2
Secondary features (and therefore, community support, if community feels your soft worth it) will come later, and you're project will involve fast enough (think: the time spend by distro's repackaging without java, or to try a gcj port, won't be a time to help you, but rather a time to hate you're choices).
[3]
Daniel Carrera, community contributor representative on the OpenOffice.org Community Council, says that Base HSQLDB "is the fastest and most feature-complete database available that could be integrated given the very limited resources we have." He adds that OpenOffice.org's C++ core was not altered by the introduction of Base

Screenshots

[julie-h]

How do you exspect me to comment on the story, when there is no pictures or screenshots?

Re:Screenshots

[Anonymous Coward]

Hehe. Screenshot here: http://spindazzle.org/green/

This is WINE all over again.

[cheesybagel]

GCJ developers add support for version 1.4.1, Sun releases version 1.4.2. GCJ developers add support for version 1.4.2, Sun releases version 2.0.0. Rinse, repeat.

Embrace and extend people! The only way to counter is to use real Open Source languages such as Python or stable open standard languages like C or C++.

OpenOffice.org is slow, bloated and uses oodles of RAM. Porting it to Java will not help things! Java on Linux sucks and does not run on all the platforms like Linux for PowerPC. Most distros do not bundle it. Sun's JRE is for all effects closed source software. Alternatives are incomplete and since the train is moving will always be so.

No cheese for you.

PDFs isn't free and Adobe isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

"To make a long story short, it is open sourced, but it's proprietary, too."

So are PDF's and Flash.

OS/2

[soullessbastard]

OS/2 actually wasn't a community porting project. It was killed before OOo was open sourced.

I'm not actually sure why the OS/2 work was dropped by Sun. It was deep sixed after StarDivision got bought out, so it may have been for some corporate reasons. The OS/2 versions of the underlying libraries were still in the old CVS branches, but no one stepped up to maintain them or revise them to the newer code bases. In theory, they could still be resurrected and brought up to SO 6.0/7.0 standards instead of the Odin (?) Win32 emulation that's being used by innotek for their OS/2 variant.

With crazy Java dependencies, however, it may be a bit more difficult now. I believe the last version of Java available for OS/2 was 1.3.1 but may be mistaken.

ed

Re:OS/2

[Anonymous Coward]

Endorsed by IBM, a third-party has 1.4.2 is available for OS/2 here.

They also have a version of OpenOffice.org which is based on running the Win32 version natively on OS/2, and not the depricated OS/2 code.

Firefox and Mozilla are also available for OS/2.

Its WINE all over again.

[cheesybagel]

Rinse, repeat.

Re:Its WINE all over again.

[javaxman]

I agree, the whole thing is a bit problematic, but then again, it's a bit like not having a good compiler implementation for your hardware, isn't it ?

At the end of the day, I can't shake the feeling that the people complaining maybe need to actually -do- something instead of complain. Do you want lots of features implemented in a short time period, or do you want all of the code produced to be fully cross-platform ANSI C?? Pick one. Most users are going to prefer features, and most users are going to be able to use a JVM for Linux as provided by Sun. Creating a VM isn't easy. That said, I doubt you need full, current functionality for these Java-based functions... and sticking to true Free Software ideals isn't easy, either. If that's your goal, you're going to have to work at it.

Ever heard of Glade?

[cheesybagel]

Here's a link. It generates XML files with the UI that can be using by Python via libglade.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[cheesybagel]

Doesn't mean they do not need some more prodding. They do, oh they do.

Besides what they are giving, they are getting in return and 10X as much. Samba? Apache? GNOME?

If they want to rewrite it then shutup and do it.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the great thing about open source software (like Open Office), if you don't like something, you can fork the project and make it the way you like it. Don't like Java, feel free to rewrite it in C or C++.

three words: corel wordperfet java ...

[icepick72]

... yes different, but a JRE! The tendency will be to use more Java then shy away from it. Interesting. Maybe it will become what Corel couldn't do way back when.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[cheesybagel]

That isn't Open Source. That is more akin to Microsoft Shared Source.

Scary as it is, you are starting to make me think RMS is right in consistently pushing for the Free Software definition.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at their JRE license.

The real issues

[FedeTXF]

The real issues are:
1) There is not a good enough database written in pure C/C++ as there are in Java: HSQL, Apache Derby
2) There is not a good JVM/runtime packages with an opensource license.

So instead of whining OOo uses some non free component to get more market share and please its users, start helping the gcj, classpath and other projects. When RMS did nto have a Free OS he did not turn to 1940 information handling methods, he started making one.

Re:The real issues

[Adnans]

Seconded!

-adnans

Grammar nazi

[Anonymous Coward]

>"It seems a decision based largely on practical
> considerations -- and with a disregard for the
> consequences for both the rest of the free and
> open source software (FOSS) communities and the
> future of OpenOffice.org itself." This is an issue
> that is not going away."

Uhhhh, more like "This is a high falutin' press
release that will never have a mother fucking
verb".

Peace out.

With all the ppl bitching...

[ShieldW0lf]

With all the developers bitching about Java and the fact that it's not free, and considering the fact that there is a massive base of Java users and developers that are friendly to the idea of a *nix system to be won over, they sure do seem to be dragging their feet at getting an up to date free JVM.

Java is one of those things that you CONSTANTLY see ppl in the free software camp bitching about. Why don't they bloody well put their heads together, through their weight behind one of the many free software projects out there that are working on the problem and clean-room reimplement the damn thing if it's such an issue?

Even if they couldn't make a free JVM and call it Java, they could still include it all the distributions configured to drive things like OOo. I can't imagine that an OpenOffice 2.0 Kaffe Edition (or whatever the JVM clone turns out to be called) would be such a big task if everyone stepped up to the plate where the JVM was concerned.

Re:With all the ppl bitching...

[putaro]

It's not the JVM so much (though the OSS versions are a bit lacking there). It's the class libraries. Java has a very large and functional set of class libraries. If they're not available Java by itself is not terribly interesting. GNU has the GNU Classpath project which has been muddling along for a long time to recreate all of these libraries.

Re:With all the ppl bitching...

[DaliborTopic]

GNU has the GNU Classpath project which has been muddling along for a long time to recreate all of these libraries.

Not that long, really :) The whole thing really started to take off one or two years ago, when free software written in the Java programming language started to become interesting to people outside the 'Java-only' community. In the last two years we've seen a massive improvement on both the class libraries and on the runtimes themselves. For example, this graph shows how quickly Kaffe alone developped in the last two years. The progress is certainly similar for gcj and other free runtimes.

GNU Classpath is already in many ways superior to Sun's implementation, and in those where it's still lacking behind, it could of course use a bit of help to get there faster. Jump on the lists and join in the fun. :)

cheers, dalibor topic

Great acronym

[subStance]

Heheh - I love that the acronym would become FOO.org. That ought to win over the geek crowd at least.

Re:What's wrong with Kaffe ? JikesRVM ? Using Java

[Anonymous Coward]

If only the mono guys were smart enough to realize this....

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[SunFan]

Besides what they are giving, they are getting in return and 10X as much.

The $500,000,000+ worth of R&D being open sourced in June (OpenSolaris) will help balance things out a little. OpenOffice.org is something like 7.5 million lines of code, too.

Gambas

[Perl-Pusher]

Sorry, but what competitors to VB6 does the OSS community have?

Gambas

Problem is that it ISN'T practical

[aaronl]

As from the summary: "It seems a decision based largely on practical considerations -- and with a disregard for the consequences for both the rest of the free and open source software (FOSS) communities and the future of OpenOffice.org itself."

Problem is that Java is not a practical requirement. Many systems do not having Java already installed. For example, Windows, the largest potential market for OOo, does not ship with Java. Now you have to convince the user to download OOo, and then to go and download Java, and then properly install them both, and in the right order. If the screw up, things mysteriously don't work right, and OOo is garbage in the user's opinion.

If they wanted to do something practical, they could clean up their build tree, name things cleanly, and code uniformly. As an example, if they wanted Base to be Java, then fine code out the whole thing in Java. But to have Writer partially in Java and partially in C++ is quite annoying, and needlessly makes things bigger, slower, and more complicated.

I choose the best language from the set of languages that I know for a given job. I stick with that lanaguage for the project, or I code it over from the beginning in a different language. This is because doing otherwise makes your code harder to maintain, and much harder for someone else to work with to add features.

Re:Problem is that it ISN'T practical

[aaronl]

Just remembered the other thing that got to me about Java. One of the reasons I don't want to install Java on my desktops.

Because of everything running through the VM, by installing a JRE you lose some of the control over a corporate desktop. People can run all sorts of wonderful things that you don't want them to. You let the VM run, or you don't, so you don't even get control of what applications can now be executed on your machines.

JAVA is the new COBOL. GCJ it away or do C++ ...

[Anonymous Coward]

When something gets used by millions, pissing
away FOSS, speed and footprint for the sake of JAVA
training wheels is just too dumb. There is a
clueless wonder at work here.

Get professional. Do the right thing. Or OO.o
deserves the fork! Duh.

GPL Globalization.

[Anonymous Coward]

"F/OSS sees proprietariness as damage and routes around it."

Unfortunately they see making money the same way.

Think of where you want to end up.

[Anonymous Coward]

Think of where you want to end up. A world with the freedoms of Free Software, or a world of proprietary software? Now ask yourself, how does accepting a proprietary platform bring us closer to a world with the freedoms of Free Software? Each step you take is a step in one of those directions. Step carefully.

Meaning of this?

[BorgCopyeditor]

What does all this mean for wxWindows? Also, given that Java is repsonsible for some of the UI under the NeoOffice port and that there is no native Mac OS X port, does this mean that the promise of a cross-platform GUI library has been deferred yet again? Or did I misunderstand what the issue was in keeping OO.org on the Mac?
--TIA

Java is the language of choice ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand the argument at all... how many C programmers want to make changes to gcc?? What difference it would make for C applications if GCC is open or not?? The Java specifications are open .. anybody is free to come up with a java compiler and run time... what else the FOSS community requires??? Also any linux distribution is free to bundle a free JDK/JRE.

Java is the language of choice for more than 50% of developers and to say that FOSS community do not want Java is just slander ... open source code written in Java far exceeds open source code in any other language .. just go to apache foundation and see how many projects are in java.

Instead of slandering let some FOSS org work on a true JVM and JRE...And to top it, Java is greater than Sun.. IBMs and Oracles make more money from Java than Sun. Java is true progression from C and C++. If you turn blind eye to Java, it means you are blind to technology.

Re:Java is the language of choice ...

[Archimboldo]

Care to elaborate?

The positive side

[Per Abrahamsen]

A likely outcome of this is that Red Hat (and others?) will put more effort into GCJ. So if the result of OO.o relying more on java is the free software community getting a better Java compiler, that is splendid.

Your Pullquote

[coaxial]

It seems a decision based largely on practical considerations -- and with a disregard for the consequences for both the rest of the free and open source software (FOSS) communities and the future of OpenOffice.org itself.

And that's the problem with the FOSS zealots. They always see the perfect as the enemy of the good. Too often when given a choice between something that works and something that doesn't, they choose the one that doesn't.

I care.

[ta bu shi da yu]

I don't run Linux to run a non-free operating system, and I find OpenOffice to be a vital part of my distribution. Java, I'm afraid, is not open. A reliance on Java is not a good thing, even if the Java bindings for UNO are much cleaner than the C++ counterparts.

Ill just stop using it

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, since Sun's JRE stops you from including competing products, disties like RH and SuSE will not be able to include it.

This could kill off OO.o.

Gambas

[midgley]

is looking interesting

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[line.at.infinity]

I have been reading here on slashdot since a few days ago mentions of java virus(es), but I haven't actually read anyone mention of such a virus's name or what it does. Could somebody expand on this? Are these viruses applets that take advantage of a security hole in a browser's JVM [Sun's or MS's]? Are people finding plain malware or do they actually replicate by infecting executables?

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Mant]

A. .NET IS Java (1.3) Numerous lawsuits were filed, some lost, some won, but ultimately, Microsoft is still producing .NET

Wrong. Very, very wrong. The lawsuits were about MS distributing an incompatable version of the JVM with windows only extention. .Net takes (steals?) lots of ideas from Java, but it is most definately not Java.

As for which is the most "free", neither really, although both have unoffical free versions.

Why the problem?

[polyp2000]

Isnt this the point about open source ? if there is something you dont like or feel could be done better another way - just take the code, fork it if neccessary and do it your own way.

Personally I agree - i'd rather OpenOffice did not have a strong dependancy for Java but thats just me!

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[jrumney]

I have been reading here on slashdot since a few days ago mentions of java virus(es), but I haven't actually read anyone mention of such a virus's name or what it does. Could somebody expand on this? Are these viruses applets that take advantage of a security hole in a browser's JVM [Sun's or MS's]? Are people finding plain malware or do they actually replicate by infecting executables?

They're trojans really, not viruses, as they do not spread themselves, usually they act as a vector for installing malware. The most common one takes advantage of a bytecode verifier bug in the MS JVM, which Sun allowed MS to patch in release 3012 (distributed as a critical update to Windows since about 2 years ago), despite being ordered by a court not to continue to release updates to their JVM.

There was a vulnerability with 1.4.2_04 (or maybe _05?) and earlier JVMs recently, but I have yet to see an exploit in the wild. People are probably becoming alarmed because their virus detection is picking up a "virus", since the exploit code was downloaded from a porn or warez site they visited, but if they are running an up to date JVM, then the exploit code was not executed, so its mere presence in the cache is not cause for concern in itself.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[sosume]

>.NET is also much less mature (as in 5 years behind) than Java at this point,

Hm, well its safe to say then, that you'd better use a serial dialup to the internet than a 100 mbit connection, since the serial dialup is much older and therefore much more mature!

Have you ever thought about the concept 'learn from other people's accomplishments and mistakes, then improve upon that' ?

Java gives me gas...

[v3xt0r]

for those of you who care to read this.

Re:Open Office and Java integration makes me nervo

[jrumney]

MS to patch in release 3012

Before I get flamed for giving inaccurate info, I don't know where I got 3012 from, it should be 3810.

What about Knoppix??

[xtracto]

I think no one has thought about the implication of this.

What does the Knoppix developers think?, I think it is a major concern now because is widely used to introduce people to linux.

If People need to install JRE to properly run OOo, then it may not come preinstalled in Knoppix (if they chose not to include it), and OOo would not be an "Out of the box" program for Knoppix (not for at least some of the features like the DB).

And also, if they chose not to include it, then OOo user base will decrease considerably.

Re:Parent is right! This is just F/OSS zealotry

[DaliborTopic]

Could Sun suddenly stop distributing Java and start charging for it? Of course. But you know what? They won't. Because they are not stupid.

Back in the old days, everyone used to write free software on Sun's SunOS/Solaris, becuase it was pretty good, and came with a pretty good, free as in beer C compiler toolchain. And then someone at Sun figured they should charge money for the development tools.

Oops. Enter gcc :)

It has happened before with Sun, why should it not happen again? It's a company, companies are greedy by definition. If there is more money to be made by selling Java runtimes and development tools, rather than by giving them away gratis, be sure Sun will not hesitate to do that. They are obliged to care for their bottom line to their share holders. They are not obliged to give stuff away for free if they can sell it.

cheers, dalibor topic

Seems retro?

[smchris]

Since OO.org can already make an ODBC connection to MySQL and PostgreSQL to do merges and basic database manipulations within OO.org, requiring Java so one can use an "Access-like" database seems like an effort to provide less with more.

Better be a good database solution and, more critically, better not break current database connectivity with quality servers.

fork the bastard

[sl4shd0rk]

If Sun is going to purposely leverage java dependancies into OO simply because they can, then f#ck them. Take the codebase that is available, strip the java, and offer an alternative. It worked for Xorg.

Re:fork the bastard

[PigleT]

Or do some work on gcj to bring it up to scratch, of course.

Re:fork the bastard

[rdean400]

It may make more sense to continue lobbying RedHat and IBM to produce an FOSS-compatible version of Java. They're already predisposed to the notion, with or without Sun's help. All we need is a GPL'd JRE that passes the Java certification tests.

I think considering Java's inclusion a "betrayal" is ridiculous, when you look at the history of OOo. Sun started out with the intention to rewrite it the StarOffice codebase in 100% Java, but this failed because Swing was an unoptimized P.O.S. (piece of software...yeah, that's it) at the time.

Go Java wholly

[jswalter9]

I would like to see OpenOffice.org become 100% pure Java.

By the same token, I would like to see KOffice read and write MS formats better. That way, on machines where I run KDE I can have a quick-loading office suite that does what I need, and on systems where I have no good alternatives (Windows), I'll have a fully Java office suite that won't destabilize the registry.

RedHat cares

[Anonymous Coward]

RedHat brings open source further by making java open source.
FC4 whil have several open source java programs, but no Sun Java. Why? Because RedHat cares about their customers future.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[cheesybagel]

Solaris is just an Operating System. Count how many Open Source OSes there are already. Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin, ad nauseum. Solaris is not necessarily better than Linux. I keep hearing the talk that it works on large machines, but so does Linux on SGI Altix (which are single system image and have 256 CPUs per node).

It is better than Linux at some things and Linux is better than it at some other things. None are things that really matter.

OpenOffice.org was the most interesting project Sun had and was a banner project for them to prove their good intentions on the Open Source segment. Now they have tainted it.

Mod Parent Up

[khanyisa]

Caolan is the one doing the porting, so he knows what he's talking about...

Maybe the best thing that will come of this

[lorcha]

Is that GCJ will be improved to the point that it can compete with Sun's JDK/JRE. That would truly be the best possible solution.

Uhhh.. Hello!

[lorcha]

Haven't you heard?

Re:Uhhh.. Hello!

[grahamlee]

Yes, I have. However, an open source update client on its own is useless to actually maintain a source repository. Linus is using a BitKeeper server (and presumably, a more functional non-Free client) for the Linux sources. That would be not Free, and hence he has chosen pragmatism over politics. Not to mention that but most Linux users seem to favour computers with proprietary locked-in BIOS (he says, patting his IEEE1275 machine).

Mono, mono, mono

[Anonymous Coward]

Dictum: all Java code must bw ported to its C# equivalent, through Mono.

Can't this Java code be migrated to Mono?

Could all Java code be replaced with C#

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder, since C# and java are so similar, if all the Java code could be replaced by C# code? Thuis would boost Mono greatly, too, as a side effect.

Re:VS .NET

[dantheman82]

I beg to differ...

In the Visual Studio editor, you can press Alt and click + drag to do rectangular select, and then Cut & Paste. This is like MS Word and most other similar Microsoft text editors. Just because you don't know it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

And then there's the Ctrl + Left and Right Arrow keys to go from word to word (and shift to select the words). And then Ctrl + Home / End to go to beginning and end of the code. And Ctrl + Up Arrow and Ctrl + Down Arrow to move between paragraphs.

There are definitely free plugins to VS to work with Trac Subversion, and CVS, as well as the built-in Source Safe compatability.

I'm sure the black on green or some wacky color combination when using VIM on your 32-bit color 17" LCD monitor makes a lot of sense.

This is not unlike many other FOSS apps

[Anonymous Coward]

This problem is much more simple than it appears.

How many applications use built in scripting languages? Especially among those that are more complex. GnuCash comes to mind, but there are others.

The issue is not it's dependance on Java, but that it's not using a free Java compiler.

The article seems to confuse the issue however. I suspect there are ulterior motives behind this _Newsforge_ article....

KOffice

[sadiklis]

Looks like a chance for KOffice.

Considering that Qt is about to be GPLed for Windows...

This is too easy.

[lorcha]

Any more questions?

lorcha watches as a point flies straight past

[grahamlee]

I said:

most Linux users seem to favour computers with proprietary locked-in BIOS

Now, unless you can prove that statement to be incorrect by stating usage statistics for LinuxBIOS, I think the point still stands. Anyway, to use and support LinuxBIOS is merely to fragment the user and developer communities for an open BIOS project - seeing as one (IEEE1275) already exists, is very stable and widely adopted.

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

Man, it's so hard to take you seriously when it's obvious you have NO CLUE what you're talking about.

Microsoft's Java = Java 1.1
Java 2 == Java 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4
Java 5 == Java 1.5

Java has become so bloated and complicated that it's infeasible that any FOSS implementation will ever be made that supports even a small percentage of software.

who sucks money?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you to pay by using Java (TM) in the e-commerce?
YES!!! :(

Have you to pay by using VBasic Runtime (TM) in the e-commerce?
YES!!! :(

Have you to pay by using GCC's C++ in the e-commerce?
NO!!! :)

So, i did pick up GCC's C++.

I hate Java (tm), VB (tm), .. fuck you Sun, M$, ..

Actually, there are more stupid licensal reasons than technical reasons.

open4free ©

What a load of old cobbler's

[turgid]

It's Sun (not SUN) and Java (not JAVA).

the reality is that unless SUN decided to make binaries available for a platform with an end-user license, there is no practical way of getting JAVA on a machine.

Wrong. You confuse Java the language with Java the platform. gcc compiles Java source down to native machine code on most architectures and provides its own runtime for the parts of the system which require it. If you want to run Java bytecode (either compiled with gcc or some other Java compiler) you have a joice of Java Virtual Machines and Java Runtime Environments from sever manufacturers, including IBM.

Now, SUN of course has such binaries for Windows, Solaris and Linux and some other systems, but for example not for FreeBSD/OpenBSD.

FreeBSD and OpenBSD run Linux binaries very well. Native ports to these platforms are not required. Incidentally, Solaris 10 will also run Linux binaries unmodified on x86.

First of all, few Linux distributions seem to have managed to include a JAVA runtime environment at all, in all other cases I have to download it from SUN. More problematic however is that when maintaining a Linux machine, you may end up having to install newer versions of libraries, which at times introduces compatibility issues. It is however not trivial to just recompile JAVA and link against the new libraries.

Well, I use Slackware and that comes with an up-to-date Sun Java Runtime Environment. Installing a JRE (or SDK) is not very difficult, and is rearely more complicated than extracting a tarball as root and setting some environmnet variables. As for recompiling Java to run against "new libraries" you completely miss the point of Java. The new JREs are backwards compatible.

Failure to do so may result in one or both of two things:
* An alternative Open Source JAVA gets created over time
* JAVA becomes irrelevant

Unless you have been living under a rock, you will realise that there are several independent Java implementations available, including ones from Sun and IBM, a free one called kaffe, and of course gcc's java compiler. Java will not become irrelevant. There are billions of computing devices around the world running Java. What might happen is that Miguel's anti Java/pro .NET FUD might become a mindset amongst the /. zealots. (Might? I think it already has).

The recent settlement between SUN and Microsoft doesn't bode well

No, not for Microsoft. As usual, they're doing a good job of shooting themselves in the foot.

Anyway, your article sucks.

Re:What a load of old cobbler's

[SillyNickName4me]

> Wrong. You confuse Java the language with Java the platform.

Not really, tho I may be unclear about it in that article. JAVA as a language I like. the platform as it currently comes from SUN I don't like.

> gcc compiles Java source down to native machine code on most architectures and provides its own runtime for the parts of the system which require it.

And have you ever tried using it with real world JAVA software that an end user might want to run, let alone OOo?

Come back when you did.

In case you don't want to or can't be bothered, it works very well for specific situations, but is not a complete replacement.

> If you want to run Java bytecode (either compiled with gcc or some other Java compiler) you have a joice of Java Virtual Machines and Java Runtime Environments from sever manufacturers, including IBM.

And which ones that are actually capable of running the large majority of JAVA applications out there also run on the platform that I happen to need for other things? (You'll prolly argue that I should switch platforms in that case, well, I don't need JAVA, so the choice is really easy for me when it comes to it)

> FreeBSD and OpenBSD run Linux binaries very well. Native ports to these platforms are not required. Incidentally, Solaris 10 will also run Linux binaries unmodified on x86.

First of all performance of the Linux jvm on FreeBSD completely and utterly sucks when compared to a native port.

Second, that does nothign whatsoever for people who need to run this on say Alpha or MIPS or PPC hardware for example.

> Well, I use Slackware and that comes with an up-to-date Sun Java Runtime Environment. Installing a JRE (or SDK) is not very difficult, and is rearely more complicated than extracting a tarball as root and setting some environmnet variables. As for recompiling Java to run against "new libraries" you completely miss the point of Java. The new JREs are backwards compatible.

And you obviously have no clue about the world outside JAVA. There are libraries outside the JVM that are used by the JVM. There may be reasons for having to change such a library, and there may even be reasons to change to a version that is not binary compatible (and hence requires programs that use it to be relinked).

> Unless you have been living under a rock, you will realise that there are several independent Java implementations available, including ones from Sun and IBM, a free one called kaffe, and of course gcc's java compiler. Java will not become irrelevant. There are billions of computing devices around the world running Java. What might happen is that Miguel's anti Java/pro .NET FUD might become a mindset amongst the /. zealots. (Might? I think it already has).

I personally don't care about mono, and I do actually care about JAVA as a language. I see SUN having done a good job at turnign JAVA into a burden instead of a solution for the large majority of my customers that use it. I don't deal with that side of things, but its very hard to not notice what happens (unless maybe when you are blinded by SUN?)

I am aware of there being independent reimplementations, and I am also aware of their usability outside very specific situations, it seems you have no clue.

> Anyway, your article sucks.

Everyone their own opinion. I hope you live happy under the SUN.

Re:What a load of old cobbler's

[turgid]

Everyone their own opinion. I hope you live happy under the SUN.

OK, I'll admit I'm a beginner when it comes to Java, and I have been working for Sun for 4 years (which ends in a fortnight due to economics) so I maybe have been drinking the Kool Aid a bit, but why don't you ask IBM to make you a Free/OpenBSD JVM port? From what I can see, IBM loves to make PR out of Sun's perceived failings. Just look at the amount of IBM posted here as news.

Sun is very bad at PR and struggles to communicate well with the Linux/FOSS/Slashdot community. That's no secret. You can judge for yourself.

What also amazes me, is that Miguel jumped on the .NET bandwagon and started a .NET/C#/CLR project frmo scratch when he could have taken an Open Source or Free JVM/JRE project and built upon that.

Just a thought.

Re:What a load of old cobbler's

[SillyNickName4me]

> OK, I'll admit I'm a beginner when it comes to Java, and I have been working for Sun for 4 years (which ends in a fortnight due to economics) so I maybe have been drinking the Kool Aid a bit, but why don't you ask IBM to make you a Free/OpenBSD JVM port? From what I can see, IBM loves to make PR out of Sun's perceived failings. Just look at the amount of IBM posted here as news.

I am a former IBM employee (worked there for 11 years), let me just keep it at IBM being a company thats there for the money, no more and no less. They have found a way to proffit from Linux so they use it and promote it. There is no reason to believe that IBM's support has any other motivations.

For as far as them producing a 'real' open source Java version, I doubt they can do that without either Sun's blessing or rewriting a huge pile of code.

Sun promotes Java almost as if it is a religion at times. Now, I do think they came up with something pretty neat there, but I think they are also the ones who effectively control the standard and decide what can call itself Java. That simply makes them the ones to look at first imho.

But, as far as my article goes, open source is not what I am asking for, I have the source and in a form that can be used to create a native version for my platforms of choice.

What I can't do easily is provide the result of that to others. Since I make a living from combining seperate bits and pieces into working systems, that makes Suns implementation unusable for me. In specific situations, the gnu solution was usefull for me.

I don't need Sun's blessing or warantee on a version that I build myself from their sources. I don't need advertising rights or whatever. I do need the ability to take the native version I built and put it on a customers machine to perform some job there, instead of having that customer go to Sun, jump through some hoops to get the source, then go somewhere else to get the patchkit, and then back to Sun to get a Linux jdk so they can actually build a native version.

What Sun does is their thing, but right now I rather use an alternative that doesn't impose such a limitation on me, You can read my article as an attack on Java, I'd rather suggest reading it as an explanation of why I use something else while Java would do as good or maybe even a better job from a purely technical point of view. If there would be a for me usable JRE and JVM I would use them where apropriate.

> Sun is very bad at PR and struggles to communicate well with the Linux/FOSS/Slashdot community. That's no secret. You can judge for yourself.

Which I find somewhat interesting because for a long time, Sun was one of the few major players who actually had a way to deal with hobbyist users and small time developers by means of affordable software and tools (I have a whole bunch of Solaris CDs here directly from Sun which was cheaper then the single version of AIX that I have, not to mention things like Irix or HPUX) To me it seems like they somehow lost this.

> What also amazes me, is that Miguel jumped on the .NET bandwagon and started a .NET/C#/CLR project frmo scratch when he could have taken an Open Source or Free JVM/JRE project and built upon that.

Would have been more usefull to me personally. It seems to me that he has personal and possibly political motivations for his choice. Wether this has to do more with MS or Sun is unclear to me.

On another note, let me elaborate a bit on the idea of running Java (or anything else) with help of Linux compatibility on a system like FreeBSD.

I mentioned that the performance is not as good as when using a native version. It may of course perform good enough for what you need still.

For a server admin, installing Linux compatibility means introducing more kernel code and a whole lot of libraries. That is extra code that needs to be kept uptodate, and that does nothing more then duplicate what is already there. Diskspace is not a r

Why Java and OSS don't go together

[einhverfr]

For many years, we had both compiled and scripted languages. Compiled ones had performance, and scripted ones had portability. Unfortunately for the likes of Sun, scripts are also generally written in human-readible text (except Perl, but that is another story, just kidding). So if a company wants to release a program without the source code, they compile it. Then they are limited to one platform.

Java doesn't offer anything new in the "Write once, run anywhere" department. Perl has been doing this for a long time, as have other scripting languages. What it does do is offer a "Compile once, run anywhere," so that commercial software houses can offer closed source software with the opaqueness of compiled programs and the portability of scripting languages.

This is why I believe that languages like Java and C# will eventually fall to the likes of Perl and Python. As open source marches forward, it takes away any benefit that Java has and hands it to these scripting languages.

SCSL is not open source, never was, never will be.

[DaliborTopic]

Thank you for quoting irrelevant mails around, but not every misinformed source you may find in some search engine can support your assertion that SCSL is open source. :)

May I kindly instruct you to educate yourself using the http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ site that lists all the OSI certified open source licenses? I especially kindly would like to point your attention to the fact that there is no SCSL listed there. And that's not an omission. :)

Furthermore, may I kindly instruct you to enlighten yourself reading the fascinating insight into the reasons why Sun made the SCSL the way they did it on http://www.sun.com/981208/scsl/principles.html , which clearly spells out that SCSL is supposed to combine aspects of 'Open Source' and 'Proprietary' licensing models into one. That's should be a very huge clue bait that it's not open source. The document also gives some explanation why Sun explicitely didn't want an Open Source license.

If you feel the need to educate yourself on the specifics of what makes the SCSL such a funny read, I kindly refer you to http://advogato.org/person/robilad/diary.html?star t=46 which compares the SCSL versus the Open Source definition, and finds it violating 8 out of 10 principles. The SCSL is about as open source as Microsoft Windows 98 SE EULA, I guess.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[Decaff]

OK, you are right about the SCSL - it is not truly open source.

But, I am afraid my honest reaction is 'so what?'

I simply don't feel the need to stick to the high principles of open source all the time. I base the software and systems I use on decades of experience of dealing with companies. I have dealt with both Sun and Microsoft over a very long time, and Sun has always been trustworthy, and has donated huge amounts of source code (under licenses you would probably approve of) to developers. Microsoft, on the other hand, has been problematic, and I find comparisons between Sun and Microsoft to be simplistic and mistaken.

We all make compromises. You are probably using an open source system, but it is running on a proprietary processor in proprietary hardware. However, with those aspects you have choice. Same with Java. Sun's code may be non-GPL (or any other OSI license), but Java is available from many vendors - you have a choice. My view is that not using it because of license objections is to seriously restrict your choice of development language without much reason. I'm sure you have a different view!

Kaffe with GNU MP beats HotSpot on BigInteger

[DaliborTopic]

I don't believe a word of this. Hot-spot is so good it can use parallel architectures like MMX to optimise math, and even optimise machine code instruction order.

You don't have to believe it. You can go ahead and check it out yourself by getting the simple BigInteger benchmark from i2p at http://dev.i2p.net/javadoc/net/i2p/util/NativeBigI nteger.html

They also use GNU MP and have a factor of 10 improvement over Sun's code on their data. Running the benchmark on Kaffe from CVS head with -Xnative-big-math makes kaffe run about 4 times faster than 1.4.2 on the modPow tests. Which is why, in scientific and crypto intensive applications, you may want to use Kaffe rather then Sun's implementation.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:Kaffe with GNU MP beats HotSpot on BigInteger

[Decaff]

You don't have to believe it. You can go ahead and check it out yourself by getting the simple BigInteger benchmark from i2p at http://dev.i2p.net/javadoc/net/i2p/util/NativeBigI nteger.html

Fair enough, but that is a very specialised use. Almost all scientific apps use the equivalent of C or Java doubles for calculation. Almost no serious high-performance scientific calculation would use arbitrary precision mathematics. The only use I can think of is numerical research.

I don't think it is useful to pick one very specialised case where Kaffe has improved speed and ignore the general case where it seriously lags. Something like Linpack is a better benchmark, which uses fixed precision floating point (although my personal interest is in molecular modelling). Linpack shows Sun's VM to be within 10-20% of C/C++, and Kaffe way behind (around half the speed). This is quite an achievement for an OS JVM, but too slow to be an adequate replacement for C in general numerical work, which is what I want to use Java for.

Re:Kaffe with GNU MP beats HotSpot on BigInteger

[DaliborTopic]

Fair enough, but that is a very specialised use. Almost all scientific apps use the equivalent of C or Java doubles for calculation. Almost no serious high-performance scientific calculation would use arbitrary precision mathematics. The only use I can think of is numerical research.

And geometrical computing. Anywhere you can't afford the results to be subject to limits of floating point represetations. See http://www.mpi-sb.mpg.de/%7Emehlhorn/ftp/ClassRoom Example.ps for an interesting paper on the subject of robustness of floating point caclulations.

I don't think it is useful to pick one very specialised case where Kaffe has improved speed and ignore the general case where it seriously lags.

Each benchmark shows some specialized case. If you look at shudo's results, Kaffe beats the client 1.5 VM from Sun on the Sieve benchmark. Does that mean Kaffe's faster than 1.5's client VM in general? To me it only means it's faster on that specific benchmark. Whether that result maps onto what you want to do, depends on what you do. Benchmark your own code, if you need to know.

Generally claiming that Kaffe is slower than Sun is wrong, as those results show. On some tasks Kaffe is faster, on others it's still slower. When Kaffe's gcj-bindings are updated to gcj4, and jit4 is merged in, it will be quite interesting to see the performance of that combined runtime solution.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:Kaffe with GNU MP beats HotSpot on BigInteger

[Decaff]

Generally claiming that Kaffe is slower than Sun is wrong, as those results show.

Not at all. On most tasks Kaffe is slower. That is a good basis for generalisation!

When Kaffe's gcj-bindings are updated to gcj4, and jit4 is merged in, it will be quite interesting to see the performance of that combined runtime solution.

It will, and I'll take another look then. I would be particularly interested in a Java implementation that was generally optimised for math.

I disagree strongly with you about many things, but I have to say you have made me inclined to keep an eye on Kaffe. I wish the project well.

Re:Kaffe with GNU MP beats HotSpot on BigInteger

[DaliborTopic]

I disagree strongly with you about many things, but I have to say you have made me inclined to keep an eye on Kaffe. I wish the project well.

Thanks! And I hope you don't mind me questioning what you know and what you believe strongly as I did.

I am currently doing the compatiblity dance with Sun, and I am very disappointed by Sun's approach to compatibility so far. I think we can do better together, towards mutually verifiable compatibility, that you, as a Java user, can verify for yourself as well, instead of having to blindly trust a logo on an officially unsupported platform (Debian).

That's where I want to get, as that's the only way to fill the empty phrase 'compatibility' with real, verifiable value.

Wish me luck, it's been fun talking to you :)

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[DaliborTopic]

OK, you are right about the SCSL - it is not truly open source. But, I am afraid my honest reaction is 'so what?'

Nothing really. I'm pretty amused by desperate attempts by Sun's marketing division to rub off a bit of 'Open Source' street-credibility onto their proprietary product by calling it 'as good as open source', 'closed open source' and what not. It's an amusing running gag in the 'Java melodrama'. I think 'closed open source' is so far the funniest description I've ever heard of Sun's licensing policy, and it comes right from Gosling.

That being said, just because Sun's implementation is not available under a suitable license, doesn't mean that Java is bad or useless or something. It's a cute platform, as C-based platforms go.

Like RMS said, let's build up implementations that help make software written in the Java programming language accessible to more people without getting them entangled in bogus non-free licensing agreements. The restrictive choice of licensing means that people who care will write implementations like gcj, Kaffe, IKVM etc. that are (becoming) better in most respects, not just freedom, than the non-free offers. It may take a few more years, still, but it's been happening already at an amazing pace. This whole article shows how misinformed people are about the massive amount of progress being made on free software implementations: OOo is now buildable with gcj thanks to Caolan, and most of the things work.

What license Sun choses for their J2SE code is completely irrelevant these days. Sun had the chance to open up their software while their implementation still mattered, people were begging them to, now the begging phase is over, and for an increasing number of people the future of the platform is beggining to lie in GNU Classpath. And they are taking an active part in shaping that future by contributing to it.

Sun is now, belatedly, trying hard to emulate GNU Classpath and Kaffe and build up communities around their code base. Looking at Sun's history of 'proprietary-to-open' transitions in OOo and NetBeans, I doubt they will succeed before Kaffe passes the TCK, in particular as long as they stick to their cooperation-unfriendly licensing regime.:)

cheers, dalibor topic

Compatibility doesn't mean a thing without proof

[DaliborTopic]

The proof is here: http://java.sun.com/j2ee/compatibility.html

That's J2EE. I asked for proof that Sun's VM passes all the tests. That's J2SE. They are very, very different things.

If you want to prove it to yourself. Here is the website for some test suites: http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/JC Ptools/

That's just a link to a description of the testing tools. It's not the tools, nor is it the J2SE test suite. Everyone can put up a cute web page saying they are compatible with something, but hardly anyone can actually prove it. And without proof, such claims are worthless.

Why should I care?

Because it's pointless to argue about compatibility without knowing what it is, and having means to verify it. You made the assertion that Kaffe is incompatible, but you can't even prove that Sun is compatible. So what's your point about invoking that marketing nosense? The branding program is just a way for Sun and their business partners to market themselves together, as far as I can see. It has nothing to do with real, verifiable compatibility.

It's like a cargo cult: just because it has a coffee cup logo on it, it must automatically be compatible. Yeah, right :) Microsoft's VM had red coffee cups slapped on it, too, and that didn't seem to work that well for guaranteeing compatibility.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:Java isn't free and Sun isn't a friend to OSS

[Anonymous Coward]

Man, it's so hard to take you seriously

This is slashdot, who said I was even taking myself seriously?

As for a FOSS JVM that runs programs, really they only need to run 3. lime wire, azureus, and oo.org ;)

If you can do that, then all is happy and good right?

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[Decaff]

Like RMS said, let's build up implementations that help make software written in the Java programming language accessible to more people without getting them entangled in bogus non-free licensing agreements.

I support this project, but I'm afraid I just don't care about these so-called 'bogus' licenses. Java is Sun's product. They can do what they like with it. I'm grateful they provide it for no charge and allow me to re-distribute JREs with my apps. That is all I (and thousands of other developers) need. I think calling arrangements like this 'bogus' is rather petty and mean-spirited. Few companies have provided products like Java free of charge to the developer community.

Sun is now, belatedly, trying hard to emulate GNU Classpath and Kaffe and build up communities around their code base. Looking at Sun's history of 'proprietary-to-open' transitions in OOo and NetBeans, I doubt they will succeed before Kaffe passes the TCK, in particular as long as they stick to their cooperation-unfriendly licensing regime.:)

I really don't get this attitude to Sun. Stuff that they have released like OOo have been vital for the acceptance of Linux on the desktop. They have done so much good for the IT industry over the years.

I am (as you know) no expert on licensing, but they do now have OSI-approved licenses, like the one for Solaris 10. It is possible to label many OS licenses as 'cooperation-unfriendly', even the GPL! The licenses have different purposes.

As for the TCK, I wish Kaffe luck and hope it does get to be a compatible implementation. The Kaffe you have described seems a huge improvement on what I remember of it years ago!

Re:Compatibility doesn't mean a thing without proo

[Decaff]

Because it's pointless to argue about compatibility without knowing what it is, and having means to verify it. You made the assertion that Kaffe is incompatible, but you can't even prove that Sun is compatible. So what's your point about invoking that marketing nosense? The branding program is just a way for Sun and their business partners to market themselves together, as far as I can see. It has nothing to do with real, verifiable compatibility.

No. It is to do with the practical ability to move code between VMs and JREs. The 'Java' brand indicates that you can do this. I don't know how to prove that Sun's VM passes the test, but I know that it does. Why? Because thousands of developers rely on the compatibility, and it works. You can label it 'marketing' if you like, but that does not remove its practical effectiveness. If it did not work, this would be a major news story and Java's reputation would crumble.

Anyone who wants to test any part of Java can join the JCP (it is free) and download the test tools.

It was not just me who said that Kaffe was incompatible - just take a look at that benchmark page:

http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/

"Kaffe does not work correctly with the applet version of SPEC JVM98". That is just one example.

However, I have just seen a screenshot of Kaffe running Eclipse - that is impressive! But, as a commercial developer, I need that Java brand. I need to be able to guarantee (or at least foolishly believe that Sun guarantees) that the Java implementation will run my apps with no code changes and no problems. I can't risk putting major enterprise apps on Kaffe and just hope; no matter the quality of the coding.

Re:Compatibility doesn't mean a thing without proo

[DaliborTopic]

It is to do with the practical ability to move code between VMs and JREs. The 'Java' brand indicates that you can do this.

Yeah, right :) Try compiling a HalloWorld app on 1.5 and running it on 1.4. Both have the cute logo. But the same program compiled on one, won't necessarily run on the other, unless you somehow manage to convince the compiler to generate code with the other VM's class file format version information and to avoid stuffing in references to the 1.5-specific classes into the class file.

As far as I can see from the logo image, it contains no 'versioning' information, so it's useless for that scenario.

I don't know how to prove that Sun's VM passes the test, but I know that it does.

As a scientist, you surely know that's belief, not knowledge. I told you it's a cargo cult :)

If it did not work, this would be a major news story and Java's reputation would crumble.

Hardly. Sun has regularly been making changes to each release so far breaking backwards compatibility at the source level(the assert keyword, JDBC 3.0 breaking interfaces, etc.) and even at binary level (the System.getenv() melodrama, see http://www.tigress.co.uk/rmy/java/getenv/case.html for an overview). And guess what? Most of Sun's users just kept swallowing the breakage and loved it, because they never noticed it happen. Others vented their anger on BugParade without much result. Where was the big news story? :)

Sun has pretty much forked Java since 1.2 in interesting, slightly incompatible ways, and never documented properly what changes they made to the VM and Language specification, so that a lot of people implementing free runtimes are forced to scratch together information from various crumbles on mailing lists. Noticed any of that in the news? Of course not, because for most users it doesn't matter at all. Most users couldn't care less if their perception of Sun's stewardship of Java and reality matched. They are locked in into non-free software, so why bother getting disillusioned :)

I can't risk putting major enterprise apps on Kaffe and just hope; no matter the quality of the coding.

I fully agree. That's what the test suites of those major enterprise apps are for. I think Jonas on gcj is getting really good, afair from aph's posts on the gcj lists.

Don't trust claims blindly, check them for yourself. Be an informed customer.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:Compatibility doesn't mean a thing without proo

[Decaff]

Yeah, right :) Try compiling a HalloWorld app on 1.5 and running it on 1.4. Both have the cute logo. But the same program compiled on one, won't necessarily run on the other, unless you somehow manage to convince the compiler to generate code with the other VM's class file format version information and to avoid stuffing in references to the 1.5-specific classes into the class file.

This is a very poor argument. Compatibility does not have to be backwards. I would not expect one program compiled with a later version of libc to run with an earlier one. I would not expect an application that ran on Linux 2.6.x to run on 2.0.x. If someone says I need a Java 1.5.x JRE, that is fine by me. I'll get any 'Java'-labelled JRE of the same number from any vendor on any platform and my application will almost certainly work with few problems. Sure, things are never perfect, but compared to the C++ coding days...

And guess what? Most of Sun's users just kept swallowing the breakage and loved it, because they never noticed it happen.

Exactly. We never noticed it. We took large applications like Tomcat and JBoss and put them on Sun's VM on Windows and they ran fine, then we put them on IBM's VM on Linux and they ran fine. We never noticed it.

They are locked in into non-free software, so why bother getting disillusioned :)

If you choose a particular language you are locked into it after a while, free or not. I have had decades of dealing with incompatibilities in implementations of supposedly the same language - C, C++, Smalltalk - Java is one of the best things to have happened in software development for a very long time.

Don't trust claims blindly, check them for yourself. Be an informed customer.

This is rather condescending. Why are you assuming I am not checking them for myself? I am not naive enough to expect perfection, and if I move to another vendor's VM, I am going to be a little cautious. I know full well that there are going to be some niggling problems. However, something without the 'Java' label, indicating a TCK pass, is not going anywhere near my commercial servers.

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[DaliborTopic]

I think calling arrangements like this 'bogus' is rather petty and mean-spirited.

I have had the pleasure to read the SCSL a few times, to enjoy its full literary value. Some of the provisions in the SCSL are very interesting attempts to extend copyright without regard for copyrightability, others are pretty bold attempts to grab patent-like protection without going through the patent process. That may have been just funny back in 1999. These days, after SCO has shown how much expensive mess a rogue 'copyright holder' can do without even owning copyrights, and having such privileges written down in their licenses, I think it's justifiable to call licenses explicitely grabbing such wide privileges dangerous, or more mildly, 'bogus'.

I really don't get this attitude to Sun. Stuff that they have released like OOo have been vital for the acceptance of Linux on the desktop. They have done so much good for the IT industry over the years.

Sun is a respected member of free software community, and does a lot of things that are just plain great. They also do a few things that are not that great. That's understandable, it's a company after all, it's not a charity.

Sun's choice of licensing their Java technology implementations is their own business. A critique of some of Sun's licensing choices does not imply critique of Sun's other actions.

For example, JCP is a great idea. The execution is not that great though, the specifications coming out of it in the J2SE area have over the years decreased in quality, in my opinion. The JLS3 has stil not been released as a final specification, *years* after the assert keyword was added to the language.

As a Sun Java user, you may chose to interpret that as an attack on Sun, without undertaking the effort to validate my assertion against facts, instead validating them against your beliefs. That's fine. It's a human, emotional response. But as you may have noticed during the course of our discussion, I have made several assertions that you believed to be untrue, that have in fact turned out to be somewhat contrary to your initial beliefs.

There is a difference between what you believe to be true, and what is true. I call SCSL cooperation unfriendly not because I have a bad attitude towards Sun, but because Sun themselves are changing away from the SCSL for JINI, another 'crown jewel' technology in Sun's crown, in order to encourage further adoption, remove restrictions on user code licensing, and to fix issues with commercial multi-tiered distribution. See http://community.jini.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=di scuss&msgNo=1182 They are switching to ASL2.0, btw. See http://community.jini.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=di scuss&msgNo=1404 for details.

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[Decaff]

But as you may have noticed during the course of our discussion, I have made several assertions that you believed to be untrue, that have in fact turned out to be somewhat contrary to your initial beliefs.

Only one. The Open Source nature of the SCSL. On other matters I remain resolutely unconvinced. I see little evidence that Kaffe is either fast or compatible enough for general use. I am a Debian user, and if I try and install almost anything Java-based I seem to end up with Kaffe installed as the default JVM on the path. I can usually tell this because of the strange exceptions that appear when I try and use most of my Java applications! (And no, they are not all Java 1.5 compiled)

The logo looks the same everywhere

[DaliborTopic]

Compatibility does not have to be backwards.

Obviously. But I wasn't the one claiming that the logo implies compatiblity, that was you. And the logo looks just the same on all implementations, afaik.:)

So what is it now, does the logo or doesn't it mean that implementations are compatible?

For another intersting bit of information that you seem to be missing, there is no backwards compatibility between 'point-releases' of a Sun implementation either. See http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/compatibility.html# incompatibilities .

Why are you assuming I am not checking them for myself?

Because you believe that Sun's implementation is compatible, but you don't know it and refuse to check. Instead you voluntarily chose to rely on hearsay. You defend relying on hearsay, saying that it doesn't matter for you because you don't implement VMs, which I find pretty amusing, as in another breath you say:

However, something without the 'Java' label, indicating a TCK pass, is not going anywhere near my commercial servers.

That's pretty funny, as you don't seem to really know what the Java label indicates, have not seen the test suites, and apparently have an idea of compatibility that James Gosling makes jokes about in interviews[1].

What I find really fascinating is that Sun released 1.4.2 with a known compatibility test suite failure according to the page I quoted above. So much for the logo guaranteeing passing the test suite, I guess.

cheers, dalibor topic

[1] 'Well, I tested it myself and it seems to work OK for me,' or 'Hi, a bunch of my friends tested it and it worked OK.' See http://programming.itmanagersjournal.com/programmi ng/05/03/17/0131245.shtml?tid=56

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[DaliborTopic]

On other matters I remain resolutely unconvinced. I see little evidence that Kaffe is either fast or compatible enough for general use.

If you read my posts carefully, you'll notice that I did not make those claims. You're bashing a straw man of your own making. I hope it feels good, it's surely amusing to watch from over here.

I said that for some specific uses, Kaffe is faster than Sun's implementation, and showed you how to check it for yourself, and explained why that is the case.

I also questioned your claim that Kaffe is incompatible by showing that you do not have any knowledge about compatibility. You have a lot of beliefs about compatibility, but no way to prove them, and that sort of disqualifies your qualifying assertions because you don't really seem to understand what you're talking about.:)

I explicitely did not say that Kaffe is compatible. It will pass the TCK one day, but till then, I can not verifyably tell how much, or if it is compatible at all, so any such assertion is pointless.

If you have problems with Kaffe in Debian, you're kindly invited to use Debian's bug reporting mechanisms. I'd recommend bug-buddy.

Also, on a side note, since you pride yourself on using a 'Java' branded release of Sun's non-free software and assume that means something, I'd like to kindly point out that what you're using has never been certified as passing the TCK on any Debian release. So what you're running is not 'Java'-compatible in any meaningful, verified way.

You're apparently blindly trusting a logo to shield you away from libc & kernel issues and you sound as if you like it that way. Good luck, anyway, you sound like you may need it. :)

cheers, dalibor topic

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[Decaff]

I also questioned your claim that Kaffe is incompatible by showing that you do not have any knowledge about compatibility.

This is logical nonsense. Questioning Sun's JVM compatibility, (for whatever political reasons you have) does not make Kaffe any less incompatible!

Also, on a side note, since you pride yourself on using a 'Java' branded release of Sun's non-free software and assume that means something, I'd like to kindly point out that what you're using has never been certified as passing the TCK on any Debian release. So what you're running is not 'Java'-compatible in any meaningful, verified way.

Then there is not much use having it installed along with stuff labelled 'Java' is there? I wonder who suggested it might be a valid replacement?

You're apparently blindly trusting a logo to shield you away from libc & kernel issues and you sound as if you like it that way.

Neat the way you condescendingly assume that I am blindly doing things!

For years Java HAS shielded me from libc and kernel issues. It works; it works day in and day out for thousands of developers. I transfer projects consisting of hundreds of thousands of lines of Java code from one OS to another and one Linux distro to another with no problems at all.

You know that being condescending isn't helping your case! I admire the effort being put into Kaffe, but ranting zealotry and being so patronising to anyone who disagrees with you is perhaps not the best way to encourage its use.

I'll take a look at Kaffe in a year or so, to see if it has matured. I am prepared to take interest in a product despite the attitude of its supporters.

Re:SCSL is not open source, never was, never will

[DaliborTopic]

This is logical nonsense. Questioning Sun's JVM compatibility, (for whatever political reasons you have) does not make Kaffe any less incompatible!

That must have been a misunderstanding. I questioned the soundness and usefulness of a definition of compatibility that is based on belief, rather than on verifiable proofs.

Without being able to prove whether an implementation is compatible or not, one can not (scientifically :) decide assertions of compatibility.

I am prepared to take interest in a product despite the attitude of its supporters. Cool! See you around. And I hope you don't mind me being zealous about compatibility.

cheers, dalibor topic

Branding and Distributing Binaries

[turgid]

Sun does control the standard and gets to decide who can call what Java.

When Linus started Linux he made it GPL'd. He said that it would aim towards POSIX (and other standards) compliance. The Open Group controls the Unix standards and gets to decide who calls what "Unix" (look at Apple's trouble). Linux can not be called "Unix" since it hasn't been validated. More specifically, every time it is modified, it would have to be revalidated to conform to the spec AFAIK, and not just the Linux kernel. It's more involved than that.

After Apple OS X, Linux is probably the most widely deployed Unix-like OS on the planet.

Sun is now open-sourcing Solaris to try to compete with Linux, to rejuvenate the Solaris community and to get more developers involved in Solaris and software to run on Solaris. Solaris is still 5 years ahead of Linux in many areas.

Now, if someone had developed a JVM in all but name (unable to call it "Java" for branding reasons), GPL'd it and said that it aimed towards Java compliance...

Just another thought.

It really is annoying not being able to redistribute those binaries that you've made. Keep shouting, but shout at the right people. They are listening, but big ships take time to turn.

Re:Branding and Distributing Binaries

[SillyNickName4me]

> Now, if someone had developed a JVM in all but name (unable to call it "Java" for branding reasons), GPL'd it and said that it aimed towards Java compliance...

Yep.. it is one of the 2 possible outcomes that I see, but the outcome would still be a large dent in Sun's relevance. What I am trying to say in my article is that Sun could prevent this from happening. The longer they wait the more difficult it will become.

> It really is annoying not being able to redistribute those binaries that you've made. Keep shouting, but shout at the right people. They are listening, but big ships take time to turn.

I know they are listening, things got a bit better over time already, but that coastline it is going to hit is not going to move away to give more room to a big ship. Sun's Java implementation is still relevant today, but as alternatives become more mature, it will lose that. Alternatives are not limited to Java reimplementations or .NET or clones, and esp. when it comes to practical web application development, the alternatives are a lot less cumbersome to use also. They wont provide everything that Java should, but that rarely turns out to be a limitation.

What counts for me is in the end how much code is out there that I can use and combine to build custom solutions. Java does pretty well in that, but for the large majority of web based projects its somewhat dwarfed by what is out there written in php or perl for example, and then there is ruby and python and pike and..

To me it seems that Sun just really doesn't know what it wants. They want control and yet also want to get the benefits of open source. I think it is really simple, Linus seems to have pretty good control over Linux still because he provides good leadership. If Sun is capable of that they can let go of their worries there. They should keep in mind however that open source software doesn't need them, but many who are involved with open source software would welcome the day that Sun just clearly moves into a direction. They have to if they want to keep some kind of leadership in their own open source experiments really.