OpenOffice 2.0 Criticized on Use of Java

karvind writes "Yahoo is running a story on how OpenOffice 2.0 Faces Opposition over Its Use of Java. According the article: "The problem, according to some free software voices, is that OO.o relies too much on Sun Microsystems Inc.'s proprietary Java programming language in an open-source project. In particular, free software advocates are objecting to the use of Sun specific Java code for such OO.o 2.0 features as the new, Microsoft Access-like database management program, Base and Writer's (OO.o's word processor) document wizards." Linus Torvalds also moved to an open-source solution for software configuration management system."

Comments

And what would be better?

[ShatteredDream]

Python which is slow, has a much smaller user base and far less consistent and well-documented standard library?

Perl whose readability for many coders is next to nothing?

C++ because we all know that more buffer overflows and random craziness is what OpenOffice needs to compete with Microsoft Office?

C# since 93-95% of the desktop users out there use Windows, why bother with the minority of others? (I actually quite like C# and am hopeful about Mono)

Ruby because a language that most coders have never even seen before is clearly the best way for a fresh start?

Objective-C because when Steve Jobs takes over the world, we'll need to be on his good side?

C, since objects really are overrated for anything that normal developers might want to maintain?

So seriously, of all of the major language choices, which would be better?

Re:And what would be better?

[puregen1us]

Congratulations on the well thought out, objective arguement put forth. A single reason why not to use each language. No positive points considered at all. None of Java's flaws mentioned either.

I actually, have no qualms with using Java, I just prefer to see rational, complete arguements on Slashdot. Something seldom posted.

However, I fail to see the issue with using a proprietary language. The project is open source and will remain that way, and Sun cannot change that. Sun could change Java to spite it, but why would they deliberately harm a free, almost acceptable alternative to a rival's application?

I use Apple's OSX, I don't use BSD's, NeXT's, Apple's OSX, and I don't use GNU Linux, I use Linux. I dislike the standard open-source, free-software bigotry, on licences. I imagine the majority of coders are working to create a decent alternative because they want just that, not out of some need for a jihad against an evil enemy. Why create such a fight. If that effort went into coding the results would be considerably better free software.

Bit of a rant, sorry.

Re:It's not GPL'ed either!

[David Leppik]

So it seems Stallman has a very good point here. Can you imagine trying to, say, re-implement DirectX if Microsoft suddenly wasn't going to let you code using it? I don't know if this is a comparable task, but it's the only thing I can think of in my terms....

s/DirectX/Visual Basic/
Funny, this isn't as far fetched as it seems.

Re:It's not GPL'ed either!

[m50d]

Replacements are already there, e.g. koffice, but they could do with more developers and users. So we point out the problems with OOo in the hope more people will come and use them and code for them, in the same way the OSS movement as a whole points out the problems with closed source software like windows.

Re:Point of order...

[g051051]

The message you quote is from 1 Jul 2002, nearly 3 years ago. Do you have any current indication that com.sun.* classes are still in use?

Re:It's not GPL'ed either!

[Decaff]

What about platforms where Sun does not provide a JVM? Those people will never be able to tun the full OOo, and the more Java used, the less they will be able to use. Will it eventually be zero?

You simply use a JVM from someone else. Use Apple's VM, or IBM's, or HP's, or BEA's.

Although Sun largely controls Java, it is by no means the only supplier of Java.