Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Oracle's Latest Java Moves Draw Industry Ire

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the can't-we-all-just-get-along dept.

Java 372

snydeq writes "Two years later, Oracle's stewardship of Java continues to raise user and vendor ire, this time due to modularization, licensing, and security concerns. 'Plans for version 8 of Java Platform Standard Edition, which is due next year, call for inclusion of Project Jigsaw to add modular capabilities to Java. But some organizations are concerned with how Oracle's plans might conflict with the OSGi module system already geared to Java. In the licensing arena, Canonical, the maker of Ubuntu Linux, says Oracle is no longer letting Linux distributors redistribute Oracle's own commercial Java, causing difficulties for the company. Meanwhile, security vendor F-Secure views Java as security hindrance.'"

cancel ×

372 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655138)

FIRST POST

Re:fp (5, Funny)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655828)

FIRST POST

Obviously you aren't running Java, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to post so fast.

Oracle and Java (5, Insightful)

ravenswood1000 (543817) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655158)

With Oracle responsible for Java, is it even worth it to learn the language any more? I mean they will be killing it off soon.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655190)

Amen.

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Insightful)

Foxhoundz (2015516) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655240)

Not a chance. Java has changed the face of mobile computing within the past decade. Why would oracle shoot themselves in the foot?

Re:Oracle and Java (3, Interesting)

silanea (1241518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655318)

Is Oracle a mobile computing company? I don't think so. By killing Java they would shoot a whole industry in the foot - or the head, more likely. But Oracle itself? No. They could still develop the Java platform in-house for their own products - at least that is my understanding of what they bought in the Sun acquisition - and leave everyone else out in the rain.

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655334)

And if oracle keeps up, Android 5 or 6 will ship with a shiny python-esque runtime when google gets tired of paying for java lawsuits, leaving java on "feature" phones nobody writes apps for.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

PickyH3D (680158) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655634)

First of all, I really do not like Oracle as a company. However, as a company that believes that they are owed money by Google for using a mostly-Java system in Android, how are they at all benefited by not "keeping it up," while Google continues to use the system license free?

There are two sides to it, and I am honestly not entirely sure which side is right:

1. Google thinks that Java is open, and therefore fair game.
2. Oracle thinks that Java is not open, and they also have damning email correspondence showing that Google did not actually believe Java could be used without a license.

As a Java developer that is not paying Oracle a dime, I can sort of see where Google is coming from. However, I am not putting my own twist on Java and putting that on a new--and wildly popular--platform either. I really see both sides of the coin here, but I think Oracle has Google just with that email; Google felt like it needed a license, but decided to go without one in hopes that then-Sun would not sue them. They probably decided that their war chest was big enough in case they were wrong to avoid sending millions of dollars to a company every year.

Not an accurate summary of the case (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655970)

Those "two sides" are not correct. This lawsuit doesn't hinge on whether or not Java is open. The real situation is that if Google had licensed Java, it would be protected from Oracle's patent infringement lawsuits (due to licensing terms) regarding patents that have NOTHING PER SE TO DO WITH JAVA. Those patents cover techniques used to implement virtual machines, and they could potentially be used to sue Perl, Python, Ruby, and other virtual machine technologies.

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656156)

There is the reality of how Sun licensed Java, and how Oracle interprets it. Oracle is not about making friends, they're about making revenue, and piles of it.

Their battle with Google is just one front, and just the first wave of litigation if they're successful. There's a big piece of pie out there, and Oracle want's their slice.

Re:Oracle and Java (5, Insightful)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655550)

Why do companies shoot themselves in their feet? I don't know, but companies do it all the time. Oracle has always been remarkably short-sighted and unable to see the bigger picture.

On the other hand, the fact that there is a an officially GPL'd version of official Java out there may well mean that in the long term, Java will be fine. Oracle can kill off their own branch, but Java in some form is probably going to continue, because it's too entrenched. There are some big players on the sidelines (e.g. IBM) with a lot invested in Java who aren't going to sit idly by and let Oracle destroy it when Sun made it easy to go another route. OpenJDK may have a few shortcomings at the moment, but that could easily change if some bigger players got more serious about it.

It's still too early to tell how this is all going to play out, but the death of Java seems like one of the least likely outcomes.

Re:Oracle and Java (1, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655622)

The GPLed branch will only act as a safety net if it's kept up to date with features introduced in the dominant branch (Oracles), or if it becomes the dominant branch in the very near future and removes Oracles ownership over the future.

If neither of those happens, the GPLed branch will be the one to fade into the past. I'm not a Java user, so can someone who is possibly chip in and give us an indication of how it's looking?

With regard to the story, it does reek of the OSGi throwing their toys out of the pram because their pet wasn't chosen.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655730)

Everybody is essentially droipping support for the comercial version as a result of Oracles bad/forced decisions. It is only a matter of time before companices with Java applications are forced to ensure they work with the free version.

Re:Oracle and Java (3, Insightful)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655858)

The GPLed branch will only act as a safety net if it's kept up to date with features introduced in the dominant branch (Oracles), or if it becomes the dominant branch in the very near future and removes Oracles ownership over the future.

Oracle's version is just a repackaged version of OpenJDK, so that shouldn't be a problem.

Re:Oracle and Java (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655978)

2. Oracle thinks that Java is not open, and they also have damning email correspondence showing that Google did not actually believe Java could be used without a license.

You mean the damning email that came out in August 2010 saying from engineer Tim Lindholm to Andy Rubin that said we need to license java?
(http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2011/11_-_November/Oracle_v__Google_and_the_most_relentlessly_litigated_email_ever/ [thomsonreuters.com] )
Remember that Oracle purchased Sun in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Microsystems [wikipedia.org] ) where Android was first released in 2008 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system) [wikipedia.org] )

Putting together a timeline:
1) Android released in 2008
2) Oracle purchased Sun in 2009
3) "Damning" email in 2010

So after Android is released, Oracle purchases Sun hoping to sue Google for $$$, then an engineer says yeah we better license java. That isn't damning, that's an opinion of one engineer (or more likely a team). Now if that timeline had #3 coming first, it would be damning, but to come last in the chain is hardly even worth mentioning. Oracle's case resting on that one email is laughable at best

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

mvar (1386987) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656054)

Why do companies shoot themselves in their feet? I don't know, but companies do it all the time.

We should probably just ask HP

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

MartinG (52587) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655594)

Because they don't know how to handly the firearm they are holding.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655714)

I remember when oracle bought RDB from DEC. They jacked the support fees up by a factor of ten, took a short term profit, and killed it off.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

jgrahn (181062) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655904)

Java has changed the face of mobile computing within the past decade.

Java didn't change it; cell phone vendors just implemented support for Java and nothing else, for reasons which are still unclear to me.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655242)

Or at least incorporate it into their products, like Objective-C and Apple, or C# and Microsoft. They aren't going to get any benefit from having a multiplatform product like the current Java.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

sehlat (180760) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655278)

With Oracle responsible for Java, is it even worth it to learn the language any more? I mean they will be killing it off soon.

Actually, I have to ask if it ever was worth learning? The original promise of "write once, run anywhere" long ago dissolved into "Write once, curse (and debug) everywhere." Add on to that an eternally-growing library that can take years just to learn the categories, never mind the content, and you end up with the current bloated nightmare that even intimidates experienced developers.

In addition, Oracle has the typical mainstream vendor's approach of "we don't have to own your code if we own YOU," and Java would appear to have become something to run from instead of to.

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

rk (6314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655358)

I have felt for years that Java is our generation's COBOL, and with Oracle in control I feel that only makes that comparison stronger.

Re:Oracle and Java (3, Funny)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655826)

If Oracle had been in charge of COBOL, businesses would have used RPG.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655362)

I write Java every day and I don't feel intimidated.

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655370)

Actually WORA works pretty damn well with Java.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

lavaforge (245529) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655514)

As long as you don't touch the filesystem or try to do anything with graphics I've found this to be true as well.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655580)

As long as you properly access resources (i.e. classloaders and not doing stupid shit), it's fine.

Graphics is a huge topic but the built in graphics apis work everywhere (even if they suck like java2d and swing do).

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

lavaforge (245529) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655686)

90% of the time you're right, but there are a few bugs in the JVM with regard to Windows vs Linux filesystems that will bite you the first time you see them.

I've also run into issues with Windows-only memory leaks in the JAI libraries when using JPEG-compressed TIFFs.

You're right that it's generally fine.

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655948)

90% of the time you're right, but there are a few bugs in the JVM with regard to Windows vs Linux filesystems that will bite you the first time you see them.

I've also run into issues with Windows-only memory leaks in the JAI libraries when using JPEG-compressed TIFFs.

You're right that it's generally fine.

Other than windows issues, which very well might be windows bugs, it really is WORA.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655896)

Java did not, last time I checked, abstract away the inability to delete a file that is open on Windows. Thus, file-handling is definitely different. There are other differences in buffering, but those can be accommodated with common code.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

timothyb89 (1259272) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655754)

I'm not really sure what's wrong with the filesystem APIs, at least for simple (and even a lot of advanced) IO. Off the top of my head the only exception I can think of is that filesystem attributes and the like were a load of garbage in Java 6, but supposedly the situation is much better in 7.

As for graphics, I did (and still do) work a lot with Java2D, and for the most part it's worked flawlessly on both Windows and Linux. I've run into a couple of platform specific bugs in the past but they would generally be fixed within a couple of patches, and even then were easy to work around. I can't vouch for 3D stuff as I haven't written too much myself, but there's a large number of libraries that have seen some serious cross-platform success.

I'll admit, it isn't "write once, run anywhere", but if you're on any of the major platforms (Windows, Linux, OSX, BSD to some degree) the number of real issues is pretty minimal, and even OpenJDK works pretty damn well. I'll hate on Oracle as much as the next guy, but the influence I see from them on day-to-day independent coding is next to nothing. Apart from the uglier Oracle-themed icons and doc pages, at any rate.

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655388)

"Write once, curse (and debug) everywhere."

That is still better than write everywhere, curse (and debug) everywhere.

Re:Oracle and Java (0, Troll)

pwizard2 (920421) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655524)

I've used Java when I need to write a quick-and-dirty program on short notice, but for serious projects I've never considered using Java because

1. It depends on the interpreter/runtime.
2. No native code (unless you count GCJ, but I've never been able to make that compile anything written in the last few years)
3. Java doesn't give you access to much system-level stuff
4. Terrible OS X support
5. Java is still slower than native code for CPU-intensive functions


If you want WORA, Qt with C++ is a better way to go. I've been able to compile Qt projects on any OS without changing a thing and I'm in the process of porting my old Java stuff to Qt.

Re:Oracle and Java (5, Insightful)

Ossifer (703813) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655618)

1. Most applications have base requirements for runtime (C libs, etc., for example)
2. HotSpot yields native code
3. Sure it does--better than any other generic language in its core, but it also provides JNI for anything else you feel you need outside of its core.
4. OSX WFM.
5. Red herring. See #2, also for truly intensive functions, use assembler.

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Informative)

Miamicanes (730264) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655954)

99 times out of 100, when a user has problems running a Java app, it's because somebody specified an inappropriate version of Java in the manifest. There's an entire subtle range of possible values that have meanings like "The newest installed VM that's Java $N or newer", "The newest installed VM that's Java $N", "The newest installed VM that's at least Java $N.$V", and so on. The problems come about when some idiot doesn't know what he's doing, has an application that only NEEDS Java 4, then turns around and specifies in the manifest that it MUST run under Java 4, instead of "Java 4 or newer", so somebody who has Java 6, release 28 installed has to try and literally install a Java 4 VM to run it. It gets even worse with applets, because Sun's official docs totally borked the explanation of how CLSID values worked, and caused ENDLESS grief when some corporate apps decided to dictate specific releases of Java for no good reason.

The fact is, if you write a Java application and Jar it up in a way that says only that it must have a VM that's at least as old as some minimum version, the likelihood of users having real-world problems with it are pretty low. I have stuff I wrote 10+ years ago and compiled with a pre-alpha 1.4 JDK that still works today (which is a good thing, because the source code was lost when my old laptop died). I've seen corporate apps that anal-retentively specify that they must not be used with any JDK besides 2.6.0_19, then go a step beyond and die if you have a newer JDK even installed at all, because they're launched by webapps that use the CLSID that means "ignore the settings in the JPI control panel, always use the newest version installed", then turn around and use Javascript to test for JPI version & commit suicide if it's older than 2.6.0_19 (even if you have 2.6.0_19 installed, and bent over backwards to specify that precise JDK in the control panel). I've actually had to use Greasemonkey in some cases to dynamically fix the stupid CLSID embedded in the Object definition on the fly so it wouldn't ignore my JPI control panel settings. But don't get me started on that... grrrrrrr...

Of course, we've all had our "ohcrap" moments. I remember spending a week working on what was supposed to be a cross-platform videochat application written in Java (so it could run under Windows, Mac, and Linux) using JMF. It worked nicely under Windows. Then I went to test it under Linux, and discovered that JMF was basically broken to the point of uselessness under everything besides Windows due to codec licensing & implementation issues. That was when I learned the hard way that anytime you're explicitly writing something that HAS to work on a platform besides Windows, make sure it doesn't have "issues" with other platforms before investing lots of time in it... especially if it depends upon any extension or framework that's not a native part of bog-standard Java that gets installed by default. Especially anything based upon a JSR. I've lost count of the number of JSR-related extensions that were nothing but stubs & almost inevitably had Macintosh problems.

IMHO, Sun fucked up, and fucked up badly, when they handed over control of Macintosh Java to Apple. Jonathan Schwarz basically handed Steve Jobs the rope, and was too oblivious to notice Steve busily tying it into a noose. Java's main reason for existing as a platform for desktop applications is WORA, and allowing Apple to screw up Macintosh Java as badly as they did hurt that main purpose really badly.

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Interesting)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656150)

IMHO, Sun fucked up, and fucked up badly, when they handed over control of Macintosh Java to Apple. Jonathan Schwarz basically handed Steve Jobs the rope, and was too oblivious to notice Steve busily tying it into a noose. Java's main reason for existing as a platform for desktop applications is WORA, and allowing Apple to screw up Macintosh Java as badly as they did hurt that main purpose really badly.

To be fair, at the time Apple execs were crowing that Mac OS was going to be the premier platform for Java development in the world. They were hinting pretty strongly that they were going to tie Java into every possible aspect of the OS to wring every possible ounce of performance and system integration out of it, so it only made sense that Apple engineers, who had insider knowledge of the Mac OS platform, should be in charge. I suppose we have nobody to blame but Sun, but nobody could have known Apple would drop the ball so badly. (And BTW, it was Scott McNealy who let Apple be responsible for Mac Java, not Schwartz.)

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Informative)

DamonHD (794830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655624)

My main Java app is right now running distributed across at least 3 major *nix variants (and Windows should I want to again) and indeed CPU families (x86/x64, ARM and SPARC) with no extra dev or debugging pain, and contains components dating back to about Netscape 2.0 time running without problem. Say what you like but WORA works very well indeed for me with Java.

A .Net app that I have been working on in a team for well over a year runs very well across exactly one release of Windows and .Net and Direct X, just about. And debugging pain: don't get me started.

Rgds

Damon

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Interesting)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655628)

I don't think it was. And it is certainly unsuitable as a first programming language. It is not close enough to the machine for many tasks, yet not abstracted enough for many others. It also does not teach concept cleanly enough that there would be a large benefit for learning other languages later.

Sadly, academia does not seem to realize that and it is taught as first (and sometimes only) language in many places. Just had to tech C to a bunch of college students last semester because you cannot teach an OS course with Java.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

Medievalist (16032) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655702)

Sadly, academia does not seem to realize that and it is taught as first (and sometimes only) language in many places.

That's both a blessing and a curse. Anywhere I go, I always have awesome job security!

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656022)

And I'm sure businesses had some influence in that area demanding more Java developers because Java is a nice safe language that can practically write itself. Hell starting certain things in a IDE yields most of your app written for you. Skynet is probably Java. That is why the original judgement day didn't happen. No one factored in the start-up time.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655700)

With Oracle responsible for Java, is it even worth it to learn the language any more? I mean they will be killing it off soon.

They can kill off Oracle Java. They can't kill off OpenJDK so easily.

Actually, I have to ask if it ever was worth learning?

It's a pretty decent medium-level general purpose language. If you want to write efficient* programs that run on any PC, want some basic facilities like garbage collection built-in, and don't want to fight with compilers for each different platform, then Java's a good choice.

The original promise of "write once, run anywhere" long ago dissolved into "Write once, curse (and debug) everywhere."

I see this parroted around all the time, but have never experienced it (unless you count the time I tried writing a program in Microsoft J++). If your application is so complex or badly written that bugs crop up when you switch platforms, that's not Java's fault. There may have been a lot of platform specific bugs in the JVM years ago (I didn't use it much then, so I wouldn't know) but if so they've been pretty well ironed out by now, as far as I can tell.

Add on to that an eternally-growing library that can take years just to learn the categories, never mind the content, and you end up with the current bloated nightmare that even intimidates experienced developers.

Then don't use the bloated libraries.

*taking JVM resource requirements into account, which are non-zero but acceptable for most of my uses. I've found that once things are loaded, a java program can be just as efficient as one written in C++ so long as you stay away from expensive operations like allocating new objects and dynamic dispatch, and even those won't have a noticeable performance impact unless you're doing them in tight loops. Very smart people have worked many hours to make the JVM fast.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655368)

Yeah, sure. They will be also killing Weblogic, Aqualogic, OESB, JRockit, Java in their RDBMS and many others according to your 'predictions'.
Ellison is evil but he's definitely not stupid.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655758)

Actually, JRockit * is * being killed off.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655928)

Actually, JRockit * is * being killed off.

Nonsense, Oracle still distributes it as part of Oracle Fusion [oracle.com] .

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

evafan76 (2527608) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655394)

Makes my Uni's CS department look stupid for moving all their high level language classes into Java

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655814)

That is about the most stupid thing they could have done. Eiffel, Python, Ruby all modern alternatives well suited for teaching and learning concepts. Java is not.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655410)

Sure it is. Oracle will make itself irrelevant in the Java world if they keep this up. The Java world will simply fork from Oracle's Java. The only thing Oracle can do it sue the Java world into oblivion.

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

Zomg (818060) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655416)

Yes. With 5 years of java experience I make 100k and see nothing but growth. It is comments like this and this thread as a whole that really drill home how ignorant some people are about java.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655536)

Yes. With 5 years of java experience I make 100k and see nothing but growth. It is comments like this and this thread as a whole that really drill home how ignorant some people are about java.

I work almost exclusively in .NET and make 100k myself and at 26 years old (3 years after graduation) I also see nothing but growth... if you think Java had anything to do with how much money you currently make you're as ignorant as those you deride!

Re:Oracle and Java (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655644)

I work almost exclusively in COBOL and make 160k a year 28 years old (switched to COBOL 3 years ago). I see nothing but old people retiring or dieing and demand increasing.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655740)

I know C programmers who work at Google and Microsoft that make more then 300k each. The language doesn't determine your salary; skill and demand are far more important.

Re:Oracle and Java (4, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656092)

Hell, I can't program past visual basic and I make more than either of you!

So there.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655716)

the industry is not seeing that, J2EE/Java is in decline, server share being eaten by .NET and scripting languages. good riddance, it's so 1990s and at the core just warmed over 1980s concepts.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655898)

It's a good thing you actually post references to your claims, otherwise people would know you're FOS.
http://duartes.org/gustavo/blog/post/programming-language-jobs-and-trends

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656062)

.Net is just Java if MS created it. Sure it's more modern but it's Windows-centric and aimed at the same exact market as Java. I'll be surprised if it lives as long as Java.

Re:Oracle and Java (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655426)

Unfortunately, Open Java breaks Powerschool, so the Cannonical update forced me to remove it and manually install Java 6. The other option was to switch to Windows.

Re:Oracle and Java (2)

medv4380 (1604309) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655494)

Depends. Oracle has Java so it won't lose it as a language as an interface tool for its database system. If you intend on eventually doing work using an oracle database it might be good to know, but I'm sure it's not required. Outside of Oracles little world might be what's at risk. If Apache and IBM finally finds something else that they are willing to work with more then Java is dead.

Honestly, Programming in general needs a game changer anyways. Multicore chips have been around for a while now, and I have yet to see any single application reasonably use more then 2 cores and most still only use 1. I've looked into this a bit, and most of the API's out there that work to use all available cores only work when you have massive datasets. Even attempting to use more then 1 core results in the application slowing down to less than 1 core to keep up with synchronization costs.

When someone finally comes up with an API, or a Language that works well with multicore chips then learn that. Until then we are all in limbo with what we already have so what Oracle does won't matter much.

Re:Oracle and Java (1, Troll)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655532)

The language itself is definitely not worth the effort, better learn C (and maybe C++) and some decent scripting like Python or Ruby. Java is a collection of not really working compromises. With Oracle messing things up, the only real argument for Java, namely wide adoption is beginning to fade as well.

So, no, don't waste your time.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655806)

Well, that collection of "not really working compromises" powers a damn lot of businesses around the world (and demand for new Java applications is still there).

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656002)

That is because a lot of businesses are fundamentally stupid when it comes to technology. The only reason so many businesses jumped on this is because Java programmers appear to be cheap (they are incredibly expensive when you had to scrap a few projects because of the average Java programmers incompetence). Lets face it, you could run most businesses on BASIC, but would that be a good choice? Definitely not. And so is Java.

Re:Oracle and Java (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655662)

Nice try, troll. Keep working at it, though. Maybe you'll get a clue one day.

Re:Oracle and Java (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38656118)

There's lots to criticise Oracle for... but Canonical's complaints are laughable (as is much of their work TBH... not to mention their moronic loud-mouthed userbase).

OpenJDK is now the *official* version of Java. It's now a legitimate part of stuff like Fedora - a full, open, legal distribution of Java. Oracle's move in this case was entirely right and constructive for all involved.

This has been discussed over and over again by various people involved - and yet we still here this bullshit.

Java as a security hindrance (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655164)

This is news?! I thought everyone knew that by installing Java you were bending over, lowering your drawers and facing away from the Internet with a big sign pointed at you that reads "Take me!"

C++ is cross-platform (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655232)

Just use a decent framework like Qt and spend a few minutes extra compiling on multiple systems.

C++ doesn't have Oracle shitting on it, either.

Re:C++ is cross-platform (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655276)

Ha - you've obviously never tried to distribute anything already compiled across multiple Linux distros... it's impossible to do reliably.

Re:C++ is cross-platform (1, Insightful)

stanlyb (1839382) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655364)

but the idea is actually to distribute the source code, not the binary!

Re:C++ is cross-platform (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655480)

There a many good reasons why that's not always desirable or possible. Linux shouldn't make so difficult - it just pushes people to the smoother experiences of other OSes.

Re:C++ is cross-platform (0, Redundant)

Ynot_82 (1023749) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655552)

I agree.
supporting all those different CPU architectures, allowing a single OS to run on devices from routers, phones and TVs up through laptops and desktops all the way to multi-node clusters and mainframes is stupid. It stops some silly developer from shipping a single closed-source binary

Madness

Re:C++ is cross-platform (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655606)

There a many good reasons why shipping source is not always desirable or possible.

If only your mind could be as open as your OS.

Re:C++ is cross-platform (3, Insightful)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655804)

*ix user since Solaris 2.6 Intel desktop edition, and to this day if someone hands me source, and I don't absolutely don't need to have that software, I walk away. I honestly have better things to do than guess at your dev enviroment, scurry up bullshit and do your job.
 

F-Secure (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655322)

Great, a language is a security hindrance. Isn't that like saying executable files themselves are security hindrances?

Re:F-Secure (2)

Ossifer (703813) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655672)

I think the basis is that with Java the code is technically in the executable's data memory and thus lacks certain OS/CPU-level protections...

Don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655342)

I really don't understand what they get out of preventing Linux distributions from including their version of Java, given that the JDK binaries are available to download free from their website; do they just want to make life a little bit more inconvenient for Java developers? Am I missing something?

Top tip: lots of potential Java programmers use Linux. Surely it's better for them if they allow the "official" Java to be packaged with the likes of Ubuntu?

Re:Don't understand (5, Informative)

gral (697468) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655406)

OpenJDK has been the default in Ubuntu for a little while now. I don't think most distributions used the main Oracle Java in their distro by default either. OpenJDK is still available, and included, it is just the oracle version that has been removed. OpenJDK is backed by other companies than just Oracle, and is licensed for distros. At least, this is my understanding of the landscape.

Re:Don't understand (1)

daihuws (2511154) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655570)

Oh yeah, I know that OpenJDK is included. I was dabbling with Java for the first time a couple of months ago, and I installed the Oracle JDK because I wasn't sure whether I might run into discrepancies between OpenJDK and Oracle JDK. You normally run into enough gotchas when taking your first steps with a new language without having to worry about things like that... (BTW, that was me above; forgot to sign in!)

Re:Don't understand (1)

Tanktalus (794810) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655504)

I'm just guessing here, but I suspect they want to have control over the JVMs out in the field in such a way that doesn't necessarily screw up your vendor's package management system. Upgrades in-place, for example, won't work when the initial install was via rpm/deb/whatever and the upgrades are via Java's updater. Or, rather, the vendor tool will think that Java is messed up - sizes and checksums won't match; timestamps will be off. I bet they're thinking this is for the distro's benefit.

Also, by forcing everyone to go to the Oracle site, they can force you to accept their license before downloading, as well as generate some reasonable pseudo-accurate numbers on how many copies are in use and where (IP address based geo-lookups).

My gut says there's a monetisation strategy in there somewhere. I just can't quite see it yet.

Re:Don't understand (3, Informative)

Miamicanes (730264) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656138)

It's because Oracle (formerly Sun) makes huge amounts of money licensing the rights to distribute installable copies of Java. Java is only free (as in beer) if you, the end user, personally download it from Oracle's official web site and install it yourself as a separate process distinct from installing any app that requires Java.

Officially, you (as a developer) aren't even allowed to try and automate the process. If you want to automate the process in any way, and/or bundle a Java installer with your app, you have to pay HUGE amounts of money for the rights to do it.

Java's licensing is brilliantly viral, because it imposes restrictions that developers never even *notice* until somebody points out their implications to naive end users. MySQL's licensing works more or less the same way -- free for end users to download & install themselves, but the moment an automated installer enters the picture (or a consultant is involved), the mandatory licensing fees kick in... and the fees are high enough that if you're running Windows servers anyway, you'll probably end up kicking yourself for having not just used SQL Server to begin with. I'm not talking about web serves you configure yourself... I'm talking about commercial apps that depend upon a database for their persistent backing store, and would normally be installed like a normal application.

It's Time We Talked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655392)

Truth is, this has been a long time coming. It's time for Java to go.

More seriously, there are alternatives to Java. There are open source Java implementations and, God forbid, .NET. But, I think we've pretty much proven that the write once run everywhere idea just isn't feasible and perhaps it's time we went back to native code, read efficient and faster. But, Java needs to go.

Re:It's Time We Talked (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655598)

Personally, I've been a fan of C# (.Net) over Java since the beginning... I also like Mono as an option. Mostly for portability in applications that may otherwise be Windows only. I wouldn't mind seeing a runtime like NodeJS (with some GUI extension) or Python become much more common. I'm not a fan of Python, but it would seem to be the way to go if you aren't doing anything on an it must be as fast as humanly possible level in Linux.

Re:It's Time We Talked (0)

Ossifer (703813) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655712)

Yeah, let's throw out 60 years of progress -- everybody write assembler!

Java was declared dead so many times back in the '90s, it's hard for me to take these announcements seriously...

OSGi alternatives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655440)

I'm sure whatever they develop, it's better than OSGi. Practically speaking, OSGi does not really fulfill on its promis(es). "Modularity Kool-Aid". Puuhleeez people. Java has modularity support on multiple levels (classloaders, object orientation, package access, services, IOC containers). Is a heavy-handed solution like OSGi worth the trouble for what it brings?

Re:OSGi alternatives? (1)

nullchar (446050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655986)

One use for OSGi on a web server is to host many separate applications. Currently, each application bundle (.war file) includes their own dependencies, but with an OSGi manifest, the app server can supply the dependencies so each application can be tiny - only include the resources it needs, not duplicate copies of shared .jar files. This saves a ton of memory in this situation. Additionally, hot-deploying of each application is much easier. Virgo [springsource.com] is one such OSGi app server.

However, if your production app servers are only serving up your one production app, OSGi doesn't seem to help much (from my limited understanding), assuming you still have hot-deploy and session-replication and all the other clustered good stuff.

I don't see these as real issues (5, Interesting)

Necroman (61604) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655454)

I follow Java developments regularly and I don't see these points as being real issues.

Modularization: Project Jigsaw is meant to bring a more simple module system when compared to OSGi. OSGi is a great tool, but overly complicated for many people. Also, having Jigsaw built into the JRE will allow Oracle to split the base JRE into modules and hopefully reduce the memory required on initial load of a Java app. (Java core libraries have some horrible dependency trees, which cause a large chunk of the base JRE libraries to load on even the most simple applications).

Java Licensing: Sun started to push OpenJDK before it was bought by Oracle and that trend is continuing. The idea is that OpenJDK should be included with OS's like Ubuntu. OpenJDK is a GPL fork of a majority of the Oracle JDK, but some pieces could not be released as GPL because Sun originally licensed them from others (so those parts had to be re-written). I think it's better for everyone if OpenJDK gets more people using it so the bugs are worked out and it's a great open source Java implementation.

Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655566)

Does anyone actually care if Ubuntu stops including Java? Let's not even bother considering that Canonical has shot themselves in the foot, calf, thigh, pelvis, and abdomen with their recent stewardship of the distro, how many people need a desktop with Java on it anyway? Are there that many Java devs using Ubuntu? There sure aren't that many desktop applications written for the platform anymore, and most of them are development tools.

Re:Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655630)

> implying that Linux's primary user base isn't populated vastly by developers, Ubuntu or no, Java or no, self-proclaimed and non-professional nerds/geeks/hobbyists/hackers or no

I mean really.

Re:Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655718)

I seriously doubt Ubuntu is primarily populated with Java developers, which is the only thing I implied (more like stated.)

Your inferences are not my responsibility. In fact, on a site like this, mainly populated by undersocialized nerds, being responsible for all inferences would be madness. It's best to take it upon yourself to not read too much into things.

Re:Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655670)

Unfortunately I need it. The SciFinder application, which ran perfectly under Wine, btw, is no longer supported and now you have to use the web version, which needs a Java plugin. :(

Installation was trivial: apt-get install some-non-free package.

Re:Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (1)

Ossifer (703813) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655772)

Java is primarily run on servers. Ubuntu (Canonical) makes great server OS(es).

I think Canonical is overreacting to the situation. They could easily distribute the "Sun JDK" the same way that they do Flash--where install downloads from the source site.

Alternately, if you are capable of putting one line of text in /etc/apt/sources, you're all set...

Re:Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655778)

That part of the article isn't even a valid point. The Sun JDK is not being distributed any more because it is old. OpenJDK is still being distributed and that is the Java SE 7 Reference Implementation. So, the actual message behind the "Oracle is killing Java on Linux" fud is that old, closed source software, which has been replaced by new, open source software, will no longer be bundled with Ubuntu by default.

Re:Not to be a jerk, but I'm gonna be a jerk... (1)

txsable (169665) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655802)

There are some of us who use a Linux desktop (in my case, Ubuntu 10.04, but possibly Mint on my next PC) who require Java -- Javasoft/Sun/Oracle/whatever "reference" JRE or JDK for either web applications or with Tomcat servers that won't run with OpenJDK, IceTea or whatever variants are out there now. Not happy about that, but it's my job and I do what is necessary to keep getting a paycheck.

Java, Ubuntu, and students (2)

Abalamahalamatandra (639919) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655612)

I will say that this has been a major pain for me - I run nothing but Ubuntu at home and already spend enough time dealing with my kid's school's insane focus on Microsoft technologies.

Now, one of the most important sites for my kids to use (Aleks) is totally broken with Open Java. It was enough of a pain with Oracle's Java, but now it's unusable.

Thanks a lot Oracle! Wouldn't want anyone actually using your software or anything.

Re:Java, Ubuntu, and students (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655832)

I don't get this. Don't you guys have OpenJDK (in the form of IcedTea) over there? You know, the open-source replacement for the Oracle JDK endorsed by Oracle?

All I had to do, was
emerge -C sun-jdk; emerge icedtea
(And perhaps an eselect java-vm and eselect java-nsplugin, in case you have another JDK [like Blackdown] installed.)

So what's all the bickering? Ignorance? Because it's not as if it didn't go around the news enough.

Re:Java, Ubuntu, and students (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655982)

You could simply download the Java Runtime from Oracle and install it on your Ubuntu machines. The ability to run on Ubuntu hasn't been removed. It has just been removed from the repository.

Re:Java, Ubuntu, and students (2)

kiwimate (458274) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655994)

already spend enough time dealing with my kid's school's insane focus on Microsoft technologies

Yeah, stupid, insance, irrational school. The idiocy, using products that are niche and unpopular and barely used by anyone...

Oh wait...

Re:Java, Ubuntu, and students (4, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656184)

I don't want to be an ass, and I agree in principle that school sites should be at least as platform independent as possible; but honestly how many possible OS configurations should a school test against? If you work on Windows you probably have 90% of parents covered. If you work on Windows and Mac you probably have 99.9% of parents covered. Is working on Ubuntu really worth that extra .1% of parents who could honestly just put Windows in a VM? I understand the desire to use what you want to use, and not let stuff like this dictate how you run your computer, but is it really worth a whole lot of tax payer money to make sure that the school website works for such a small user base? If so at what point do they stop? Do they have to test against every Linux distro? The various BSDs? 32 and 64 bit version of all of this? Install the most minimal cost/complexity Windows VM you can get away with and show the kids how to boot it to do their work.

OSGi is awful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655786)

Sorry, but I welcome a competitor. This sounds a lot like FUD and butthurt from IBM.

damned if you do... (4, Interesting)

blackfrancis75 (911664) | more than 2 years ago | (#38655926)

the really funny/sad part is that many of the same people here who will condemn Oracle for capitalizing on Java are the very people who sadly shook their heads that Sun *wasn't* able to leverage it commercially.

Re:damned if you do... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38656076)

I wish I had mod points.

Re:damned if you do... (3, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#38656134)

You assume they are mutually exclusive.

you Fail It (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38655992)

poor priorities, all over America a dead man walking. users 4ll over the Our chances
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?