Oracle Aims To Sustain Java's 27-Year Franchise With v20 Rollout - Slashdot

Oracle Aims To Sustain Java's 27-Year Franchise With v20 Rollout

›

• Re:

  First off, that's not an answer for an employer who has clearly developed a damn good reason to ban Oracle.

  And lastly, when you can come to the CIO with an Enterprise-grade support package that includes covering the inevitable 3AM support call, then you can rest a little easier knowing the next major bug that cripples the company might not result in your immediate termination.

  • Re: Java is already dead.

    Red Hat, Azul and others have fully supported distributions of Java.
    • 1 hidden comment

  • Re:

    I wonder what can what replace java in this case. Replace the whole language, using alternative libraries with cheaper support, both? What are the alternatives? Microsoft(with full rewrite of the soft)?
    • 1 hidden comment

    • Re:

      Well, for some purposes I use Python and for others I use C++. I haven't done anything recently where C would be the better choice, but I looked at it pretty closely a couple of times. However hash tables are so useful that it's never made the cut. What I'd really like is what D and Vala promised to become, but neither one has developed in the right (for me) direction. E.g. I'd like a better documentation system than Doxygen, but nobody offers one. Not even as an add-on. I'd like built in conversion b

  • Re: Java is already dead.

    Why does your CIO need a support package for a friggin language? We use gcc at my place. Do you think we get onto the hotline to Gnu HQ everytime we have a core dump??

    • Why does your CIO need a support package for a friggin language? We use gcc at my place. Do you think we get onto the hotline to Gnu HQ everytime we have a core dump??

      JRE isn't just something that runs only on the server. When a serious bug comes around that cripples every workstation, your CIO won't give a flying fuck about "open" support at 3AM. They just want to know what the fuck you're ACTUALLY doing about the problem other than waiting on someone to clean the Cheeto dust from their fingers to fix a massive impact to business operations and revenue that will result in your boss being eventually fired.

      One would think you're more interested in self-preservation. You wanna waive that unsupported "open" flag around? Do it at home, not at work.

      • Re:

        I guess we just operate in different worlds. If something goes wrong at 3AM it's my problem and "I called Oracle and they are looking into it" isn't going to save my job. "Why couldn't you fix it/why don't we have a backup/why isn't there a contingency..." etc. The boss would be on the phone to his colleagues to suggest someone to replace me while I'm still trying to explain how much downtime 5 nines in the SLA really comes to...

      • Re:

        This feels like just a lack of experience with the JVM.

        First, Java is mostly a server language and runtime.

        Second, I have *never* had any stability problem with Java in the last 22 years, at least when following reasonable update pace and not jumping on the first release of a new major version.

        Third, if you have a bit of scalability, one server going down does not affect your uptime. So forget about hardware and software support. If it stops working, just put it offline and reinstall / repair the damn thing

• I will confess to not track Java license situation in general, but so long as Oracle are the ones dictating the terms, they've earned skepticism.

  Not that long I was dealing with a company that claimed Oracle shook them down for JRE license fees even though they didn't install any JREs (they say some Oracle tool saw third party software offer up a java web start, and then *assumed* use of JRE on every desktop in their enterprise, without actually detecting JRE.

  Oracle broadly has a reputation for being fickle about how 'open' their open projects are moment to moment, and swinging the wrong way at the wrong time and you end up with an Oracle shake down.

  So it's easier to just avoid "Oracle" business relationship, both explicit business relationship most critically (so they have no leverage to insist on an 'audit'), and also mitigating risk by avoiding open Oracle projects in case they suddenly gain a surprise clause in a revision.

• Re:

  I started writing something similar and then noticed the GP had specifically stated Oracle Java, not Java. There are plenty of Javas, including Oracle's own OpenJDK, that are not "Oracle Java".

  It does seem a weird thing to write as a response to this article, and is arguably off-topic. But it's not wrong on the face of it, Oracle Java isn't something anyone with any sense wants to touch with a ten foot pole.

  • 1 hidden comment