Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE • Hacker News Board

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#321

Post by ergothus » Sat, May 04, 2019, 9:53 PM UTC

victor106 wrote: post #169

StevePerkins wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> except Kotlin no new JVM language Java's never going to be on the bleeding-edge of trendiness (thank goodness). But there have been fewer JVM-targeting alternative languages over the past decade, because Java itself started leaning in a functional direction. It became "good enough" to negate the purpose for most of them. At any rate, counting compile targets for hobbyist toy languages is barely one step beyond meas…

> except Kotlin no new JVM language. What about Clojure? I 100% agree with you on Java. Some of these people who compare Java to Cobol have no idea. It’s hard for anyone to predict the future in tech but at this point Java is so widely used in the enterprise that it’s foolhardy to think that Java will disappear anytime soon. To the credit of the Java community they keep the language relevant and refreshed. I agree it…

> Some of these people who compare Java to Cobol have no idea....at this point Java is so widely used in the enterprise that it’s foolhardy to think that Java will disappear anytime soon.

Isn't that PART of the Java to Cobol comparison? Someone making that comparison wouldn't be saying that Java will disappear anytime soon.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#322

Post by theandrewbailey » Sat, May 04, 2019, 9:59 PM UTC

znpy wrote: post #158

Dumb question... Wouldn't it be possible to fork the namespace to something like javax -> jawax (or java->borneo as someone suggested) and then patch the JVM to alias the javax package to the would-be jawax package (or borneox or whatever) ?

Maybe have a more sensible namespace convention. Presently, for any given API, it's a toss up of whether it's under javax.* or java.*, with no rhyme or reason.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#323

Post by theandrewbailey » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:01 PM UTC

ausjke wrote: post #161

Oracle is a cancer. Android may get infected one day which is worrisome. What about MySQL. Google should have bought Sun in the first place, unfortunately all they could see is its searching with ads. Google better buy Canonical now before Oracle or other evils do it.

If anyone buys Canonical, I'm betting on Microsoft.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#324

Post by noopnoop » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:19 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #89

dtech wrote: post #78

> And the idea that corporate developers or even frankly any developers are switching to LLVM and WebAssembly en masse is pretty ridiculous. There is only 1 popular language released since 2009 that targets JVM: Kotlin. All other target JS, their own bytecode or LLVM: Go, Rust, Dart, Elixer, Julia, Typescript, Swift. This is a significant difference from 2003-2009 languages which all targeted JVM unless they were Mic…

And all of them have a lot of work to catch up with 25 years of market experience.

Yes, but it will take a fraction of that time to catch up, now that the work has already been done.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#325

Post by igouy » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:24 PM UTC

BoyRobot777 wrote: post #241

scarface74 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seeing that generics have been around since 2005 in C#, I think the .Net community has had plenty of time to work around the incompatibilities.... There are other languages that support CLR besides C# and they manage to “work around” generics. All in all, The JVM is leading not only CLR on all fronts, but pretty much any other runtime. C# compilers and GCs are at least a decade behind Java's. You may argue on how imp…

F# does not have higher kinded types, because of CLR. So no, they don't manage "work around" generics. Regarding measurements: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/ Also, I am very interested to see new benchmark results once AOT SubstrateVM will be more widely adopted in JVM community. Demo: https://youtu.be/MN6jNIwl2FQ?t=1136 RedHat already working on a framework which takes full benefit of that: https://quarkus.…

> Also, I am very interested to see new benchmark results once AOT SubstrateVM …

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

In some cases, the faster program with OpenJDK does not seem to be the faster program with Substrate VM.

In other cases, the faster program with OpenJDK seems to fail with Substrate VM - maybe it needs something different on the command line?

Otherwise, the same program is shown for both.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#326

Post by bborud » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:31 PM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #51

bborud wrote: post #41

Oracle makes Java a risk factor in all projects. I stopped approving new Java projects in my team 2 years ago after we switched to Go. This wasn’t a decision we took lightly and it took almost a decade for me to be comfortable with leaving Java behind. But it is the right thing to do. Oracle is not trustworthy.

Strange attitude to take when you can just target OpenJDK and then it is completely irrelevant what Oracle does or does not do. The fact is that every single one of the largest companies has some Java or Scala code within their core platform. And none of them have ever raised Oracle as a risk.

No, it is not irrelevant and people thinking it is makes it more dangerous.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#327

Post by jacques_chester » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:35 PM UTC

fiddlerwoaroof wrote: post #306

jacques_chester wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The JDK would promptly be forked from the last-covered commit, presumably by a coalition of Amazon, Azul, IBM, Red Hat, SAP, Google, Microsoft (amazing times we live in) and Pivotal amongst others. What enterprise customers want is certainty . Given the choice between "Java by Oracle" and "Basically still Java by Literally Every Other Enterprise Software Vendor", they will pick the latter in a heartbeat. It would be…

Wouldn't this run into the issues behind the Google-Oracle lawsuit around the Android runtime?

Possibly, though it would kill Oracle's Java business even more thoroughly.

If their business strategy is more nuanced than "cut your own throat in the hope someone else's is behind it", then political jiggery-pokery like Java EE is probably about as far as they would want to go.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#328

Post by doggydogs94 » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:39 PM UTC

Java would be better off if even Microsoft owned it.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#329

Post by duskwuff » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:43 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #91

votepaunchy wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and iOS? And I’ve only done upgrades, but I don’t believe any JVM is preinstalled on MacOS.

Apple used to have its own JVM implementation. As for iOS, RoboVM, Codename ONE, GluonVM are three possible AOT compilers to native code.

Apple's JVM was MRJ, the Macintosh Runtime for Java. It became obsolete around 2004, during the transition to Mac OS X.

Re: Negotiations Failed: How Oracle Killed Java EE

#330

Post by mbell » Sat, May 04, 2019, 10:44 PM UTC

smadge wrote: post #11

Illniyar wrote: post #2

Well, mmm, good riddance? I suppose this will cause a lot of hardships to a lot of people who need to maintain JavaEE, but the fact that Java EE is no more is nothing but good. It is a nightmare case of overengineering.

I never used a flow blown Java EE web application server, but the various APIs I used like JDBC, JAX-RS, and JPA were generally well thought out and pleasant enough to work with. It would be a shame if these interfaces/specifications became proprietary.

Without knowing it you have cherry picked possibly the only good parts of Java EE. The rest that constitute a 'full blown' Java EE stack are horrific disasters (JSF, EJB, etc).