When asked by a Computerworld reporter back in June 2003 what the latest thinking was at Sun on making Java open-source, Gosling replied:
"I am certainly one of the people who would love to make it open-source. But it's hard for two reasons. One is that open-source ways of dealing with software work really well so long as you get this sort of collegial atmosphere. If you happen to have a bully on the block who is really strong, it really doesn't work. We have this history of having been victimized, and there are lots of people who are nervous about that."
"The other issue," Gosling continued, "is that when you've got a platform technology like Java, there are really two sides to the community. There are the people who are building the platform, and the people who are using the platform."
"From the point of view of the people who are using the platform, one of the most valuable things about Java is the consistency, the interoperability. And from the platform providers' side of the world, they feel it's this sort of tension. On the one hand, they just want to go off and do whatever they damn well please. On the other hand, they know that if they did that, they'd be cutting themselves off from some developers."
"Being involved with interoperability is something that most manufacturers have this love-hate thing with," Gosling added. "So we've tended to have our licenses be as close to open-source as we can be, while maintaining the one thing that we really care about, which is interoperability."
Given those arguments he'd adduced himself, he was then asked: do you still favor open-source for Java?
"I believe all of those arguments are actually correct," he replied. "The question for me is, have we gotten to a point where market pressures will enforce the values of the developer community? Are we someplace where there's no one player who could just take over and be the bully on the block? And I think we're basically there. But different people have different opinions on that."
Could Java go open-source soon, he was asked. (Remember, this was June 2003.) "It could conceivably happen soon," sais Gosling, "although Sun is kind of a funny company. I don't really know what the right word is. We aren't like a dictatorship. We don't have somebody in the center that's the ultimate control. We aren't like a really hierarchical company. We're a consensus company, which in some ways is lovely and in some ways is completely maddening."
Gosling concluded: "And this has been a point on which I think everybody agrees on the basic arguments about why we need to protect [Java], and I buy those arguments. The question is then, How do you enforce that? And right now, the argument is mostly, Are we there yet? If we really let it go, what would happen? And there are enough people that are pretty nervous. Right now, that's kind of where the consensus is, but it's slowly been inching away."
About Java News Desk JDJ News Desk monitors the world of Java to present IT professionals with updates on technology advances, business trends, new products and standards in the Java and i-technology space.
Paul Hobbs wrote: The SUN
brand gives the product
credability, besides we
have more than enough
open-source development
kits.
carld wrote: What are the
fears or main reason to
Open Source?
Is it for market
position?
Is it for many
minds focusing on new
ideas?
Is it forking the
language?
Is it because
everyone wants to bite
the hand that feed em?
Is it branding?
I think we should leave
it be for now.
And have a better voting
methodology for bug
parade and JCP.
Preserve a good thing...
(WORA)
Why was this a
good thing 3-4 years ago,
and now it doesn''t
really make a whole lot
difference. When you open
source it, it is really
for the API developers.
Those are the folks who
are want permission to
mess with the underlying
implementation
(JNI,C,C++). I believe
that many Users of the
API want to jump on the
band wagon, and may not
realize what is good for
the platform. When you
fork the JVM it would be
called XVM or XYZVM?
Just becareful what you
wish for...
-Carl
-Carl
Ray wrote: My company has
concentrated exclusively
on Java development since
1998. I know what''s
good about it and I know
its weak points, probably
as well as Sun''s
internal Java team does.
Open source would kill
it, and anyone who thinks
otherwise is just too
short-sighted to be
making such a significant
decision. I''d give Sun
a billion dollars for
Java before I''d let them
open source it.
Scott Sauyet wrote: > The
advantage of this would
be that it would allow
other
> groups to do a
fork if they wanted to,
without losing the
> official Sun brand of
Java...
However, I think a fork
is exactly what Gosling
is saying Sun fears.
Right or wrong, this is
an understandable
concern. Java has
managed to make it as far
as it has in part because
the community has never
been able to become
fractured.
I think that Eric Raymond
is right, and the time is
right to release Java,
but I certainly
understand the concerns.
David Fraser wrote: The
trouble with this
argument is that it
assumes "open-source" and
"community-driven
management" are the same
thing. It would still be
possible to move to an
open source license, but
keep the management
structure controlled by
Sun. The advantage of
this would be that it
would allow other groups
to do a fork if they
wanted to, without losing
the official Sun brand of
Java...
jay wrote: Yeah right:
and Sun was going to do
it in 1998 too, if one
believed the Wired report of
the time ("Open-Source
Java at Last?" by Niall
McKay.)
ashishK wrote: "Sun
should go for broke on
open-source Java and
scare Microsoft away in
the bargain." So said Nich
olas Petreley,
founding editor of
LinuxWorld
IBM announced two new
advances in the insurance
industry - a solution for
improving operational
efficiency and a
framework for process
acceleration - that are
designed to help
insurance providers lower
costs and increase
customer satisfaction by
handling core processes,
such as claims
ParAccel announced it has
entered into an original
equipment manufacturer
(OEM) agreement with IBM.
Under the terms of the
agreement, ParAccel will
embed IBM InfoSphere
Change Data Capture
within the ParAccel
Analytic Database,
providing ParAccel
customers with seamless
and real-time u
Mike Neil is general
manager for
virtualization strategy
in the Windows Server
Division at Microsoft.
Mike is focused on the
delivery of the Windows
virtualization
technology, including
Windows Server 2008
Hyper-V, Microsoft
Hyper-V Server and
Virtual PC 2007. Mike
also directs the tec
Micro Focus announced the
availability of SOA
Express 8.0. The new
version adds support for
direct deployment into
IBM's Customer
Information Control
System (CICS), enabling
users to accelerate the
deployment of Web
services by reusing their
existing CICS TS
mainframe infrastructure
in
From Application
Virtualization to Xen, a
round-up of the
virtualization themes &
topics being discussed in
NYC June 23-24, 2008 by
the world-class speaker
faculty at the 3rd
International
Virtualization Conference
& Expo being held by
SYS-CON Events in The
Roosevelt Hotel, in
midtown
Red Hat is a trusted
open source provider.
Red Hat offers enterprise
customers a long-term
plan for building
infrastructures on the
quality and innovation of
open source. Combining
open source operating
system platform, Red Hat
Enterprise Linux,
together with
applications, management
SUBSCRIBE TO THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL NEWSLETTERS
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR RSS FEEDS & GET YOUR SYS-CON NEWS LIVE!
Click to Add our RSS Feeds to the Service of Your Choice: