"2007 will go down in history as the year Sun Microsystems gave up the reins of the Java platform, releasing it under an open source license to the Java developer community. In this article, Java developer Elliotte Rusty Harold predicts new directions for the Java platform, in everything from scripting to bug fixing to new syntax."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 1
instead of that half assed article, read here:
http://tech.puredanger.com/java7/
much detailed information.
Member since:2005-06-29
Fans: 5
Member since:
2005-08-06
Fans: 0
Member since:
2006-02-15
Fans: 9
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
> It is amazing how many people seem to think that releasing
> an implementation of Java under an open source license is
> the same thing as abandoning control over the specification
> of Java.
That's not the issue. The problem is that if the most advanced/popular implementation is free (as in freedom) then every little language designer wannabe can release slightly incompatible versions. Otherwise only large companies have the resources to do that, and they have the motivation to keep their version compatible (and thus get to call it "java" instead of "j" or whatever).
So, even if Sun wouldn't abandon the control over the official specification of java, it would have no control over the specs of all those j+-#&co that would inevitably(?) spring up.
That said, I myself welcome the freedom of java 7.
Member since:2006-02-15
Fans: 9
That's not the issue. The problem is that if the most advanced/popular implementation is free (as in freedom) then every little language designer wannabe can release slightly incompatible versions.
The reason Java is described as "write once, debug everywhere," is that all of the versions are slightly incompatible with each other.
But anyone who makes an implementation that's incompatible enough not to pass the certification test doesn't get to call it Java.
Otherwise only large companies have the resources to do that, and they have the motivation to keep their version compatible (and thus get to call it "java" instead of "j" or whatever).
You would be surprised at how small a company can be and still have a certified Java implementation.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
> anyone who makes an implementation that's incompatible enough
> not to pass the certification test doesn't get to call it Java.
That doesn't matter since most people don't care whether it says "java" or "java compatible". Heck, most wouldn't notice the difference in the first place.
> You would be surprised at how small a company can be and still
> have a certified Java implementation.
It doesn't matter if the company is big or small, only that it has invested enough to have the proper motivation to pass the standard java TCK.
Member since:
2007-03-03
Fans: 0
Isn't this the same article as this other one presented a while ago? [1] The dW link name seems to be slightly different but they sure look the same to me.
[1] - http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=17224