digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Open source Java scheduled for October arrival

siliconvalleysleuth.com — Sun Microsystems plans to release the first chunks of Java under an open source license by October this year, the company said at an event during the Linuxworld conference in San Francisco.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Zatko, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Even though I am a Java programmer, I feel it is too little and too late
    • ucg1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Though they should have done this sooner, better late than never. Personally it's not too late for me to be happy about this. I'm interested in what type of open source license they plan to use, though.
    • beotch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2To put that in perspective, MS hasn't open-sourced .NET, so where are dissatisfied Java users going to go?

      There seems to be a trend in the business world to become unhappy with their existing products over a few years and decide changing languages is going to fix things. People will be writing the same old stuff years from now because MS and others are marketing languages to managers. I for one say hooray! We'll have jobs until we are sent to the bone-yard.
    • evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10"To put that in perspective, MS hasn't open-sourced .NET, so where are dissatisfied Java users going to go?"

      http://www.mono-project.com
    • JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Traditionally, languages are open, products are closed. The reasons for this are long and varied. Java and Open Source have a few things in common. Both run counter to tradition and both suffer from the lack of a coherent marketing plan. From a business perspective, Java has pretty much failed; as have most other efforts built around proprietary languages. In order to convince people to adopt the lanaguge, Sun had to surrender enough control to the point where they couldn't make any money from it. From a business perspective, Open Source has a few problems as well so it's only fitting that these two should finally be together.
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Too little too late?

      Java remains the most popular programming language in the world. It is still growing by leaps and bounds. And it didn't even eed open source to get it there. Open source is a bonus. Java would continue to do extremely well even without open source.
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12"http://www.mono-project.com"

      Mono is:

      A: Mostly undocumented

      B: Very slow

      C: Way behind .net. Mono doesn't even have a stable version that is equivalent to .net 2.0 yet, and meanwhile, .net 3 is already nearing release.

      D: Not fully compatible, since many libraries are not supported, or supported poorly.

      So no, I don't see many Java programmers flocking to mono just cause it is open source.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I don't think Java would have lasted .Net as a closed product itself. MS is going to leverage its monopoly wrt .Net, I wouldn't be suprised if we see Java breaking on Vista with every update. Java needs all the help it can get in this regard. If it goes open then prehaps we can look at making it more efficient and hopefully it can compete then.
    • loboforestal, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3QUOTE Java remains the most popular programming language in the world. UNQUOTE

      what?

      Anybody want to explain?
    • Moggers87, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@loboforestal

      A lot of Computer Science courses at degree level in the UK teach Java, the OU for example have a Java module for their BSc Computer Science course.

      Although personally I would prefer to learn CC++
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"QUOTE Java remains the most popular programming language in the world. UNQUOTE
      what? Anybody want to explain?"

      Yeah, I will explain.

      As of November of last year, Java had surpassed both C and C++ for the number of projects on Sourceforge, and the gap is still getting wider. (prior to Java, C and C++ were the most popular languages. Java passed up C++ sometime in the middle of 2005, and then a few months later, passed up C as well).

      Also, when it comes to Job demand, Java is still the most in demand programming skill. Here are a few searches I did on Dice.com, listed in order from most demand to least demand:

      #1 Java: 15071
      #2 .Net: 12550
      #3. C: 8867
      #4 C++: 7948
      #5 Perl: 5144
      #6 VB: 2767
      #7 Python: 878
      #8 Ruby: 237

      That explain it?
  • echoic, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2They could hand it out with cookies and nobody would care.
  • pdubois95, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I don't know, there's still no real alternative to what Java does. If Java goes truly open-source there won't be any legal reason *not* to use it when convenient.

    Performance issues on the other hand....
    • kolobcreek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Maybe we can finally implement all the crap sun put in the spec but still hasn't implemented since 1.3
  • atariby, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2A response to Ruby on Rails maybe?
    • beplacid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1That and PHP I would have thought. I'm really interested not only in the license but what 'parts' of Java they're going to release first...
    • nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10A response to a web framework? Do you know what Java is?
  • zagi1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Well they have been saying that for years, lets see if they truly mean it this time.
  • mv36, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Direct link to article,

    http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2162306/first-open-source-java-promised
  • motang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So does this mean all Linux distros and Unix variants will come with them like gcc? If so that would so cool, then I don't have get it afterwards.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You can get the JRE with distros these days anyway since Java changed the license its released under. That was the last 'Java going open' scare.
  • Monkeyget, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Note that the source code of java has already been available for quite some time.
    The code of the current version : http://java.sun.com/j2se/jrl_download.html
    The code of the next version of java : https://mustang.dev.java.net/
    The code is available but not under an open source licence.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It's not open source unless you can see, use, modify and redistribute the code without restriction. Releasing code under NDA's and other favoured corperate methods of diluting OSS don't count.

      Whats the point of me improving a code base if I have to sign over all the rights to the modifications to a company who may or may not give me the ability to use my hard work.
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1"It's not open source unless you can see, use, modify and redistribute the code without restriction."

      I'm not even going to adress this except to say that first of all, the only thing you are doing is parroting a worn out tired old argument that you could have copied and pasted vertatim from some Web site. And second, open source predates Richard Stallman and his Marxist ideas about software. So I don't know who died and made him the final and ultimate authority on what is open source and what is not.

      I also don't know who made OSI the final authority, since open source had been around for years before OSI came along. So as far as I am concerned. Neitehr RMS or OSI have any authority whatsoever to determine what is considered open source and what is not.
    • GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't care about RMS to be honest. I'm more interested in having code fully redistributable so we can get a better product. I do however believe that the rights RMS goes on about leads to better code in the long run. This is why I invest my efforts in code that respects those freedoms. Not because I believe I should have the right but because it makes things better. A simple selfish desire on my part, it suits me.

      I'm not interested in coding under a NDA and possibly never seeing the result of my work ever again.

      If Sun don't want to open their code base then thats their choice. The OSS equivalents are getting better anyway and will catch and overtake them in time. I will make my choice and code where it suits me.

      Anyway what people want is OSS as in OSI definition. When 99% of the devs out there say they want source they mean under an OSI license. We all know that you can get Java code under restricted licenses its just we're not interested for purely selfish reasons.
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"I'm not interested in coding under a NDA and possibly never seeing the result of my work ever again."

      You don't have to code under an NDA. Anyone who wants to can download the Java source code, change it for internal use, fix bugs, send patches to Sun, etc. As of right now, you cannot redistribute it yourself because Sun wants the chance to test it and make sure it does not break compatibility.

      "If Sun don't want to open their code base then thats their choice."

      Except their code base IS open. Again ANYONE who wants to can download the code, change it for internal use, contribute code, etc. And Sun does want to use an OSI approved license, and will be using one.

      "If Sun don't want to open their code base then thats their choice. The OSS equivalents are getting better anyway and will catch and overtake them in time. I will make my choice and code where it suits me."

      I suspect the current OSS equivalents will not survive at all actually, or will be absorbed into the main project. I fail to see the incentive for continuing the current OSS projects once the Sun one is OSS (by OSI standards)

      Now answer this question honestly: Have you ever made changes to the JVM code? Have you ever even looked at it? Do you actually have the time or the interest to understand it at a deep enough level to work on the JVM itself? If not, then what's the big deal anyway?

      "When 99% of the devs out there say they want source they mean under an OSI license. We all know that you can get Java code under restricted licenses its just we're not interested for purely selfish reasons."

      Actually, keep in mind that the VAST majority of Java developers responded to an independant survey shortly after Sun announced they were going to go all the way with open sourcing Java and said they were either "very worried" or "worried" that open sourcing Java was going to cause incompatible forks that would make their lives problematic as far as supporting their applications written in Java.

      So again, not only do most Java developers not care if java is really open source or not. But many of them have serious concerns about the consequences of open sourcing is. So basivally, you pulled that 99% of developers number out of your ass.
  • p1p3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2From now on I’m going to bury everything i see that post to a blog and not to the real article as spam. I don’t care how interesting or important the article is. It’s noting more than spam. Hope more people will follow so we can get rid of this crap...
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"From now on I’m going to bury everything i see that post to a blog and not to the real article as spam"

      Dude... Keep in mind that the only reason half the people who post on digg take the time to do so is for self promotion purposes. Take that away, and the incentive to post for a lot of people goes away.
    • curupira, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"the only reason half the people who post on digg take the time to do so is for self promotion purposes"

      I have no problem with getting rid of that half.
  • sixpackistan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Here is a great movie from the guys at NASA which highlights their thoughts on JAVA:

    http://oodt.jpl.nasa.gov/better-web-app.mov
    • S1mba, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Nice try at spinning it. But guess what? You got caught for the following reasons:

      1. The disclaimer at the front SPECIFICALLY says it does not reflect the views of NASA or the JPL. So you downright lied when you said it is what the guys at NASA think. It is what ONE guy who happens to work for NASA thinks.

      2. It did not highlight their thoughts on JAVA. It highlighted their thoughts on J2EE. if you don't know the difference, then you don't know what you are talking about anyway.

      3. Ruby demonstrated all to well last week what one of the major problems of using scripting languages to develop Web applications is. Namely, Rails got caught with its pants down, and a security hole large enough to drive a bus through.

      4. The Zope framework (which this video supports as the best) is often said to have a Z shaped learning curbe by those who have used it for complex projects. As in it is really easy for the kind of simple stuff done in the video, but as soon as you try to do anything complex, the learning curve gets very steep in Zope.

      5. Once you start getting into dynamic languages like Ruby and Python, large projects can become unmanagable and difficult to maintain because of the fact that automated refactoring tools simply don't work well with languages that are not statically typed. Furthermore, these languages can't warn you of type mismatches at write time like Java can. So simple bugs that should be caught by the IDE (and are caught by the IDE in Java) don't get caught until runtime in Ruby or Python, when they cause am application failure.

      6. Point #5, combined with the fact that neither Ruby or Python enforce error handling, mean that Ruby and Python suck for mission critical systems, and have serious problems with reliability. (There's a reason the Mars Rover software is written in Java and not Python or Ruby)

      7. Ruby scales horribly, It doesn't even support prepared SQL statements, which means the database has to reparse the query everytime it is run. This is a huge overhead on a busy site.

      Nice try, but sorry. Not only did you try to claim the video represented the view of a group of people it specifically says in the disclaimer that it does NOT represent, and try to spin it into a general take on Java when it was a take on J2EE. But the claims made in the video are easily debunked when dealing with real world complex applications, and not little "Hello world" type sample applications.

      The greater initially configuration that Java requires pays off in the long run in the form of a more reliable and more maintainable application (as well as one that performs better)
  • kmk2006, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Java > .NET

  • reachbach, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Its not too late. Sun should be appreciated for this move. And speaking of languages, Java is the most widely used language on this planet. I won't waste time on stats. You can google up & find the results for yourself. And in each category of programming languages, there's only one leader: :
    Procedural language : C
    Object Oriented: Java
    A language desperately trying (for several decades) to be both & getting buried under its own complexity: C++
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.