Now that Java has a fully open sourced implementation in RedHat's IcedTea, Neil McAllister questions whether an open Java even matters: "Even as Java has stretched outward to embrace more concepts and technologies - adding APIs and language features as it goes - newer, more lightweight tools have appeared that do most of what Java aims to do. And they often do it better."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-07-13
> Additionally, it's currently the only serious free software competitor to .NET
Actually, according to TIOBE:
http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
Neither C#.Net nor VB has the pervasiveness of Java (despite what Microsoft marketing would like you to believe). There's a fair bit of VB out there but even Microsoft would consider it 'legacy' for the most part (most new .NET stuff seems to be C#).
Java may not always be the best tool for the job, but it is a tool that can do almost any job. If you only felt like learning one programming language to be your 'swiss army knife' then Java should be the one (and perhaps C as number two for dealing with hardware).
Back on the topic proper. It is great Sun's Java implementation is 100% free/libre. That removes a whole bunch of risk using it in free software projects. I hope that the Free Software movement adopts it for use, instead of clunky and fragile scripted messes, or cobbled together native libraries with wildly diverging design philosophies.
Member since:2006-03-28
There is several things rudiculous - first is obsession with speed. As for client side, your app is either fast enough, or not, so the obsession for C++ like performance is just funny. The second thing is obsession to run various dynamic languages upon Java. Gee - why? Those are better than Java. Java might be well established, supported, having some APIs, but - as an innovation technology it completly failed to fullfill what it was meant for. Dynamic and scripting languages run circels around Java productivity. So save Java's ass, they came-up with JavaFX declarative aproach. Some ppl finally realised, that all that object stuff might actually pretty much suck.
And before you would try to educate me of the OOP advantages - beeing there, done that.
Member since:
2005-11-18
- Performance that is (in most situations) acceptable compared to natively compiled C/C++ code: check.
- Comprehensive class library, proven third party libraries and application server platforms: check.
- Hosts of well-trained programmers available: check.
- Taught in most education institutions: check.
From the article:
Imagine if Java were released today, brand-new, as is. That's almost how it is for the Free Software community. Java is now an option for Free Software development, for the very first time.
No it's not, Red Hat-ish (and other distributions) had provided Eclipse, Tomcat, and others running on top of gcj for a while. It's just that OpenJDK is complete, has a fast VM, and verifies against the TCK. So, for most it is a better alternative than gcj now.
Now ask yourself this: If Java really were released today, brand-new, would it be a tool you'd choose?
But that is not the situation. Java was released more than a decade ago, has a high-performance virtual machine. There are good frameworks, and programmers are in high demand. Like C, C++, and Cobol, it's not going away, and even if it doesn't become more popular on free software platforms, it will continue to form a chunk of widely used infrastructure (e.g. J2EE, Eclipse).
To be honest, I think Java (as a platform) will only grow. There is a lot of movement to have dynamic languages run better on Java (e.g. JRuby, Groovy), which will make it more attractive to some programmers. Additionally, it's currently the only serious free software competitor to .NET.
Edited 2008-06-26 19:49 UTC