Google Backs Out of JavaOne

snydeq writes "Citing concerns about Oracle's lawsuit against it, Google has backed out of the upcoming JavaOne conference. 'Oracle's recent lawsuit against Google and open source has made it impossible for us to freely share our thoughts about the future of Java and open source generally,' Google's Joshua Bloch said in a blog post. The move may signal eventual fragmentation for Java, with Google conceivably splintering off the Java-like language it uses for Android."

Comments

Re:!Good

[tomhudson]

Except that Android doesn't run Java classes - it runs dalvik classes. It's like you taking a .doc file and converting it to pdf so that people don't need the Evil Word.

Java's dying anyway. It's a lot slower than dalvik, and Java simply hasn't lived up to its "write once run anywhere" claims. Just like it hasn't lived up to earlier promises to "reinvent the desktop", or before that, to "change the way we use the Internet with applets - remember them - to add interactivity.

What are they going to do when dalvik is extended to run on regular servers, and all those Java support contracts dry up? Just like is happening right now in the mobile space with the multi-fragmented JavaME?. Pretty bad when your core market tells you that the competition already raided your fridge, ate your breakfast and lunch, and took a dump on your supper.

Re:Can't they technically fork it?

[TheRaven64]

Sun open sourced Java, and you can easily fork it. You can't call it Java unless it still implements the specification correctly, but the license that Sun released the code under means that you are safe from patent problems.

Google's problem is that they did not fork Java, they reimplemented it. This means that they have no copyright problems and do not have to abide by the Java license (GPL + runtime exemption), but they do have potential patent problems. Sun / Oracle has a patent grant that permits the use of their Java-related patents in any complete implementation of the Java spec. Android, however, is not a complete Java implementation. It implements the core language and a number of the java.* classes, but it does not provide the entire java.* class hierarchy. This means that it is not covered by the patent grant.

In summary, open source Java is fine, open source almost-Java is not.

Re:!Good

[tomhudson]

Java is still a lot slower than native methods - it's also, unfortunately, so inflexible compared to, say, c, that you can't even consider using some algorithms that c programmers use all the time. That's what happens when you can't do pointer math - you lose a whole class of efficient ways to do things. Ditto for the lack of first-class functions, so no function pointers for you.

Dream on if yo believe that the JIT is competitive. Even if it were able to pre-compile everything to native methods, you still lack some of the essential programming models that people have been using for decades to make things go faster.

Re:!Good

[Anonymous Coward]

I wasn't asking for proof that native code will be faster than Java, I was asking for proof of your original statement that that Java (I assume you meant the JVM) is a lot slower than Dalvik.

But yes, you're right, there's a hell of a lot of stuff that Java (be it running on a JVM or Dalvik) just won't do well, and anybody wanting to write truly high performance software had really better get used to writing in lower-level languages, or at the very least, understanding their stack right down to the hardware level.

Re:Lose-lose situation

[Rockoon]

Having a good reputation among the slashdot crowd may be more important than you think. Oracle's name is quickly becoming mud in the minds of of a lot of developers, and while in the short term that may mean little to them, it will probably bite them in the ass down the road.

Developers dont make decisions about the use of Oracle's money stream products, of which Java is not among them.

Its the IT guys that make those decisions, and they pick Oracle because Oracles solutions are some of the best in the business. Oracle's revenue stream is in the same league as Google, Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Cisco, etc.. not a household name like some of them, but their revenue stream is testimonial to the quality of their products and the loyalty of those who do make purchasing decisions relevant to Oracle.

Oracle did not buy Sun for Java. Java was just a bonus. Sun was a direct competitor with some unique IP in the storage solutions space that Oracle was and will continue to be the #1 player in. You see Sun Server prominent on that products/services page, while Java is relegated to only footnote status in the "Related Technologies" section.

Java is a fine language for what its primarily used for, and Oracle certainly uses a lot of Java code, but they barely marketing Java itself. They couldn't give a rats ass as to what developers feel about Java. They sell solutions, not platforms.

Re:Lose-lose situation

[bill_mcgonigle]

Am I missing some great strategic outcome Oracle is hoping for?

Yes, they need Google patents for their database product to not become obsolete in the next few years. Buying Sun got them two things - a) hardware fast enough to get them over the gap b) leverage for patent cross-licensing agreements.

This is a [software] patent (government) problem.