6 ms·

Oracle certainly wasn't good for Java. But Java-on-the-desktop had been struggling for years before that. You either bundled a complete JVM with your applicati

Oracle certainly wasn't good for Java. But Java-on-the-desktop had been struggling for years before that. You either bundled a complete JVM with your application (fine if you're making a 500MB IDE, not so good for anything smaller) or you had the embarrassment of directing your users to an installer that bundled the Ask toolbar. They might even end up with the security-hole-riddled java browser plugin. And even once the user has java installed, you can't just double-click a jar file to run it. And the performance isn't anything to write home about either, if Eclipse is anything to go by. Java remains a fine choice for use on the server, of course.

biorach 5y ago
...or you had the embarrassment of directing your users to an installer that bundled the Ask toolbar ....the Ask toolbar. Had happily forgotten about that. shudder
lagerstedt 5y ago
You are right in that desktop Java aldready was a mess when Oracle took over. And I agree that distribution was a hassle. At the time it was hard to create standalone .exe or .msi for distribution. Webstart broke so often it was impossible to use outside strictly controlled corporate environments But the bundling of Ask toolbar came about in 2013, so that was definitely Oracles doing.
cryptos 5y ago
In fact Oracle saved Java. Sun was struggling and Java was stagnant at the time. There was hardly any big innovation in the last years under (the) Sun. Java Modules started in the Sun age, but they didn't get it out of the door. J2EE / Java EE was also kind of dozed off. So, while Oracle is for sure not the most sympathetic company, it is good at execution.
- AtlasBarfed 5y ago
  Google or IBM would have been better tjam Oracle. This seems like a false choice: Oracle or nothing. Back when Java/Sun were up for grabs: 1) Google by far (they were less evil back then, I think). I mean, they would have saved money and headaches and probably a lot of distracting management meetings. 2) IBM, well ok: they did Eclipse, had their own JDK, and a lot of enterprise customers on locked platforms that could financially support the language and platform and were decent contributors to Linux. ... .... 3) Really? Oracle? It's a miracle Oracle didn't completely kill Java.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Yes, really Oracle. They were one of the first companies to jump into Java, in fact the first conference talk about Java that we had on the campus back in 1996 was sponsored by Oracle. They also collaborated with Sun on the Network Computer thin clients for Java based computers. In 1999, all Oracle GUIs for their software were converted into Java applications. They also own J/Rockit and BEA, whose core technologies now live on OpenJDK (JFR, JIT Cache, GC) as free beer instead of enterprise prices. IBM already has their own Java, and have done so since forever, including some extensions (AOT is supported since decades), so it is debatable what they would further do, kill OpenJDK and replace it with J9? Given Dart and Go examples, and Android with outsourced everything (language, IDE, messy updates, forked language), thankfully Google doesn't own Java.
    - AtlasBarfed 5y ago
      Don't try to gaslight me that Oracle is some benevolent company and the BEA / etc product suite of Oracle was some grandiose idealistic movement of software. IBM and Oracle have a history of acquiring companies to acquire customers. The difference between the two is that Oracle acquires software so it can sue them. IBM just wants to sell hardware and licenses. Um, yeah, I'll take IBM. Oracle of course jumped on Java. What was the alternative? IBM had DB/2 at the time. Microsoft had SQLServer. That's not some great vision or buy-in with the Java ecosystem, it was just economic calculation. And why did Oracle acquire Java? Oh that's right, they only cared about suing google. There are numerous stories of Oracle asking Sun officials specifically about that potential avenue of litigation, almost to the exclusion of any technical merits or other value to the Java assets. Oracle bundled Ask.com toolbar. End of story. Google would have simply outsourced everything. Win win win.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        Gaslighting?!? No one else bothered to buy Sun, or top Oracle's offer, that is how much the industry cared for Sun. The amount of hate speech people can vomit against Oracle doesn't change that fact. > And why did Oracle acquire Java? Oh that's right, they only cared about suing google. There are numerous stories of Oracle asking Sun officials specifically about that potential avenue of litigation, almost to the exclusion of any technical merits or other value to the Java assets. Sun wanted to sue as well, they already lacked the funds to do that. James Gosling on the matter, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&t=3462s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&t=3462s > Oracle bundled Ask.com toolbar. End of story. Learn your story, Sun did that not Oracle. When Sun was acquired, Java was at version 6, and MaximeVM was a Sun Research Labs project. Now we have Java 17 and MaximeVM graduated into GraalVM. And to re-iterate, no one else, not a single company, bothered to top Oracle's bid. It was definitly end of story for Sun's mismanagement.
- oldsecondhand 5y ago
  2005-2006 brought as generics and EJB3. Quite the opposite of stagnation.
  - cryptos 5y ago
    But Oracle bought Sun (and Java) only in 2009. In the last 3 to 4 years there was not much going on.
  - jsiaajdsdaa 5y ago
    Don't forget quite a few multithreading improvememts!
adamrezich 5y ago
> They might even end up with the security-hole-riddled java browser plugin but at least this would let them play Ski Stunt Simulator...
babypuncher 5y ago
The hassle involved with needing multiple versions of Java on one system also impacts its viability on the desktop. Not a problem if you run your Java-based services in containers that can use their own JRE, but a huge annoyance for kids and budding hobbyists who try to run Spigot and god knows what else on the same computer.
- kaba0 5y ago
  There is not even a JRE anymore, current best practice is to create a platform-specific lean package with jpackage that will only contain the modules that is actually used (decreasing binary size as well startup time). So the current direction is very much away from the old ways.
pjmlp 5y ago
Not good for Java?!? I guess you enjoy being stuck on Java 6 then.

biorach 5y ago

...or you had the embarrassment of directing your users to an installer that bundled the Ask toolbar ....the Ask toolbar. Had happily forgotten about that. shudder

lagerstedt 5y ago

You are right in that desktop Java aldready was a mess when Oracle took over. And I agree that distribution was a hassle. At the time it was hard to create standalone .exe or .msi for distribution. Webstart broke so often it was impossible to use outside strictly controlled corporate environments But the bundling of Ask toolbar came about in 2013, so that was definitely Oracles doing.

cryptos 5y ago

In fact Oracle saved Java. Sun was struggling and Java was stagnant at the time. There was hardly any big innovation in the last years under (the) Sun. Java Modules started in the Sun age, but they didn't get it out of the door. J2EE / Java EE was also kind of dozed off. So, while Oracle is for sure not the most sympathetic company, it is good at execution.

AtlasBarfed 5y ago
Google or IBM would have been better tjam Oracle. This seems like a false choice: Oracle or nothing. Back when Java/Sun were up for grabs: 1) Google by far (they were less evil back then, I think). I mean, they would have saved money and headaches and probably a lot of distracting management meetings. 2) IBM, well ok: they did Eclipse, had their own JDK, and a lot of enterprise customers on locked platforms that could financially support the language and platform and were decent contributors to Linux. ... .... 3) Really? Oracle? It's a miracle Oracle didn't completely kill Java.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Yes, really Oracle. They were one of the first companies to jump into Java, in fact the first conference talk about Java that we had on the campus back in 1996 was sponsored by Oracle. They also collaborated with Sun on the Network Computer thin clients for Java based computers. In 1999, all Oracle GUIs for their software were converted into Java applications. They also own J/Rockit and BEA, whose core technologies now live on OpenJDK (JFR, JIT Cache, GC) as free beer instead of enterprise prices. IBM already has their own Java, and have done so since forever, including some extensions (AOT is supported since decades), so it is debatable what they would further do, kill OpenJDK and replace it with J9? Given Dart and Go examples, and Android with outsourced everything (language, IDE, messy updates, forked language), thankfully Google doesn't own Java.
  - AtlasBarfed 5y ago
    Don't try to gaslight me that Oracle is some benevolent company and the BEA / etc product suite of Oracle was some grandiose idealistic movement of software. IBM and Oracle have a history of acquiring companies to acquire customers. The difference between the two is that Oracle acquires software so it can sue them. IBM just wants to sell hardware and licenses. Um, yeah, I'll take IBM. Oracle of course jumped on Java. What was the alternative? IBM had DB/2 at the time. Microsoft had SQLServer. That's not some great vision or buy-in with the Java ecosystem, it was just economic calculation. And why did Oracle acquire Java? Oh that's right, they only cared about suing google. There are numerous stories of Oracle asking Sun officials specifically about that potential avenue of litigation, almost to the exclusion of any technical merits or other value to the Java assets. Oracle bundled Ask.com toolbar. End of story. Google would have simply outsourced everything. Win win win.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      Gaslighting?!? No one else bothered to buy Sun, or top Oracle's offer, that is how much the industry cared for Sun. The amount of hate speech people can vomit against Oracle doesn't change that fact. > And why did Oracle acquire Java? Oh that's right, they only cared about suing google. There are numerous stories of Oracle asking Sun officials specifically about that potential avenue of litigation, almost to the exclusion of any technical merits or other value to the Java assets. Sun wanted to sue as well, they already lacked the funds to do that. James Gosling on the matter, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&t=3462s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYw3X4RZv6Y&t=3462s > Oracle bundled Ask.com toolbar. End of story. Learn your story, Sun did that not Oracle. When Sun was acquired, Java was at version 6, and MaximeVM was a Sun Research Labs project. Now we have Java 17 and MaximeVM graduated into GraalVM. And to re-iterate, no one else, not a single company, bothered to top Oracle's bid. It was definitly end of story for Sun's mismanagement.
oldsecondhand 5y ago
2005-2006 brought as generics and EJB3. Quite the opposite of stagnation.
- cryptos 5y ago
  But Oracle bought Sun (and Java) only in 2009. In the last 3 to 4 years there was not much going on.
- jsiaajdsdaa 5y ago
  Don't forget quite a few multithreading improvememts!

adamrezich 5y ago

> They might even end up with the security-hole-riddled java browser plugin but at least this would let them play Ski Stunt Simulator...

babypuncher 5y ago

The hassle involved with needing multiple versions of Java on one system also impacts its viability on the desktop. Not a problem if you run your Java-based services in containers that can use their own JRE, but a huge annoyance for kids and budding hobbyists who try to run Spigot and god knows what else on the same computer.

kaba0 5y ago
There is not even a JRE anymore, current best practice is to create a platform-specific lean package with jpackage that will only contain the modules that is actually used (decreasing binary size as well startup time). So the current direction is very much away from the old ways.

pjmlp 5y ago

Not good for Java?!? I guess you enjoy being stuck on Java 6 then.