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!

Corporate vs Open Source:Sun Stealing Blackdown?

Cliff posted more than 14 years ago | from the immovable-force-meets-immovable-object dept.

Java 246

An anonymous submittor droped this in the inbox: "A Linux Today story talks about how Sun repackaged Blackdown's porting of JDK 1.2.2 and called it their own. Even the script wrappers for this thing are the ones Steve Bryne wrote for the Blackdown effort and even have the name of the Blackdown developers in it. This is ridiculous! Is this what happens when corporate meets open source?" We all knew something like this was going to happen eventually. Hopefully Sun and Inprise will realize their mistake and take steps to correct it. If they do not, though...what steps can the Blackdown team take to protect their work?

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

hmmm... (1)

chris_se (96649) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476544)

well, not too surprising i suppose.

my guess is that more companies do this than we realize, just probably on a smaller level.
one example: that disk compression utility microsoft borrowed in dos 6.?

it seems like companies wouldn't be so hideously stupid about it though...

What license? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476545)

An important question, and one which I haven't seen answered anywhere, is what type of license the Blackdown folk had from Sun to work with the Sun code. It sounds like this is not really a violation- just that the Blackdown people were desperate enough to finish the product that they accepted a crappy license and have now paid the price for that. While this is not very "nice" of Sun, it's what you get for not working on a project with a strong, protective license like the GPL. Oh well... ~luge without his login

This is why I use IBM's JDK (3)

Logan (7529) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476546)

Granted, it's only 1.1, not 1.2, but that's all I need. It works exceptionally well. Jikes + IBM's jdk will be the future of open source java development in Linux. Perhaps this is why Sun feels the need to desperately claim they are supporting Linux, when so far I've yet to see any real evidence of such support. This is my favorite attribute of non-proprietary solutions. When the vendor is lazy, other people can step in. I don't think Sun's learned that lesson yet, but they're bound to soon enough. Now off to [] .


Did they make it proprietary? (1)

PG13 (3024) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476547)

I am unfamiliar with the blackdown project so I don't know what liscense they use. However, did the sun team release an open source tool (i.e. the source code is still freely modifiable) and just not give proper credit or did they actually make it proprietary? If the first is the case don't jump on them too hard yet. The fact that the names of the developers is in the README is a good sign. This might have just been a marketing screw up (maybe whoever wrote the announcment didn't know anything about this). Besides it is a good thing if Sun puts its name behind an open source project (it gives it more credibility) of course they should have given proper credit (and should be urged to do so).

The later (making the code proprietary) is more worrying and of course (whether you like it or not) is what the GPL is designed to protect against. Of course some developers don't mind this and hence release their code under differnt liscences (their choice).

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476548)

Some of us need 1.2, unfortunately. Do you know if IBM has any plans to support 1.2 or not? ~luge

Re:hmmm... (0)

chris_se (96649) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476549)

oops submited too soon... i meant to say something (re: on a smaller level) about how i can imagine it's just too tempting for (some|a few|most) closed source developers not to borrow something from open source code...

although slightly offtopic, it's something to think about...

SUN is as bad as Microsoft (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476550) intent. They simply lack the power Microsoft enjoys to be more damaging.

Please also note that Sun has decided to PULL JAVA from the ECMA standards process they were putting it through. Look here [] . IBM (and probably others) are rightfully pissed off. When is Sun going to learn? The funny thing is, despite all the bad press they get from pulling these stunts, they seem to keep getting worse each time! Must be McNealy's ego.

Playing Devils Advocate... (3)

Myddrin (54596) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476551)

Devil = 1
Isn't this perfectly legal under the Sun Community License? It's not real nice, but I was under the impression that all changes to the Java source belonged to Sun.
Devil = 0

Overall though, even if this is ok according to "the law", it still bites the big one. I really like Java, it has a great deal of potential, (INMHO) both as a language and as a VM... stuff like this just makes it look really bad.


Contrast this with IBM (1)

lal (29527) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476552)

Though Sun touts itself as the Java company, I think Sun's behavior (and this incident is just one of may) shows that the real Java company is IBM. IBM has a quality JDK 1.1 implementation and will soon have their JDK 1.2 implementation done. Their JDK is developed in-house, and they don't put their name on other people's efforts.

Disclaimer: I don't have anything to do with IBM -- just an observation.

What was the license? (1)

JamesSharman (91225) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476553)

Can any one tell us what the licence that the original code was released under? From the text it sounds more like a direct copyright violation than a license issue

Most open source licenese don't seem to prohibit repackageing and sale but changeing a copyright notice to say it's your own is breaking the law in anyones book. Any additional information would be most apreciated, I havea feeling that their is more to this than meets the eye

It should also be rememberd that this may not be sun's fault, for all we know some rogue employe grabed some source code of the net and told the boss he wrote it to avoid getting fired, I've come accross stories like that before, I guess however that sun would still have a degree of responsability for not checking

Wasn't this discussed earlier this year? (3)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476554)

When the Sun Source Code License was first introduced, there was a thread on /. stating that Sun would behave in exactly this manner. You would make improvements to the Code, and Sun would then claim the benefits, and wouldn't even have to acknowledge you or your work.

Sun is within its legal rights ... but (1)

PhilLong (42015) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476555)

The article is exactly right; it's legal for sun to do what they did, and it is helpful to both java and linux. HOWEVER .... some snaps to Blackdown in the press release would have been very appropriate. From sun's point of view, other's contributions to Java are small compatred to the $ and effort the've put in to something that costs them money at an accelerating rate. BTW -- I'm using the blackdown JDK becase I want native threads on my SMP box ...

Another witch hunt! (5)

jrwilk01 (88081) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476556)

The Blackdown folks did release their code back to Sun you know. And, the Blackdown project is not an open source project, they license the reference implementation of the JDK from Sun and modify it to run on Linux. Thats why its called the "Java Linux Porting project". Everyone should consider it a good thing that Sun is now taking interest. That means we will finally get a good JVM for Linux, something we have needed for a very long time.

What licence? (1)

arcade (16638) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476557)

The big question here is - what licence was the "stolen" software written in ? And how are they presenting it? If it was released under the GPL, then other companies may use the source, and I remember correctly, they ONLY need to provide the source (and licence it under GPL), but they don't need to give credits. .. I think..

If the software was released into public domain, then sun has done absolutely nothing wrong legally, but of course a lot wrong morally.

Wasn't this what happened to emacs? Someone made xemacs and made it closed source. Then Richard Stallman made the GNU licence and distributed all future versions of emacs under that licence - simply because the corp behind xemacs "stole his work". It wasn't stealing in the legal sense, but it was in the moral sense.

Wellwell, I don't know enough about this to say for sure, but I have a feeling Sun has talked a lot to their lawyers before doing this, and thus - I guess nothing can be done.

Blackdown (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476558)

The article suggests that code from the Blackdown project was stolen. Is there any evidence to Support that claim? As far as I know, this new port from Sun is an independent port done by Inprise (who is eager to port their Java development tools to Linux) using the Sun's base code.

In any case, isn't Blackdown's whole port based almost entirely on Sun's code? I don't want in any way to diminish the good work done by the Blackdown folks. I'm not sure if this Sun/Inprise venture puts Blackdown out of business either. I don't think we should jump on the wagon and assume that Sun is somehow being unfair to Blackdown.

If we want to blame Sun for anything, it should be for writing a bad Java license. If we agree to that license, anything that follows is our own fault.

Who cares? Where's the free software spirt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476559)

Really now, the point behind free software is that it allows others to build upon the experience of others. Why complain about what free software does best? Sure, the Blackdown people made their contribution. But the point of free software is to offer up a sacrafice useable by anyone including corporations or individuals. And afterall, Sun invented Java. It is their intellectual property. Live and let live, that's the spirit! Sure, sometimes a few toes get stepped on, but don't let that ruin the dance!

*sigh* ... again? (2)

Mawbid (3993) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476560)

Creative slapped their own copyright on other people's code and didn't even credit them. It looks like they didn't mean any harm. After the limited outrage that ensued, they properly credited the authors. I can believe that they just made a mistake. I can believe Corel just made a mistake too, and I can believe this is also a simple mistake and they'll be quick to make it right after it's politely pointed out to them.

But it stinks, methinks.

Companies do not mistakenly distribute other companies' commercial products as their own. If they did, they'd be in deep shit, so they're careful that way. Companies don't seem to feel they need to be careful with open source software. What are open source authors going to do about it?

Sun & Microsoft: family? (1)

storem (117912) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476561)

This story seems like Sun is moving in the same area as Microsoft. These companies are the best in what they do: taking credit.

I'm sorry to say, but Sun is using the Java support to grow into an arrogant monopolist.

Have a look at the licence (1)

Olivier Galibert (774) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476562)

Which is here [http] .

It basically includes "do the work for us for free, and we will take it for us, and it won't even be stealing because the work will be ours, not yours". It is nowhere near open source, it is nowhere near fair either, and I really wonder why the people at blackdown have accepted to sign such a thing.

And this is bad for real free software because of the "why bothering writing a free java sdk, blackdown's one is good enough" effect.


Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (3)

Logan (7529) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476563)

They intend to have a preview version of 1.3 for Linux available by first quarter 2000 (see er/portingplans.html [] ). Whether or not that means anything, I don't know, but I'm hopeful.


Who is creating such a fuss here? (1)

Twinky (32219) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476564)

I was reading the article that anonymous coward was pointing to, because somehow I got the feeling from the discussion before that sun had been allowed to include Blackdowns code.

Now the article does not mention any *stealing*. It just talks about Blackdown not being mentioned in the press release. And then it's not even Blackdown members who are complaining.

(Since when are AC's allowed to post storied anyway?)

Read the java-linux list archives FIRST (5)

brassrat77 (9533) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476565)

There's already an active thread on this at blackdown's java-linux mail list. Blackdown developers, some Inprise developers, and just folks. My impressions:

- Inprise knows they started with Blackdown's work

- The initial PR did not mention Blackdown. Could have been the stupid marketing departments

- The Inprise folks say they are mentioning and crediting Blackdown in press interviews at the Java conference in NY

- everyone agrees more communications between the teams would help

- The SCSL apparently allows Sun to do anything it wants with any code provided back to them.

And BTW, a new release candidate of blackdown's port was released yesterday!

I'm concerned about Sun, too. Don't attribute to deliberate malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity [paraphrasing Pournell]. But keep your powder dry [anon.]

Immoral but Legal (1)

MassacrE (763) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476566)

The blackdown code is sent directly back to Sun, so this is definately allowable. Indeed, changes the Blackdown team made (bugfixes) have been merged into the java code already, at least for Solaris.

The problem comes just in that Blackdown has been around for four years, and Sun releases a new jdk one day (without cluing anyone in beforehand), and don't give Blackdown any credit.

Technically, they don't have to give credit. But Blackdown has done a _hell_ of a lot more than Sun or Imprise have in getting java working on Linux.

Note that although Sun would be to blame for not having Blackdown listed in the press releases, Imprise would be to blame for using code, scripts, and readme's from Blackdown. Imprise did the port to help get JBuilder out for UNIX platforms, Sun is just taking over the source tree.

License (5)

SimonK (7722) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476567)

It says quite clearly on a page pointed to by the Blackdown FAQ about licensing [] that Sun owns all changes made under the non-commercial internal use agreement that the Blackdown team have agreed to.

If they object, having accepted the agreement, then that is their silly fault, frankly. To be honest though, I don't expect they will object as long as Sun give credit where it is due, and I imagine that their not doing so immediately is just a screw-up.

License == "Free download" (1)

(void*) (113680) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476568)

It appears that Blackdown wasn't releases as GPL code in the first place. Given that, and that Blackdown was based on code from Sun that is their SCSL, nothing was stolen.

So the LinuxToday's article that Sun "stole" Blackdown is simply wrong.

And yes, the spirit of free software is in the giving. If it was not the intent of the Blackdown developers, they are going to have a hard time taking back what was their effort.

Re:Another witch hunt! (1)

OnlyNou (90455) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476569)

it'll be a good JVM only it'll be ported by the blackdown team and then given to sun to claim as there own with an imprise JIT.

the only way to go is with IBM. i wish IBM was working with blackdown.

i wish sun acted better with java (TM). this action demonstrates to me how heartless they are. there's something so classless and wrong about using blackdown to port, taking there code and not hinting in the release that blackdown had anything to do with it. at least they left all the credits for the developers in.

for now, i'll be using the blackdown port. it's the same as sun's port, except with better threading.

Bad, bad Sun (2)

Steeltoe (98226) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476570)

Just for the record, Sun still is the company who actually made the Java SDK. Blackdown just reconfigured it to work under Linux. Now, perhaps they should have put the proper acknowledgements and links along with the download. They could at least have asked the Blackdown-crew first. I'm assuming here. Anyone who know if they did?

But is it really more wrong when a company does this thing, than when individuals or groups of people do it? I think the reason we react so harsh on this is mostly because Sun has ignored Linux support for so long concerning Java, in favour for their own OS.

It seems ./ers do nothing but file complaints all day. Before this happened, Sun got criticized for not having a Linux version of the Java SDK on their pages. Now that they do, we complain about that. As long as we get to complain, we are happy ./ers?

- Steeltoe

Sun, Java and ECMA (2)

Florian H. (6933) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476571)

On a related note, Heise [] has two articles on Sun and Java (in german). One [] says that sun announced not to charge any license fees for the Java Standard Edition, while the other one [] notes the Sun just withdrew Java from the ECMA standardization process, due to copyright considerations. The interesting bit: The technical commitee of ECMA is now thinking about standardizing Java without the participation of Sun.

So the sudden moves (no licence fees, linux support) may in fact be defensive maneuvres...

Didn't we want Sun to take control of this?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476572)

Almost since the start of Java, we have been hammering on them to support a Linux port in house. Sure they didn't Blackdown much of the credit that they deserve, but we all know.

The important thing is that you can now download the Linux port on Sun's page, moving towards having the Linux as a choice along with windows and solaris.

marketing bone not talking to dev bone (1)

BenHmm (90784) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476573)

relax a bit. This is just a sign of big corporation snafu. The press office didn't talk to the developers. That's all.
They'll put it right - because right now, I'm sure they're probably getting a serious bollocking (due not in small part to /.)

what's slightly more interesting is the question about whether people would be so upset if it was another small company - and not the big'n'scary corp like Sun...because GPL does mean that one day some big incumbent corp will publish a boxed something and stick lots of money behind its marketing and sell more than anyone else.


Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476574)

Hi, My Nale is Scott Mc Nealy. You've probably seen me before in such films as "The Backbone of The Internet", "A Rainy Day In WA", or "Everybody Says I Love You Bill".

My PR dept. here at Sun kept telling me about this great website, Splashpot.

So I am going to tell you about those allegations of us ripping off Blackgowns. Lemme tell you one thing. It cost us millions $$$ to come up with that cute steaming logo. Our lawyers keep crying "hungry" in our ongoing lawsuits. Our marketing dept. is glutonning millions still to hide the fact that we can't produce a stable VM. But let me tell you something -- we had to take that money from somewhere. Clearly, engineers are way overpaid.

Love, dudes.

Re:Read the java-linux list archives FIRST (2)

hedgehog_uk (66749) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476575)

This could well be just stupidity on Sun's part, but has caused Sun to lose a lot of credibility with the open-source movement. I doubt that anyone will trust the SCSL anymore after this (if they did so before). Watch Sun's reaction to this very carefully - this is how we'll really find out where Sun stands (good company, stupid slip-up or bad company, preying on the good faith of open-source developers). Personally I'd still put my money on Sun turning out to be one of the good guys but, like any large company, it does have some real idiot PHB's (or did so when I worked there).


Getting what you asked for (1)

Shimbo (100005) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476576)

'Hopefully more credit [to Blackdown] will appear on printed and online magazine in the next days. '

--Paolo Ciccone , JBuilder, /.

I think one has to accept a certain amount of crap from a press release. The PR guys might not have known better. Still, a public acknowledgement of the Blackdown work seems in order.

Re:Contrast this with IBM (3)

DanaL (66515) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476577)

Not to mention that Jikes (a bytecode compiler made by IBM) is Open Source. They're actually giving back to the community, rather than (apparently) stealing from it.

I *hope* Sun hasn't stolen Blackdown (has anyone got in touch with them? Have they made a statement?). It's entirely possible that Blackdown turned the code over to them and Sun completed it. Before we start burning Sparc boxes in effigy, we should get a little more information.


but is it... (2)

gnudot (79462) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476578)

the same code? Why is the release by Sun 21MB while the largest JDK 1.1.* release by Blackdown only 13MB? If you want to discuss the Blackdown 1.2 releases, the largest of those is 19MB in bzipped format. It doesn't appear to me to be the exact same package.

Re:What license? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476579)

You will be happy to know that all these questions, and perhaps even a few more are answered in the most surprising of sources -- my pants!

Or perhaps, they're answered in the most obvious of sources -- the article linked to!! Why don't you buzz over there, read the article, then come back and post again and tell us what you thought?


Growing Pains (4)

Tenement (94499) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476580)

One of the things you're going to have to consider that these corporations have been dealing with TIGHTLY CLOSED source for the last several DECADES.

Any large corporation is very slow to change beneath it all (that's just the nature of the beast)--even though it would seem that they've changed thanks to marketing hype, etc.

If we voice our opinions (politely, preferably) about such things, most likely the changes will take place.

It's impossible to expect someone that has put nails into the top shelf of a cabinent for 20 years, to get up, go to another part of the factory and start painting PERFECTLY.

It takes JOB TRAINING. Who trains the corporations? The public does. Who trains the public? The media does. Who trains the media? Hmmm I'll stop before I start ranting..

Just raise the 'penalty flag' tell them the mistake politely (especially in public), and wait a bit. They'll learn.

With thanks,


Re:Java should disappear from our radar (5)

Oates (18921) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476581)

At first, when reading this, I decided that I should start to abandon my Java work. Then I realized the awful truth of the world.

Every place I've worked has happily used proprietary tools.

I work for a consulting company. 1/3 of the people do mainframe work, about 1/2 work on VeeBee, and the remainder do training or work (like I do) in Java, C/C++, UNIX, etc. Our business is based on the fact that companies produce proprietary languages like VB, Powerbuilder, Delphi, Visual C++, etc. They may be based on standard languages, but they are NOT standards except to themselves.

As long as there is money to be made in Java, I'll end up continuing to work in it. I might really want to be doing projects in Python or C++, but I'll end up working in Java because that's where the money is. And it's the same way for business. My clients don't care if Java is proprietary or not as long as their web-apps get done on time, just like they've always approached client server development.

So, in the end, it doesn't matter to the people who really matter--the people who pay for my paycheck. If you want this to change, the staff people in these corporations need to convince their managers that only standards-based and open-source products should be used for development.


Actually.... (2)

macdaddy (38372) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476582)

Actually one of the Blackdown guys was pretty pissed when he posted a message to a linux list I'm on. I would have to say that he was more than justified in being pissed. How would you like to do all the work on project X and not get a damn bit of recognition for it in the end, even if the license agreement didn't state that I'd get that recognition? I know it would thoroughly piss me off. Its a pretty shitty thing to do on Sun's part if you ask me.

Compare this to "Back to the Future" with the bully and McFly making him do his homework for him. Bastards..... Hello!?! McFly!


Re:Blackdown (1)

dancres (92347) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476583)

I am unaware of the licensing agreement the blackdown guys have with SUN but I suspect it'll be the SCSL. If it is then, sure enough, SUN have every right to release it under their own banner.

The "stealing" argument would, therefore, be inappropriate BUT I feel that SUN are well out of line for not giving credit to the Blackdown team for it's efforts. To be fair, it may be SUN have given credit although it sure ain't in the original press release.

Oh, and until SUN have native threads support, I'll be sticking with the Blackdown port for which I am very grateful.

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (1)

lonely (32990) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476584)

Hmm I couldn't even get it to start up with the Java Application I was working on. Admitedly my app does push things a little bit...... must remeber to get five mins to log a bug with IBM. (But then when will I find five mins to read ./!)

(NT4Sp5 is that helps anybody!)

GPL code => GPL code (2)

dillon_rinker (17944) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476585)

Suppose I license my source code to you (and anyone else who wants it) on the condition that any works you derive from my source code are licensed back to me (and anyone else who wants it). Suppose further that you actually DO produce code based on mine. I think I (and anyone else who wanted to) would have every legal right to use your code.

Specifically, if you produce code based on my GPL'd code, then I think I'd have a real solid legal basis for assuming that what you produce is GPL'd, regardless of what license you try to put on it. If you tried to fight it, I think you'd rapidly find yourself in MASSIVE hot water over your technical, legal violation of my "intellectual property rights," since you used my code in violation of my license. If you didn't want to share your code, you shouldn't have used mine.

In this instance, if it were Sun (or some other big set of pockets) that did this, I'd definitely go for the big tamale - damages, treble damages, punitive damages, and criminal charges (despite what many think, willful violation of copyrights can be treated as criminal matters).

Re:What was the license? (1)

treke (62626) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476586)

I think the blackstone code was a port of Sun's code, under a license that gave Sun the rights to the code. So this should be legal, although still not right. I can't get through to the article, so I can't be sure of this.

Re:Another witch hunt! (1)

akey (29718) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476587)

Noone is arguing that Sun's releasing the JVM is not a "Good Thing". Most people are even picking up on the fact that Sun was well within their rights under their license to do what they did. But it still sucks that they couldn't make at least a token reference to Blackdown to acknowlege their contribution.

Wrong headline. (1)

Dave W (1310) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476588)

The headline for this story is completely wrong. As is clear from some of the comments the license under which the blackdown team have done their work has always allowed this to happen.

The real story is that the FSF and everyone else who has criticised the Sun community licence has been proved right. This licence has now been proved to be anti open source as we expected.

Calling IBM a saviour in this situation is also naive. Their JDK is not open source either.

Java must now decline as a language for open source/free software.


It was only a matter of time... (2)

moonboy (2512) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476589)

It was only a matter of time until this happened. Considering how "big business" has traditionally had a ruthless streak (like certain companies who shall remain nameless, because we're all tired of hearing about them) I'm surprised it hasn't happened sooner. It may have already happened and who would know? I would think this would be one of the problems with open source vs. closed source. With a piece of software being closed source and provided to the public only in binary form, who's to say some open source code hasn't already been "borrowed" without credit being given to the original author or any changes that were made, being made open. As well, this case or a similar one is bound to end up in court and what will happen then? I, for one, hope we will have some good lawyers who can argue effectively for the open source position. Lawyers that understand what it is really all about and can convey that message to a judge effectively so he can make an truly informed decision.


"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein

Re:What was the license? (1)

treke (62626) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476590)

ooops. Blackdown, it's been a looong night

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (2)

Logan (7529) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476591)

I did have a problem with .java_wrapper. I had to replace a comma with a space at or around line 21:
printf "%s",$src
Should be:
printf "%s" $src
Or better yet:
echo $src

I could start any of the binaries that came with the jdk until I made that change.


Waiting for that check in... (3)

Neville (88610) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476592)

Apparently Sun crafted a patch to help bridge the gap between Solaris and Linux threads, but they haven't shown any indication of adding that code to the Blackdown tree.

At the risk of treading on etiquette, here's a snip from a post made by one of the BlackDown contributors on a Sun mailing list:

Well, as I said in another mail, it looks at least a lot like they started out with the results of 4(?) years of Blackdown porting efforts. You need to have been on board in order to get a feel for the awful amount of work necessary to convert Solaris' threading to Linux' threading, etcetera. That this results in a comparatively small patch file does not mean that they weren't 90% jumpstarted by the Blackdown effort, and indeed only added a couple of patches and a few bits of functionality.

Of course, the really great thing is that a) we (Blackdown) were unaware of this effort, and b) we still have to see these fixes contributed to Blackdown. Not that it is really necessary, because the first team member already resigned so I think Sun and Inprise can maintain the port all by themselves in the future. I certainly won't lift a finger anymore to debug the Intel port...

Sorry, I can't moderate you (1)

guran (98325) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476593)

But if I had any moderation point you would have an insightful point.

I can GPL all I want in my spare time, but at work I'm in the hands of my management. Those guys think money first, ethics later. (at least they think etics) SO... How do we get management types to realize that open source is good for more than hobby?

A little too late (1)

bjb (3050) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476594)

Aagh! If this had only been posted at around 2-3pm yesterday, I could have asked the head of Inprise and Pat Seltz (?) who is the president of Sun's software division yesterday at a press conference. FYI, it was at the Javits Center in NYC, a public "unveiling" of Java 2 Enterprise Edition. They were both there and fielding questions ..

Should'a, Could'a, Would'a..


Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (2)

operagost (62405) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476595)

The 1.1.8 runtime does have a speed advantage. You should see its performance on NT and OS/2. It's faster than anyone's 1.2 implementation. []

Re:Java should disappear from our radar (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476596)

I mostly see your point, but including Visual C++ in your list of proprietary languages is just wrong. There's nothing specifically proprietary about Visual C++...I mean, sure the Win32 API is proprietary, but then so is the MacOS API or the Amiga API, or whatever.

Its not like Visual C++ uses some mutant strain of C++.

Re:Did they make it proprietary? (2)

javatips (66293) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476597)

Sun probably gave the, to blackdown, source under theire community license and gave them the right to publish theire work without paying anything to Sun.

Because that license give Sun the right to use the modification in theire own codebase, Sun can do what they did. What they cannot do is remove the copyright notice from code written by the blackdown team.

Now is it a good move from Sun, I don't think so. But the Blackdown project did nothing to protect themself.

Now the blackdown project has to re-evaluate their mission. One thing that Sun will probably not do is write a JIT for every platform that Lunix run on. So maybe blackdown could concentrate on making the source compilable on many platform and to provide a JIT, which can be written from scratch so Sun cannot advertise it as their own, for the different platform.

I don't know if someone else notice, but the Sun release run with green threads as default. It seems that they did not incorporate the new threading code that is present in the blackdown release.

Related news: Sun withdrawing ECMA Java standard (2)

Pope Raymond Lama (57277) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476598)

Maybe it is not connected with this issue at all, but as its being announced just along with it,
Id bet that the cancelling of a Java stantard [] plan is something to worry about.

Ok. This withdraw would be a sad thing at any time.

What about RedHat? (0)

BoLean (41374) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476599)

If you consider this a slap in the face think of the money lining RedHat's pockets. Money earned on the blood and sweat or many anonymous contributors backs.

Don't get me wrong, Open Source can and should be profitible, but not if you are not adding any real value.

VALinux builds great machines and provides support. Corel is bringing an excellent office and graphics suite to the platform. RedHat, when you look at true value added vs the amount of benefits that they are receiving-- its sickening.

Talk about taking credit for the work of others. SUN just did it with one of their many tiny (in terms of revenue) products. RedHat is 90% based on Linux and taking credit for 99%.

Don't cry GPL (4)

copito (1846) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476600)

While your hypothetical is correct, GPLed code has the feature (or failure depending on your POV) that it forces derived code to be GPLed.

The code in question was not GPLed. Therefore the point is moot. In fact it was originally based on Sun code which was licensed with the requirement that changes became the property of Sun. Sun apparently used this to their advantage, as one might expect a business to do. You may argue the political sagacity of their move, but it seems perfectly legal to this non-lawyer.

Bad Cliff, Bad (1)

freakho (28342) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476601)

This story needs to be updated to reflect the actual situation, but since this is and Ask Slashdot:

If Sun & Inprise don't ever credit them (I realize somebody said it's likely they will, but hypothetially..), then Sun is still within the terms of the liscense. Therefore, the most effective action to take is to do what this article has accomplished already: raise a huge stink. Make sure nobody will ever work under the exploitative SCSL ever again. (which should have been done from the beginning, IMHO, but whatever) So: problem solved. :)

Re:hmmm... (5)

BrianH (13460) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476602)

I'm sure it happens all the time, but I doubt that people are stealing whole programs. The sticky area of the GPL, and an area that I've personally ventured into, is "micro-theft" of open source code.

Here's an example: About two years ago I was developing an application for a client (who will remain nameless), and the app needed to have some simple word processing abilities (mostly just font support and page formatting abilities). While I got that portion of the application developed properly, there was a kludge in the code that I didn't particularly care for and which was slightly buggy. About 3 weeks after I wrote that portion of the app, I went over to a friends house and found him trying to track down a bug in a GPL'd word processor (which will also remain nameless). Since he had it open anyway, I decided to take a look and see how the author of that program had handled the bit I'd kludged. I liked the way the author had done it and a whopping 15 lines of his code ended up in my program (with just a little bit of editing).

So the question is, did I violate the GPL? What if I had just been "inspired" by his code and re-written a similar bit of code from memory? Could/should I be sued? Can I be forced to open the source? (I actually sold the program and all rights to the client, so I couldn't do that anyway) Where is the "magic line" here?

In case you can't tell, I've been wondering about these things for quite a while but this is really the first opportunity I've seen to bring them up :) What do you guys think? What qualifies as a GPL violation?

Re:but is it... (1)

Utter (4264) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476603)

Sorry for the moderation to flamebait. The scroll wheel played tricks on me. Please moderate this up to 1.

Re:Sorry, I can't moderate you (1)

Dave W (1310) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476604)

"but at work I'm in the hands of my management. Those guys think money first, ethics later"

So leave and start your own company that does things right.

Then you can change things.

I did and now only use two non free applications (Interbase and visual slickedit) thats changing as we move to postgresql and vim.

Java may be next we already use python for many tasks that used to be java.


SlashDot already covered this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476605)

This was covered in the comments about the release of Java 2 earlier today. The posters have commented on this several times. Wonder if LinuxToday is just quoting SlashDot sources...

Re:Sorry, I can't moderate you (1)

Dave W (1310) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476606)

Oh and as I forgot to say we are already contributing in work time to more than one project and have released tools under open licences. Now we are negotiating to release full products under GPL.


Blackdown's mistake (5)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476607)

Blackdown mistakenly thought that Java was the next big thing, and that for Linux to remain viable it *needed* Java. They reasonably agreed to whatever license Sun would grant, simply to get a JDK available for Linux before Linux missed the bandwagon completely. A reasonable, indeed selfless act, which, had Java really been as important as Sun convinced many of us it would be, would have been critical to Linux's success.

In hindsight it turns out to have been the other way around. Java, while a nice language in some respects, was basically just so much hype. Linux on the other hand quietly attracted 10-20 million users and snuck its way into corporate server rooms everywhere. It's growth rate appears to have not slowed down in the least, while Java languishes for lack of mindshare. Java needs Linux far more than Linux needs Java, and Sun successfully suckered good people into doint their work for them at no cost.

Very unfortunate, but a good lesson why one should really think twice, or even ten times, before contributing to a project under Sun's "community" license.

Why We're Upset By This (3)

Little Brother (122447) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476608)

By now most of us agree that Sun is completly within their legal rights to absorb the project. We also agree that it will probably help the Linux community. So why are we all upset?

The way I see it is, we have been the victums of mininformitive news realease. Had the realease stated "O happy Day! Sun going to support Java for Linux!" We would, for the most part, been completly supportive of Sun. However the headlines, /.'s and the refrenced news article's both begin with calling into question the morality of Sun's actions. They have planted the suggustion in our minds that Sun has done a big bad no-no and violated someone's rights. Once that suggustion had been planted they could go ahead and tell what really happened and the truth appears very different when seen under the light of our preconceived notions.

Questions? Comments, email me.
Flames, raves, rants, complaints? Redirect to /dev/null

But Does blackdown get SUN/Inprise's fixes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476609)

The lack of credit to the cool efforts of Blackdown sucks - but I also wonder how quickly the changes made by SUN/Inprise will become available to Blackdown? If they are slow to get things back out to people like Blackdown then its a pretty onesided deal.

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (2)

Kingpin (40003) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476610)

Why do you need 1.2? You can download Swing and most importantly Collections as seperate packages.

Re:Contrast this with IBM (1)

Hop-Frog (28712) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476611)

I'm not sure if you meant to say that IBM's JDK is not based on Sun's. It is; only the JIT is different, I believe (and I'm sure they have each fixed different bugs).

I agree that IBM has been doing some good stuff with Java + Linux (JDK, Jikes, VisualAge, etc).


Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476612)

What's the deal with's IPO, as far as I can tell they should be trading on the secondary market right now, but there not.

I don't understand the problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476613)

Isn't this what open-source is supposed to be about?

If you want to keep your code to yourself, don't give it away. If you do give it away, someone's going to use it for something. Is this a surprise? Is it a problem?

Is this just Sun-bashing (or a broader corporate-bashing)?

Is open-source only open with proper credit?

Re:What about RedHat? (2)

Vesperi (10991) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476614)

I'll tell you what - go download the tarfiles for EVERY package on the redhat discs, compile each one and install into a temp top level tree. Then tarball that temp tree so you can untar it into the root dir.

In the proccess fix all the little bugs that crop up with make files and old library calls, make patches for each source file tree.

Now, manage to build a boot floopy image and write an installer for your system. Heck - don't have to that's basicaly slackware.

However come up with a useful package management system that others can and do use as well to do all that in a few key strokes.

Then I'll lend an ear to your bitching about redhat or ANY distribution company making a living off the blood and sweet of coders. There is NOTHING to stop you and your closest geek friends from developing your own distribution. Just time and desire stop most people. New ones crop up all the time. Case in point - Mandrake actualy out sells Redhat now. However the BRANDING redhat has done is what works for them now. That had years of work behind it as well.

So clean out your mothers basement where you still live and get to work on that distribution kiddo.
James Michael Keller

Re:Java should disappear from our radar (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476615)

My clients don't care if Java is proprietary or not as long as their web-apps get done on time

But they should care if their chosen tools do an about-face due to some unforseen strategic shift on behalf of the single code maintainer.

Sun owns Java and will take it where they need to take it to continue to undermine Microsoft.

You currently have no protection against this.

Once again, please look past the "pie in the sky" aspects of open source and try and understand how opening the source protects your strategic investment.

Many companies demand the source even for commercial software they buy, precisely because of this.

Re:What licence? (3)

Garrett Rooney (1508) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476616)

> Wasn't this what happened to emacs? Someone made
> xemacs and made it closed source.

no, it wasn't. do some research before you go around badmouthing a perfectly legitimate open source project like xemacs. l

Re:OT:ANDN (1)

Kaht (122157) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476617)

They're not avaliable 'til friday, or so
I hear 'round the IRC campfire.

Don't complain: support instead! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476618)

Kaffe is a GPL'd cleanroom implementation of a Java Virtual Machine and libraries. Also support the Classpath project, a cleanroom implementation of the Java standard libraries.

Re:SUN is as bad as Microsoft (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476619)

"When is Sun going to learn?"

Why would they need to 'learn'?

As long as the community hates MS blindly SUn ix int he drivers seat. Not only will fools keep putting Java into OSS projects (Apache and so on) in a attempt to strike at MS... but they managed to whip you all into enough of a frenzy to get the government to do their dirty work.

All the while they sat in court saying "poor innocent us, MS hurt us - Daddy make the bad man stop!" they were quietly screwing you all over.

Personally, I am very amused.

Check out the benchmarks (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476620)

Saw this benchmark link on a post on

I was expecting Great Things from Sun's release given that Blackdown's JDK1.2 RC3 performance can be described as mediocre as best. But not bad. In fact, I pay little attention to "raw speed" benchmarks. Scalability and reliability are everything for me and in my anecdotal opinion Blackdown rocks (solid)! And so to the benchmarks:

They show that in raw speed Sun/Inprise JDK is marginally faster than Blackdown but whereas Blackdown at least jumped the first scalability hurdle, Sun didn't even make it that far! This is bad. I'm not gonna bother downloading Sun's JDK until it improves.

Wot will put a smile on your penguin-loving face is that TowerJ's Java compiler for Linux tops performance and scalability tests. Also, IBM's JDK1.1.8 for penguins is near the top. I can barely wait for their 1.3 release which is slated for Q2 next year.


and my perennial whinge - when are we going to see better Java support for non x86 Linux? Specifically for my 533MHz Alpha... :)

Re:Don't cry GPL (1)

dillon_rinker (17944) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476621)

The code in question was not GPLed. Therefore the point is moot.

That much was obvious from everyone else's comments; this was more a personal diatribe on the primary feature of the GPL. I really don't understand why people would consider its "viral" nature a failure of the license - it's the purpose of the license.

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (2)

Amphigory (2375) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476622)

I have to agree with you on that. I futzed around with blackdown for weeks -- finally got it working, and it was slow, buggy, and unreliable. I downloaded the IBM JDK in desperation, and it worked right, out of the box, was fast and reliable. In fact, it is subjectively faster on my $700 Linux box than Sun's JDK is on a fairly beefy Ultra 60.

There was a post recently talking about how there was an opportunity for IBM to take over the Linux standards process. I think this would be wonderful: they seem to have a much better base in java than Sun does, and are much less antagonistic to OS's they don't make.

Re:Read the java-linux list archives FIRST (1)

sanderb (9539) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476623)

More points:

It is not open source as others have mentioned.

Steve Byrne who is mentioned in the article works for Sun as far as I know (at least he did when he started working on the project)

flamebait ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476624)

Why is this marked as flame??? sometimes i wonder if moderators even read comments!!!!!!!!!

This is certainly not "flamebait" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476625)

The real story is that the FSF and everyone else who has criticised the Sun community licence has been proved right. This licence has now been proved to be anti open source as we expected.

I have no idea how this can be construed as flamebait. Once again, the moderetards have pulled a collective brain-fart.

Re:but is it... (1)

wct (45593) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476626)

They could have included more architecture independent classes. For example, when I downloaded IBM's JDK 1.1.8, it didn't come with the Swing set, which I had to download separately from Sun (around 11MB).


Open Source = Open Death (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476627)

Say goodbye to proprietory code, say hello to everyone "stealing" everyone else's stuff.

If you come up with some genius peice of work in today's market, and open source it, say goodbye to any money you might have made. On the other hand if I'm a smarmy company, all I have to do is cruse through open source stuff, find something marketable and wrap it up with some documentation and make some money.

But hey, it's just my opinion.

Isn't this just forking the source? (1)

Rexifer (81021) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476628)

My take is, the worst thing that they're doing wrong is that they aren't giving the blackdown team the proper recognition. They admitted that this was a snafu, and that they were going to resolve it.

But, all they did was take the codebase that the blackdown team worked on, and started working from there. Can't I do that with the Linux kernel under GPL? It's not like they're selling it, and I'm sure the source will be available under their (albiet restrictive) licensing agreement.

Besides, and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't blackdown do the same thing to begin with? Blackdown identifies itself as the Java-Linux Porting Project, I'm guessing they took the Solaris Reference release source base to begin with.

Not a problem, IMO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476629)

I agree with the others here who have said that as long as Sun and Inprise haven't broken the law, no one has a right to complain. This is the fundamental flaw of open source and free software that no one wants to acknowledge: When you let people use your code for free there is nothing to stop them from doing things you don't like with it, as long as they abide by your license. Bitching that it's not "fair" or "nice" is horribly naive and even childish. If you want to protect your work via the law, then do so; if you use a weak license that allows for things like this, then such things will happen, and you have only yourself to blame.

Time to turn to Microsoft? (4)

Dacta (24628) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476630)

No estabilshed company is a friend of open source.

Redhat, etc owe their existance to open source programs, but Sun, Oracle, HP, Corel and even Inprise are just using us to get what they want.

Perhaps IBM is different.. They have at least tried. Maybe SGI, too - it looks like they need Linux to survive, now.

But understand this: MS should no longer be the primary target of our flames, and matching Windows should no longer be the goal of our development projects.

With the DOJ and the press watching MS like a hawk, we need to refocus.

Linux is now, without a doubt the premier Desktop Unix thanks to GNOME and KDE nothing against *BSD, but Linux is slightly better here, if only because that is what most developers use.

Next year Ittanium (sp?) comes out. Linux will be ready, for sure, and it will probably run flawlessly sooner than Windows2000 - but that ain't the game any more.

World Domination, remember?

Next year Montery also arrives. I still havn't seen even any speculation on how well Linux will compare to that.

SCO, HP, Intel, IBM and Compaq makes a pretty impressive team - all (except SCO) have Linux projects, too. What's going to happen when Montery and Linux go head to head for the same space?

Don't think that "Montery will be high end, and Linux will take the low end", either. That is just market speak for not having the features, yet. Both Linux and FreeBSD will, I believe, be very close to Montery (and Solaris) on Intel by next year.

What's going to happen then? Can we rely on Red Hat and VA Linux's money to compete?

Don't forget, these companies aren't like MS. They make pretty good software (for the most part).

Things like StarOffice are dangerous to Open Source, because they give the power back to the companies - and yet they are just as cheap (to the consumer) as Open source.. until Sun changes the file format or something like that.

Maybe it is time to play the Windows card? Linux does operate well in a Windows environment, and Windows computers are easily converted to Linux. Perhaps we need more open source software that interoperates well with MS stuff. Samba is great, maybe we need something that can provide DCOM services?

My Enemy's enemy is my friend. Sun was a useful ally. Lets not get stabbed in the back.

Sigh. Say it ain't so, Slashdot. (1)

dougman (908) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476631)

IT seems that the once-mighty Slashdot has fallen to the inevitable forces of money and all the convenience that comes with it.

No longer under ANY tangible pressure to make the Slashdot content even vaguely synonymous with the word "quality", the past few months (quite coincidentally starting with the injection of well over a million dollars into the pockets of the Slashdot founders / main (only?) fulltime employees, with the promise of more millions to come) Malda, Hemos and co. have more or less abandoned any pretense of being a provider of "quality content". It seems that every other "story" posted to Slashdot in the last few weeks is based on at least a serious misunderstanding and quite possibly, (although this is only my humble opinion as an observer and not meant to be stated as fact, but speculation) gratuitous flamebait.

Reading the prospectus on (which I strongly recommend y'all read...very telling stuff!) we learn that the dynamic duo that brought us the once uber-cool Slashdot are effectively (on paper at least) millionaires today (or darn close to it) as a result of the Andover acquistion. Further reading of the prospectus tells us that the Slashdot founders can look to realize more millions in income based on their statying onboard, and the future "performance" of Slashdot.

But sadly, as we all know in the world of corporate internet media, "quality reporting", "journalistic integrity", and "objective editorial presentation" mean zero to "performance" of a web site owned by a corporation. As indicated in the Andover prospectus, 95 PERCENT of the revenue of Andover in the past year (I believe it was stated for last year, please correct me if I have the timeframe wrong) was AD REVENUE. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that AD REVENUE is most easily derived by getting a group of people in some common demographic (in this case, technology) to view your pages. A lot. And rather than take the high road, Slashsot appears quite comfortable with letting an ever-increasing mob correct the gross inaccuracies in its "reporting" , and realizes the inherent human instinct to participate as a spectator and a player in these flame-fests that are all too often the heart of Slashdot discussions these days, get the all-important PAGE VIEWS. In great quantities. Admit it. How often do you read a "story" on the Slashdot front page that seems so clearly wrong, or so destined to invoke a passionate (hostile) repsonse that you're just hooked, and you HAVE to continue reading the discussion. In the process generating many, MANY more PAGE VIEWS for Slashdot, more $$$ in the pockets of whom I submit, in my humble opinion are corrupted by said $$$, and , I also suggest, in my humble opinion, will be less and less motivated to improve the quality of the Slashdot experience the more we inevitably line their pockets supporting the all-to-typical Slashdot flame/correct-the-editors-fest.

Don't even get me started on the sad lack of interest in maintaining a healthy relationship with the developer community exhibited by Rob Malda with regards to the "open" Slash engine. Check out the "code" page. Note that the current "production" Slashdot uses code almost, what, a year older than what is posted on the "code" page?
To take the stance that you're opening the code you've written that drives the Slashdot site, and then turn around and refuse to update the page for many many months at a time is NOT the way to look genuine, like you truly have some skin in the open source game. Granted, it may be a VERY busy life running Slashdot, but the occasional half-hour of posting the current code with warnings to how dangerous it may be to use in its current state is NOT too much to ask. If you don't feel you should be imposed on to do that, REMOVE the Slash code from the public domain, open-source, or whatever category it's currently in. But don't just try to "look" like an open-source player. Walk the walk AND talk the talk.

Okay, I'm done ranting for now, and probably just earned myself a lifetime ban on Slashdot. But boy, was it worth it, and boy, do I feel a LOT better now.

-el Dougo

Hypocrasy Alert! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476632)

"Most people are even picking up on the fact that Sun was well within their rights under their license to do what they did. But it still sucks that they couldn't make at least a token reference to Blackdown to acknowlege their contribution.

So, the apologists are out. God forbide we should take Sun to task ....

One wonders if MS would have gotten so much slack?

But then, Slashdot is closed source too and no one seems upset.

emacs, xemacs, GNU and GPL (was Re:What licence?) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476633)

Wasn't this what happened to emacs? Someone made xemacs and made it closed source. Then Richard Stallman made the GNU licence and distributed all future versions of emacs under that licence - simply because the corp behind xemacs "stole his work". It wasn't stealing in the legal sense, but it was in the moral sense.

Uh, no.

xemacs and emacs forked but both remained under the GPL (which had been created long before this event occurred).

Re:Sun & Microsoft: family? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476634)

"I'm sorry to say, but Sun is using the Java support to grow into an arrogant monopolist."

And why not? The Linux/OSS community has been doing Sun's dirty work for years now.

Pushing Java despite it's obvious technical flaws, contributing code, building it into products (like Apache). Hell, otherwise intelligent people have bought into this "think client" stupidity.

Why? To "get back" at MS.

Wake up - you've been used.

Re:Java should disappear from our radar (3)

SoftwareJanitor (15983) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476635)

Its not like Visual C++ uses some mutant strain of C++. I doesn't? What the heck do you call goofy abominations like lstrcpy() lstrcmp() lstrcat()? Maybe the core language syntax is marginally ANSI-like, but their library implementations are highly wacked, not even including Win32.

And if you use any of VC++'s code generation, you are going to get stuff that is MFC dependant, which is in turn Win32 dependant.

Personally, I had a lot better luck with the Powersoft (Watcom) C++ compiler when I had to generate binaries under Windows. Their library implementations were much more normal.

Re:What licence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476636)

You are perfectly right: both Emacs *and* Xemacs are Open Source projects.
The one that was a commercial product (I do not know if any code was
taken from emacs though) is gosmacs, an emacs-clone developped by ...
James Gosling, the father of ... Java!

What I know is that the commercial implementation was really crappy, bugged, and
including stupid error messages (a hit on a wrong key and the soft was
replying "Rubbish!").

What is funny is that according to Bill Joy, the Sun Community License (SCSL)
has been precisely designed so that forking like these (the three emacs)
do not happen. The negative side of it being the strong control on the technology...

I wish Sun could just make a move toward GPL...

Christophe Muller.

= May the source be with you ! =

Re:SUN is as bad as Microsoft (3)

kemokid (122655) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476637)

It's interesting to consider this event in the larger light of what free software/open source is all about. It seems to me that many people in the "open source" world think that some other corporation (Sun, IBM, Netscape, etc.) will save them from the Great Satan. But of course the other corporations want to be Great Satan.

This is one reason why some people prefer the phrase "free software" over "open source". Because, as RMS points out here [] , the phrase "open source" de-emphasizes the community aspect of free software, and has led some companies (most egregiously, Apple) to thinking that they can just open up a little bit of code and then get free development.

For the record, I'm no free software firebrand. But given recent events, I've started re-reading some of RMS's tracts, and they continue to make quite a bit of sense. Sun is one company that just doesn't seem to get it (although the jury's not out yet). Does IBM get it? Too early to tell. It seems that the only ones that do are new companies (e.g. Red Hat/Cygnus, SuSE, etc.) that have started since the free software movement began.

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (2)

Tjl (4493) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476638)

Garbage collecting is my pet peeve... 1.2 has weak references possible, 1.1 you're stuck if you want to cache something but only if it's used by someone else as well.

Re:Hypocrasy Alert! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476639)

no one cares about the slash code because you'd be better off rewriting it. In fact, someone has already gotten off to an excellent start, see "squishdot"


Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476640)

dear slashdot,

i have had this happen to me as well. as you may know, i am the anonymous coward with the open source natalie portman and open source drew barrymore project.
as it turned out, i found out recently that natalie portman and drew barrymore had obtained my open source natalie portman and open source drew barrymore project.
shamelesly, they repackaged the project, not even bothering to change the names from natalie portman and drew barrymore to something unique.
now, natalie portman and drew barrymore look cool as they walk the streets.
"look, it's natalie portman and drew barrymore!" the random onlooker would note, "look how cool they are as they walk down the streets!"
"yes!!" the onlooker would agree.
"yes!! indeed, we look cool as we walk down the streets!" natalie portman and drew barrymore reply, "and you will all be handsomely rewarded!"

i will be looking forward to any legal advice i obtain here. you will be handsomely rewarded.

thank you.

Re:GPL code => GPL code (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476641)

"Specifically, if you produce code based on my GPL'd code, then I think I'd have a real solid legal basis for assuming that what you produce is GPL'd, regardless of what license you try to put on it."

It will be VERY interesting to see what happens to the GPL in a real court test. It is not at all clear that the viral nature of the GPL is legal and enforceable.

There are many, many legal precedents that you cannot be enforce a contract that violates the rights of someone, and the GPL may be found to do that.

eh (1)

_brute_ (27722) | more than 14 years ago | (#1476642)

Steve Byrne is a Sun employee.

Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1476643)

OK, could you please give me a URL for where I can download the 2D API for 1.1?

Yes, some of us do need 1.2.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?