×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

451 comments

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409497)

Wurd

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409498)

FP

Not very important for me (5, Interesting)

Zo0ok (209803) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409507)

For my needs and preferences, Java is "free enough". Anyone who ever has turned Java down in favor of something else, because it is not free?

Re:Not very important for me (5, Interesting)

---- (147583) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409541)

I prefer "Unencumbered Enough", "Flexible Enough", "Fast Enough", "Supported Enough" as enough reasons for choosing Java.

Once chosen, I like how strict the OOP was, and the tools that are available.

/* ---- */

Full artical text (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409711)

In response to an open letter from IBM asking Sun Microsystems Inc. to join the company in developing an open-source version of Java, Sun plans to meet with IBM to discuss the issue, Sun sources said.

Sun officials planned to meet with IBM as early as Thursday to discuss the merits of whether the company should work with IBM on an independent project to create an open-source implementation of Java.

According to Sun, the company is in agreement with IBM's letter in many ways, and over the last two years Sun has made "significant" Java contributions to open source through The Apache Group; portions of the XML processing engine, through the Web Pack contribution last year; and the Java 2 Enterprise Edition processing engine known as Tomcat. "Sun is closely evaluating the effectiveness of the process," a Sun spokesperson said.

Sun said it will make an official statement about IBM's offer later on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Bob Sutor, IBM's director of WebSphere Infrastructure Software, in an interview with eWEEK, said, "We need an absolutely official open-source implementation of Java."

To read the full interview, click here. [eweek.com] .

Sutor said IBM is not trying to change things right away. "We're trying to walk before we run on this," he said. "We're not looking for the world on Day One."

But what IBM is offering is "to put people on this and to donate source code."

Sutor said IBM has proven its open-source mettle with its experience with the Eclipse open-source Java-based development platform, its success with Linux, and work the company has done with Apache.

In addition, Sutor said an open-source Java implementation will spur innovation and help generate revenue for developers. "This would be a boon for Linux," he said. "If every Linux distribution had a full implementation of Java, it would spur innovation. The money is not in this base-level plumbing, it's in what you add on top."

When asked whether IBM would be as willing to create open-source versions of its OS/390 or z/OS, Sutor said: "We're not suggesting Sun open source its directory software or proprietary stuff. Java is already in the JCP [Java Community Process]. It is already a community process that many people have contributed to. It's a mistake to look at it as though Sun is the sole author, and this is not any of their proprietary products."

Moreover, on the issue of Sun ceding control of Java should an open-source implementation surface, Sutor said: "They'll have less control, but they speak very highly of Linux," noting that Linux is not controlled by any one vendor but many benefit from it. "This is the logical next step in progressing the platform."

IBM's vice president of emerging Internet technologies, Rod Smith, sent the letter Wednesday night to Rob Gingell, Sun's chief engineer, vice president and fellow.

Citing an eWEEK article as inspiration (see "Sun: 'Secret Negotiations' on Eclipse Continue" [eweek.com] ), Smith said IBM is ready to work together with Sun on an open-source Java.

In the article Smith cited, Simon Phipps, Sun's chief technology evangelist, asked: "Why hasn't IBM given its implementation of Java to the open-source community?"

Wrote Smith in his letter: "Simon's comment appears to be an offer to jointly work toward this common goal. IBM is a strong supporter of the open source community, and we believe that a first class open source Java implementation would further enhance Java's position in the industry by spurring growth of new applications and encouraging new innovation in the Java platform."

Moreover, "IBM has been calling on Sun for years to open up Java because it will spur innovation," said an IBM spokesperson. "Now IBM is throwing down the gauntlet."

Rick Ross, president of Javalobby Inc., of Cary, N.C., an association of Java developers with more than 100,000 members, said, "On the surface, Rod's reply indicates a clear willingness on IBM's behalf to invest in an independent, open-source Java implementation that would benefit everyone"

Ross said the move could have benefits for Java developers.

"One, if an independent, certifiably compatible implementation of the Java core libraries is available, then third parties can focus on competitive performance enhancements in the VM [virtual machine]," Ross said. "Two, the barriers to Java being distributed as part of standard Linux distributions would be lowered. And three, Sun competitors who are presently unwilling to invest in the Java platform would finally be able to view Java as a platform that is independent of Sun, rather than as Sun's tool."

Re:Not very important for me (5, Insightful)

gusmao (712388) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409553)

The question is not whether someone will or will not turn java down because it is not free, but how much more wildly adopted and improved the language and the VM can become.

Re:Not very important for me (4, Insightful)

Delirium Tremens (214596) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409635)

Actually, the question -- or the worry -- is more around how to prevent somebody from forking Java and kill the "Write Once, Run Everywhere" idiom.

Re:Not very important for me (5, Insightful)

jocknerd (29758) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409742)

If its not given a BSD-style license, but one closer to GPL, there shouldn't be a problem. Microsoft won't touch the GPL since they can't make it their own like they can with BSD code. So I doubt Microsoft would do anything with Java provided its using an open-source license which prevents it from being hijacked.

Re:Not very important for me (5, Interesting)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409884)

Or it could get an original open office (or was it star) type license where non-compatible versions must be open source but if it is 100% compatible it can be closed.

Re:Not very important for me (4, Insightful)

bogado (25959) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409745)

The answer is easy create a test suite that a piece of software can only be called java compatible if it pass this test suite.

Re:Not very important for me (5, Insightful)

BaronAaron (658646) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409825)

Any fork from the Java specifications would simply not be Java anymore.

I would imagine Sun would act as a gatekeeper if Java went open source. Anything code that breaks compatibility would not be included in the "offical" Java feed.

As the grandfather post stated, this is more about portability than anything.

Re:Not very important for me (0, Insightful)

pocoloco (38079) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409557)


I haven't had the need for java yet and I will not learn it unless I have to (e.g., for work), or it is a standard not controlled by a single "for profit" entity. If two or more companies get together and I have the time, then I may take a look because of curiosity.

Re:Not very important for me (4, Informative)

goodviking (71533) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409634)

or it is a standard not controlled by a single "for profit" entity

The standards are driven and approved via the Java Community Process [jcp.org] which includes many people and organizations.

Re:Not very important for me (4, Interesting)

aled (228417) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409697)

Let me quote:
"We're not suggesting Sun open source its directory software or proprietary stuff. Java is already in the JCP [Java Community Process]. It is already a community process that many people have contributed to. It's a mistake to look at it as though Sun is the sole author, and this is not any of their proprietary products."

Brain dead moderator alert! (-1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409594)

Java is NOT FREE! Unlike something like C. ANSI C is standardised, frozen, anyone can write a compiler without royalties, and is very portable! Want to compile your program on XBSDnux 5.432? Yes you can. You cant do that with java because the VM is closed source!

Java fanboys should be ashamed of moderating this up! I advise people who agree with this to visit Anti slash [anti-slash.org] and ad Zo0ok as their foe.

Java isn't free, and most versions of Linux don't bundle it because of this! Hence I use something like python, php, c, and other free languages!

Re:Brain dead moderator alert! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409629)

Help! The only punctuation key that works on my keyboard is the exclamation point! What am I going to do!

Re:Not very important for me (1, Insightful)

Sanity (1431) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409608)

For my needs and preferences, Java is "free enough". Anyone who ever has turned Java down in favor of something else, because it is not free?
If it isn't free enough to form part of a GPL'd application, then it isn't free enough.

Re:Not very important for me (1)

msh104 (620136) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409611)

it is easier to port to different platforms and to include in open source distro's.

Re:Not very important for me (2, Interesting)

plams (744927) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409626)

Hmm. Would you use Java for scripting a game? I've never seen it before, but it's not that Java ideally isn't suited for it. If it was free I guess somebody would craft a solution suited for game scripting.

Re:Not very important for me (4, Interesting)

sperling (524821) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409752)

Funny you should say this... I can say with certainity that this is being done right now. Although java still is a memory hog, it's way faster than any custom scripting language we could make up, and a lot more flexible than most other mainstream (read: possible to hire expert developers) languages.

Re:Not very important for me (2, Interesting)

Hast (24833) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409782)

There was a vampire game for PC a few years ago that used Java for scripting. (Or rather, game logic.)

Not a very bad idea actually, there are a lot of knowledge about it and it saves you time to develop your own. You might go with other languages too naturally, like Python and such.

NOT free enough (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409627)

It is NOT free enough because it cannot come by default with linux distros. License states that third parties cannot distribute java development kit. It will be free enough for me when I can do:

apt-get install j2sdk-1.4.2

Now it is not. Of course having source available and having the right to mofify and distribute your own version (f.e. optimized for athlon or modified to conform to debian-standards) of java would be a HUGE bonus, but it is not THAT necessary.

--Coder

Re:NOT free enough (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409786)

Nice.

You managed to incorporate Debian, Free software and apt get into one troll that the /. Crowd loved. I'm going to save this to post any time anything concerning Java comes up. Know what else should be free, Hookers. I won't be happy until I can get free hookers at the local Salvation Army.

Re:NOT free enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409815)

hey, that guy is correct.

the license is that way.

which just makes a pain to others that have to download it manually.

Re:Not very important for me (2, Insightful)

SalsaDoom (14830) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409636)

Its not a matter of freeness in many ways, its a matter of longevity. The whole position we are taking here is that Java is going to get defeated by the cheaper and better advertised C# from MS. MS is of course, going to start hyping up C# soon, and no doubt bundling it as per usual. Java as it presently is going to lose to this, so we want it to be a permanent, true feature in the open source world where it will ride with our success.

There was an article in Linuxworld that summed it up nicely, let me see if I can find it.. well, I can't ;(

But you get the idea from what I said above. OSS software is in many ways untouchable. I think this, and greatly lowering the costs of deployment, are mainly why it should be OSS.

--SD

Quite important for me (5, Interesting)

qortra (591818) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409691)

I use Debian, and generally speaking, if it isn't free enough for Debian, it isn't free enough for me. Beyond my hatred for the lack of JRE in the main unstable tree (which is really annoying), there is also an ethical ideal of truly free software that is being violated by Java.

Many people believe RMS is too hardcore about sticking to his guns on this issue, but I do believe he has a good point. Many programs are "free" for temporary use, and Java is one of them. Other examples of superficially free software are Windows Media Player and Adobe Acrobat, for which there are no guarantees of future freedom. These programs, like Java, introduce standards and structure that other people build on. If the freedom of these platforms was to be compromised, many poeple could stand to lose a great deal of work. The only way to guarantee the possibility of future support is to open source it.

Re:Not very important for me (1)

primus_sucks (565583) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409808)

Anyone who ever has turned Java down in favor of something else, because it is not free?

No, but it certainly has made me look at alternatives more closely (Python, Ruby, C++, etc.).

Re:Not very important for me (2, Troll)

avante (524777) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409835)

I am of the mind that I should move away from Java because it is not free enough. In the work I do, ensuring that something is going to remain free and low cost and not get my partners in to political trouble is more important than usual. Truth is, we can't move away, but we can choose other routes.

I know most people don't need to think along those lines, but in Human Rights work, we need to more and more. We do use Java in our software, and I would like to see Sun commit to a freer model. It would be a great relief to me because I think Java is a good platform for a number of things.

Also, maybe I won't get criticized so badly the next time I meet RMS. The last time was very embarrassing. ;)

Um. An? (5, Interesting)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409508)

Sun officials planned to meet with IBM as early as Thursday to discuss the merits of whether the company should work with IBM on an independent project to create an open-source implementation of Java.

Wait... an .. implementation?

Rick Ross, president of Javalobby Inc., of Cary, N.C., an association of Java developers with more than 100,000 members, said, "On the surface, Rod's reply indicates a clear willingness on IBM's behalf to invest in an independent, open-source Java implementation that would benefit everyone"

What? Two Javas? This sounds weird. Obviously an open source implementation will grow and respond to demand rapidly and outpace something proprietary, yet it sounds like there will still be a proprietary version. Can anyone shed light on this? I'm confused.

Re:Um. An? (5, Insightful)

cynicalmoose (720691) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409537)

In other words, there will be an open source java implementation, but you can bet your bottom dollar there will be better tools and IDEs for the closed version initially.

Then there will be enough libre programmers to make decent libre IDEs etc, and the proprietary Java will wither away (and Sun with it).

Though I hope Sun doesn't die, because they can stand up against Microsoft.

Re:Um. An? (5, Interesting)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409578)

Then there will be enough libre programmers to make decent libre IDEs etc, and the proprietary Java will wither away (and Sun with it).

This, aside from Sun withering away, is what I see, too. Or possibly worse, a fork. Anything added to the OSS that finds its way into Suns would likely fall under the GPL, how's Sun feel about that? Clearly Sun and IBM have some things to sort out.

No they can't (2, Insightful)

qortra (591818) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409875)

Though I hope Sun doesn't die, because they can stand up against Microsoft.

They can't stand up to Microsoft. They can barely stand up for themselves! Don't get me wrong, I love Sun. I love Java (as a programmer), I love OpenOffice (a quite generous gift from Sun), and I like Sun hardware. However, they've been crashing quickly just as most other corporate competitors of Microsoft have, and they will continue to do so. If a victor is claimed against Microsoft, it will not come from the corporate sector. It will be decentralized Open Source hackers that beat them. Thus, through open-sourcing their technology, Sun can at least allow a part of them to live on posthumously. Otherwise, they'll drag Java down to the grave with them.

Re:Um. An? (3, Interesting)

tesmako (602075) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409549)

What? Two Javas? This sounds weird. Obviously an open source implementation will grow and respond to demand rapidly and outpace something proprietary, yet it sounds like there will still be a proprietary version. Can anyone shed light on this? I'm confused.

I cant see clearly at all that an open-source java would necessarily outpace a proprietary version, why do you assume that that would be the case? I'm confused.

Re:Um. An? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409644)

I think that it could be an excellent test case to either prove or disprove some notions of OSS. It would be interesting to see where OS is a better solution to proprietry, and vice-versa.

The multi-platformness of the java language makes it an ideal test bed. Personally I feel that OS is better at picking up faults and errors, whilst proprietry would be better at implementing new ideas.

Re:Um. An? (2, Informative)

smackjer (697558) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409563)

I think you might be reading too much into it, granted the language is a bit vague.

It doesn't say that there will be 2 versions of Java, one open source, one closed... just that an open source Java may be a reality.

Re:Um. An? (4, Insightful)

lpp (115405) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409572)

An OSS version that comes with no support and little in the way of guarantees. A commercially licensed version that does.

Companies will make the same choice they make with other dual licensed OSS projects.

Re:Um. An? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409580)

Yes, but I still get a chuckle about how Sun told ESR to blow it out his ass. And rightfully so. ESR is a jackass.

I mean, I understand someone being concerned about privacy relative to credit cards. Sure. So don't go around putting every little purchase on them. But, in this day and age, to decide that you won't have a credit card AT ALL is asinine. And, thanks to ESR's idiocy, everyone who wants to host ESR has to go through these insane gyrations of booking his travel and his hotel, etc., such that he'll never be asked for a CC. Jesus what a fucking idiot. Just get a fucking CC and only use it on travel. Really, ESR, the govt. couldn't give a tiny little fuck about where you go and what you put on your CC. Paranoid dumbass.

Glad to get that off my chest.

Re:Um. An? (2, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409740)

But, in this day and age, to decide that you won't have a credit card AT ALL is asinine. And, thanks to ESR's idiocy, everyone who wants to host ESR has to go through these insane gyrations of booking his travel and his hotel, etc., such that he'll never be asked for a CC.
If there's any truth to that anti-ESR rant, then my estimation of him has just been raised. Your comment suggests he's willing to put up with a high degree of inconvenience in order to prevent attacks on his privacy and freedom.

Most of us wouldn't. My hat off to him.

Re:Um. An? (5, Insightful)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409603)

Neither company wants to release their own IP into an open source project. However, IBM providing the manpower, with Sun providing the specs, is a good combination for a new product.

It benefits Sun because A) it keeps Free Software advocates off their backs, and B) it promotes the continuance of Java, a flagship product, and one of the ways they as a company become known to many others.

It benefits IBM because it A) improves their image with the free software community, B) helps keep them in a leadership position for corporate attitude towards open source, C) it keeps investor opinion high.

It's all about IP (1)

Mr. Competence (18431) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409680)

Specifically, IP that is licensed by Sun, but not owned by them. IBM's implementation of the JVM has similar issues.
I can almost guarantee that is one of the largest impediments to opening the source.

Re:Um. An? (1)

RailGunner (554645) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409710)

I think this is a non-start of an issue. Clearly, there is room for both Netscape and Mozilla, why wouldn't there be room for a Open Source JVM and a proprietary JVM?

And I would suspect that while the Open Source JVM included new features more rapidly, I think the proprietary JVM would be the "debian-stable" version, and the only one that Sun would officially support.

Nothing to fear here - this is just giving developers like myself more choices, and more tools to work with.

IBM may already have Java libraries ready... (4, Informative)

kbonin (58917) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409729)

This reminds me of an interesting experience I had once 3+ years ago. I worked for Cisco on a line of security products being implemented in Java. We (I) spent a lot of time talking w/ engineers at Sun about problems and limitations of various API's that we would have LOVED to get improved or expanded, there were far too many things we just couldn't do without rewriting many packages from scratch so they could be extended.

The response from Sun engineers I talked to always amounted to some version of - 'those APIs are the result of too many meetings between vested parties, for political reasons it would be nearly impossible to extend them in the way you want'.

At the same time, I spent some time talking with my counterparts at IBM (at conferences.) Over and over again I discovered (through completely non NDA conversations at these conferences) that they already had rewrites of just about all of (if not in fact 100%) the libraries. They had already rewritten everything from scratch so they could make the needed extensions themselves, they just didn't have permission to give them to anyone else. (So I had to do the same, at least for all the java.security and JCE stuff I needed...)

So its entirely feasible that IBM has had for years a parallel implementation of all the libraries, and releasing them as open source would be relatively trivial. The only issue holding them up is the Java license terms regarding package naming, i.e. I believe they would need explicit permission to release packages named 'java[x].*'

Two Java's (5, Insightful)

just fiddling around (636818) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409798)

In fact, we are talking about JVM's, not the language itself.

The Java language specification [amazon.com] is already avaliable in the open, just like the JVM spec [amazon.com] . This means that anybody could write a complete java implementation, open source. The open source version could not evolve faster than the Sun spec(because it would not be a real JVM then), but the optimization and bug-tracking processes could go faster (if it gets the same kind of support Apache has).

What is interesting here is that Sun would participate directly.

I think it only makes sense (5, Interesting)

robslimo (587196) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409517)

As Sun has already stated (in response to criticisms) that they have no problem with someone working up an Open Source version, as long as the spec is adhered to. Now someone with serious manpower is offering to do exactly that.

I'm not surprised at all. Quite pleased, actually.

Re:I think it only makes sense (5, Insightful)

aled (228417) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409605)

The problem is that open sourced java means something different to everyone, thus most people rants about different things. Many are shouting the "open source good" mantra, without stoping to think what to open source or how (a language, an implementation, a licence, a platform?).

Sun reply (4, Informative)

Espectr0 (577637) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409520)

I wonder what IBM has to say on Sun's reply, which is covered by techworld [slashdot.org]

Apparently they don't understand IBM's position on Linux

Microsoft's Stand? (4, Interesting)

GTsquirrel42 (624871) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409524)

So, what does M$ have to say about this? Will they be in favor of open-sourcing Java, or will Steve pull the "open-source-is-dangerous" rabbit back out?

Just wondering (5, Interesting)

captain_craptacular (580116) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409525)

Don't hate me, but has anyone ever thought that this might not be a *good* thing? As irrational as it sounds there are probably a number of companies out there who are using Java just because the PHB's have decided that since it's "owned" by a major company like Sun, it must be good/stable/etc... These same cover your arse PHB's may not like the fact that the language they depend on has no "official support"... I'm thinking of the type of boss who would deploy RH or SuSE but not Debian...

Re:Just wondering (4, Insightful)

bhsx (458600) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409619)

It's being spearheaded by IBM and Sun. I don't think anyone will have issues about poor corporate backing.
Not an issue, not even for the most retarded PHBs.

Re:Just wondering (5, Interesting)

bc90021 (43730) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409630)

That is likely why they would dual-license it, ala MySQL. The PHBs and the CXOs get a version that comes with Enterprise support that they pay for, and the Geeks get an open source free version that they can use that has no support.

It's being done quite successfully with MySQL, so Sun would be remiss if they didn't at least explore their options. IBM has proven that they will support open source (as it furthers their ends as well), and doing this for Java would help with their server offerings as well.

Really, I can't see how everyone won't win.

Re:Just wondering (2, Insightful)

microbox (704317) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409637)

PHB's, as annoyingly ingornant as they are, will generally follow the advise of their experts unless they have some agenda of there own. Now, computer experts are going to say cheap, no vendor lockin, no hidden features, and most can understand that even if they don't understand the process

Now, what about that agenda... Bill and Steve can only play golf with only so many PHBs. Perhaps M$ can start hiring idiot business graduates to play golf with the CEO's?

Well... the type of... (1)

cnelzie (451984) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409645)

...boss that will deploy RH or SuSe and not Debian is simply covering the corporation's rear and is making a sound business decision.

All Linux distributions are not created identically, if they were, then there would be only one. Instead, every distro has its own unique way of handling particular issues. Some are painfully annoying and others and are ingenious solutions to issues.

Going with a distro that holds a strong commercial support structure provides a serious back-up is something were to happen to the in-house support teams and also provides the possibility of holding a support contract holding corporation a reasponsible party to fall back on.

AFAIK, Debian by itself does not provide a support contract for major corporations. I do believe that for Debian to do so, they would be going against their non-corporate, community only driven distribution system.

Re:Just wondering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409660)

Who says Sun won't give "official support" after making java open-source? Of course, I doubt they will make it open-source, but we can dream, cannot we?

--Coder

Re:Just wondering (1)

supergiovane (606385) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409717)

Chances are that the same boss, knowing that respected SUNMegaCorp released its enterprise-class, bleeding-edge, award-winning, buzzword-collecting Java thing as open source, could start thinking:
"Hey, this Open Source can't be that bad, I must tell my computer guys to try that IBM Lunox, and check if it's good and if I can really save some bucks with it!"

Re:Just wondering (3, Interesting)

allelopath (577474) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409731)

That's a valid point, but when I was selling Java to the boffins i work for, their concern was the weakness of Sun, so I had to convince them that Sun was not going out of business anytime soon.

Sounds good (2, Redundant)

BCW2 (168187) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409538)

An open source Java would definatly benifit all of us. Faster bug fixes, more creativity, this universal language will shine, and it's good now. Anything to overpower that bastardized version that M$ did, it doesn't even work with windows half the time.

It might be arecord, 15 inches of snow in High Point, NC as of now.

Re:Sounds good (2, Interesting)

TrebleJunkie (208060) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409769)

See, I don't know about this. I think that if you open-source Java with a free softwareish license, and folks have the ability to use, modify, distribute, etc... Java, then you run the risk of *more* "bastardized versions", and close-but-no-cigar java variants, I would think, as people decide to add their own hooks into it for their own purposes. The thought of which gives me the heebie-jeebies.

If done right... (5, Interesting)

brasten (699342) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409540)

Wow... despite my skepticism in previous posts, I do think this CAN be done and done right. I think it would be VERY smart to get IBM and Sun to work *extremely* closely on this. In much the same way IBM is defending Linux currently, Java would still need that corporate support to defend it against outside challenges.

But, it could work...

this would be great... (1, Troll)

chrisopherpace (756918) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409543)

If Java became OSS, this could really be somewhat of a groundbreaker here. Here we would have this OSS, cross-platform, supported in darn near every browser programming language. Maybe some improvements could be made over its speed as well, as Java is really slow compared to other languages. Sun isn't going to really be making any money soon over their SDK (its free as in beer anyhow). I personally don't see why this wasn't done a long time ago. Hopefully there won't be any modification of the standard though, with every person having their own little flavor of Java. That would suck.

Re:this would be great... (4, Informative)

Liselle (684663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409753)

Maybe some improvements could be made over its speed as well, as Java is really slow compared to other languages.
Calling Java "really slow" in comparison to other languages is almost a troll, at this point. This is not 1995. Java is a memory hog, sure. But as far as speed as concerned, it's more than fast enough, especially with JIT compilers and the like. The gap between Java and more cryptic C-like languages is narrowing as computers continue to get faster and faster.

Other /.ers can defend Java's speed more eloquently than I ever can, but I didn't want to let that little comment slide in a +5 Interesting. :P

Re:this would be great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409856)

Good enough is the enemy of the great.

This could be very good indeed (4, Interesting)

seldolivaw (179178) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409546)

It's well-known within IBM (I worked a summer there) that IBM's implementation of Java on Linux and Windows is a lot faster than Sun's own. IBM for a long time has wished it had a way to make its implementation the standard for this reason. Sun must also be aware how slow their implementation is, and this gives them an honourable way of getting their hands on IBM's code without handing over control to IBM. It's a win-win, so hopefully this will happen.

Re:This could be very good indeed (2, Insightful)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409695)

I don't think IP is likely to be shared. At least, not early on.

However, as an open source project, you can apply more coders than just IBM's and Sun's.

My guess would be that... (5, Insightful)

cnelzie (451984) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409550)

...Sun is attempting to buy some time and save face by stating that they will look into it with IBM, rather then ignore IBM and the OSS community by continuing their existing party-line.

What they may attempt is to persuade IBM to understand their side and perhaps even join them in keeping Java a closed environment.

It will be interesting to see how this will all turn out in the end.

Stop beating up Sun (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409554)

While I hope that Sun does this someday, I really think that Eric and some others are out of line for beating up on Sun.

Sun is in trouble... nothing is really working for them. The Opteron is going to kill the Sparc, and they don't make much money off software. They need to figure out ways to make money from what they're doing or they're going to go under and take a lot of really cool stuff with them when they do.

I am personally an old fan of Sun. I think they're a great company. Their lukewarm support for SCO (I personally think they were just straddling the fence so they'd be on the winning side no matter what) is disturbing, but I understand their desire to stay out of the way of a litigous monstrosity like this. I want Sun to survive.

Sun has done a great job with Java so far. If they had opened it in the beginning, it would have been embraced, extended, and extinguished by you-know-who and we'd now have Microsoft Java.NET for Windows. Cross-platform Java would be dead. Sun did the right thing, and have been great stewards over this wonderful technology.

So, as we call for them to OSS Java, please keep their interests in mind. They deserve some reward for developing such a wonderful thing. We should not just blindly beat up on them for no reason, and we should keep in mind that IBM may have entirely selfish reasons for "leaning" on Sun here.

(IBM has done the community some great favors, but that doesn't entitle them to some kind of blind religious allegence.)

Re:Stop beating up Sun (2, Insightful)

Swamii (594522) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409772)

So you're asking us to give Sun a free pass if they say no to IBM's proposal?

In the previous /. headline [slashdot.org] we hear about Richard Stallman telling us that software for money == bad morality, and we all nod our head. Now we see Sun keeping Java closed, trying to make money off it, and you tell us to look the other way?

Hell, that's a double standard if I've ever seen one.

Re:Stop beating up Sun (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409813)

Stop following Stallman like a sheep and think about the bigger picture here.

You use too much "we" in this message. Try using the word "I" and thinking for yourself.

OS/390, z/OS (1, Redundant)

Espectr0 (577637) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409564)

Seems we won't be getting free OS goodies:

"When asked whether IBM would be as willing to create open-source versions of its OS/390 or z/OS, Sutor said: "We're not suggesting Sun open source its directory software or proprietary stuff. Java is already in the JCP [Java Community Process]. It is already a community process that many people have contributed to. It's a mistake to look at it as though Sun is the sole author, and this is not any of their proprietary products.""

I want free Starbucks (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409568)

Open up your latte for all the java lovers.

Mad Hatter (5, Interesting)

almaon (252555) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409576)

I wonder if this will have any impact on the development and direction of Mad Hatter, with IBM's ongoing journey to bring linux to a wider audience. These two companies in bed, in marriage, could produce some interesting offspring for Java and ultimately could very well trickle down to Mad Hatter.

Could this venture open up doors for Mad Hatter to become a part of IBM's fleet of products? Any thoughts?

Crossing my fingers! (5, Interesting)

provoix (730200) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409585)

From the article - "Sun officials planned to meet with IBM as early as Thursday to discuss the merits of whether the company should work with IBM on an independent project to create an open-source implementation of Java."

Well...perhaps they've seen the benefit of the OpenOffice project.

what's the point? (0)

OPTiX_iNC (691070) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409590)

Most commercial software becomes open-source because the company no longer wants to pay to continue development. Sun is doing a great job developing java as it is.

On the other hand, it can be seen as both IBM and Sun telling SCO to "stick it."

Took them long enough (4, Insightful)

InsaneGeek (175763) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409625)

I gotta think that Java operates at a loss for them, they've basically been using Java as loss-leader to buy their other sutff lately. With all their corporate wide financial difficulties spinning Java off, letting other people do their development for them makes a lot of $ sense. They've gotten enough brand naming out of Java, so it will always be linked with Sun, so they aren't losing much branding. Why spend lots of money & resources on a free product when you are strapped to the gills with financial problems.

Re:Took them long enough (5, Insightful)

Albanach (527650) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409838)

I gotta think that Java operates at a loss for them

Really? Have you looked at a mobile phone recently? Every new phone comes with Java. That suggests almost every new phone means a royalty payment to Sun. Mobile phone sales are back on the up thanks to mobile multimedia content - mostly delivered through Java. I suspect Sun are raking it in.

Conflict of Interests (0, Offtopic)

a!b!c! (137622) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409646)

Why do you think Slashdot is posting two stories a day about open sourcing Java for Developers?

What does OSDN stand for again?

Sorry, if others have mentioned this already.

GCJ - The gnu compiler for java (4, Informative)

stripmarkup (629598) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409659)

There is already an open source java compiler [slashdot.org] . It works pretty well but its missing the UI functionality. It compiles to bytecode or native code on Windows or Linux. It does not support awt or Swing yet. This should be the obvious starting point for IBM.

Re:GCJ - The gnu compiler for java (4, Informative)

tdrury (49462) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409843)

This should be the obvious starting point for IBM

Wouldn't it be smarter if IBM started with their own SDK/JVM [ibm.com] ? If IBM wants open-source Java so bad, let them open their SDK and JVM.

Hooray (0, Offtopic)

ximor_iksivich (666068) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409683)

At last I can create "Blue Java" Goodbye cruel case sensitivity :D

Anyone else think this senario might happen..?

Open Source (5, Interesting)

jefu (53450) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409701)

I'd have thought that Sun might have learned something about opening source by now. NeWS, the rather radical window system that sun built in the late 80's probably failed mostly because it was kept proprietary (at least many who used it thought so). When X was openly and freely available, it was tough for even the excellent technical solution NeWS was to compete.

<offtopic>
Does anyone know if there are implementations of NeWS available as open source now? Has anyone working on one of the "X Is Icky - I have a Better Way" window systems looked at NeWS for a model? Enquiring minds (however enfeebled) want to know.
</offtopic>

Probably too little, too late (3, Interesting)

ShatteredDream (636520) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409721)

Mono is making good progress with its VM and core libraries. It is getting very functional on Win32 and Linux, and the PPC/OSX version is slowly, but surely, becoming useable.

What IBM should do is offer Microsoft the ability to integrate any of IBM's contributions to Mono in exchange from litigation immunity for Mono on patents. Hell, even go so far as to help Microsoft get J# J2SE 1.4/1.5 compatable or something.

IBM would be better off working on an existing open source VM and slowly moving Java-the-language to another VM that is not controlled by a rival. Hell, maybe even parrot.

Re:Probably too little, too late (2, Informative)

petabyte (238821) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409839)

IBM would be better off working on an existing open source VM and slowly moving Java-the-language to another VM that is not controlled by a rival. Hell, maybe even parrot.

Or you know, IBM could work on their own virtual machine. [ibm.com] :)

Transcript of sun-ibm discussion (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409725)

http://www.tophat.se/rocknroll/

Opensourcing smashes .Net (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409727)

Opensourcing Java and the following wild adoption will help gaining market share against .Net / C#.

Awesome (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409741)

This could lead to some extremely good things.

Unfortunately, the only downside is that ESR is going to try to take credit for it, and he will be insufferable after this.

If Sun doesn't do something quick, (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409773)

PHP5 will make most of what Java does simply irrelevant.

Well (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409776)

Not everything has to be open source, you fucking hippies.

Not a lot to read into this (4, Informative)

ArchAngelQ (35053) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409785)

Sun has publicly said they will talk to IBM about this. This doesn't amount to agreeing to do that which is proposed, ala an open source java.

What they HAVE basicly said is "We have officially turned to look at the road that may lead to an open source java". This isn't the first step on the road to Sun being involved in an open source java. But it's the precursor to that step, so I think anyone interested in java will take note.

Just my 2c

Sure they might (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8409819)

They will open source Java if they think it will be more profitable than *not* open sourcing Java. Not trolling, just being blunt and honest.

The sad part is that if they do, it'll probably be "Free As In Stallman" instead of "Free As In Free"

OpenSource susbtitute of agreement between company (5, Interesting)

nereid666 (533498) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409833)

It si very interesting to listen how one company talks with another in order to achieve the liberation of a technology and asking to release it as opensource. I think it is a revolution, years ago one company made a deal with another under propiertary licenses.
Do they arrive to a private deal? Or they arrive to a deal with the benefit of everyone, in opensource-way?

Yay! (5, Interesting)

Gorath99 (746654) | more than 10 years ago | (#8409847)

I really hope this works out. Not because "free as in beer" isn't good enough for me (it is), but because it'll help focus the Java community.

We want Java's greatest supporters on one line, so they can face the growing competition of C# instead of bickering among themselves about whose VM/Gui toolkit/IDE/Compiler is the best.

Getting an OSS Java is just a nice bonus.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...