|
Sun's Historic Java Announcement |
|
Monday, November 13 2006 @ 11:43 AM EST
|
This is an historic day. Let's share it together. You can watch a live webcast of the announcement by going here at 9:30 PST and clicking on the link that says Live Webcast, More. Here's the direct link where you will also find a statement that begins like this: Sun believes deeply in creating communities and sharing innovations and technologies to foster more participation. Today in a historic move, Sun is opening the door to greater innovation by open sourcing key Java implementations—Java Platform Standard Edition (Java SE), Java Platform Micro Edition (Java ME), and Java Platform Enterprise Edition (Java EE)—under the GNU General Public License version 2 (GPLv2), the same license as GNU/Linux. You'll find a link on that page to GlassFish source code, which is also going GPL. And here's what the community is saying about this wonderful announcement about Sun choosing to release Java under the GPL. They are aware of the limited choices for viewing the webcast, RealPlayer and FlashPlayer. They say they "hope to offer open content
media format alternatives in the future." That would be great. Update: I'm watching as I write: a video of Richard Stallman commending Sun, saying they are showing leadership by choosing the GPL, and that he hopes others will follow their lead. At this point, as he points out, Sun is now the leader in donating software code to the community. Truly, the world seems to be turning upside down. They showed the code on a video screen being released under the GPL, with the GPL license shown at the end. Very cool. GlassFish is dual licensed, CDDL or GPL, as you please. All I can think about as I'm watching everything is: this is fantastic for the desktop. Now there are various folks explaining how important this is, such as Paul Cormier at Red Hat and Eben Moglen, who points out that Sun is opening hardware specs too. Now they announce the open sourcing of Duke, the mascot, under the BSD, so he's modifiable too. Now it's Q&A. Jonathan Schwartz is saying that Eben and Richard Stallman were stunned when Sun called them. I'm stunned too. And thrilled. Why did they choose GPL? Because developers love it and understand it and are comfortable with it. So you guys, in that sense, made it happen. They will consider GPLv3 when it's done, by the way, so pundits saying it's GPLv2 only are apparently wrong on that detail. They are pointing out now that there is no patent risk. They are an IP creator, not just a redistributor, so there is no royalty required to be paid to anybody. By donating code to the GPL, the patent freedom goes with it. Well done, Sun! Well done! Simon Phipps asks a question from David Berlind, who asks why Sun didn't just donate to the Harmony project under the Apache license. Schwartz says it's a curious thing if IBM is opposing the GPL. Amen. So, what about Solaris? It's been CDDL. Might that change? Will it go GPL? They are taking a very close look at that right now, and the hint is very likely yes, it could happen. Bottom line: it's a new day at Sun Microsystems, and it's a new day for the GPL. A truly great day, indeed.
: )
Update 2: A word from Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz from his blog: And in closing, I want to put one nagging item to rest.
By admitting that one of the strongest motivations to select the GPL was the announcement made last week by Novell and Microsoft, suggesting that free and open source software wasn't safe unless a royalty was being paid. As an executive from one of those companies said, "free has to have a price."
That's nonsense.
Free software can be free of royalties, and free of impediments to broadscale, global adoption and deployment. Witness what we've done with Solaris, and now, what we've done with Java. Developers are free to pick up the code, and create derivatives. Without royalty or obligation.
Those that say open source software can't be safe for customers - or that commercially indemnified software can't foster community - are merely advancing their own agenda. Without any basis in fact.
They're also fighting a rising tide. For those who didn't watch, but want to know what it was like, here's the best coverage that I can find, by China Martens on ComputerWorld, because it captures not only the facts but the flavor of the event. And Schwartz explains his thinking
here.
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 11:57 AM EST |
first post ? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: feldegast on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:00 PM EST |
If needed
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2006 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Totosplatz on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:06 PM EST |
Please make links clicky.
---
All the best to one and all.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- UK copyright survey - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:36 PM EST
- "An historic" = yuck - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:15 PM EST
- "An historic" = yuck - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:38 PM EST
- "An historic" = perfectly allowable - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:05 PM EST
- "An historic" != yuck - Authored by: fxbushman on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:50 PM EST
- "An historic" = yuck - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:55 PM EST
- "An historic" = yuck - Authored by: Altair_IV on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:22 PM EST
- Any BBC news presenter would tell you that "an historic" is perfectly correct - Authored by: billyskank on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 05:36 PM EST
- As you please - Authored by: devil's advocate on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 07:49 PM EST
- "An historic" = yuck - Authored by: mrcreosote on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:24 PM EST
- "An historic" is the same as "a unique" or "a young" - Authored by: skidrash on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 11:37 PM EST
- Have done with it! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 12:57 PM EST
- 3D desktops, OpenGL, SGI, Novell and Microsoft - Authored by: IMANAL on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:02 PM EST
- Resist Microsoft! Don't let them win! (article) - Authored by: billyskank on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 05:07 PM EST
- RMS's accent - Authored by: josmith42 on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 06:46 PM EST
- RMS's accent - Authored by: PJ on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 07:16 PM EST
- I absolutely cannot resist this link: "Is Legal Trouble Brewing for Microsoft and Novell?" - Authored by: Brian S. on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 11:35 PM EST
- JMRI next month - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 11:43 PM EST
- M$ Deals.... - Authored by: penfold on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 12:32 AM EST
- M$ Deals.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:11 AM EST
- M$ Deals.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:55 PM EST
- M$ Deals.... - Authored by: Tyro on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 03:56 PM EST
- Another GPL violator trying "GPL is unenforceable" defence - Authored by: wjaguar on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 02:30 AM EST
- Now there's something positive - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 06:17 AM EST
- Linus Torvalds in Time Europe - Authored by: macrorodent on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 06:19 AM EST
- MSFirefox (R) - Authored by: belzecue on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 06:31 AM EST
- Marketplace 11/14/2006 6:50 am - Authored by: jplatt39 on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 07:00 AM EST
- User paid to uninstall Windows XP on a Dell! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 07:58 AM EST
- Waitaminute. - Authored by: jplatt39 on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 08:02 AM EST
- Open source contract vs copyright law - Authored by: tinkerghost on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:05 AM EST
- MS compalint against Viodentia - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:31 AM EST
- MS Firefox??? - Authored by: pfusco on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:40 AM EST
- It's a joke - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:55 AM EST
- Don't lik it? Redefine it. - Authored by: Latesigner on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:54 AM EST
- DRM and the Luddite perspective, - Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:25 PM EST
- Solaris GPLv3!!!!!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:31 PM EST
- Solaris GPLv3!!!!!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 02:36 PM EST
- BSD GPLv3 - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 15 2006 @ 11:27 AM EST
- "Ten Spammers Create 80 Percent Of Spam" - Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 03:10 PM EST
- Do you write open source apps on company time? - Authored by: estherschindler on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 03:22 PM EST
- "Free" maps - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 07:28 PM EST
- 18K votes missing, but good news: Looking at paper - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 07:48 PM EST
- Novell trolls in my laptop!? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 08:34 PM EST
- Some really interesting discoveries about Pipe Fairies and SCOG by Panglozz over at IV - Links - Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 09:44 PM EST
|
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:09 PM EST |
Java is the perfect candidate for open sourcing. It might have saved Sun a
great deal of trouble if they'd done this with Java in the first place. But
that's easy to say with hindsight.
---
I would rather stand corrected than sit confused.
---
Should one hear an accusation, try it on the accuser.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Stumbles on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:25 PM EST |
Actually I'm surprised and think it's a good thing. With all the
vacillations they have done over the past several years I was beginning
to think they couldn't make any sort of decision
---
You can tuna piano but you can't tune a fish.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:37 PM EST |
All the time I've been using OSS I had always thought SUN was going to be the
opensource darling. When SCO started it's lawsuit, for some reason, IBM-Novell
got pushed into that position. IBM's silence about Novell's deal tells
mountains.
With this move, may SUN take it's rightful place. Too bad there was so much
ground lost but thankful that's the past and we can all move forward, together.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- One extreme to the other - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:32 PM EST
- OpenOffice - Authored by: davcefai on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:57 PM EST
- Sun - Authored by: Altair_IV on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:37 PM EST
- Sun - Authored by: Observer on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 09:30 PM EST
- Sun - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:11 PM EST
|
Authored by: jmc on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:39 PM EST |
SCO should now sue Sun because it's touched their pressshhhuss IP and they own
it......
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: kawabago on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:42 PM EST |
I think this shows that the business community is starting to understand that
the GPL is the best license to use if you want to get value back from the
community. Congratulations to Sun![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: sef on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:52 PM EST |
My question is whether they will be dual-licensing it -- making it available
(at a cost) under non-GPL terms.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 12:55 PM EST |
I can not load real player because I can not accept the terms of the EULA.
Guess I'll miss out.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Tri-Be on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:02 PM EST |
After the Novell .. thing .. this is a breath of fresh air.
I've always been a bit reluctant to do anything with Java, mostly because of its
proprietary nature. This announcement is definitely a good thing.
It would be extra nice if they GPL'd Solaris too ;-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Eric Damron on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:03 PM EST |
This is perfect timing! Anyone developing web services for the Linux platform
should concider switching to Java. The Novell/Microsoft deal puts the entire
Mono project under a dark patent cloud.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: alansz on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:14 PM EST |
Finally, Debian will get java packages into main! :) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yay for Debian! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 10:05 PM EST
|
Authored by: enigma_foundry on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:24 PM EST |
Well, this is slightly surprising, but it is part of market action that I had
been discussing with several folks over at TLF and IP Central, making the point
that competition happens on many levels. As Schumpeter has noted, economist
are over-fixated on price competition, and service and innovation competition
happens, too. The more Sun donates, the more it will attract developers.
Novell is about to find this out, too. --- enigma_foundry
Ask the right questions
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:31 PM EST |
.NET was always the answer to a question that nobody asked: how can I get the
benefits of Java and still remain tied to Microsoft Windows? When Sun was
diddling around with almost-but-not-quite-GPL-compatible-Licenses (or ABNQGPL if
you prefer) it might have made some sense as one could argue that using Java was
just a different choice of masters. Not anymore. Now Java offers a real
alternative. You can chose .NET and stay a slave, or choose Java and become a
free man. IIRC, one of the things that Sun got out of their lawsuit with
Microsoft was a really broad patent cross-licensing agreement. I have to
believe that real soon now, Microsoft will pop up and assert that that cross
licensing agreement doesn't give Sun the right to release Microsoft patented
inventions under the GPL. They pretty much have to if they want to save .NET,
and they REALLY want to save .NET because the last thing they want is a boatload
of free, cross-platform applications.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Eeyore on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:44 PM EST |
This is one of those times that it might be nice if the GPL really was as
"viral" as it's been FUDDED up to be. If it were, Micro$oft would
either have to pull Java OR GPL Windows.... Baaahahahahaah, all your base are
belong to us. :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cventers on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:44 PM EST |
I'll fully admit that I used to be pretty unfriendly
towards Sun. I was always suspicious of their motives,
even though I knew about projects like OpenOffice.
I have to say that my opinion of Sun has been brightening
quite a bit lately, and it just did by a huge leap today.
It's really fantastic to have a new friend for free
software.
For the record, I'm not a fan of Java as a language. But
all those reasons are technical, and even if Java is one
of the last languages I'd voluntarily choose for a
project, I realize it is important and important to many
people (including Sun) which makes Sun's freeing of Java a
very large move. (And who knows, perhaps under GPL Java
might see improvements to some of the things I dislike :P)
Kudos, ladies and gentlemen. Kudos.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:48 PM EST |
It's nice that Richard had some positive words for Sun on this. Sun explicitly
selected version 2 of the GPL for this release. (Yes, I know that version 3 is
not 'official' yet.) They didn't include a clause that said; "or any
future version".[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:53 PM EST |
I use Java a lot for work, so this is absolutely fantastic news. Thank you Sun! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: billyskank on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 01:56 PM EST |
The Java Trap has been deactivated. (I only recently learned Java too, and
found I liked it). :)
---
It's not the software that's free; it's you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:00 PM EST |
Hey, everybody!
Oh, this is sweet. I read the post about how this effectively reduces .NET/Mono
to secondary status....
...uh...hold on a sec....
Big companies don't get big by being stupid. IBM figured out the time was right
to go with Open Source. And now, here's Sun doing it.
The reason this is standing out in my mind is the timing is so close to Novell
and it's Faustian bargain. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great, but I'm
wondering if Sun did this because they got wind that Novell was going to pull a
nutty and they saw this as the perfect opportunity to take the lead.
So, anyone know if the timing is coincidental, or are they sending a message to
.NET/Mono?
Dobre utka,
The Blue Sky Ranger
"So, what, exactly, did you do?"
"Exactly what I wanted to do."
-Shark and Fitz
"12 Oz. Mouse"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:07 PM EST |
Simon Phipps asks a question from David Berlind, who asks why Sun
didn't just donate to the Harmony project under the Apache license. Schwartz
says it's a curious thing if IBM is opposing the GPL. Amen.
I
don't understand the reference. Is David Berlind from IBM?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: itchytweed on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:13 PM EST |
IIRC, there were several distro's that wanted nothing to do with Java and
software that used Java because of its "baggage". And I think that may
have affected OpenOffice (which I love! [cheap and shameless plug]) acceptance
in the same way. Sun has gone a long way by taking this huge step. My question
now is, what is going to be the collateral fallout? I know that there has been
at time bad blood between Sun and M$ involving Java and, for the lack of a
better term, M$-Java. The conspiracy theorist in me is wondering if the timing
of the decision/announcement is related to the M$-Novell tryst and to mess with
"heads" of M$ and Novell? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:19 PM EST |
After years of internal debates and public calls from IBM to make Java open
source, you would think that IBM would be overjoyed at the news.
Not so.
IBM on Monday issued a statement attributed to Rod Smith, vice president of
emerging Internet technologies in the IBM Software Group, who penned the open
letter in 2004 requesting Sun to make Java open source.
Smith said that IBM supports all open-source licenses approved by the Open
Source Initiative (OSI). But he noted that there are already two projects around
open-source Java.
There is Harmony, a project in the incubator phase at Apache to build an
open-source edition of Java SE. IBM joined the Harmony project shortly after it
was launched in 2005.
"In light of the Apache projects, we have discussed with Sun our strong
belief that Sun should contribute their Java technologies to Apache rather than
starting another open-source Java project, or at least make their contributions
available under an 'Apache friendly' license to ensure the open-source Java
community isn't fragmented and disenfranchised, instead Sun would be bringing
the same benefits of OS (open-source) Java to this significant and growing
open-source community," the statement said.
Sun chose the General Public License, rather than the Apache License, in part to
ensure that there is compatibility with Linux, which is under the GPL, according
to the company.
So, Big Blue not too happy. I wonder why.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: oneandoneis2 on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:20 PM EST |
...that to get your code into official Sun Java, you have to give it to
Sun:
"Sun
requires that contributors to all of its Free and open-source projects sign
the Sun Contributor Agreement (SCA). . .to ensure that Sun has the rights to use
your contributions in products and projects."
As I understand this, if
I write some code for Java & let Sun have it, they can then license that
code to MS in a completely closed-source, proprietary form.
The only
blackspot in what's otherwise a really nice announcement. No more newbies
complaining that they can't get Java working with Firefox :) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Brian S. on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:41 PM EST |
Java is used in more than 3.8 billion mobile phones, computers and other
devices around the world.
The decision to release the code under an open
licence means the world can now use, develop and share Java for free..... BBC
I've
always felt that this was Sun's "nuclear option".
I'd been waiting for a
response to Novell/Microsoft from Red Hat. Is it necessary any more?
:)
Novell have doomed themselves to eek out an existence as the poor-mans
Windoze substitute in the client/server market.
But, I always did have more
faith in Sun.
It may not have been noticed much in the US, but in the weeks
leading up to the Patent vote in the EU parliament, Sun were the only large IT
Corporate(apart from Red Hat) to campaign in Europe against the adoption of
software patents. They even did a tour(over a week) to lobby the politicos,
including a visit to Poland whilst they were holding the fort.
EVERY OTHER
major IT corporate campaigned in favour of software patents. Brian S.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: IRJustman on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:52 PM EST |
Though where does this leave Kaffe, a
"clean-room" implementation of the Java Virtual Machine?
--Ian.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Tester on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 02:54 PM EST |
Glass Fish is the Java EE (Entreprise Edition) for "complex" server
applications. Its not for the desktop, you were probably thinking of project
Looking Glass which was already GPL. Anyways, thanks Sun.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:21 PM EST |
I would love to see, as I imagine others would, OpenOffice.org under the GPL. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:28 PM EST |
The article states that IBM wants the Sun Java source under the Apache Public
License and not the GPL. By putting the Java source under GPL, IBM will have
problems using that code in the two open source Java projects currently under
the Apache Foundation.
Could this be IBM's business-oriented, corporate mindset shining through -- that
they'd rather have the code under a more restrictive license than GPL for
competitive reasons?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:32 PM EST |
I can't help thinking this is nothing but a ploy to save themselves when the
truth comes out about their SCO dealings...
Just like M/S they paid "SCO" a wad of cash for something....whats the
bet there is going to be some interesting facts come out about that![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 03:36 PM EST |
This was the right move by Sun, and I had long stopped believing this would
happen! I am amazed that this valuable tool is finally open to outside input
(hopefully by collaboration not fork), and I can only hope that Sun will benefit
tremendously from it. I just hope they didn't lose any mindshare to that highly
dubious Mono project by being late to the GPL party ... (the latter sounds like
that kissing disease, fittingly enough)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: pipitas on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:08 PM EST |
Was the infamous Novell:Microsoft deal the last little push that made Sun
choose the GPL (instead of another license) for their latest move with opening
up Java completely?
Yes. At least that's what Jonathan
Schwartz (Sun's CEO) says in his blog (emphasizing by
me):
And in closing, I want to put one nagging item to
rest.
By admitting that one of the strongest motivations to select the
GPL was the announcement made last week by Novell and Microsoft, suggesting
that free and open source software wasn't safe unless a royalty was being paid.
As an executive from one of those companies said, "free has to have a
price."
That's nonsense.
Free software can be free of royalties, and
free of impediments to broadscale, global adoption and deployment. Witness what
we've done with Solaris, and now, what we've done with Java. Developers are free
to pick up the code, and create derivatives. Without royalty or
obligation.
Those that say open source software can't be safe for customers
- or that commercially indemnified software can't foster community - are merely
advancing their own agenda. Without any basis in fact.
They're also fighting
a rising tide.
Wether or not that indeed was the last push --
at least it is a nice little jab against that "unholy alliance". :-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:19 PM EST |
---------------
Steve Stites[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mram on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:35 PM EST |
That Sun really wants to push OpenSolaris as a credible alternative to Linux?
They needed to do two things to achieve that
1) Gain the support of the community
2) Release Open Solaris under GPL
They have done the first by releasing Java under GPL.
They have FSF by their side, and to gain more support they might even push for
GPL3.
So we would have GPL2 Linux (and GPL3 everything else) on one side, and
OpenSolaris GPL3 on the other....
They would definitely stand a good chance...
So in the end we may end up with Linux with more focus on the embedded market
side, and OpenSolaris with more focus on the desktop / server side.
Anyway, even if all this doesnt happen, I can still very gladly live with GPLed
Java!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: grouch on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:40 PM EST |
I've griped long and publicly about Sun making announcements that Java would
be opened up 'Real Soon Now [tm]'. It looked like just lots of hot air designed
to milk the PR for as long as it could be done. I'm happy to 'eat crow' over my
cynicism in this matter. Sun did what they said they would do.
Congrats, Sun
Microsystems!
--- -- grouch
http://edge-op.org/links1.html
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 04:57 PM EST |
Let me start by saying I may be wrong. I'm not a lawyer and this is all license
stuff. Sun didn't GPL what most people consider "Java". "Java" in that sense
is the API - the library of 1000's of classes that makes Java work. Sun GPLed
the following: - JavaSE - the compiler that takes your source code and
turns it into something that runs. Free versions have existed for some time
from the FSF.
- Hotspot - the virtual machine that runs compiled Java
code. Again free alternatives available as GPL from the FSF for some
time.
- Other stuff
If you read the fine print Sun states
that the Java API will remain under the JCP process and they have no intention
of using the GPL for it. Don't get me wrong Sun using the GPL is a good
thing. I just believe it is more a business move to stop GNU/Linux from basing
their development on the GCC/GCJ &
Classpath free alternative. Me? My Java/GCJ code was free last week and
will be free tomorrow no matter what Sun or IBM does.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: thombone on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 06:16 PM EST |
I literally cried.
This fills me with HOPE I haven't had in a long long time concerning the free
development and sharing of tecnhology.
The closing of operating systems, the DRM, the idea of the user being the enemy
has hung over me like a black cloud, slowing stripping me of the feeling of
excitement and awe I have had since I was a child concerning technology and what
it can do to make the world better.
It may take awhile to sink in for all of us, just how ABSOLUTELY HUGE this
announcement is. The world is going to change forever because of this.
This has just given free software and especially Linux such a HUGE boost that
it's unfathomable. I'm trying to just grasp this, it's SO amazing!
Thank you, Sun. THANK YOU![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 06:32 PM EST |
It's maybe time to take stock of who's doing what. Which corporations believe
there is value in the commercial copyright to 'software', and which corporations
believe that value lies elsewhere. I'm sure the corporations are intending to
sell something for more than the cost of production; that is how they make
profits.
Sun, when it comes to Java and Solaris, think there is no value in
the commercial copyright. If you want a Sun warranty on Java, or if you want Sun
engineers to build you a solution on Java, Solaris, and StarFire, they'll
quote.
Sony, when it comes to Vaio, I'm sure they will recommend Microsoft
Windows Vista. But when it comes to Playstation, they seem to have commissioned
a port of Redhat Fedora Core. I know how Sony intend to make their money on
Playstation; they intend to sell video games on the commercial copyright. They
know that some people will use Playstations as technical workstations; very good
ones, probably; and that Sony will make a loss on those ones. But it will be a
minority, and the marketing budget for the video games can carry it. So the
money comes from the commercial copyright, but on what Hollywood call
'software'; not the Computer Program kind.
IBM, as I know, sell Solutions.
There's an increasing pile of IBM Free Software. IBM distributes IBM Free
Software, and not anyone else's. Much safer that way. There is also IBM
Commercial Software, stuff like Websphere and Lotus Notes, but that's so
expensive that only major corporations can afford it; and you only go for it if
you really appreciate the rock-solid IBM warranty.
Microsoft say they sell
Commercial Software, and when it comes to Personal Computers that is true. But
when it comes to XBoxes, the model is similar to Sony and Playstation. There's a
twist, though; Microsoft understand that it takes millions of dollars of
investment to make a decent commercial video game, and so there's a significant
barrier to entry for anyone who wants to try their hand at that business; and
Microsoft would like the barrier lowered, so that there are more XBox games to
be had. Their way is to encourage 'bedroom programmers' to write games, share
them over the Internet, and improve on each others' work. Microsoft will be
selling game development kits, and 'XBox Live' subscriptions, to help with this
process. What licence do you expect the 'bedroom programmers' to pick for open
collaborative works ? GPL, probably. So we'll have Microsoft making money out of
the GPL. Of course, eventually the good 'bedroom programmers' will band together
and invest to produce a commercial-quality game, start selling, and we'll be
back to value in the commercial copyright.
But there's a big dislocation
going on. Some of the corporate participants and sticking to their old
positions, and others are shifting ground dramatically. It's public Internet,
and games console supercomputers, that drives it. I cannot say 'good', and I
cannot say 'bad', but I see it happening.
Progress. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: overshoot on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 06:38 PM EST |
Yeah, it does. The weekend that fell between Microvell's announcement
and Sun's should remind us of that if nothing else.
Now, who's in? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 07:19 PM EST |
i'm just elated. wow.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 07:33 PM EST |
Wow !. Player number 9, Ron Novell get an injury and has been replaced by player
number 10, Jonathan Sun. That's great.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- In and Out - Authored by: mram on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 07:51 PM EST
|
Authored by: belzecue on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:02 PM EST |
SCO attacks Linux and instead ends up proving Linux has a clean Unix-I.P. bill
of health.
Wallace attacks the GPL and instead ends up proving the GPL is the opposite of
'restraint of trade'.
Novell attacks other Linux distros and ends up encouraging Sun to demonstrably
renew their commitment to the FOSS community by GPL-ing Java.
Meanwhile, MS continues to avoid those kind of backfires by first embracing
their enemies...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:11 PM EST |
In what ways does this help Sun?
This isn't a troll - this is genuine curiosity from someone a little clueless
about Sun's current business. I will say up front that I am probably more on
the skeptical side - but certainly willing to listen.
So... how does this help Sun's bottom line?
1. One could say that it makes endears more free software developers to the
Java platform.
Naysayers will say that developers are rooted in the languages and platforms
they already develop on, and GPL'ing Java won't suddenly result in a groundswell
of converts - there's got to be a more compelling reason to come on board. Are
there really that many developers ready to jump on board with Java, just waiting
for the day Sun sets it free? If so , then that's a great thing!
2. Let's assume that, yes, it *will* win more converts. Will Sun really see a
windfall of revenue from this?
Most Java development I've been privy to uses Tomcat for low-end stuff, JBoss
for a low-budget project or as dev and QA servers, and for production systems
use WebSphere, Weblogic (less and less it seems, but it's still prevalent),
Oracle for hard-core Oracle shops, and occasionally Sun ONE (Netplanet, whatever
you want to call it). Will this necessarily mean more money going to Sun ONE?
IIRC, a commonly reported fact a few years ago was that BEA and IBM were taking
the lion's share of the J2EE app server market, and ironically Sun just wasn't
making that much money from Java, even back then.
3. It can be argued that Java has gone as far as it can go under Sun's
guidance, so GPL'ing it can only help Java's continued growth. So that's good
for *Java* (and the Java developer/user community), but how is it better for
Sun, other than not having to spend as much money on continued J2SE
development?
So yes, it is a good day for GPL proponents, and I don't mean to detract from
that. But is it also a good day for Sun (or Sun shareholders)?
What are your thoughts?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bdrell on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:31 PM EST |
I'm not sure IBM's reaction is completely out of line. It seems they've
invested a rather large amount of resources into Harmony. It's really not
surprising that they'd be dissatisfied that Sun released Java under the GPL --
it effectively kills all other projects, since Sun's Java implementation is the
best documented and most complete implementation of Java. I don't think it's a
licensing issue as much as an issue of IBM not particularly wanting all of their
efforts on Harmony to go to waste. And if that's truly the case, then I can
understand their frustration.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:33 PM EST |
Brilliant, absolutely brilliant!
Thanks Sun, especially for making the licensing terms identical to those of
GCJ/Classpath. Let the exhange of code and building of a larger community
start!
Now, where did I put that Java book? Time to get up to speed with Java again :-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: raya on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:36 PM EST |
We have had two wildly different FOSS news stories this past week.
First
the bad news, Novell, widely criticised for "selling out" to Microsoft and
potentially violating the GPL with a "patent covenant not-a-licence" agreement.
Now the good news, with Sun releasing Java as GPL and being widely acclaimed for
it.
What may have been missed in the noise of the Java-GPL celebration is
the fact that Sun made its own sellout pact with Microsoft only a couple of
years ago.
Part of that pact was a "patent covenant not-a-licence" agreement
appearing very similar to Novell-Microsoft (with the exception that it is not
stated to cover the parties' customers - although it may in fact do so).
To quote the sun press at the time:
Patents and Intellectual
Property: The parties have agreed to a broad covenant not to sue with respect to
all past patent infringement claims they may have against each other. The
agreement also provides for potential future extensions of this type of
covenant. The two companies have also agreed to embark on negotiations for a
patent cross-license agreement between them.
In common with the
Novell case, we have no public information on exactly which patents and products
are at issue and there is no published provision for passing the covenant on to
downstream recipients (as many are currently arguing is required under the GPL).
There is no information (that I can find to date) on this covenant in the
information on GPL Java
The GPL issues regarding patent covenants-not-to-sue
would not have been raised at the time of the Sun deal because there was no GPL
software at issue - but now there is: Java.
I have no doubt that Sun's
motives are entirely honest in GPLing Java, however that does not mean that
Microsoft may not be left holding the same patent trap as they claim to hold
from the Novell agreement - as a result of the earlier Sun covenant.
For
some time now, various free-Java-replacement projects have attempted to provide
an alternative for those free-software developers who could not accept Sun's
previous licence. It is now likely that these projects will wither and die and
become increasingly further behind Java itself. It is also likely that free
software projects will become increasingly dependent on a full Java
implementation - now that there is a free one available. This means that should
MS wait a while before springing the patent trap, the alternative Java projects
will be dead or no longer relevant/capable. The free software backup plan will
be gone.
For these reasons I believe it is important (whilst not wishing to
detract from celebrations of Suns decision) that the Sun-MS patent covenant is
subject to the same examination (reported to be in progress) as the Novell-MS
covenant to determine the full nature of the patent threat and any
GPL-compatibility problems in both cases. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:36 PM EST |
From reading the Sun page, it appears to me that this release includes the JVM,
Java Compiler, and a couple other things. The HUGE ommission that jumps out at
me (though maybe I'm reading too much into this) is that, it doesn't appear that
they are including the standard Java Class Libraries.
We already have Free JVMs and Java compilers. The thing that's always been
missing is an implentation of all the APIs for Java. Stuff like SWING.
Is Sun also releasing the Java Library under the GPL? If not, I'm afraid this
might not be as important as everyone is gushing on about.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 08:56 PM EST |
And Microsoft had better watch out for Fall Out! This is the equivalent of
dropping a tactical nuclear weapon on C##. It won't kill it, but it will cause
the pool of programmers to shrink.
And the pool of Java programmers will grow. Part of the value of a language is
the number of developers using it - the larger the number of developers, the
more valuable it is. Just as the larger the pool of GPL code the more valuable
the GPL is.
So the amount of GPL code out there has just surged. The number of programmers
using Java is going to soar.
Closed source programmers, and users of other languages will loose.
---
Wayne
http://urbanterrorist.blogspot.com/
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 10:21 PM EST |
So can we say safely this
article written by Richard Stallman in 2004 is no longer valid ? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 12:35 AM EST
- And he's happy - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:10 AM EST
- And he's happy - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 06:10 AM EST
- The Java Trap - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 15 2006 @ 06:54 AM EST
|
Authored by: skidrash on Monday, November 13 2006 @ 11:46 PM EST |
comedy rhodium for you, right here on Groklaw !!!!!! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SilverWave on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:40 AM EST |
Wow great news!
Lets hope they start making money out of this strategy so others see this as the
way to go.
---
GPLv3: Eben Moglen explalined this well the new DRM clause just says that you
can't use technology to add restrictions that the licence doesn't allow.
coriorda[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 02:11 AM EST |
First - Yes this is for real.
Sun's been fairly honest (for them..) in this whole dealing. They've been
talking to us and asking us for feedback since they made the first announcement.
We were even invited to the press conference (yeah, we had forehand knowledge
about this)
Second - Don't see this as a loss for us. This is a Big Win. True, we'd rather
see _our_ class library and VMs become the first Free alternative, but the main
goal was always to have a Free alternative.
Now we're getting what we wanted, with the exact license we wanted. We're even
getting things in the order we wanted. (Because Sun still has to clean up some
parts of the class-library before they could release that, we were asked in what
order we'd like to see things released. And that's been pretty much the
announced order (E.g. the HotSpot VM first)
Third, I'd like to say that our work has not been wasted. In particular thanks
to the fact that Sun chose the same license as ours, the Classpath contributors
are more likely to forward those contributions to Sun's Java. And Sun will be
needing contributions, since there are parts which cannot be relicensed as Free
Software as of yet, and for which Classpath already has the equivalent code.
Anyway, yes. It's a big day for us.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 04:47 AM EST |
Q: Are you open sourcing the Java language or the Java SE platform
specifications?
A: We are not open sourcing the
Java programming language, nor the platform APIs and specifications, which
are governed by the JCP. We're open sourcing Sun's implementations of the Java
SE and Java ME specifications.
But I congratulate Sun and it's still a
great day for programmers. - giafly[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Simon G Best on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 07:57 AM EST |
I'd never bothered to learn Java, because it was proprietary. Now I'm going
to learn Java.
:-)
--- NO SOFTWARE PATENTS - AT ALL! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rao on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 09:02 AM EST |
Didn't Sun settle a lawsuit from Kodak related to java? Does this have any
impact on end users?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 10:00 AM EST |
this is great news indeed!
congrats to sun - I am glad I administer sun and redhat
boxes.
I will be recommending java over mono any day. to me mono
is dead and miguel should get as far away from microsoft's
ip as he can. that is just a disaster waiting to happen.
maybe novell should of partnered with sun instead of
microsoft.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 01:25 PM EST |
Considering the influential (and wonderful) blogger that PJ is, I recommend that
she reconsider using the phrase "intellectual property" or IP, as explained at
this GNU project web
page. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Limulus on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 02:55 PM EST |
Just FYI to anyone who missed it or wants to see it again, its available here.
Scroll down to "Channels",
click "Announcements/Events" and select "Java - Open & Free"
The
viewer is some Flash-based thing, but for most of the clips there are MP4
(video) and MP3 downloads. The first file, "Live Event Coverage" is the entire
almost hour-long video (a warning- the MP4 is just over 550 MB!)
Click
the arrow next to "Displaying 1-8 of 15" to see the rest :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 05:21 PM EST |
As I understand, (or maybe misunderstand) with JAVA one essentially writes the
code once, and it is interpreted or compiled at runtime using the appropriate
runtime for the OS being used.
What is the advantage over this method, as opposed to developing compilers for
each OS that compile the same source code to an executable that runs on that OS?
I realize that the runtime method works best for JAVA apps from the web where
the target OS isn't known ahead of time, but what about software where the
target OS *is* known, like say for a mobile phone, or other software for
specific OS's?
OpenOffice seems to have separate versions for different OS's, and it seems that
if you go as far as that, you might was well go all the way to the finished
executable that doesn't need the JAVA runtimes.
I read about the "portability" of JAVA apps, but I don't understand
how it's any more portable with having to write multiple runtimes than if you
wrote multiple compilers.
Maybe I just don't get the point, but I would really like to understand this.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 05:46 PM EST |
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 08:33 PM EST |
Previously, I prefer "write once compile everywhere concept" than
"write once run everywhere concept" due to performance reason. That's
why I like C++ and QT (www.trolltech.com) instead of java.
My Question is : Is it posible now to use GPLed sun code and put in GCJ to
produce native executable that compatible with interpreted java but with better
performance ?.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 14 2006 @ 09:04 PM EST |
Bah.. java apps are junk. While it may be a programmers haven because it is not
machine dependent.. My experience with is that it is resource intensive, buggy
(graphics not refreshing properly), and very version dependent. My work pc has
5 different versions of java installed on it.. that is a complete and total
waste of hard drive space. Ever darn time I turn around there's another java
application, and sure enough, it needs a slightly different version of the
runtime environment. 1.2 1.3 1.3.1 1.4 1.5... jeez[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|