Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM buys Gluecode

Posted by samzenpus on from the buy-it-all dept.

karvind writes "After acquisition of Ascential, Big Blue has bought the application management firm Gluecode. From the article: IBM plans to allow its customers to download Gluecode software, develop their own application server software, and begin using it -- all at no cost. IBM also said it will become an active contributor to the Apache Geronimo open source project and will expand the existing community of developers."

81 comments

  1. Diabetes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I got diabetes from too much glucode.

  2. Amazing technology! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... download Gluecode software, develop their own application server software, and begin using it -- all at no cost

    Next up from IBM -- they mail you sand, which you can use to develop advanced microprocessors and chipsets, and begin using them, all at no cost!

    Followed by their patented 4k GIF reading "WORK FASTER," intended for use to develop your own source code control system, and begin using it -- all at no cost!

    For the coup de grace, an online whiteboard, allowing you to jot arbitrary equations and thus evewntually develop amazing new branches of quantum physics, revolutionizing modern thought. All for just two percent of royalties (plus naming rights)!

    Thanks, IBM!

    1. Re:Amazing technology! by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      Sorry, the name "Boson" was already named... ;P

      And there are no computrons.

      Though I guess having the first quantum-spelled name (IBM in xenon atoms with nickel base) is pretty cool.

      Gotta hand it to IBM. At first they were the ones to bring the computer industry down, but now they're bringing it up, up and up. I think they really understand what our computer and tech culture is becoming.

      --
    2. Re:Amazing technology! by Afrosheen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I think they really understand what our computer and tech culture is becoming."

      Yeah they sure do. It's a source of great income for those with deep pockets like Dell, Microsoft, and IBM. IBM is just leveraging their power to stay alive and grow. They invested heavily in Linux from a number of angles to benefit themselves first and the rest of us second. I don't have a problem with their methodology, just pointing out that their the primary benefactor of the technology they purchase and open up like this.

    3. Re:Amazing technology! by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      If they benefit, and we do too, wheres the badness?

      When treading into software, its not a zero-sum game. In fact, its the companies and people who mooch off of free stuff without giving back. The recent anti-GPL companies recently 'featured' are an exemplary demonstration of that.

      --
    4. Re:Amazing technology! by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1, Insightful


      Right.

      That's the difference between IBM and Microsoft.

      As IBM betters its fortunates, it gives us free stuff.

      As Microsoft betters its fortunes, it gives us, oh, DRM, viruses, BSOD, ever increasing fees, endless FUD and BS from Gates, etc. ad nauseum.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    5. Re:Amazing technology! by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      ---As Microsoft betters its fortunes, it gives us, oh, DRM,

      You can thank the "Big Studios" for that, thank you. People dont want DRM, the content distributors (not creators as much).

      ---viruses

      What virus has Microsoft made? Guess you've never seen a naughty shell script or C code with bad calls that do things like... encrypt your ~ and then demand X amount of dollars for the decryption key.

      ---BSOD

      Yeah, like I'd rather have Windows (or ANY OS for that matter) try to attempt to recover from a kernel error. Lets see, since the oplocks controlling the DB were mangled, lets open them again and do stuff, never the fact that we just fucked up the whole DB. Whoops.

      Id rather have stop screens and BSODs if that meant better data integrity. Then again, how about real quality testing for those crap windows drivers. That craphardwarefrombiglots.com and its associated driver are probably more at fault than Windows will EVER be.

      ---ever increasing fees

      We're now free not to use Windows and accopanied software any more. Oh yea, teh cost for MS software sure beats 120$ per YEAR upgrades from Apple. Yeah. bleh.

      ---endless FUD and BS from Gates, etc. ad nauseum.

      Every company talks up themselves and down their competitors. Too bad YOU cant see past it.

      --
    6. Re:Amazing technology! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, if it were microsoft, you would all be wailing about how Mircosoft buys up smaller companies and isn't very innovative. Isn't that what IBM is doing in this instance?

    7. Re:Amazing technology! by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


      Another Windows troll. It's everybody's fault but Gates and Windows. Yeah, right.

      THIS is why we're better off with IBM.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  3. Job Losses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought IBM were trying to save money by getting rid of 13,000 jobs?

    1. Re:Job Losses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      This is part of their overall plan to return to profitability: Give stuff away and make it up on volume.

    2. Re:Job Losses by pilgrim23 · · Score: 1

      They did. They fired all the workers. Now the managers realized there is no one left to attend meetings, form focus groups, create mission statements and position papers. New blood needs to be hired now or there will be no one around to find fault with in time for the next quarterly review process.

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    3. Re:Job Losses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      After the last story, I read your post as " They did. They fried all the workers." I wonder if they'd do that in an aquarium...

    4. Re:Job Losses by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.

      That sounds like a motto for the Ankh-Morpork Fools' Guild.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    5. Re:Job Losses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Few good companies (read: IBM) fire 13,000 people to save money. They fire 13,000 people who are mediocre, under-performing, or difficult to work with and instead make the mass firings the result of an "economic downturn".

      Makes it easier on the employee getting fired (less insult to injury) and also reduces the likelihood of a law suit (harder to demonstrate discrimination).

      Then they turn around and hire 13,000 people who are (hopefully) exceptional, and though the net employee count is unchanged, the average employee competency has grown.

    6. Re:Job Losses by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1

      Maybe the layoffs are the result of increased automation, as has happened in other countries. It makes sense, doesn't it? I mean, they are a computer company. They should know a thing or two about increasing productivity.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    7. Re:Job Losses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt 13,000 employees out of over 300,000 would dent the company that much. That is just over 3% of IBM's work force.

    8. Re:Job Losses by serialdogma · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the Apache part?
      They sack 13,000 jobs and get FOSS people to do the work for them, the giving the code away part is just to win them over.

      Not that i am saying it is bad for them to do this.

    9. Re:Job Losses by mwg_stpaul · · Score: 1

      Best. Sig. Ever.

  4. Why not use JBOSS? by Armatich_Defiant · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    If you are wanting a free J2EE application server, why not use http://www.jboss.org/?

    What am I missing here?

    Def

    1. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by javaxman · · Score: 1
      If you are wanting a free J2EE application server, why not use http://www.jboss.org/?

      Indeed. I see the question as being "when you can't cope with your expanding J2EE app server needs yourself, who do you want to call in, IBM or JBoss ?"

      Note that's jboss.com... IBM isn't the only for-profit company involved in open-source J2EE app server products here. Maybe that's what you're missing. Or maybe you're just missing the concept that someone might look to an outside company for help with their app server, rather than hiring more guys like you and I.

    2. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by ikeepitreal · · Score: 1

      JBOSS is LGPL, Geronimo is ASF.

    3. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by carlfish · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know. We should all just use JBoss and ignore any other attempt to make an open source Java application server. Competition is a terrible thing to have in any market, and should be discouraged at every opportunity.

      Charles

      --
      The more I learn about the Internet, the more amazed I am that it works at all.
    4. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by dsgfh · · Score: 2, Informative

      JBoss is great when you only want to deploy a single application on a single box. Start needing to deploy multiple applications on a single server instance & you quickly get into classloader hell (damn ambiguous specs, and JBoss deciding to take a unique approach to just about everyone else).
      Try & set up multiple JBoss instances & ask yourself why pre-packaged JBoss components in the deploy directory (where you deploy your applications) refer to specific ports configured elsewhere, and you have to change a half dozen obscure files to get it to work.

      Don't get me wrong, I think JBoss is great. I could just do without some of it's quirks.
      The Apache Foundation has become a commercial Java developers best friend, esp license wise. Regardless of how compatible other licenses are to internal development, minimal restrictions on what a client can do with their IP gives them a warmer, fuzzier feeling & lets me get on with not re-inventing the wheel.

    5. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      every single application server has classloading quirks. with BEA/WAS,etc you get to call them bugs and cry and shout that things aren't working right, then wait two weeks for a potential patch from support, that may or may not work.

      i think the specs are farily clear regarding the application container provider's responsibilities regarding classloaders. care to expand on some of the things you see lacking?

      if you read the jboss docs/examples, you'll see that there's a simple ant execution to setup multiple server instances without port conflicts.

      just a hunch, but i don't think the apache folks will be able to quickly leap ahead of jboss wrt documentation and administration. bea/was give some silly console for server management that makes deployment a point and click fun little web based activity. those interfaces are error prone and lend themselves to inconsistiences in environments (test env doesn't match prod).

    6. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by dsgfh · · Score: 3, Informative
      very single application server has classloading quirks. with BEA/WAS,etc you get to call them bugs and cry and shout that things aren't working right, then wait two weeks for a potential patch from support, that may or may not work.
      Yup... they're bugs b/c they're documented to work one way, and actually work another. However the class-loading heirachy is very clear (until you start deploying applications that do their own class-loading as well ala Sun Portal Server).

      Any application server that, when it doesn't find the class it's looking for in your deployed application, goes looking for class files in other deployed applications (& yes, I know you can turn this behaviour off, but recall experiencing other problems when I did).

      i think the specs are farily clear regarding the application container provider's responsibilities regarding classloaders.
      Actually, the spec is very loose when it comes to class loading. It does state that applications shouldn't assume that classes will be loaded by a different classloader, but doesn't state that the servers shouldn't work this way.
      By convention amongst the major vendors, it seems you get a heirachy of classloaders, where your application can only load classes deployed with itself or its ancestors. JBoss by comparison flattens it out, so you can load things from other applications.
      Clear specification, rather than phrases like "should not assume that each component is loaded in a separate class loader and has a separate namespace" and "Typically this will require the use of a separate class loader for each application.", where the classloading behaviour/heirachy is mandated would be preferable in my books. & while I'm ranting, so would getting rid of app server specific deployment descriptors.

      if you read the jboss docs/examples, you'll see that there's a simple ant execution to setup multiple server instances without port conflicts.
      I'm obviously running a different version to you, as I've not seen this in the docs. Instead, I've found that I have to enable the bindmanager (which isn't used by default in 3.2.x), then grep the rest of the server structure for all the ports it could possibly be using (hasingleton comes to mind as one offender). This is as per the instructions on the jboss.org website. Possibly it's changed in the latest versions. Unfortunately my corp clients don't like rapid upgrade cycles.

    7. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by killjoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Competition is one thing, competition without purpose is another.

      Right now there are two major J2EE engines out there. JBOSS and JONAS what is the purpose of a third? Both JBOSS and JONAS are certified by SUN, both of them are proven enterprise ready, both of them have active developers and userbase.

      So I'll ask it again. What is the purpose of a third open source J2EE container? Is there some missing functionality tlhey want to implement?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    8. Re:Why not use JBOSS? by cygnusx · · Score: 1

      Geronimo was forked off JBoss because a number of developers found JBoss Inc difficult to work with.

  5. Buy Buy Buy by PacketScan · · Score: 1

    Go big blue. Why do i have a feeling this is just the start for big blue in the next few months.

  6. More info by kbahey · · Score: 4, Informative

    Editors: articles are increasingly lacking context. Please editorialize a bit more.

    The company's web site and Product overview for Gluecode SE would help next time.

    --
    2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
  7. Apache Geronimo by Nik13 · · Score: 4, Informative

    For all of those who didn't know, it's a J2EE server.

    Apache Geronimo Homepage

    I knew of [apache jakarta] tomcat, but not geronimo. Sorry, I guess I've been living under a comfy rock for too long.

    --
    ///<sig />
    1. Re:Apache Geronimo by TopSpin · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...it's a J2EE server.

      So is Websphere...

      o.O

      Gluecode actually goes beyond J2EE; Apache Derby is supplied as a DBMS. It merges all of these independent parts into a cohesive, turn-key J2EE stack with a few extras, like a web based configuration/management interface.

      Jetty is the HTTP listener. I really like Jetty. For most small J2EE apps, if you need something that isn't in Jetty Plus (besides the database,) you need to think hard about whether you're over engineering. If you can live within Jetty Plus, your life will be far more pleasant; you need a JVM, tar/winzip and vi/notepad to manage that server.

      Why has JBoss moved away from Jetty anyhow? It use to be the default HTTP listener and servlet engine, but it looks like they've diverged. NIH?

      --
      Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
    2. Re:Apache Geronimo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      For most small J2EE apps, if you need something that isn't in Jetty Plus (besides the database,) you need to think hard about whether you're over engineering.

      ARE YOU KIDDING?? Suppose I have a SMALL, J2EE app, and suppose it's overengineered..., but I repeat myself.

  8. One Word... by gerf · · Score: 1

    Cool!

  9. The enemy of their enemy... by brasten · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course they would support Apache Geronimo. It's in IBM's best financial interest to protect WebSphere, and protecting WebSphere means not allowing JBoss to become the de facto open-source AppServer standard. At the same time time, they want to appear friendly to open-source to attract developers.

    So, they support Apache Geronimo to compete with JBoss.

    1. Re:The enemy of their enemy... by mark_lybarger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the only problem jboss has is it's use of the lgpl. you can't get outside corporate sponsorship for core projects (eclipse) by using the lgpl. with geronimo, any company will be able to donate some serious cash to its development and then make money off packaging, selling, and supporting the product.

      i'd guess ibm went with linux only because they had already a corporate server room presence (RHEL/SuSE), and the BSD's most likely have much less deployments.

    2. Re:The enemy of their enemy... by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      you can't get outside corporate sponsorship for core projects (eclipse) by using the lgpl. with geronimo, any company will be able to donate some serious cash to its development and then make money off packaging, selling, and supporting the product.

      Possibly. But if a company does improve Geronimo and sell its version, it has fewer incentives to release those improvements: if it did, other companies could release their own improvements and the first company would have no access thereto. Whereas with the LGPL they would. The GPL and LGPL are very much corporation-friendly, from a certain perspective: they mean that one can release one's code with the assurance that one will be able to use any improvements others build thereon.

  10. Apache Harmony by olafura · · Score: 4, Interesting

    IBM has campaining for open source J2SE.
    When Classpath is turning almost compliant, Apache tries to help it's accepance by requesting
    them to move the code to the Apache Licence.
    The man behind it is a VP at Gluecode.
    IBM buys Gluecode.

    Also there was a rumor on jpackage about an undisclose three letter company that
    was getting them to test a free j2se impementation.

    1. Re:Apache Harmony by Decaff · · Score: 1

      IBM has campaining for open source J2SE

      Which is a bit of a puzzle, because they don't need to campaign for it - they can simply write it. If any company has the resources to do this, it is IBM.

    2. Re:Apache Harmony by Thumpnugget · · Score: 4, Informative

      IBM has already written their own JVM. But they made the mistake of looking at Sun's source code and signing a license agreement with Sun for said source code. Now they can't write an actually free-as-in-speech one themselves without Sun suing that JVM out of existence for 'contamination' issues and IBM proper for breaking licensing agreements.

      So, all they can do now is encourage other people to hurry up and write a free-as-in-speech JVM and, for example, provide financial incentive to that end without actually providing anyone to do the work itself.

      --
      Free yourself. Everything else will follow.
    3. Re:Apache Harmony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is a bit of a puzzle, because they don't need to campaign for it - they can simply write it. If any company has the resources to do this, it is IBM.

      Except Sun has different licensing rules for companies and non-profits. By laundering their code through Apache, maybe IBM can get good PR and special licensing treatment from Sun.

    4. Re:Apache Harmony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also there was a rumor on jpackage about an undisclose three letter company that
      was getting them to test a free j2se impementation.

      The hell does SCO have to do with Java?!?!?!

    5. Re:Apache Harmony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is not entirely correct, IBM has developed two JVMs, the second one is not contaminated

    6. Re:Apache Harmony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's correct, IBM's J9 Java Virtual Machine is a cleanroom implementation so it has absolutely no code from Sun. It's actually the successor to OTI's K8, a Smalltalk VM. And if you didn't know OTI was bought by IBM many years ago.

    7. Re:Apache Harmony by Decaff · · Score: 1

      But they made the mistake of looking at Sun's source code and signing a license agreement with Sun for said source code.

      It is misleading to consider a huge company like IBM to be a single entity who as 'looked at Sun's source code'. They could always form a development team from people who haven't seen it.

    8. Re:Apache Harmony by k98sven · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IBM has campaining for open source J2SE.

      Right.

      When Classpath is turning almost compliant, Apache tries to help it's accepance by requesting them to move the code to the Apache Licence.

      Not true. Apache Harmony is an effort for an Apache VM. They haven't decided yet if that means writing their own from scratch or adopting one.

      They haven't decided yet if they're going to use GNU Classpath either. Although it is very, very likely.

      Apache has not requested that Classpath change its license. Firstly because they haven't decided to use it yet. Secondly because there is no percived reason to; So far noone has brought up any reason to belive the Classpath license is incompatible with the Apache one.

      What has happened is that the Classpath hackers have said that if they chose to use Classpath, and if there is some minor problem with the license, then they will be prepared to tweak the license as to be compatible. But relicensing the code under the Apache license has not come up.

      In any case. It's not about supporting Classpath or IBM. It's about their own self-interest. Apache has more Open Source java code than any other single entity out there. Why would they not want a Open Source JVM to run it on?

    9. Re:Apache Harmony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to SCO.

  11. Re:Wise Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CEO James Marciano here.

    Are you really that arrogant that you have to go flashing it around? And do you think that people give a rats a$$ about reading your bio?

  12. Gluecode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    IBM plans to allow its customers to download Gluecode software, develop their own application server software, and begin using it -- all at no cost.

    Does that mean there's a lot of cutting and pasting involved?

    1. Re:Gluecode? by TheStupidOne · · Score: 1

      I hope the adheshive isn't the kind that you lick. Licking 10,000+ lines of code together has to taste horribly nasty.

      And imagine the Gentoo people's horror when they hear they have to lick all the code together just to compile Tux Racer. "emerge tongue" indeed

      --
      unable to resolve function slashdot.sig(), aborting...
    2. Re:Gluecode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not so bad if you pick the right font.

    3. Re:Gluecode? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Well, you can improve the taste by pasting some Wine code into it. PearPC code may also give an interesting note. However, you have to be careful, because the code might have bugs in it, and licking a bug probbably isn't the experience you'll like.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  13. Hope there weren't.... by SA+Stevens · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ...any royalty arrangements in the deal with the former owners/employees of Gluecode.

    Sucks if you make that kind of a deal and then the purchaser just throws your product out free to the wind.

  14. Why mention Ascential? (They're nothing special) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why even mention Ascential in the submission?
    They're nothing particularly interesting or relevant to the story.

    [Disclaimer: Ascential employee (now IBM) speaking. AC for obvious reasons.]

  15. Imagination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it my imagination or does it seem that the tables are turning. IBM was this dominent monopoly in the late 70s, early 80s, until a small up-start by the name of Microsoft took off. IBM fell as a result, but not it seems like with their embrace of the open-source community and encouraging this form of development, THEY could pull one over on Microsoft and regain their position.

    Come to think of it... I'm not sure this is a good idea. Where do you think the nickname BIG BLUE came from? ;)

  16. First thought about "IBM buys Gluecode" by renrutal · · Score: 3, Funny

    Larry Wall sold Perl?!?!

  17. yeah... by fallendove · · Score: 0

    An IBM spokesperson was quoted saying "we have to stick together in this time of transition."

  18. Another unmentioned benefit of the purchase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM is trying to lighten up its line of J2EE and database products -- but this is difficult -- inertia tends towards bloat. The standard load laptop for an in-house programmer/engineer as well as a field technical sales person is a 3GHZ + 1 GB RAM + 4800RPM drive. And when you try to run all of IBM's industrial strength products together on that sort of laptop to form a cohesive demo -- eg Websphere + DB2 + MQ etc -- it very frequently implodes in a death spiral of non-productive unhappiness due to resource limitations and configuration complexity. So by supporting the simpler and ligher Geronimo stack it gives IBM a much simpler platform on which to demo and prototype applications that will be sold to eventually run on beefier hardware and a more "robust" software stack.

  19. Smooth move? Can't really tell. by SphericalCrusher · · Score: 1

    Well, from IBM's recent layoff of over 10,000 employees and the selling of their PC making division, I really don't think purchasing a new company and then offering stuff for free is really going to help them. But don't get me wrong, I'm 100% for OSS, I'm just looking out for big blue. I don't see them lasting if they keep this up. This is just my two cents though.

    --
    "Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
    1. Re:Smooth move? Can't really tell. by JamesTRexx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They know what they're doing. They're shifting more from selling software to selling software services. Think of the way Redhat makes money off of a free OS. Businesses (especially the bigger ones) that need support will most likely turn to those that develop the application suite they're using.

      --
      home
  20. Re:Wise Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CEO George Funkatoot here. I'm here, and I'm a CEO. Hooray for me. I'm wonderful. If you don't believe me, then you're dumb. Thanks. Bye.

    BTW, IBM is cool. And I'm cool. Thanks again. Bye.

  21. ERP market stance by saitoh · · Score: 1

    anyone else see this as a way of stepping up their solution line against Oracle (who had the RDBMS, and grabbed PeopleSoft for the front end, so they could complete with SAP).

    This wouldnt make much sense, except Oracle has been snatching up middleware people, and other IP groups to try and strengthen their overall ERP stance, something that IBM was looking to do with their strategic alliance with PeopleSoft last fall. Just a thought.

    --
    We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
  22. Re:Wise Strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The name's James. My friends call me Captain Awesome, but you can call me Sam. My mom calls me Zippy.
    I'm a CEO, which means 'Chief Executive Officer.' This is special, because not everybody gets to be one. Sometimes I put syrup in my chocolate milk.
    I like IBM because they're a good company. They do things. Sometimes they invest in things. I like it when they do that because it makes me feel good. I think they also make stuff. I'm pretty sure it has to do with technology.
    Anyways, if you want to come talk with me, I think that would be neat. I get lonely sometimes. I have a web-page too. It has some stuff on it about me. It's neat.
    Anyways, I have to go feed the cats.

  23. What are IBM really buying? by wrmrxxx · · Score: 1
    Geir Magnusson Jr. is a lead in the proposed Har mony Project, which is intended to be an open source Java J2SE 5 implementation.

    Geir Magnusson Jr. is from Gluecode, which IBM has acquired.

    What is IBM really trying to buy here? I always thought that when IBM wanted Java they'd just buy Sun.

  24. *Business* Competition == redundancy and waste by CarpetShark · · Score: 1
    Competition is a terrible thing to have in any market, and should be discouraged at every opportunity.

    You're joking here, but I think this isn't too far from the truth. Too often, we confuse improvements with the inefficient competitive business practices under which they were developed. However, improvements can also come about through cooperation, and in fact, they probably do come about through that method more often.

    Take Free Software project branching, for instance: you can branch a project and compete with the original project, developing your own code for new features, but also developing code for features that the original branch is developing too. Or, you can be a true feature branch, and just work on that one new feature, while cooperating on everything else as much as possible.

    One -- cooperation -- is efficient, and gives good opportunity for experimenting with minimal waste. The other, competitiveness as we often see between capitalist companies, is wasteful, needlessly secretive, and generally childish.

    1. Re:*Business* Competition == redundancy and waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The problem is that JBoss is, to a large extent, a pile of fetid dingo's kidneys, and JBoss Inc. seems to do everything it can to discourage people from wanting to help improve it.

    2. Re:*Business* Competition == redundancy and waste by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

      One -- cooperation -- is efficient, and gives good opportunity for experimenting with minimal waste.

      When people agree.

      The other, competitiveness as we often see between capitalist companies, is wasteful, needlessly secretive, and generally childish.

      At times. But it's a useful organizing principle for a pluralist society where people often disagree.

      --
      -Stu
  25. you scared me to death! by gcnaddict · · Score: 1

    I originally thought you wrote "IBM buys Google" You almost gave me a heart attack >_

    --
    Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
  26. JBoss and Jetty by mparaz · · Score: 2, Informative

    JBoss moved away from Jetty because Mort Bay is part of the Core Developers Network which forked from JBoss. Jboss now supports Tomcat.