Comments on: Sun reluctant to make Java open source

The company's top software executive calls IBM's proposal to make Java open source "weird" and says it would encourage incompatible standards.

Bad-mouthing open-source

Dear Mr. Schwartz:
Here are a couple of questions for your eloquent demeanour to consider:
1. How are you countering the threat of .NET? Or are you content with burying your head in the sand that this threat will blow away? *wink* like all the other threats from M$ *wink*
2. Why are you bad-mouthing open-source? Its the GPL that has allowed you to redeem some of your company's pride by riding on the Sun JDS which is nothing more than Sun-crippled Suse Linux! So, please don't make the GPL out to be a mistake ... although seeing your support for SCO its pretty obvious why you say that ...
So, stop shooting off your mouth and try to do some ground work before the M$ .NET juggernaut runs over Java and its (admittedly) glorious past and present.

Sun(tm) takes ideas from others, credits self

I have watched the development of the Java Language for a long time. Although most is not, part of the language is a unique invention of Sun(tm) and its employees. I know this because I have studied the features of the Java Language, and I have noticed were such ideas have orignated beforehand.

Xerox P.A.R.C. employees worked on a language that had many ideas that Java now implements, yet the makers of Java claimed the invention.; look at LambdaMOO, for example. The language is like change in dialect. That is not all.

I have worked on a system, atomatrix.sourceforge.net , for longer than the Java Language was first published. I noticed many details of the Atomatrix system also implemented into the Java Language. I do not use the Java Language, so I do not get any ideas for it.

Why would a company claim the creditials that they mastered the Java Language to a level that actually included previous implementations done outside of the company by individuals that do not work for Sun(tm)? I expect that the answer would include the reason why Sun(tm) does not release the source code; they don't want to lose their creditability. "They don't reveal their sources."

What happened is that the systems that were built before the Java Language was published were hot stuff at the time. Sun(tm) decided to put the pieces together and hire employees to complete the details of state-of-the-art virtual machines. Of course, they took the market and advertised. I know I can to improve Atomatrix at the low-level well beyond what the Java Language currently handles. Of course, I do not have the employee force to write all the details like Sun(tm). The systems that were hot stuff quickly ate the dust.

Now, Sun(tm) is unable to keep up the to the latest object orientated technologies. They have to keep that "supreme compatibility" issue as their priority. That is also their downfall. I have seen systems that make the Java Language not even look like a object orientated language. Sun(tm) continues to press its model as "the object orientated language" -- at least until the sources are seen.

[John Kuzak]

Java Language

http://www.analogstereo.com/pontiac_owners_manual.htm

Java - The Best of Both Worlds!

Java is the best of both worlds - It is Free, invovles a community process to grow the language and has the quality control of a major IT company.

It works with Windows, UNIX, LINUX and tons of smaller PDA/Cell phone type devices. What could be better?? .NET w/C# is a cheap (for now) knock off of OO and Java. It might be there in a few years but ask yourself if you believe in LINUX why would you ever advocate for .NET?? The M$ plan to tie me to a Windows OS for life?

Java does provide access to the source as was pointed out in the article. The language does in fact grow and adapt through the Java Community Process (JCP). I think Java would survive a move to the open source (GPL) license model but what is in it for Sun or its customers? Sun has spent large amounts of time and money as was pointed out in other postings, marketing the brand, since it is a free distribution the only thing they really get back is the name recognition of the brand (I don't think enough Java logo hats are ever sold to make up the difference -BTW). SO What's wrong with Free Code and consistency? My job is tons easier not having to worry about what implementation of Java to code for. Version control is pretty good, Security is a major feature and the release schedule makes sense. Sun being the lead for Java is like having a good facilitator and note taker at a meeting. I like having a person to do that work but I rarely want to be that person.

Just because Sun doesn't follow everyone else's lead in swooning over Open Source, doesn't make them bad. Besides if they did that Java wouldn't be around in the first place.

Java is already open source

Java is already open source Sun have published the source of the Java API's for ages. Just check the jdk on your machine and look for src.jar. It may not publish the source for its JVM but that is irrelevant most of the time since the idea of java is that you can change your JVM with out even having to recompile. The source for Sun's JVM or IBMs' or BEA etc will be different but should not matter since they must all conform to the spec.

How often do open source linux developers use the C code to an application compared to how often they bug fix the kernel or gcc to get an app to work, it is the same issue. The JVMs work developers don't need to know how, the API's source is there to help developers. I regularly look into the java API source, I have never wanted to look into the JVM source.