3 ms·

The problem with write ups like these is they send the exact opposite message of what was intended to be sent. Even those people who didn't receive the news, wi

by kamaal 8y ago

The problem with write ups like these is they send the exact opposite message of what was intended to be sent. Even those people who didn't receive the news, will now hear about this. On the other hand, the entire write up seems to attempt to convince people to keep faith in Oracle. The problem with this kind of talk is you are the mercy of some VP in Oracle, whose one decision could change everything and given the fact they are already thinking of monetizing(and to some extent have) Java, it most certainly will. In most companies merely migrating Java versions is a process that happens over several months if not years. Asking people to change their entire install bases, and expecting them to not worry about it is pointless. These people have to redo not just regression tests but a range of security tests. And of course even after all that you are still not sure about the future. The right question to ask at this point is, about the alternatives. One of the greatest things about Java is the library ecosystem. The language itself is not that enjoyable, but Java has had so much money driving behind it that you will find pretty much a library for every thing on Earth. The only languages that can match that ecosystem are Perl and Python. And may be Javascript. My only concern with Java is related to Clojure. I liked that language as a practical alternative to Lisp, if Java has no future, then Clojure's biggest sell 'Java interop' doesn't have a future too.

sytelus 8y ago
> The only languages that can match that ecosystem are Perl and Python. And may be Javascript. Nope. Python as well as Perl are pretty slow compared to Java on JVM. To replace Java you need to move to either C# or Go. The key thing would be licensing terms and available frameworks. Smart CIOs with lots of Java baggage in their companies should be investing in transition to C# given the state of things. It would be pretty stupid if you are starting new development on Java at this point.
- kamaal 8y ago
  Very interesting to see Go as a choice. On sheer library numbers Go would still come short compared to Perl/Python. But Go's simplicity is actually huge accidental positive. One of things that I remember from the past is applications used to be developed as giant Monoliths. Which is why you needed all that OO, templates and generics related magic to work with. These days people don't develop applications that way anymore. Adding to which microservices architecture has taken off really well. People tend to write their binaries as applications that do one thing well. Go is actually a very practical language for today's everyday work.
  - moocowtruck 8y ago
    go is simplistic, not simple
- wbl 8y ago
  In what world does openJDK stop existing and RedHat or IBM drop Java?
- saiya-jin 8y ago
  CIO deciding to dump all Java estate and move to .NET/C# wouldn't last in the position for long. Business doesn't care much about platform or other technological nitpicks, they want solid, reliable tools. Both (and many more) can deliver this. Java was, is and will be solid, you can find much more tools/frameworks/libraries for any task, and tons of highly skilled devs. That few people moan on internet forums won't change things a bit.
  - bilbo0s 8y ago
    >Business doesn't care much about platform... Businesses would care about the new support bill they would get for C# support. I think there would be a little sticker shock on the part of the CFO when they saw the matching support contract. The real problem is, they used to get all the support free. Now they have to pay. So if they switch, they need to switch to something just as reliable, equally performant, but free of support charges. Which doesn't really exist. (Well it does, but that would be OpenJDK. Which they don't want to use. Presumably because they don't get commercial support at the level they need it.) The people complaining want to switch to something where the commercial support contract does NOT cost money. Which kind of eliminates Java and C#.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  >Smart CIOs with lots of Java baggage in their companies should be investing in transition to C# given the state of things... Uh, out of the frying pan, into the fire. People are complaining because the DON'T want to pay for support. So switching to C# to pay for support is not really solving the problem. The base problem is that people want to pay ZERO for support, but get the OracleJDK instead of having to use the free OpenJDK. (I'm a linux guy so I don't mind OpenJDK. But apparently a lot of people don't like the whole free side of Java.) So if they switch to C# to access support, they would still have to pay. This is the essential issue. People don't want to pay. Switching to C# does nothing for them. Switching to Go would allow them to get free stuff. But only until someone started charging. Which might not be for a while. Also, Go probably doesn't have even close to the number of third party libraries that Java has. So that would be a consideration in the case of switching to Go. But yeah, switching to C# would just be stupid in this case. It would cost more for the support than Oracle charges for Java.

by kamaal 8y ago

sytelus 8y ago

> The only languages that can match that ecosystem are Perl and Python. And may be Javascript. Nope. Python as well as Perl are pretty slow compared to Java on JVM. To replace Java you need to move to either C# or Go. The key thing would be licensing terms and available frameworks. Smart CIOs with lots of Java baggage in their companies should be investing in transition to C# given the state of things. It would be pretty stupid if you are starting new development on Java at this point.

kamaal 8y ago
Very interesting to see Go as a choice. On sheer library numbers Go would still come short compared to Perl/Python. But Go's simplicity is actually huge accidental positive. One of things that I remember from the past is applications used to be developed as giant Monoliths. Which is why you needed all that OO, templates and generics related magic to work with. These days people don't develop applications that way anymore. Adding to which microservices architecture has taken off really well. People tend to write their binaries as applications that do one thing well. Go is actually a very practical language for today's everyday work.
- moocowtruck 8y ago
  go is simplistic, not simple
wbl 8y ago
In what world does openJDK stop existing and RedHat or IBM drop Java?
saiya-jin 8y ago
CIO deciding to dump all Java estate and move to .NET/C# wouldn't last in the position for long. Business doesn't care much about platform or other technological nitpicks, they want solid, reliable tools. Both (and many more) can deliver this. Java was, is and will be solid, you can find much more tools/frameworks/libraries for any task, and tons of highly skilled devs. That few people moan on internet forums won't change things a bit.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  >Business doesn't care much about platform... Businesses would care about the new support bill they would get for C# support. I think there would be a little sticker shock on the part of the CFO when they saw the matching support contract. The real problem is, they used to get all the support free. Now they have to pay. So if they switch, they need to switch to something just as reliable, equally performant, but free of support charges. Which doesn't really exist. (Well it does, but that would be OpenJDK. Which they don't want to use. Presumably because they don't get commercial support at the level they need it.) The people complaining want to switch to something where the commercial support contract does NOT cost money. Which kind of eliminates Java and C#.
bilbo0s 8y ago
>Smart CIOs with lots of Java baggage in their companies should be investing in transition to C# given the state of things... Uh, out of the frying pan, into the fire. People are complaining because the DON'T want to pay for support. So switching to C# to pay for support is not really solving the problem. The base problem is that people want to pay ZERO for support, but get the OracleJDK instead of having to use the free OpenJDK. (I'm a linux guy so I don't mind OpenJDK. But apparently a lot of people don't like the whole free side of Java.) So if they switch to C# to access support, they would still have to pay. This is the essential issue. People don't want to pay. Switching to C# does nothing for them. Switching to Go would allow them to get free stuff. But only until someone started charging. Which might not be for a while. Also, Go probably doesn't have even close to the number of third party libraries that Java has. So that would be a consideration in the case of switching to Go. But yeah, switching to C# would just be stupid in this case. It would cost more for the support than Oracle charges for Java.