10 ms·

So is Oracle's goal killing off Java? It seems so from the looks of it. Or perhaps I'm missing the big picture here

by tekkk 8y ago

lumost 8y ago
The goal might be forced evolution. A few years ago no startups wanted to touch Java, and the ecosystem was lagging. The rapid release cycle is bringing much needed improvements
pron 8y ago
You are. The community asked for those changes, but some don't understand them and are confused because they apply old terms to new concepts. First, Oracle has completely open sourced the JDK, for the first time ever. Instead of a JDK with a complex license, mixing both free and commercial features and containing field-of-use restrictions, Oracle now provides the JDK under a 100% free and open source license, or under a commercial license for those who wish to purchase a support subscription (and fund the development of OpenJDK). Second, there are no longer major releases, and the new feature releases are similar to the old six-monthly "limited update". JDK 10, 11 and 12 are roughly the same size as 7u2 and 7u4, which also didn't get free security patches after six months. What's changed is the name given to those releases, and to make the updates cheaper and easier, they have been made more gradual, by allowing spec changes in feature releases. Not only do you get security fixes for free forever, but there are no more major upgrades. So the main point of confusion is that some confuse the new feature releases with the old major releases, when, in fact, they are much closer to the old "limited update" releases. People see a new version number, see that that number is not freely supported beyond six months and panic, when, in fact, the old releases that were similar to the new feature releases were also not supported beyond six months. They themselves were considered "updates" to some major release, but major releases no longer exist, and the "updates" now get a new version number. See here [1] for a more complete explanation. In addition, there's another new model, that allows organizations that for some reason need a much less gradual upgrade process than the new one -- and even less gradual than the old one -- and that is something that Oracle charges for. But because the JDK is now completely open source, other OpenJDK members have committed to backporting the fixes to provided a similar step-wise upgrade path for free. (I work on OpenJDK at Oracle, but speak only for myself) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/bav1sy/winter_is_coming_for_java_updates/eke9l7u/ https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/bav1sy/winter_is_comi...
- deng 8y ago
  Just one data point: our IT has now blocked the whole java.com domain. Oracle Java is now primarily seen as an infection you get through the Java Updater. Yes, I know of OpenJDK and I'm currently in the process of migrating machines to it, but I can assure you the damage to Java is very real.
  - pron 8y ago
    OpenJDK is the name of the JDK developed primarily by Oracle. java.com is the website for "consumer-side" Java -- i.e. the desktop JRE. The JRE and "consumer Java" no longer exist (as they've been replaced by jlink), and so the website is out of date and largely irrelevant. I hope someone soon figures out what other use to put it to.
    - deng 8y ago
      You might not like it, but java.com/download is still the first result when searching for Java. I am aware what OpenJDK is and who develops it, and I can handle the changes to our systems just fine, but I'm an engineer, not a manager. I can assure you that the confusion around Java is very real, as well as IT departments worrying about machines updating to a Java version requiring a commercial license.
      - Recurecur 8y ago
        Perhaps your company should hire some competent managers.
      - pron 8y ago
        I don't think that the desktop JRE's autoupdater can automatically update to versions (of the old JDK 8) that now require a commercial license, but I'm not sure. I'll ask. But I understand and agree that communication/websites can and should be clearer/easier to find. EDIT: I asked about the JRE autoupdater, and got this answer: Before update, it will offer to change the license to personal use (or to get a commercial one) or remove the software. It will default to remove. You can also choose not to upgrade and not to remove and keep using an out-of-date version. And if you accidentally remove, you can still get the old free versions from the Java archives.

So is Oracle's goal killing off Java? It seems so from the looks of it. Or perhaps I'm missing the big picture here

by tekkk 8y ago

So is Oracle's goal killing off Java? It seems so from the looks of it. Or perhaps I'm missing the big picture here

The goal might be forced evolution. A few years ago no startups wanted to touch Java, and the ecosystem was lagging. The rapid release cycle is bringing much needed improvements

pron 8y ago

You are. The community asked for those changes, but some don't understand them and are confused because they apply old terms to new concepts. First, Oracle has completely open sourced the JDK, for the first time ever. Instead of a JDK with a complex license, mixing both free and commercial features and containing field-of-use restrictions, Oracle now provides the JDK under a 100% free and open source license, or under a commercial license for those who wish to purchase a support subscription (and fund the development of OpenJDK). Second, there are no longer major releases, and the new feature releases are similar to the old six-monthly "limited update". JDK 10, 11 and 12 are roughly the same size as 7u2 and 7u4, which also didn't get free security patches after six months. What's changed is the name given to those releases, and to make the updates cheaper and easier, they have been made more gradual, by allowing spec changes in feature releases. Not only do you get security fixes for free forever, but there are no more major upgrades. So the main point of confusion is that some confuse the new feature releases with the old major releases, when, in fact, they are much closer to the old "limited update" releases. People see a new version number, see that that number is not freely supported beyond six months and panic, when, in fact, the old releases that were similar to the new feature releases were also not supported beyond six months. They themselves were considered "updates" to some major release, but major releases no longer exist, and the "updates" now get a new version number. See here [1] for a more complete explanation. In addition, there's another new model, that allows organizations that for some reason need a much less gradual upgrade process than the new one -- and even less gradual than the old one -- and that is something that Oracle charges for. But because the JDK is now completely open source, other OpenJDK members have committed to backporting the fixes to provided a similar step-wise upgrade path for free. (I work on OpenJDK at Oracle, but speak only for myself) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/bav1sy/winter_is_coming_for_java_updates/eke9l7u/ https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/bav1sy/winter_is_comi...

deng 8y ago
Just one data point: our IT has now blocked the whole java.com domain. Oracle Java is now primarily seen as an infection you get through the Java Updater. Yes, I know of OpenJDK and I'm currently in the process of migrating machines to it, but I can assure you the damage to Java is very real.
- pron 8y ago
  OpenJDK is the name of the JDK developed primarily by Oracle. java.com is the website for "consumer-side" Java -- i.e. the desktop JRE. The JRE and "consumer Java" no longer exist (as they've been replaced by jlink), and so the website is out of date and largely irrelevant. I hope someone soon figures out what other use to put it to.
  - deng 8y ago
    You might not like it, but java.com/download is still the first result when searching for Java. I am aware what OpenJDK is and who develops it, and I can handle the changes to our systems just fine, but I'm an engineer, not a manager. I can assure you that the confusion around Java is very real, as well as IT departments worrying about machines updating to a Java version requiring a commercial license.
    - Recurecur 8y ago
      Perhaps your company should hire some competent managers.
    - pron 8y ago
      I don't think that the desktop JRE's autoupdater can automatically update to versions (of the old JDK 8) that now require a commercial license, but I'm not sure. I'll ask. But I understand and agree that communication/websites can and should be clearer/easier to find. EDIT: I asked about the JRE autoupdater, and got this answer: Before update, it will offer to change the license to personal use (or to get a commercial one) or remove the software. It will default to remove. You can also choose not to upgrade and not to remove and keep using an out-of-date version. And if you accidentally remove, you can still get the old free versions from the Java archives.