In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Lion-O
<nosp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote
on Sun, 02 Dec 2007 16:45:02 -0600
<slrnfl6dc5.5e3.nosp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
>> Are you sure that Sun's Java (TM) will continue to exist?
>
> We've heard and read many doom stories like these before
> and so far all of them turned out to be nonsense.
>
> Sure, you can fork Sun's JRE but cannot call it Java.
> And for good reasons too.
For starters, it would be a copyright violation.
> Should Sun allow stuff like that to happen they'd be
> really dooming the whole project. The proof of that
> can be seen with the impact of the implementation of
> that horrible piece of **** (personal opinion) called
> Gij and GCJ on Linux.
Not to mention Microsoft's J++.
> People perceive it to be "java" but guess what? "java"
> doesn't even manage to deal with simple examples from
> the java tutorial (http://www.thejavatutorial.com/).
> So Java sucks and doesn't even work as it should.
No...just gij and GCJ. Sun's official implementations
work fine. Put blame where blame is due.
>
> Fortunately things are a little better setup than that,
> more and more people come to realize that Java is only
> Java if Sun says so. Your own post is part of
> the proof of that.
Precisely.
>
> As long as that realization is there Java will continue
> to go strong.
Only if Sun has a "death strategy". If Sun were to go
Chapter 7, who ends up with Java? That is a question that
must be answered.
> Sure, Sun
> can be a pain in the ass sometimes when it comes to this.
Sun is protecting its intellectual property, as it should.
> But thats exactly what a complex project like Java needs.
Owner****p?
Protection?
Maintenance?
Understanding?
Different questions.
> Most open source projects which
Assuming "which" = "will" or deleted entirely. This sentence
got a little chopped up.
> eventually fell into chaos and either ended, exploded or split into a
lot of
> sub projects reached that stage because there wasn't a leader present
who
> called the shots. No one to say "This we do, that we don't". Resulting
in an
> eventual upstirr and a split in the whole project.
Exactly.
>
> Don't forget; most developers want to develop and don't care about all
that
> open source zealotery nonsense.
They also want to get paid good money.
> Things need to work, and we need to be able to
> do our jobs. If you allow yourself to fall down
> to the open source zealot road you'll end up with
> bull**** idiocy like "Oh no, we can't distribute Firefox as
> such because of some licenses we don't like. So we'll
> just re-compile it and call it "Iceweasel" (as is
> happening with the Debian distribution)".
It is also happening with Gentoo, which has an "official
branding" option. This is as it should be.
>
>
> concluding.. As long as Sun keeps protecting their interests
> as they do you can be sure your software will run when
> you're dealing with "Java" because "Java" can only be applied
> as name when it really meets all the demands.
>
> And that is exactly what is needed to keep it going strong;
> confidence and trust that "Java" can handle Java code.
>
And C++ code written to proper specifications. Java still has JNI
last I looked.
--
#191, ewill3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of
elderberries!" - Monty Python and the Holy Grail
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
