The Artima Developer Community
Sponsored Link

Weblogs Forum
Free As In Lawsuit

39 replies on 3 pages. Most recent reply: Sep 30, 2010 5:32 PM by Standard IO

Welcome Guest
  Sign In

Go back to the topic listing  Back to Topic List Click to reply to this topic  Reply to this Topic Click to search messages in this forum  Search Forum Click for a threaded view of the topic  Threaded View   
Previous Topic   Next Topic
Flat View: This topic has 39 replies on 3 pages [ « | 1 2 3 | » ]
V.H.Indukumar

Posts: 28
Nickname: vhi
Registered: Apr, 2005

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 3:16 AM
Reply to this message Reply
Advertisement
>> Regarding "free as in ...", OpenJDK has been available for years.

Still, even with the OpenJDK being under GPL, it is not patent free. I do not know of cases where companies releasing their software under GPL have sued others over patent claims.

In case of Oracle, it has violated the "spirit" of open source. Under these circumstances, having JDK under GPL is of no use (other than the ability to look at the source code, which Java had since day one).

Some good may come out of this fiasco, but at the cost of Oracle's good will among us.

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 8:41 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> > java has never been "open source", only fee free.
>
> These arguments sound like a WWF advertisement.
>
> Java has arguably been open source since day one. I
> downloaded and read all of the source for JDK 1.0.2 beta
> back in '96. (Not "free as in GPL software", but open
> source.)

And, of course, since it's not GPL, both Harmony and Dalvik are in various degrees of trouble. If java were "open source", then forking in any way one wishes (which is what makes "open source" "open") would be a right. It isn't. Stallman was right. Oracle is proving it.

>
> The specifications were available from day one. The source
> code for the libraries was too. Within a few years, the
> source for the Sun JVM was available.

There is no java7 spec.

>
> Regarding "free as in ...", OpenJDK has been available for
> years. Free as in GPL. According to Wikipedia: "OpenJDK
> (aka Open Java Development Kit) is a Free and open source
> implementation of the Java programming language."

If I can't make my own implementation without Oracle/Sun's blessing, then it isn't Open Source. M$ tried the same thing years ago: you can look but you can't touch. Nobody believed them either.

>
> Despite manipulation by the PR of hundred+ billion dollar
> corporations, we should at least agree to stick to the
> facts.

The fact is: Oracle (Sun before with Harmony) is attempting to quash an implementation that isn't of themselves. Open Source doesn't work that way. "Free" implementations from Oracle or Sun or IBM aren't what Open Source is all about.
>
> Peace,
>
> Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
> http://coherence.oracle.com/

Roland Pibinger

Posts: 93
Nickname: rp123
Registered: Jan, 2006

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 8:51 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> For me Java is dead, I'll go back to C++ and continue with
> Python.

Java is a platform. C++ and Python are programing languages.

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 9:29 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> > For me Java is dead, I'll go back to C++ and continue
> with
> > Python.
>
> Java is a platform. C++ and Python are programing
> languages.

java is a language with an interpreter, that's all the "jvm platform" is, same as GW Basic in the original PC. there are as many libraries in C/++ as java.

Cameron Purdy

Posts: 186
Nickname: cpurdy
Registered: Dec, 2004

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 9:55 AM
Reply to this message Reply
Robert -

> There is no java7 spec.

There is no Java7 yet.

Come on, Robert ..

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
http://coherence.oracle.com/

Cameron Purdy

Posts: 186
Nickname: cpurdy
Registered: Dec, 2004

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 10:01 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> java is a language with an interpreter, that's all the "jvm
> platform" is, same as GW Basic in the original PC. there
> are as many libraries in C/++ as java.

Robert, if I didn't know better, I would mistake your flame-baiting for ignorance. ;-)

Except in some exotic cases, Java uses the same interpreter that C/C++ does, e.g. the x86 interpreter -- which most people refer to as a chip, a processor, or a CPU.

Secondly, there is no "jvm platform". A JVM without the class library is completely inoperative, unlike the examples you provide.

If you were, for example, to look at the Java Language Specification, you would also see that the language specification both includes and relies on the presence of the class library.

Please retract or correct your statement.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
http://coherence.oracle.com/

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 10:24 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> Robert -
>
> > There is no java7 spec.
>
> There is no Java7 yet.
>
> Come on, Robert ..
>
> Peace,
>
> Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
> http://coherence.oracle.com/

What??? You think this is *my* complaint, new to the world today? Sun, IIRC, intimated years ago that they wouldn't make a spec.

Colebourne, for those with short memories, made a big issue of it more than a year ago: http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/no_more_java_7

What's changed? That's a real question, in that I've not followed the story for a while. If Oracle has it at the printer, then I certainly apologize.

Cameron Purdy

Posts: 186
Nickname: cpurdy
Registered: Dec, 2004

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 10:27 AM
Reply to this message Reply
Robert,

There isn't yet a Java 7. Under the current process, until the JCP approves what "Java 7" is, it can't go to the printer.

There is a lot of work that is expected to be in Java 7, and you can see a lot of that in the branch of the JDK work called "JDK 7". But there is no "Java 7" at this point, and there is some considerable work (including at the JCP level) between "now" and getting it done.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
http://coherence.oracle.com/

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 10:43 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> > java is a language with an interpreter, that's all the
> "jvm
> > platform" is, same as GW Basic in the original PC.
> there
> > are as many libraries in C/++ as java.
>
> Robert, if I didn't know better, I would mistake your
> flame-baiting for ignorance. ;-)

Neither. just pointing out the many ways that java is captive to Sun, and now Oracle. Spinning either's behaviour as benevolent to the developer community is not a Good Thing. There are interpreted languages and there are compiled ones. java is interpreted, period, full stop. Now, the sophistication of the interpreter to hand off machine code has improved over the years, in all such languages. A .class file is not an object module. A .bas file isn't either.

>
> Except in some exotic cases, Java uses the same
> interpreter that C/C++ does, e.g. the x86 interpreter --
> which most people refer to as a chip, a processor, or a
> CPU.

Cute. I must say, that's the first time I've read that an instruction set is an interpreter. To the extent that instructions are executed in micro-code (a practice that goes back at least to the 360/30), then may be so. I may give you half a point for that.

>
> Secondly, there is no "jvm platform". A JVM without the
> class library is completely inoperative, unlike the
> examples you provide.

I said that there was no "jvm platform", in any meaningful sense. Do we agree? I think what the OP meant was that there is a large ecosystem built with java, and I have no argument with that. There are other languages, notably C/++, with just as rich an ecosystem.

The fact that the jvm cannot exist without the class library is exactly why java is first cousin to GW Basic, and every other interpreted language ever invented. The fact that both (Professional Basic, son of GW) implemented JIT (initial java had none) doesn't make java any better or worse than any other interpreted language. Some java programs, as Pro. Basic programs, may (will??) end up being fully compiled if run long enough.

>
> If you were, for example, to look at the Java Language
> Specification, you would also see that the language
> specification both includes and relies on the presence of
> the class library.

Again, that just means it's an interpreted language. The fancier term, these days, is dynamic binding, but it boils down to the same thing. java didn't do anything that hadn't been done before in language implementations.

>
> Please retract or correct your statement.
>
> Peace,
>
> Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
> http://coherence.oracle.com/

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 10:47 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> Robert,
>
> There isn't yet a Java 7. Under the current process, until
> the JCP approves what "Java 7" is, it can't go to the
> printer.
>
> There is a lot of work that is expected to be in
> Java 7, and you can see a lot of that in the branch of the
> JDK work called "JDK 7". But there is no "Java 7" at this
> point, and there is some considerable work (including at
> the JCP level) between "now" and getting it done.
>
> Peace,
>
> Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
> http://coherence.oracle.com/

IIRC, in all previous releases, the spec was either before or contemporaneous with the reference implementation, i.e. the jdk. The fact that Sun/Oracle didn't do that, and the "control" of the JCP, leads many to be suspicious. This lawsuit simply confirms the suspicions.

John Zabroski

Posts: 272
Nickname: zbo
Registered: Jan, 2007

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 11:09 AM
Reply to this message Reply
Bruce,

Man you don't give up.

C++ and Java bruised you so much that you have over-reacted and becoming a Ruby/Python/Flash salesman.

> Now, if you are choosing a programing language,
> aren't you more likely to consider something
> truly unencumbered like Ruby or Python -- where
> something like this just wouldn't happen -- than
> you are Java?

What about Scala? With a bit more polish, Scala.NET will be ready. Is your argument that we'd be better off stuck with Python's global interpreter lock problems and various subsets of Python to improve performance in our apps?

Also, why isn't anyone arguing that Java fragmentation is a good thing? My guess is people are so cloaked with fear and stress at hearing the phrase "lawsuit" that they've pinned this as Hell.

Nemanja Trifunovic

Posts: 172
Nickname: ntrif
Registered: Jun, 2004

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 11:49 AM
Reply to this message Reply
While I am a bit amused by all this commotion about Oracle vs. Google lawsuit, I still fail to understand why it is a big deal for any non-Android developer. Switching a programming language because of this? What am I missing here?

Dmitry Cheryasov

Posts: 16
Nickname: dch
Registered: Apr, 2007

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 12:08 PM
Reply to this message Reply
So, are there clear answers to these questions:
* Is non-Android Java (e.g. server-side) in trouble, and why?
* Are non-Java JVM languages, e.g. Scala or Clojure, in trouble, and why?

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 12:31 PM
Reply to this message Reply
> So, are there clear answers to these questions:
> * Is non-Android Java (e.g. server-side) in trouble, and
> why?
> * Are non-Java JVM languages, e.g. Scala or Clojure, in
> trouble, and why?

That's what's causing the angst. No one really knows. If you're using all Sun/Oracle java bits, then likely not in danger of not being able to ship your application. BUT, if Oracle succeeds, then the next step is to say to all of those folks I just mentioned, "you're using our patents and copyrighted code, so you owe us 1% of your gross sales". That's the fear, uncertainty, and doubt. And precisely the way Larry behaves.

robert young

Posts: 361
Nickname: funbunny
Registered: Sep, 2003

Re: Free As In Lawsuit Posted: Aug 20, 2010 1:01 PM
Reply to this message Reply
> Also, why isn't anyone arguing that Java fragmentation is
> a good thing? My guess is people are so cloaked
> with fear and stress at hearing the phrase "lawsuit" that
> they've pinned this as Hell.

Sun certainly didn't want fragmentation. Nor did they want ANSI-java. Not wanting fragmentation is probably a Good Thing for corporate computing; you don't want to even have to recompile your COBOL programs when installing new hardware. There was time, a not too distant past when Oak/java was born, that COBOL was the lingua franca of business computing. But it was fragmented; by IBM, who'd a thunk it. There was ANSI-COBOL and RM-COBOL (pretty much ANSI) and IBM COBOL. You couldn't reliably recompile your application to arbitrary machines (and there was a raft of minis running COBOL, most long since expired).

Sun clearly wanted to control the progress and implementation of the language so that "write-once-run-anywhere" would be more than a marketing slogan, and COBOL (and FORTRAN, and likely others I don't recall) proved that ANSI standardization wouldn't do that. (Still didn't work out, but they tried.) So, we got fee-free java. IBM, having the time and money, forked according to the rules Sun laid down, so now we have IBM java and Oracle java. If you work with WebSphere, et al, you'd better use the IBM jdk.

Flat View: This topic has 39 replies on 3 pages [ « | 1  2  3 | » ]
Topic: JavaOne 2010: Functional Programming, from Java to Scala Previous Topic   Next Topic Topic: Need Recommendation for Community Site Software


Sponsored Links



Google
  Web Artima.com   

Copyright © 1996-2014 Artima, Inc. All Rights Reserved. - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Advertise with Us