What is Digg?51 Comments
- KingAdrock, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21HeatedYetUseLessArgument.Generate();
- DickBreath, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Here is a plausible scenerio. Java may presently incorporate third party code. This may be under a license which allows Sun to distribute it in all the forms that they presently do, including source code "under glass" read-only distribution, but not as open source.
Sun may have to replace portions of third party code before they can change the license to an open source license. The reason OpenOffice.org didn't get the database from the old StarOffice was because of third-party code as I just described. Sun had to completely rewrite the database part of OpenOffice.org.
This is speculation. Any resemblance to actual people or events is unintentional and purely coincidental. Very few animals were harmed in the making of this post. - FreakyT, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18That sounds all well and good, but it's too bad J2ME *already* violates Java's 'write once, run anywhere' mantra.
- alphager, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16This is a duplicate story.
And it is intentional; http://digg.com/tech_news/Sun_will_open_source_parts_of_Java comes up during the "Submit a story"-Process.
Plus, it is a blog, not a direct link to the information.
Dirtyfratboy should be ashamed. - neko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10try {
Point p = new ConstructivePoint();
} catch (DiggException de) {
p.getDuggDown();
} - ExCornelius, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The language is portable, it's just the API isn't fully since ultra-constrained hardware can't use them anyway. Of course, you *can* run a J2ME app on a non-constrined machine. WORA is the goal given the reality of having to run on hardware; it's not an promise that I'll be able to run a spreadsheet on my cellphone.
- jarvuss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Why does this link to some guys blog, that then links to the actual article??
- a1programmer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12"However, they are still having problem on how to keep Java compatible, and how to ensure that no company uses market forces for its own implementation, a move that would threaten Java's 'write once, run anywhere' mantra."
The only way to keep that from happening is to not make it open source. - williambertram, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9GNU has an open source Java project:
http://www.gnu.org/software/java/ - pgouy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Can we have a more lightweight JRE, please? Thank you. :)
- evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Links to the actual articles:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/07/17/HNjavaopen_1.html
http://www.mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=3345 - terminalpariah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@tommasz: many free software operating systems won't distribute non-free software in the default install and repositories. That keeps many Java-based free software projects out of the default repositories, too.
- DickBreath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Isn't the JRE that runs on, well basically, 100% of the cellphones out there lightweight enough? Or did you specifically mean lighter JSE (standard edition) vs. JME (micro edition).
- gerkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yet _another_ media grab from Sun about Java. I say ***** or get off the pot. Tired of hearing about this stuff. If they are going to open soource it then please do so. It's been years that this discussion has been going on. At this point int he game java is getting long in the tooth and has really lost sight of it's initial goals, with things like the M$ jvm mucking up the whole idea behind it.... and of course a good majority of the intranet applications I've seen are done with the M$ jvm ... so what's the point? Why not just write them as .NET or whatever since they are NOT portable at that point in time.
- tmcc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You misunderstand what that slogan means.
As another poster said, after you compile to Java byte code, those WILL run on any spec compliant JVM (which JME is one). Whether you will have the hardware or libraries to make it functional or not isn't guarenteed. But it WILL be able to execute the byte codes, even if they bail out at some point due to missing dependencies.
This is different from C in that you must recompile for different platforms. - tmcc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Sun is definately WAY, WAY ahead of Microsoft in terms of open source:
NFS
OpenOffice.org
Solaris
Looking Glass
Sun Grid Engine
and I'm sure I'm missing quite a few - bloodylip, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"no company uses market forces for its own implementation"
didn't microsoft already threaten it by writing their own implementation based on the specifications? - DickBreath, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Microsoft threatened it by EMBRACING Java, then writing their own EXTENDED version with features not present in those inferior implementations of Java. You should use only Microsoft Java because it has those extra tasty features and will EXTINGUISH the competition.
- EricAnderton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4greyghost487.java:1: 'class' or 'interface' expected
"Insert generic anti-java comment here"
^
1 error
I don't think that's a properly formatted Java comment bub. - GlargTheKelfn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4exactly. my first thought is, if you are opening up the src, you can forget all that keeping it under control stuff. once you set it free, what happens is what happens.
what do they think opensource is? here's the code, but don't do anything we don't like with it, ok?
dweebs - Keloran, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4hasnt Sun said they were gona do this for about 4 years ??, abit like MS said they were gona do the same (Sun did OSS Solaris, so they are further along on htere promisses than MS)
- tmcc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It was also "far better" in terms of exploits, as 99% of all Java-based exploits were solely within the MS JVM.
Figures though, Microsoft never did know how to write secure code. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3GNU Classpath is all about compatibility. Forking has happened because Swing sucked for too long so SWTs were required. Sun should just get to work on better compatibility tests. Any Java versions would WANT to show compatibility.
- anonydigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Do it already. Talked about too many times. Never realised. I'm starting to think its a tactic to stop people from flocking to GNU versions with no real intention to carry the claims out.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@tmcc
Yeah it makes sense. So Sun should Just Do It and not ***** around.
Did you notice that Eclipse can be compiled by gcj? That means it is near to too late for Sun's Java to matter anymore. - evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Sun doesn't know the meaning of Open Source. They've been claiming Java is Open Source for years.
- rabidsnail, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3GJS will support SWING and AWT before Sun's java is anywhere near open source, mark my words.
- tmcc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3There are currently more Open Source projects based in Java than any other language (yes, more than C, Python, Perl, Ruby, etc).
It only makes sense for the platform to be Open Source. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Dickbreath
First of all, what an excellent and evocative name.
Secondly, while MS does a whole lot of things wrong, Visual J++ was ***** brilliant and years ahead of Sun, which only very recently made Java usable for desktop apps. Sun should have lost that one. - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Correct. If Sun is tweaking out about things they won't be able to control, might as well fuggedaboudit. IBM will probably open source J9 without all the bullcrap and control, and Kaffe, gcj, and GNU Classpath are already very good.
- mrjatsun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Why? It's actually very simple. It takes a *long* time to go through every file and verify that
Sun owns the IP for that file or it legally allowed to release this code as open source. If you
waited until everything was cleared, you would be waiting a lot longer for the source to show
up. Concentrating on sections and releasing incrementally is much more manageable (e.g.
see open solaris) - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2J2ME is a a very minimal environment: Crappy UI classes, no reflection, no classloaders, funky JSRs not used in any other Java environment... It is barely OK for writing games.
Oh, and even though every J2ME implementation is licensed by Sun and supposedly passed the TCKs, nobody implemented even a simple call like Display.setCurrentItem the same way. Open source would have HELPED that. - raindog469, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The obvious way to do that is to use trademarks. Microsoft was able to "embrace and extend" Java without it being open source (see Visual J++), but if the license Sun chose was a copyleft, at least they'd be able to take improvements anyone else makes and include them in Java, while ensuring that "Microsoft Java" or "Microsoft .NET, now Java-compatible" really is java-compatible through the implementation of a Java trademark licensing program.
It's like if Linus decided the only way you were entitled to use the Linux trademark on your product was if it conformed to LSB. Sun doesn't need to be as lenient as Linus is, even if they chose a license like the GPL or LGPL. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I used to be very anti-java after observing memory bloat in old JVMs.
But Java has matured. I don't know if it's in the JVMs yet but I heard talk about the JVM automatically deciding which object to allocate on the heap vs the stack. You can do this manually currently. Also, benchmarks show it's up there with C++ in terms of speed.
Which is great - I can code up and produce a system in java 10 times faster than in say C++. Hell instead of needing a team I just do it all myself, the trick is to re-use everything to hell and back. Then you don't have to deal with memory leaks which is a big bonus.. My full time job used to be chasing memory leaks, I'm glad I don't do that anymore. - gdonald, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Isn't that 'write once, test everywhere' ?
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All I can say to that: fork anyone who forks java.
- scruffles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Here's the problem... what single api will everyone want in a light weight java runtime for the web? Swing. What does Swing depend on? Everything in the current JRE.
- GedMarc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wait what am i not understanding here, they must obviously mean the JVM will become open source, because pretty much all their objects and classes are open sourced in any cased, from AWT to SWING and further... If they made the JVM (no matter which system, or mobile device) open source, i believe it would be breakthrough in the way that programs are handled and run (and i read somewhere that java is matching C in speed, my ass... the garbage collector in java is way to slow, even in 1.6 mustang, if you dont call .gc() method, it would use up and waste too much memory creating badly programmed code) - however if open sourced, you would have a world contributing to improving this incredible technology so that one day maybe it will be the standard.. the possibilities could be anything to creating an online operating system where the system itself would not have to sit on the hard drive.. i believe this a right move.
- jma06, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1> It was also "far better" in terms of exploits, as 99% of all Java-based exploits were solely within the MS JVM.
Do you have an article and numbers to back that up? - GedMarc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0dont be daft, the only thing not open source about java is the JVM
- Saffa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Whats the deal with making language spec changes? For me it seems a good thing that there will be many JVMs to choose from, but it seems a bad idea to let people make their own customisations to the Java language. Anyone know if Sun has/will put something like that in place in the licensing? I would certainly like a little bit of standardisation from Sun as it seems worrying that code will become JVM specfic...
- gerkin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1is it just me, or does someone running the dig servers need to learn how to keep the time on their servers correct? My posts are posting as "7 minutes ago" on submit, no chance for editing and my time IS correct.
- peter303, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Copy it, change the name from Java to C-sharp, and make it proprietary again.
You mean this isnt an original idea. Is it wrong to copy those who copy? :-) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Cool, I can't wait to play with the code. I Just hope companies don't try to modify it and sell it.
- tommasz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2This might have mattered, oh, 5 year ago or so but does anyone care now? Sun's hemming and hawing over this has gone on for years and anyone who might have been interested has moved on long ago. It's the same with Solaris. Do you know of any projects that are using it? I don't. Indecisiveness is no way to build a community.
- spytromics, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1A significant problem with Java is that Sun has not had the ability to invest in the continued development of Java. I understand that this goes against the deep-seated religious beliefs of those who choose to ignore fact, but the major reason for making Java open source is that Sun can no longer afford to pay for its development. But once Java goes open source, it will fork. And that is going to pose a long-term problem to corporations that will now have to decide whether to use IBM Java, Oracle Java, etc.
- greyghost487, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5"Insert generic anti-java comment here"
- FreakyT, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2It was a shame though; MS's Java VM was far superior to the Sun one at the time, at least in terms of speed. (Of course, Internet Explorer was far superior to the competition when it came out, and look where that went.)
- tommasz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1I don't get your argument. I see no particular reason why an OSS project has to use an open source language. It may simplify some issues around bugs in libraries and compiler implementations but the two concepts are not joined at the hip.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Ok, and why? Figure out the legal aspects behind it, and release the code as is. I don't see why it'd be released incrementally unless they're changing stuff. We don't want modified Java code, we want code as is.
I hate when people don't give logical explanations for their questionable reasoning.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is