IANAL, but I don't see how they can since it is under a GPLv2 license, but with enough money and lawyers I suppose anything is possible. It's not likely however since that would probably cause a massive rejection by the user base. Right now, the user base seems willing to accept the status quo since Oracle seems to be moving Java in a good direction technically. Still, I'm hopeful that Google will prevail and maybe even invalidate some of Oracle's patents.
Interesting idea, however, if you think the patent waters around Android is thick with sharks, can you image the patent clusterf*ck surrounding the database arena with Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, Sybase and a myriad of other vendors all staking claims to anything that remotely resembles storing information in a way that it can be retrieved?
For the umpteenth time, Oracle's patent issues are not with the Java language, they are with the Dalvik VM. It doesn't matter if you write your program in brainf*ck, if it runs within a VM on a mobile device, it's likely to run afoul of Oracle's fairly broad patents. Can we please stop the "switch from Java to {insert language of choice}" blather. The source language is not the issue.
Lets be honest guys if MSFT would have pulled this shit the crowd here would have laughed them right out of the building.
What the hell are you talking about? MSFT did exactly this. Ever heard of J++?
When Microsoft lost the case against Sun, they simply renamed their Java implementation J++ and they were in compliance. No problem. Google never called their product Java, so they never infringed on the trademark in the first place.
It was only have the market rejected J++ that MSFT "embraced and extended" Java and came out with C# and.Net.
Why Google should get away with bastardizing Java now, is beyond me. Just because they are still the "cool kid on the block"?
The difference is that Google is not calling their system Java. When Microsoft lost their case, all they had to do was change the name of their version of Java to J++ and voila, no trademark violation. However, the market didn't buy this strategy which is why Microsoft "embraced and extended" Java and introduced C# and.Net as it's answer to Java.
This is not as far off as you might think. I'm running the Android-x86 (an x86 port of Android) right now on my desktop within a VirtualBox VM. Android-x86 is still in it's early stages, but is pretty stable and impressive already. Currently it supports Froyo (2.2) and Gingerbread (2.3) is in beta.
All that's really needed is a set of VirtualBox guest additions like those available for Windows and Linux guests to enable "seamless mode", and Android apps would appear on the desktop as (nearly) native desktop applications.
Java is "technically" open-source under GPLv2 (OpenJDK), but it's license contains an extra clause (classpath exception) designed to prevent someone from forking it. In order to fork Java and be granted protection from enforcement of Oracle's patents, the fork must pass Oracle's TCK (compatibility test). However, the catch-22 here is that Oracle will not license the TCK, so no fork can pass the TCK, so no fork can be granted patent protection, so, as in the case of Google, they would get sued for patent infringement.
A better solution would be to "uncripple" the Linux already contained within Android and allow applications to be deployed directly on Linux. They could keep the Dalvik VM and the Android APIs in place. That way the 150,000+ Android apps would continue to work as well as native Linux apps. Best of both worlds.
Oracle's main complaint regarding Android is it's alleged patent infringements in the JVM. These patents are broad enough that they could apply to the Go VM as well, so changing languages would not solve the problem. A simpler solution would be for the Dalvik VM to change the way it works internally to sidestep the patent issues. This would nullify Oracle's patent claims and yet still allow already developed Android apps to run unchanged. However, given the "broad scope" of the Oracle patents, this may not be possible.
Eclipse is not owned by IBM. It is open-source licensed under the EPL, which is an OSI approved open source license. True, Eclipse was originally developed by IBM, but is now managed by the Eclipse Foundation.
NetBeans is not owned by Oracle. It is open-source, but with a clusterf*ck of different licenses (some portions licensed under the LGPL, some under GPLv2 and some under GPLv2 with classpath exception (OpenJDK components), some under CDDL, and a couple others dealing with JavaME, JavaCard and JavaFX).
Both of these are considered open-source, although Oracle's handling of OpenJDK, it's insistence on enforcing the classpath exception, and it's current litigation with regard to Android does give one pause as to it's commitment to open-source (understatement acknowledged).
Even if I thought sharing your facebook login with your employer was reasonable (which I don't), why would they need your password? So they could post crap on your account?
Disclaimer: I am an avid non-facebook user. I refuse to support what I consider a complete waste of time and computing resources.
These companies are investing ridiculous amounts of money into alternative fuel research
Citation?
Chevron is investing about $300 million/yr in alternative entergy research. (http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/oil-companies-promote-alternative-energy/).
Meanwhile, it posted 4th quarter 2010 profits of $5.3 billion, or about $19 billion for the 2010 year (http://www.pennenergy.com/index/petroleum/display/3120811156/articles/pennenergy/petroleum/finance/2011/01/chevron-profits_skyrocket.html).
This amounts to 1.5% of PROFITS (not total revenue) is being funneled off for research.
Exxon (2010 profits of over $30 billion) reportedly spends less the 0.5% of their profits on alternative energy research. It "claims" to be spending $1 billion/yr on R&D, but won't say how much is going to "alternative energy" research, leaving the impression that most of it is going toward petroleum directed R&D.
I wouldn't exactly call these a "ridiculous amount of money" given the "ridiculous" profits being generated and the acknowledged looming peak oil crisis.
You can't always place the blame on corporate developers. Most times when a project comes up and an estimate is provided, management comes back and dictates that it needs to be done it 1/2 or 1/4 of the time. Padding the estimates doesn't help either. Most times going into a project someone else (on the sales side) has already promised the customer what it will cost them, so many times what gets cut out of the projects is sufficient analysis and design.
Sad but true. Welcome to the real "Cledus T. Judd" world.
No, only about 6 years (circa 2005). I was late to the C# party since most customers that were tied to Microsoft still wanted their apps written in VB back then.
Wasn't hard to pick it up though, given that it's pretty much a knock-off of Java with a.Net framework.
J2EE is an environment for developing, building and deploying Web-based enterprise applications.
It may be hard for you to grasp the concept, but everything is not a web based application. Maybe they failed to teach you that in your intro to comp sci class.
However, generally speaking an application that is written in 100% pure Java should run without change on later versions of the JRE.
'Should' is a wonderful word which, in IT, means 'won't'.
No, it means should in IT, just like it does everywhere else. It does not however, mean "always" which, in the case of Java I suppose is where the bar is set.
I suppose it's ok for a new version of Windows, Linux or OSX to break existing applications. It's fine for new versions of.Net, Cocoa, GTK, QT or other frameworks to break old applications. It expected that new versions of VB, Python or Ruby might cause problems for existing applications. However, if the latest version of the JRE causes problems for a ten year old application, lord almighty, what a piece of crap it is.
C'mon folks it's just software, like any other platform. It is prone to bugs, distribution screw-ups and inadequate regression testing just like any other software package. My experience is that it's better than most, but it's not perfect. Maybe your experience is different. If so, choose a different language/platform. That's the wonderful thing about software today, there are many other choices.
On that note however, as a former Java hater who had to start doing Java development , I came to realize that shitty buggy java apps are generally the fault of the shitty developer who made them, not Java
I think that one sentence says it all. How can you be a Java hater before you've done any development in it? Somehow the word "lemming" comes to mind.
If it's so shitty, can you explain why it has been and continues to be (increasingly) the most widely used language/platform on the planet?
For the same reason that the craptastic COBOL was before that? It's easy to learn, and once its popularity grew among non-technical managers, the network effect took over.
There's still no real need to have Java on the desktop. Server-side, just like COBOL before it, it has it's place. Inventory, payroll, CRM, and all those other card-walloping programs need to be written somehow, even if there aren't any cards to wallop anymore.
Sorry, by my recollection is different. Java became popular despite the the fact that the corporate world was practically OWNED by Microsoft and Visual Basic/Visual C++. Most non-tech managers were afraid to use anything that didn't have a Microsoft logo on it. Most only allowed Java into their shops when it became clear that it was the logical choice in certain application spaces.
I agree, Java is not and never has had much to entice desktop application development (though that may well change when Android apps start landing on the desktop).
Also, I understand it's in vogue to dis COBOL on/. and geek forums. For a 50+ year old language, as "craptastic" as you may think it is, it seems to me it's held up pretty well. Where will you're current favorite language be in 50 years?
I'm not here to make excuses for Snoracle's screw ups. Any time a new version of software (anybody's) is installed, there is a chance things will break. I agree, in this case it was an obvious dumb move to push out a new version without at least flagging it in bright red letters and supplying work arounds. It was noted in the release notes for u17 (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/6u17-141447.html), but who reads those and who can control the clients anyway.
I understand why that had to make this change (otherwise they'd get slammed for security holes), but it obviously could have been handled better.
In any case, this is a certificate/security issue and not a language/platform issue which was the original point I was trying to make.
Slashdot Mirror
IANAL, but I don't see how they can since it is under a GPLv2 license, but with enough money and lawyers I suppose anything is possible. It's not likely however since that would probably cause a massive rejection by the user base. Right now, the user base seems willing to accept the status quo since Oracle seems to be moving Java in a good direction technically. Still, I'm hopeful that Google will prevail and maybe even invalidate some of Oracle's patents.
In short, no. Eclipse runs on the standard JVM, so it is granted the right to Oracle's patents since the standard JVM has passed the TCK.
Interesting idea, however, if you think the patent waters around Android is thick with sharks, can you image the patent clusterf*ck surrounding the database arena with Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, Sybase and a myriad of other vendors all staking claims to anything that remotely resembles storing information in a way that it can be retrieved?
For the umpteenth time, Oracle's patent issues are not with the Java language, they are with the Dalvik VM. It doesn't matter if you write your program in brainf*ck, if it runs within a VM on a mobile device, it's likely to run afoul of Oracle's fairly broad patents. Can we please stop the "switch from Java to {insert language of choice}" blather. The source language is not the issue.
Lets be honest guys if MSFT would have pulled this shit the crowd here would have laughed them right out of the building.
What the hell are you talking about? MSFT did exactly this. Ever heard of J++?
When Microsoft lost the case against Sun, they simply renamed their Java implementation J++ and they were in compliance. No problem. Google never called their product Java, so they never infringed on the trademark in the first place.
It was only have the market rejected J++ that MSFT "embraced and extended" Java and came out with C# and .Net.
Get your history straight.
Why Google should get away with bastardizing Java now, is beyond me. Just because they are still the "cool kid on the block"?
The difference is that Google is not calling their system Java. When Microsoft lost their case, all they had to do was change the name of their version of Java to J++ and voila, no trademark violation. However, the market didn't buy this strategy which is why Microsoft "embraced and extended" Java and introduced C# and .Net as it's answer to Java.
This is not as far off as you might think. I'm running the Android-x86 (an x86 port of Android) right now on my desktop within a VirtualBox VM. Android-x86 is still in it's early stages, but is pretty stable and impressive already. Currently it supports Froyo (2.2) and Gingerbread (2.3) is in beta.
All that's really needed is a set of VirtualBox guest additions like those available for Windows and Linux guests to enable "seamless mode", and Android apps would appear on the desktop as (nearly) native desktop applications.
Java is "technically" open-source under GPLv2 (OpenJDK), but it's license contains an extra clause (classpath exception) designed to prevent someone from forking it. In order to fork Java and be granted protection from enforcement of Oracle's patents, the fork must pass Oracle's TCK (compatibility test). However, the catch-22 here is that Oracle will not license the TCK, so no fork can pass the TCK, so no fork can be granted patent protection, so, as in the case of Google, they would get sued for patent infringement.
A better solution would be to "uncripple" the Linux already contained within Android and allow applications to be deployed directly on Linux. They could keep the Dalvik VM and the Android APIs in place. That way the 150,000+ Android apps would continue to work as well as native Linux apps. Best of both worlds.
why not just buy the rights to Java and open source it.
Ummm, that would require Oracle agreeing to give it up. Not likely to happen until pigs begin to fly.
Oracle's main complaint regarding Android is it's alleged patent infringements in the JVM. These patents are broad enough that they could apply to the Go VM as well, so changing languages would not solve the problem. A simpler solution would be for the Dalvik VM to change the way it works internally to sidestep the patent issues. This would nullify Oracle's patent claims and yet still allow already developed Android apps to run unchanged. However, given the "broad scope" of the Oracle patents, this may not be possible.
Eclipse is not owned by IBM. It is open-source licensed under the EPL, which is an OSI approved open source license. True, Eclipse was originally developed by IBM, but is now managed by the Eclipse Foundation.
NetBeans is not owned by Oracle. It is open-source, but with a clusterf*ck of different licenses (some portions licensed under the LGPL, some under GPLv2 and some under GPLv2 with classpath exception (OpenJDK components), some under CDDL, and a couple others dealing with JavaME, JavaCard and JavaFX).
Both of these are considered open-source, although Oracle's handling of OpenJDK, it's insistence on enforcing the classpath exception, and it's current litigation with regard to Android does give one pause as to it's commitment to open-source (understatement acknowledged).
But the cartidges will cost you an arm and a leg (literally!)
/. is only a 90% waste of time. That's an acceptable level for me.
Disclaimer: I am an avid non-facebook user. I refuse to support what I consider a complete waste of time and computing resources.
These companies are investing ridiculous amounts of money into alternative fuel research
Citation?
Chevron is investing about $300 million/yr in alternative entergy research. (http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/oil-companies-promote-alternative-energy/).
Meanwhile, it posted 4th quarter 2010 profits of $5.3 billion, or about $19 billion for the 2010 year (http://www.pennenergy.com/index/petroleum/display/3120811156/articles/pennenergy/petroleum/finance/2011/01/chevron-profits_skyrocket.html).
This amounts to 1.5% of PROFITS (not total revenue) is being funneled off for research.
Exxon (2010 profits of over $30 billion) reportedly spends less the 0.5% of their profits on alternative energy research. It "claims" to be spending $1 billion/yr on R&D, but won't say how much is going to "alternative energy" research, leaving the impression that most of it is going toward petroleum directed R&D.
I wouldn't exactly call these a "ridiculous amount of money" given the "ridiculous" profits being generated and the acknowledged looming peak oil crisis.
You can't always place the blame on corporate developers. Most times when a project comes up and an estimate is provided, management comes back and dictates that it needs to be done it 1/2 or 1/4 of the time. Padding the estimates doesn't help either. Most times going into a project someone else (on the sales side) has already promised the customer what it will cost them, so many times what gets cut out of the projects is sufficient analysis and design.
Sad but true. Welcome to the real "Cledus T. Judd" world.
Because iOS is soooo much better! Oh wait...
Since you can't use data and voice at the same time.
Snicker, snicker. Oh aren't you witty!
No, only about 6 years (circa 2005). I was late to the C# party since most customers that were tied to Microsoft still wanted their apps written in VB back then.
Wasn't hard to pick it up though, given that it's pretty much a knock-off of Java with a .Net framework.
J2EE != Java, Bro.
J2EE is an environment for developing, building and deploying Web-based enterprise applications.
It may be hard for you to grasp the concept, but everything is not a web based application. Maybe they failed to teach you that in your intro to comp sci class.
However, generally speaking an application that is written in 100% pure Java should run without change on later versions of the JRE.
'Should' is a wonderful word which, in IT, means 'won't'.
No, it means should in IT, just like it does everywhere else. It does not however, mean "always" which, in the case of Java I suppose is where the bar is set.
I suppose it's ok for a new version of Windows, Linux or OSX to break existing applications. It's fine for new versions of .Net, Cocoa, GTK, QT or other frameworks to break old applications. It expected that new versions of VB, Python or Ruby might cause problems for existing applications. However, if the latest version of the JRE causes problems for a ten year old application, lord almighty, what a piece of crap it is.
C'mon folks it's just software, like any other platform. It is prone to bugs, distribution screw-ups and inadequate regression testing just like any other software package. My experience is that it's better than most, but it's not perfect. Maybe your experience is different. If so, choose a different language/platform. That's the wonderful thing about software today, there are many other choices.
On that note however, as a former Java hater who had to start doing Java development , I came to realize that shitty buggy java apps are generally the fault of the shitty developer who made them, not Java
I think that one sentence says it all. How can you be a Java hater before you've done any development in it? Somehow the word "lemming" comes to mind.
If it's so shitty, can you explain why it has been and continues to be (increasingly) the most widely used language/platform on the planet?
For the same reason that the craptastic COBOL was before that? It's easy to learn, and once its popularity grew among non-technical managers, the network effect took over.
There's still no real need to have Java on the desktop. Server-side, just like COBOL before it, it has it's place. Inventory, payroll, CRM, and all those other card-walloping programs need to be written somehow, even if there aren't any cards to wallop anymore.
Sorry, by my recollection is different. Java became popular despite the the fact that the corporate world was practically OWNED by Microsoft and Visual Basic/Visual C++. Most non-tech managers were afraid to use anything that didn't have a Microsoft logo on it. Most only allowed Java into their shops when it became clear that it was the logical choice in certain application spaces.
I agree, Java is not and never has had much to entice desktop application development (though that may well change when Android apps start landing on the desktop).
Also, I understand it's in vogue to dis COBOL on /. and geek forums. For a 50+ year old language, as "craptastic" as you may think it is, it seems to me it's held up pretty well. Where will you're current favorite language be in 50 years?
I'm not here to make excuses for Snoracle's screw ups. Any time a new version of software (anybody's) is installed, there is a chance things will break. I agree, in this case it was an obvious dumb move to push out a new version without at least flagging it in bright red letters and supplying work arounds. It was noted in the release notes for u17 (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/6u17-141447.html), but who reads those and who can control the clients anyway.
I understand why that had to make this change (otherwise they'd get slammed for security holes), but it obviously could have been handled better.
In any case, this is a certificate/security issue and not a language/platform issue which was the original point I was trying to make.