Java To Be Opened For Christmas? 243
MBCook writes "At the Oracle OpenWorld conference, Sun's CEO Jonathan Schwartz announced on Wednesday morning that Java would be opened within 30-60 days, which would would mean about Christmas Day at the latest. Sun first announced they would do this back in May at JavaOne but didn't give a date. We've seen rumblings before on this topic. Schwartz also commented on the companies Sun Fire servers, Sun's relationship with Oracle, and general trends."
Re:64-bit (Score:5, Insightful)
An open source VM isnt much use (Score:4, Insightful)
Finally (Score:4, Insightful)
It looks like Sun Microsystems are starting to see the benefits of Open Source technology, first Open Office (Under the GPL no less) then Solaris and now Java, - I can only hope it catches on throughout the industry.
Just a couple of points - I know that Java isn't being released under the GPL, and that there are still some interesting debates going on about the CCDL and interoperability with the GPL (I wont even pretend to know the precise issues), but it is definitely a good thing. Since Sun Microsystems is primarily seen as a hardware company, and presumably isn't too worried about the revenue's it is losing from the software sales it could have had (I know this doesn't apply to Java but it could have to Open Office and did to Solaris) it does mean that nothing that they are doing can be readily applied to a Software company. So anybody suggesting that Microsoft et al should start Open Sourcing their code because it works for Sun Microsystems is probably a little off the mark.
Well anyway - Be a good day when it *actually* happens and his is very good news. I wonder if I should look at using Java...
PS: By the way (and slightly random) my spell checker in OO.org attempts to correct CCDL as CUDDLY and GNU-GPL as SNUGGLE, how sweet.
Firefox : Iceweasel :: Sun Java : ??? (Score:4, Insightful)
umm yeah ... who cares (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Firefox : Iceweasel :: Sun Java : ??? (Score:3, Insightful)
And wasnt that why Sun Microsystems were *not* going to Open Java? Im sure I remember reading that they wanted to maintain control of the development of the language and its implementation, although that was a long while ago.
I wouldn't though compare this to the Debian - Firefox - Iceweasel scenario though, as Debian are not Forking Firefox, developing it independently and making it less compatible, but simply working around some (legitimate) issues that Debian have with Mozilla. (and Mozilla has a perfectly sensible stance on the issue too - Im a Debian user but I don't think you need to take sides over that particular issue - Both groups are aiming at the same goal, but with slightly different ideas of how to get there.)
Re:Firefox : Iceweasel :: Sun Java : ??? (Score:4, Insightful)
While not 100% true in all cases, the beauty of java isn't really in the base JVM, its in J2EE. At least, it is what pushes it in the corporate space, where the money is. With that in mind, a specific J2EE implementation usualy has a couple of "supported" JVMs (sometimes only one even). So I suspect even these alternate JVMs, at least the serious ones (which would want to work with J2EE, or else be forgotten), will stay in line (read: compatible) with the commercial J2EE implementations, or die. So while we WILL see a bunch of weirdo useless JVM/Java implementations (I realise both aren't the same thing, but the logic still stands), there should be a couple that stay at the top, and we'll just use those.
Re:Firefox : Iceweasel :: Sun Java : ??? (Score:5, Insightful)
So? There already are several more versions of Java. What keeps the ones that succeed largely compatible isn't licensing (as the non-Sun, non-Microsoft ones are reverse-engineered, not licensed) but the fact that there is no interest in incompatible "Java". Releasing Sun's implementation under the GPL (or the CCDL, or, heck, into the public domain) isn't going to change that.
Re:An open source VM isnt much use (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, but do they handle the full language that Sun's VM handles, and are they as fast?
Re:Don't get yer hopes up (Score:2, Insightful)
WODE is a silly myth promoted by people with an axe to grind, usually those who have no real world experience with Java. Its extremely easy to write portable code in java, but java won't stop you from writing unportable code, just like any other language.
HA! Portability provided you don't need to port to windows.
The "overheard" you speak of is largely irrelevant and has been for quite some time due to advances in computing power.
I'll believe it when I see it. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll belive this is really "open" when (if) I see it and it's really open.
And if so it will be a first for Sun.
Re:Co-ffeee... (Score:5, Insightful)
Using Azureus as an example of memory problems in Java is like using Firefox as an example of memory problems in C++
Re:64-bit (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:umm yeah ... who cares (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:64-bit (Score:3, Insightful)
It's essential that Java not fragment (Score:2, Insightful)
An even wiser zen monk didn't go into a fast-food joint, and said
"Make me one OF everything."
One standard version of core Java things like the language definition, bytecode definition,
and the annointed standard libraries is absolutely ESSENTIAL to Java's continued success.
Because "one of everything" means that a java app and library code-sharing culture and a
shared and reusable expertise can flourish. Fragmentation of the core standards will lead
to disintegration of the core value proposition of Java.
I hope that this issue can be dealt with as Java is opened.
Perhaps by trademark protection means? Break (fork) the standard if you want, but if you do
you can't call it Java.
Or perhaps just by a consensus-agreed committee approval structure like the java community
process.
Can you imagine if everyone were free to fork the XML standard and still call it XML.
Sheer pointless chaos.
Java forked in its core standards and libraries is the same.
Re:IBM Trolls (Score:4, Insightful)
In all fairness, FF is dual-licensed under the GPL.
Re:Don't get yer hopes up (Score:3, Insightful)
Sez you. In the real world, java has been the language with the most projects on Sourceforge for quite some time. There are also many other repositories. So you don't speak for the majority.
In the Free world portability comes from automake/autoconf and doesn't need to pay the emulation overhead of a virtual machine or any of the other problems.
Again, the majority of languages today, including the open source world, target a virtual machine or an script interpretor. JVM, Mono, Python virtual machine, Parrot, the Lisp virtual machine, and all the scripting languages - Ruby, Javascript, PHP, Lua...oh what the hell, all of them.
Problems like each major Java app tending to bring along an entire JVM and set of libraries to solve compatibility issues.
Apps coming with their own virtual machine rather uncommon today. And what application doesn't come with a set of libraries today?
Re:Finally (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact of the matter is that they for the most part suck. As you mention yourself, they are only now close to becoming 1.4 compatible. The problem, of course, is that 1.5 was a huge improvement over 1.4 and it came out over 3 years ago. 1.6 is in beta 2 and will be released soon.
You can spend a lot of time discussing performance comparisons between the different VM's like SableVM, but that's not really interesting. It doesn't really matter which "free" VM you use, you still don't have a modern class library available until Sun releases theirs. That is why an open sourced version of Java is interesting for these parties.
Personally, I think the Sun VM is fantastic, but giving the "free" alternatives the ability to use the same class library will only increase competition and that is good for everybody. Today, they are playing the catchup game, and that must be really boring, since no one that really matters actually use their product for anything important.