Slashdot Mirror


Oracle Hasn't Killed Java -- But There's Still Time

snydeq (1272828) writes Java core has stagnated, Java EE is dead, and Spring is over, but the JVM marches on. C'mon Oracle, where are the big ideas? asks Andrew C. Oliver. 'I don't think Oracle knows how to create markets. It knows how to destroy them and create a product out of them, but it somehow failed to do that with Java. I think Java will have a long, long tail, but the days are numbered for it being anything more than a runtime and a language with a huge install base. I don't see Oracle stepping up to the plate to offer the kind of leadership that is needed. It just isn't who Oracle is. Instead, Oracle will sue some more people, do some more shortsighted and self-defeating things, then quietly fade into runtime maintainer before IBM, Red Hat, et al. pick up the slack independently. That's started to happen anyhow.'

74 of 371 comments (clear)

  1. Oracle Forms by Dynamoo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Oracle Forms is dependent on Java.. but it seems very version-sensitive. Updating Java can often break forms, despite both being Oracle products.

    Other than that, the only use I can see for Java on the desktop is to enable machines to get infected with malware.

    --
    Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
    1. Re:Oracle Forms by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's like Java, only not terrible.

      And only runs on Windows.

    2. Re:Oracle Forms by gbjbaanb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nothing stopping the open source community from implementing a 100% compatible .NET library. Other than not giving a shit about it.

      you want .NET on Linux, go ahead and port it yourself. If its so easy then you should have it done by teatime. Nobody in the FOSS community wants it to be ported, and they don;t want to use it either, so there is no expectation of such things happening.

    3. Re:Oracle Forms by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ever heard of Mono?

      Oh, that weird-ass thing that Miguel invented to try to drag the Linux crowd away from multi-vendor, vetted languages? Yeah, I've heard of it.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:Oracle Forms by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's the thing that runs a tiny subset of Windows C# programs, isn't it?

    5. Re:Oracle Forms by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Updating Java has long been known to break stuff. Old Cisco Pixes used Java for the web interface, and it didnt work with anything but JRE 1.4.2. EFI printing controllers rely on 1.6.0 and break with anything newer. Im sure other admins can vouch for a million widgets that break when you upgrade java.

  2. "Anything more than a runtime and a language" by timrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What else does this article's author expect Java to be? A programming language and a runtime are exactly what Java is supposed to be.

    1. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by Kenja · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then what have I been drinking every morning?

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think that Java started to fail when it went into a split of Standard Edition and Micro Edition instead of relying on the same core for both platforms and then have a good interface between the different libraries. Of course - today the mobile devices are often powerful enough to run Java SE, but it still comes with unnecessary overhead there. The problems with diverting code started when Java 5 was released when you could improve the code considerably when it comes to being type safe through the Generics feature. However Java ME did not follow and that caused problems for developers trying to create a write once, run everywhere app.

      I think that the business model that Oracle has is not working when it comes to projects like Java where there is a large codebase depending on the openness of the platform - and by cutting the strings Oracle will suddenly make Java insignificant even though it has been in decline for some while. Cutting the strings might also alienate many major companies that have a large codebase in Java today and that depends on a long term support of that language. So Oracle may sit with something that they want to turn into a fully commercial unit while at the same time they can't because it will kill the product. And a dead product means that they can't find any software developers on the market for their own software written in Java. A catch 22.

      The other way around would be to make Java fully open source under some useful license, e.g. the Apache License. But I don't think that Oracle understands how to maintain control then.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by disposable60 · · Score: 2

      Malkovich all the way down.

      --
      You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
    4. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by Horshu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Libraries.

    5. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by drolli · · Score: 2

      And it has stagnated because it conquered everything up ato a realistc marke penetration for a single platform.

    6. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by gbjbaanb · · Score: 2

      Could be that was the start of the decline, but I think the real killer blow was when all the browsers decided to put it on the equivalent of a 'do not fly' list.

      Everyone and his dog now knows its not to be trusted, its a security nightmare, in addition to being dog slow and having really poor UIs.

      (whether that is true or not, doesn't matter).

      So now.. who wants to be a Java developer? Its akin to admitting to work for Walmart in the personal hygiene section.

    7. Re:"Anything more than a runtime and a language" by suutar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He wants new features, new syntactical elements, gamechangers like generics, enums, and closures. He wants fun things to learn while sticking with the "same" language, things which will hopefully let him use even higher layers of abstraction.

      Which is not in itself a bad thing. If Java doesn't add new useful features it'll get replaced by something that has them. But I'm not sure Java has a lot of room left in its complexity budget to add new stuff without becoming too confusing to stick with (assuming it hasn't already, which is debatable :) It may be best to let Java coast for a bit.

  3. This is the best case scenario by netsavior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oracle can't figure out how to screw over java, and we are complaining?

    1. Re:This is the best case scenario by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oracle can't figure out how to screw over java, and we are complaining?

      No. Oracle *IS* screwing over Java, and we are complaining. That's what OP was all about.

      It's the same crap they did to MySQL, it's just slower. Do you really wonder why most big web hosts have switched to MariaDB? (Hint: they probably won't tell you about it either. They still advertise MySQL, which for practical purposes it still is.)

  4. Java EE is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Java EE is dead

    Really?

    I guess I missed that.

    1. Re:Java EE is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More over... spring dead? =/

    2. Re:Java EE is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yep, NodeJS has pretty much taken over as the go-to language in enterprise development now.

    3. Re: Java EE is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hah, no it hasn't. Jesus. I love node, but the ecosystem is still a messy collection of immature libraries. There are some very cool frameworks and experimental bits. The node community reminds me of early-days Rails - lots of true believers reinventing the wheel in their favourite language. Spring is a well-designed and mature framework that has been getting better every year, and it isn't limited to Web applications. Java is verbose and slow to change, and it doesn't attract gee-whiz handwavy types (yay). It's always refreshing to get called into a company that needs help with a Spring application - nice clean well-separated concerns and stable libraries as opposed to the mess that production apps in PHP, Rails, or node seem to become.

  5. Oh noes! by qbast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some random nobody proclaims death of Java. Thousands of companies that do depend on Java EE just vanished in puff of logic.

    1. Re:Oh noes! by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Java is becoming the new COBOL. It may not get much respect with the hip young cats, but it's ubiquitous and those that know how to code well in it will always have employment.

      To me, it's just a programming language and library ecosystem. There are aspects I don't like, but, providing I don't get too damned clever, I can run my code on all the major platforms, which makes it better than just about anything else out there. For portability, it remains the king.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Oh noes! by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      For portability, it remains the king.

      As long as you don't want to run on iPhone or WindowsPhone, or any number of other CPUs. As long as you stick to Windows/Mac/Linux, Java is good for portability

      Unless you want to write a library that can be used from several different other languages, like Cython bindings to Python, or JNI to Java, then you should use C. But if you don't want to do that, and you only have a few platforms that you care about, then Java is good for portability.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Oh noes! by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Funny

      Some random nobody proclaims death of Java.

      He's not a random nobody. He's a strategic developer. The big ideas are the Cloud, NoSQL, and Big Data. You heard it from him first. Java needs to embrace them.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:Oh noes! by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Java is becoming the new COBOL.

      I'd like to be the first to say... huh? I'm sure Java will become a legacy language some day, but hipsters don't really define much of anything. Hipsters are against anything that's popular (because popularity by definition isn't hip), and go for the obscure things. That's why PBR became popular. It's not good, but among the younger set microbrews are very popular, so a hipster has to go for something unpopular to distinguish themselves from what's popular.

      20 years ago people used to say that about C. C is dying, C is going to be replaced, etc, etc. Didn't happen. By popularity C has a lot more competition, but it's alive and well and not going away. People hate COBOL because it was a badly designed language. If anything is the new COBOL, it's PHP. I've known several PHP programmers, and many of them have switched to another language not because of a lack of jobs, but because they hate the language. I'm not old enough to have been around for the COBOL era, but I'd guess it was the same then.

      The death of a language starts when developers leave it in droves for something else. I don't see that happeneing for Java. Do you?

      --
      AccountKiller
  6. Here's the problem by Nimey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Oracle can't figure out how to charge $5000 per CPU per year for Java, so it's not really interested.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
  7. Troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Huge troll. They got Java 7 released after Sun let it stagnate for years, they released Java 8 with major improvements the community has wanted for years, they are currently working on Java 9 and the module system, etc. Java EE and Sprign certainly are not dead. I regularly attend a local JUG and I would say the majority of people are using Java EE features such as Servlets, JPA, JAX-RS, JAX-WS, many are moving into CDI, and yes there are even a bunch of JSF users. There are Spring users too. IMO the Java community is alive and well.

  8. Where are the big ideas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally, I'd rather not see Oracle get any big ideas. They usually end badly.

  9. JAVA EE is not dead. by jaeztheangel · · Score: 3, Funny

    With Lambda expressions in the last release, and the renewed focus on mobile - Java is awesome. For a language which forced Microsoft to up it's game with C#, and with Linux has stormed into taking over most of financial services - it's as least as alive as COBOL. Which - like Sarah Palin - cannot be killed and will not go away. Java has the Colbert of Languages. Wildly successful, despite being in a suit.

    1. Re:JAVA EE is not dead. by qbast · · Score: 2

      Ooooh, they bought themselves an ISO standard. Quick, everybody switch to OOXML.

  10. Ahhh ... large corporations ... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Where cool technology goes to die.

    Large corporations often do not have the vision, flexibility, or ability to execute on these things.

    They're not making technology for the sake of making better technology, they're doing it purely to monetize it and make money -- for example, Oracle's insistence on keeping that stupid ask.com toolbar in the Java installer.

    Oracle doesn't need the revenue from putting shitware on computers, but they do it anyway. Something about "One Rich Asshole".

    Instead of writing a good platform which people use, Oracle have just been doing the greedy asshole thing.

    Which, considering how much of their stuff runs on Java, you'd think they'd have an interest in keeping the platform working and widely used.

    Sun could be visionaries, but Oracle not so much apparently.

    I think a lot of people expected Java to begin its decline once it was in the hands of Oracle -- who are completely incapable of being the stewards of an open standard which doesn't generate huge amounts of revenue.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  11. Java = Mark Twain of programming languages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

  12. Re:Seriously?!?! by multimediavt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Andrew Oliver? The shit mountain of self-importance? Still hasn't died of a heart attack? WhyTF is this on /.? Has this website really sunk that far?

    In a word, "Yup."

  13. Re:Nobody kills Java by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hey, COBOL still lives... Sorta

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  14. Re:Nobody kills Java by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    yeah.

    " for it being anything more than a runtime and a language with a huge install base." makes me confused. why the heck would it be something else? what does he want? he wants them to brand some operating system as JavaOS or what the fuck?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  15. Why is anyone suprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Oracle bought sun to gut the outfit of IP and maybe con some of Sun's userbase in to Oracle products.

    That, and some misplaced idea of becoming a vertically integrated one-stop solution. (Yeah. What kind of fucking moron that suffers Oracle's software pricing wants Oracle's cold clammy hands squeezing their nuts for hardware costs too)

    They don't give a wet fart about Java, Java's users, or any of other's Sun's formerly important initiatives.

    RMS was right about closed software. If you depend on it, you could find yourself at the mercy of some narcissistic slimy fuck like Larry Ellison who buys the company you used to have a good relationship with.

    The world is now running away from Java in every possible place it's not irreplaceable (like, say, blu ray players)

  16. Shenanigans! by multimediavt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    'snydeq' isn't a member of the community, he's a paid writer. Go look at his submissions v. comments. This whole site is a sham anymore. This will be my last logged in post. Complete troll bait anymore. Have fun being cogs in a money making scheme. Like Facebook they're done making money off me.

    1. Re:Shenanigans! by GoddersUK · · Score: 4, Informative

      "'snydeq' isn't a member of the community, he's a paid writer. Go look at his submissions v. comments." - Go and check what site he links to in every single one of his submissions... he fails at subtlety, that's for sure.

    2. Re:Shenanigans! by roger10-4 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, looking at syndeq's submissions...they're mostly links to "infoworld" articles. Looks like he's just trying to get extra traffic from the /. crowd.

  17. Java was fantastic in 1995 by presidenteloco · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But the JEE framework went against some of the Java founders' quest for simplicity, and byzantine configuration-based frameworks were not brought out at dawn and shot soon enough, so they took over. And the language has some annoying verbosity and stuttering.

    20 years later we need to move on. Less is more.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  18. Been decades by JustOK · · Score: 2

    I've been saying for a couple of decades that Java is just a fad. I'll be right, sooner or later.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  19. Just like C then? by putaro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, how much language "innovation" do we need? The platform is huge and there's more than enough third-party libraries to satisfy any needs.

    1. Re:Just like C then? by ljw1004 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You need language innovation for the things that can't be expressed in libraries, e.g.

      * async+await from F#/VB/C# (later adapted into C++, JS, Python).
      * non-nullable reference types from Haskell/F# (later adapted into Swift)

    2. Re:Just like C then? by ADRA · · Score: 2

      async+await seems a lot like features included in java.lang.Concurrent which has been in Java since 1.5 and as a popular third party add-on before that. Maybe they aren't language sugar in the same way level C# integrates with it, but it also means I can swap in various implementations of the provider if I found a more optimal solution for my specific problem area.

      --
      Bye!
    3. Re:Just like C then? by jd · · Score: 2

      Oak was originally designed for household appliances.

      D looks intriguing, certainly superior in theory to C++ or C#, but I'm seeing nothing substantial in it so far.

      For other C derivatives, there's Aspect C and related attempts at adding high-level abstraction. On the other end of the spectrum, you've Silk and UPC - efforts to make parallelism simpler, safer and usable. Again, though, how many here have even got these compilers, never mind written anything in them?

      For highly protected work, Occam-Pi is unbeatable. And almost unusable. Extraordinarily powerful, but extraordinarily formal. You could easily write an OS or virtual machine using it that could exploit multicore, SMP and clustering transparently. You just couldn't easily get it to do anything else, like hot-swap resources, add memory, access the busses, support RDMA, exploit hardware...

      That's the rub. Most of what is needed in an OS is inherently unsafe. It's why there's so much interest in splitting operating systems into unsafe parts (which often need to be fast and low-level) and safe parts (the stuff that does all the managing and abstraction). So long as the unsafe parts are well-behaved with valid data AND the safe bits provably give only valid data (though it doesn't have to be provably correct), then the system is guaranteed to be stable.

      You ideally want to split these up further. The safe bit should access an independent security kernel that handles all the access control, for example. The security kernel should be provably correct, which is a very different constraint than that imposed on other safe sections. Some sections of code should be able to self-replicate or migrate, to take advantage of resources rather than create bottlenecks. That would require greater emphasis on abstraction and adaptability, rather than validity or correctness.

      No single language can handle this level of versatility. All languages obtain specific characteristics through constraints and freedoms. This means you need superior linkage between languages and optimization that takes into account that different paradigms are used to solve different problems and that there is insufficient data to optimize at compile time, that it has to be done at link time.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  20. Re:Nobody kills Java by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the problem is Oracle isn't innovating, isn't advancing the technology, some aspects of it are essentially dead, the Java Community Process is largely ignored ...

    Java is moving along under its own intertia, but as stewards of the technology, Oracle isn't really doing a damned thing with it.

    They're doing exactly what you expect a company like Oracle to do ... maintain the status quo, fail to innovate, and rest on their laurels.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  21. Re:Nobody kills Java by Jaime2 · · Score: 2

    "runtime and a language with a huge install base" describes a future where Java just coasts. By contrast, Python, Ruby, and .Net are all runtimes and languages (several languages in the case of .Net) with a huge install base that are actively introducing new frameworks, development tools, and feature on a regular basis. I'm calling an interpreter a runtime for the purposes of this conversation.

  22. Re:Nobody kills Java by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorta? If you have a home mortgage in the US, I can say for a fact that you've got a 50/50 chance of using COBOL every month.

  23. Re:Nobody kills Java by idontgno · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, what you're saying is that Oracle's stagnant "sit on it" leadership is bad for people for whom the language and runtime are the end, the product, the point of it all.

    As opposed to in the real world, in which the language and runtime are just tools to get shit done, and its users want stability.

    You don't have to guess which community Oracle cares about. But if you're not sure, ask yourself which community can Oracle extort support contracts out of, or can be upsold on other products.

    Follow the money. How much is the JCP paying Oracle to give a rat's ass about their concerns? Innovation is a cost center to someone protecting a market share, and competing against others who are protecting a market share.

    If you want novelty, go find it someplace else. The other posters comparing Java to COBOL, even if jokingly, are very nearly right. Especially if you stipulate that, at the time of COBOL's dominance, the primary implementation of COBOL was associated with IBM big iron.

    And that's your historical analogue of the day: COBOL was to IBM what Java is to Oracle.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  24. Java Aint Dead by ISoldat53 · · Score: 2

    I get a popup every other day with an update.

  25. Re:Nobody kills Java by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

    Sorta? If you have a home mortgage in the US, I can say for a fact that you've got a 50/50 chance of using COBOL every month.

    And if you pay taxes, at least in the US, there is a better than 80% chance of COBOL being involved.

  26. The promise of Java... by theendlessnow · · Score: 2

    Java - Write once. Run everywhere.
    Java - Write once. Test everywhere.
    Java - Write for one version. Run on one version.

    Java - Write once. Run scared!

  27. Re:Nobody kills Java by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He probably wants "Innovation", you know, change for the sake of change? Taking something that works and making new partly incompatible versions of it so that it does not have the taint of old and uncool.

    Besides, who would want to work on a stable platform where all the major library needs have been met and vetted when one can be on the bleeding edge of something new to show off?

  28. Is this what the masses want by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 2

    With most programming languages there are 3 sorts of programmers: There are those 9-5 programmers who examine their paycheck more closely than their code; there are those programmers who have mastered the language and can do amazing things to make it dance, and there are the hard core insiders who give talks at language specific conferences and are on steering committees.

    With some languages such as assembler the bulk of the programmers are in the middle category, while with a language like PowerBuilder the vast majority were in the first category. But what I have found with almost all languages there are very very few people in the steering committee category and they can be very detached from the first category.

    With Java I would hazard a guess that the absolute majority of programmers are in the 9-5 category and about the only thing they want from the next version of Java is to "Please please please" don't break their code. Beyond that their needs are simple.

    So Oracle can let Java Stagnate and it will probably actually please that first group for the short term. Obviously, this can be unhealthy for the language so even that first group will lose out if the language dies as they will then have to learn a whole new language when they thought they could spend a whole career in Java.

    But one thing that I have also observed in many of the mega Java based projects is that they are often 1 or more versions of Java behind. Thus even newer versions of Java are totally irrelevant unless they solved some critical existing problem in the codebase of these mega projects. The real issue is that as Java moves on it becomes more and more of an effort to upgrade a mega codebase to a newer version making it eventually impossible under that company's coding management.

    So if Oracle ever did want to push forward with new Java ideas then it should also push a huge program where zillions of programmers were taught to manage a version upgrade for a large codebase and given the tools to make it as painless as possible. Remember 9-5 programmers love free trips to sunny places.

  29. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think that Java started to fail when it went into a split of Standard Edition and Micro Edition

    Under Java 8 ME
    http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/embedded/overview/javame/java-embedded-system-requirements-359229.html

      * Alignment with Java SE 8 language features and APIs, enabling more streamlined creation of embedded software through a unified development model between Java SE 8 and Java ME 8

    Oracle has been trying to fix that...

  30. Re:Nobody kills Java by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 2

    You don't have to guess which community Oracle cares about. But if you're not sure, ask yourself which community can Oracle extort support contracts out of, or can be upsold on other products.

    Follow the money. How much is the JCP paying Oracle to give a rat's ass about their concerns? Innovation is a cost center to someone protecting a market share, and competing against others who are protecting a market share.

    At the moment, lawyers seem to be a bigger cost center in protecting Java market share. See Oracle vs. Google, still ongoing.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  31. Re:Nobody kills Java by Tridus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is all about your definition of "dead". COBOL is "dead" in the sense that it's not being developed, it's not generally taught, and it's not generally used.

    It's "not dead" in the sense that some people are still using it to do meaningful work.

    The number of dead languages will vary considerably based on which definition of "dead" you use.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
  32. Re:Nobody kills Java by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 2

    That's true, but there's a difference between an open source support contract and the way in which Oracle does a support contract.

  33. Probably written by a PHP "programmer" by msobkow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Jave does what it needs to, and does it well. So does JEE.

    There isn't a lot of "innovation" in the stack because the stack serves it's primary purpose quite well, and is used by tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of websites to deliver business functionality.

    And that is, of course, the crux of the matter: functionality. Business is not interested in jumping on the latest and greatest craze just for the sake of doing so. Business wants stability. It wants predictability. It wants reliability.

    Not "innovation" for the sake of being different.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Probably written by a PHP "programmer" by jd · · Score: 2

      Stability, predictability and reliability could be done with Erlang, Occam, Eiffel, Smalltalk or Ada.

      Business could have build "enterprise" applications with any of these. Most existed before Java or, indeed, the web. Servlets could have churned out WAIS or Gopher data for businesses. Graphics, via SGI's VRML, Apple's Postscript or the ancient GKS standard, could have given you everything that Swing delivered. Not that businesses use Swing, as a rule.

      Portable applications in the form of Tcl/Tk packages could have provided everything Java applets did. Not that anyone uses applets either.

      It should be self-evident that absolutely bugger all of the usual explanations hold water. If the explanations were valid, the role would already have been filled and Java would have never taken off.

      Businesses flocked to Java and not to any other technology. Even technologies pushed by very large corporations. Businesses liked, and like, Java. That is obvious. "Why" is not obvious, Java does nothing that couldn't be done better in other ways. It isn't done in other ways, it's done in Java. There will be a sound reason for this, but it won't involve stability, reliability or predictability.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  34. Re:Nobody kills Java by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 3, Informative

    Complete nonsense. New upgrades have been carried out for COBOL, including COBOL 2002 which adds objects. There are several actively developed COBOL implementations. I think COBOL is more useful and available than its ever been.

  35. Re:Nobody kills Java by morgauxo · · Score: 2

    That is dead to this crowd. 1/2 of them were probably in diapers in 2002!

  36. Re:Nobody kills Java by ADRA · · Score: 2

    I think you missed the half-decade under Sun's stuardship where Java moved quite slowly between 1.2 -> 1.5. A language evolves to suit its community, and if it doesn't shove out the latest buzz word to the populace immediately, then I'm fine with it as long as they get to it eventually. Most library based tools have been out years before Sun/Oracle decided to standardize on a given set, which is 100% FINE. Let the trail blazers blaze trails and the standards follow. The aternative is building OSI model or maybe X.500 and expecting the world to change for them. Let a dozen interesting implementations develop and then combine the best parts of a few into the 'defacto' implementaion.

    --
    Bye!
  37. Re:Nobody kills Java by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Funny

    That is dead to this crowd. 1/2 of them were probably in diapers in 2002!

    Really? My impression is that Slashdot is mostly geezers.

  38. Re:Nobody kills Java by Frobnicator · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Besides, who would want to work on a stable platform where all the major library needs have been met and vetted when one can be on the bleeding edge of something new to show off?

    It is nothing to be too concerned about, it is part of the normal life cycle.

    Like happens to all languages before it, Java has slowly changed from a lean and sexy system into an overweight, middle-aged, sometimes nagging system that is not really much to look at. While it is great to have around, cooks great meals, and keeps the house clean, it is not attractive any more.

    Nothing to be ashamed of.

    Systems get older. Usually they get less attractive as they age and stop attracting people.

    Java was once that lean and sexy system when compared to its contemporaries. I was there when C++ was lean and sexy compared to predecessors. I remember hearing stories about C being lean and sexy compared to needing to rewrite the program for every system.

    Lots of new languages are popping up that are new and sexy. Dart and Go and Boo languages are all cute (and are mature enough that people don't look away and mumble 'tsk tsk'). Apple's new Swift language looks cute but is still a bit too young. While I have a lot of code in Java, I'm not married to the language and can use them as they appeal to me.

    Now for my rambling "get off my lawn" story. Stop reading here if you don't want to listen to grandpa babble about his old conquests and drift into a drooling sleep.

    I first started playing with C++ around 1985. It was so easy to create systems compared to the C systems I was also working on. I could modify behavior really easy with inheritance. I didn't need to specify my structure on every single function, just use the fancy new member functions that passed it automatically with the this pointer. Function names were much simpler, instead of the format NounVerbNoun they could be reduced to VerbNoun or just Verb. So much less typing. I didn't need to maintain tables of function pointers inside every object. I didn't need to follow every allocation with a series of intialization statements, but throw them into a constructor. I didn't need to search the entire code base and make hundreds of changes when adding something to a structure, I could just modify a single file. It was wonderful. But over time people kept adding new requirements and best practices; when you do this you also need to do five other things. Build times radically increased as features like templates were added (they were not there originally) and then huge swaths of code was automatically generated at runtime, or hundreds or even thousands of potential types were evaluated as potentially deduced types. It slowly changed from young and sexy to old and ugly.

    I first started programming with Java back in the 1.1 days, around 1996. It was so easy compared to the C++ systems I was also working on. I could create a good looking graphical program that I could run from a web page in a matter of minutes, or hours at most. My first real project at the time was a distributed image processing tool, with back-end clients running on 12 machines and a coordinating server, and the whole project took less than a week. If I needed to build a similar tool in C++ at the time it would have taken five or ten times the effort. Being able to simply rely on java.net.* rather than trying to find a networking library, relying on java.awt.Image classes to process the work, and otherwise having everything instantly available made development very easy. I could dynamically build images and pass them over the web with a trivial amount of human effort.

    Today I could still do that, but it would upset people. I would be asked things like "Why doesn't it use Maven to build it? Why don't I use more advanced image processing packages? Why are these talking directly with network libraries rather than using a comprehensive REST-based system? Why is there no comprehensive unit testing?" All the little additions have crept

    --
    //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
  39. Java stagnated UNTIL Oracle took over by musicmaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The JCP under Sun was completely broken. Java 7 was YEARS late. Under Oracle, we got Java 7 released, OpenJDK sorted out, and Java 8 released with Java 9 on its way. As a Scala developer, I don't feel like the Java world has stagnated, but then the Open Source "Community" has been proclaiming the death of Java since Java 1.5. The Open Source "Community" could learn a hell of a lot from the Java community, like how to actually have and maintain large open source libraries that work for years and years. How to build systems and platforms that mature and age and function for decades without needed to be rewritten. I'd bet there are far far more programmers developing on Java than there are for Linux as a desktop OS, and I shudder to think how a post submitted to Slashdot that declared Linux as a Desktop OS is dead would fare.

    --
    Everyone is living in a personal delusion, just some are more delusional than others.
  40. Re:Nobody kills Java by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

    You would be surprised how many banks, insurances and transportation companies still use COBOL. Or are running legacy COBOL applications ...
    And your claim that it is not actively developed is plain wrong.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  41. Re:Pauses my 16 GB desktop working on 4K program by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can write a one-liner script that will bring a Unix machine to a crunching slowdown. Stupid in, stupid out.

    If your little editor / mini-IDE craps out your machine, it is poorly written. Noticeable garbage collection will only be triggered if your Old Gen memory space is too full, which means you're maintaining references in memory which you should not (circular references are fun-- in someone else' code). Also possible is that it's simply not updating the UI while running a compile script, which is definitely bad programming. Blaming Java for that is idiotic.

    Disclaimer: I write high-performance Java applications using Spring. Also maintaining a pile of spaghetti that has grown over the past ten years, that still performs adequately.

  42. Re:Nobody kills Java by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Java browser applet will go surely.

    How often do you see Java browser applets used anyway? Not that much, because they never really took off in the first place (despite being by far the most hyped aspect of Java when it first came out in the mid-90s).

    Yeah, you do see them used sometimes for banking applications, custom internal-use corporate tools and the like, but for general use Java Applets were massively outnumbered by Flash apps.

    In fact, I'd say that Flash on web pages ended up almost entirely fulfilling the general-purpose embedded code role that Java Applets were originally meant- but failed- to fill.

    The problem was that Java was just too heavyweight and slow for computers of the time, whereas Flash was more lightweight- having started out as little more than an interactive animation creator- its increasing capabilities better matching slowly-improving computer power.

    I wouldn't say that Flash stole that market from Java, because the latter had already had a run at it (during the mid-to-late 90s) and failed to take off by the time that Flash started growing up around the turn of the millennium.

    Obviously it's in decline now, but Flash had at least ten- and probably closer to fifteen- years at the top, whereas Java Applets never took off in the first place.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  43. Re:Actually by jd · · Score: 2

    Most of what you're complaining about is in the standard library, not the core language. The standard library is semi-open, you can alter the code, rip out what you don't want. Only the core language is Java, the rest is just a programming aid.

    As for what COBOL has, Admiral Hopper was running software on a non-networked sequential architecture. This is rather different from operating in a multicore SMP-architectured server farm. There is nothing complicated about parallelism, but naivety and self-blinding are two great ways to make every mistake in the book - and then some.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  44. Re:Nobody kills Java by osu-neko · · Score: 4, Funny

    That is dead to this crowd. 1/2 of them were probably in diapers in 2002!

    Really? My impression is that Slashdot is mostly geezers.

    Being geezers and wearing diapers are not mutually exclusive.

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  45. Re:Nobody kills Java by osu-neko · · Score: 2

    Old languages never die, they just stop being hyped.

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  46. An area where Java applets continue to thrive by gwolf · · Score: 2

    I still continue to see Java applets being widely used in tasks that require trusted signatures — Say, filling in the tax declarations in my country, or submitting the grades for my students. For both actions, we must use a x.509 client certificate, and for both actions, quite different entities do not trust client-side Javascript validation, Flash code, or anything like that — Only Java applets.

    Which quite sucks, right, but anyway there'sa point to them.

  47. Re:Nobody kills Java by gwolf · · Score: 2

    Yes, the hole was dug 25 years ago, the grave stone ordered 23 years ago, the undertaker paid 20 years ago. But the hole has got filled with leaves, which had a lot of time to be composted into new ground. The undertaker died two years ago. The grave stone shows signes of decay. And COBOL is happily breathing.