12 ms·

Oracle checks in -XX:+UnlockCommercialVMOptions in JVM

80 points by spariev 15y ago

asg 15y ago
And so it begins. While this leaves me with an icky feeling, being a java developer, I'm also cognizant of the fact that one of the major criticisms of Sun from the financial markets was that they could not monetize java very well. It'll be interesting to look back in 10 years and see how Java has fared under Oracle.
- Maro 15y ago
  It will fare well for Oracle.
  - pi18n 15y ago
    I was thinking more like farewell to Java
- ColdAsIce 15y ago
  Could it mean more money for us Java developers?
  - nl 15y ago
    Probably not. One way to look at it is like this: Previously, to increase performance of a production Java app you would pay the best Java developer you could find a lot of money to make it run fast. Now, you might still do that, but first you will pay Oracle some licence fee so you can use their commercial JVM options (and good Java developers are likely to insist on using those feature because generally JVM tuning options work very well). That take money out of the budget for Java talent.
    - mseebach 15y ago
      > That take money out of the budget for Java talent. Unlikely: The C# runtime costs money, yet C# devs are as well paid as Java devs.
      - jallmann 15y ago
        The .NET runtime doesn't cost money. The tools to write .NET programs cost money. Some of them.
        mseebach 15y ago
        The .NET runtime is a part of Windows which costs money. Mono falls in the same category as OpenJDK: Not relevant for this discussion.
        thedeuce 15y ago
        if mono and openjdk are not relevant than neither are 0$ unsupported operating systems to run java on, at which point those operating systems cost equivalent $.
        deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
        dextorious 15y ago
        The money Windows cost are nothing compared to Oracle fees. You can buy Windows server editions for less that a developer's week salary. You'll need MUCH MUCH more than that for Oracle.
        mseebach 15y ago
        It's very unlikely that the license to run the commercial JVM will cost the same as a license to run the Oracle DB. These are two very different beasts. In fact, I would guess that the cost of a Windows server license would be something of a benchmark for the price of the commercial JVM license.
      - 15y ago
  - drivingmenuts 15y ago
    Sure, if you have stock in Oracle, otherwise, who knows.
- InclinedPlane 15y ago
  It's interesting to compare this to Microsoft's languages (e.g. C#). They give away the platform (other than the OS, of course) for free and make their money on development tools (Visual Studio, Team Foundation, etc.)
  - qw 15y ago
    They can do that because they have integrated commercial software into the platform. When someone is using .Net, there's a high probability that it will run on a Windows server and probably also use MS SQL. That's where they get their money from. In the Java world they are more likely to use open source alternatives like MySQL and PostgreSQL, rather than Oracle
binarycrusader 15y ago
The important thing to note from the source comments: commercial flags support features for which Oracle charges a fee for production use, though they're free for development and/or evaluation. There's no enforcement mechanism in Hotspot other than that -XX:+UnlockCommercialVMOptions must first be specified in order to use them.
- listrophy 15y ago
  Should read "Currently, there's no enforcement mechanism..."
  - po 15y ago
    They don't need a technical enforcement mechanism. Their enforcement is a pack of license auditors sent into your company to verify compliance.
  - Maro 15y ago
    There's no software enforcement mechanism in the flagship Oracle Enterprise DBMS either. You can download it for free on the web. From http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/Oracle_Licensing http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/Oracle_Licensing: A license is the "right to use" (RTU) the software and not the software itself. If you have a license, you can obtain a copy of the software through whatever means - order, download, use the CDs from your last project, etc. Please note that Oracle doesn't use software keys. You can just install the software and use it. It is up to you and your consciences to license the software before using it.
    - markokocic 15y ago
      Does that means that I can legally use their software free of charge if my conscience doesn't prohibit me from using it unlicensed?
      - toyg 15y ago
        No. Every EULA you'll click through will include some clause restricting usage to 30 days for evaluation purposes, except in a few cases (db client, beta versions, XE edition, Technology Network stuff, Linux etc). And they do enforce that clause as soon as they find you're using any of their stuff. Plus, you need an account on their site to download pretty much anything, so they'll know what you download, and from time to time you might get a call to see how that "reviewing" is going, especially if you are not a customer yet. It makes it very easy for people to get access to software and to learn, however, especially if they're covered by a company who is already a customer.
hapless 15y ago
If nothing else, this proves that Oracle is serious about OpenJDK. If they weren't planning to continue to provide the commercial/patented features under the open source license, why have a gate/switch to disable them ?
mseebach 15y ago
The biggest problem here is the risk of the JVM losing its suitability for large, scalable projects. Currently JVM on Linux is $0 in licenses. No matter what $N is, it's ∞% more than 0, and the added cost of scaling to X servers is X * N, not 0. Plus, of course, the ridiculous, soul sucking calls with a "consultant" who will try to sell you Oracle licenses and insists on being your pal and "how about I come out on Wednesday, these discussions are easier face-to-face" to actually procure the bloody licences - and then sends you an Excel sheet with 15 different term and payment options that you then have to spend an afternoon parsing. Better for a cash-strapped start up to go with something free instead. This is exactly the reason Microsoft has a BizSpark™ programme, and Ruby doesn't.
- mitchty 15y ago
  How exactly does an open source programming language compare to a cloud computing program from Microsoft? I don't really see the link, at all. Or are you equivocating Ruby with Rails running in a cloud platform? Your last sentence doesn't really parse well.
  - xorglorb 15y ago
    BizSpark is a program that gives free Microsoft software to startups and small businesses for three years. From my understanding, it has nothing to do with cloud platforms.
    - georgemcbay 15y ago
      BizSpark members get a bunch of free Azure resources as part of the package, but I would guess that isn't really a big part of the selling point for most who actually use the program.
  - chc 15y ago
    BizSpark is a program to give software free to cash-strapped developers. He's saying that being free gives you a huge boost from grassroots support. Ruby doesn't need to do anything special to get this support because it is already free. The Microsoft stack is commercial, though, so they need to have a whole specialized program just to almost level the playing field.
mreinhold 15y ago
The -XX:+UnlockCommercialVMOptions flag has been removed from OpenJDK (http://j.mp/u9gAJ9 http://j.mp/u9gAJ9). It was pushed to an open repository by mistake.
- lambada 15y ago
  Not sure why this hasn't been upvoted more, especially as it is one of the most relevant posts I've read in this thread.
dalibortopic 15y ago
As Mark Reinhold, Chief Architect for Java SE at Oracle, pointed out on Twitter [0], that patch was meant for Oracle's product VM, a minor fork of OpenJDK, which has "commercial features" just like other vendors' VMs. Since it was checked into OpenJDK by mistake, it has been backed out of OpenJDK again within 24 hours[1]. Some of the key points of Oracle's Java SE strategy[2] are: * Oracle plans to contribute the results of the combined Oracle Java HotSpot and Oracle JRockit JVMs to the OpenJDK project. * The Oracle JDK and Java Runtime Environment (JRE) will continue to be available as free downloads, with no changes to the existing licensing models. If you'd like to learn more about it and the ongoing JVM convergence work, I'd recommend reading Henrik Ståhl's blog post from last year here: http://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/oracles_jvm_strategy http://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/oracles_jvm_strategy - Henrik is Senior Director of Java Product Management at Oracle and runs a group responsible for product strategy for Java SE, among other things. Dalibor Topic, Java F/OSS Ambassador, Java Product Group @ Oracle [0] https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142122264220008448 https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142122264220008448 [1] https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142102137130844161 https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142102137130844161 [2] http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/173782 http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/173782

80 points by spariev 15y ago

asg 15y ago

And so it begins. While this leaves me with an icky feeling, being a java developer, I'm also cognizant of the fact that one of the major criticisms of Sun from the financial markets was that they could not monetize java very well. It'll be interesting to look back in 10 years and see how Java has fared under Oracle.

Maro 15y ago
It will fare well for Oracle.
- pi18n 15y ago
  I was thinking more like farewell to Java
ColdAsIce 15y ago
Could it mean more money for us Java developers?
- nl 15y ago
  Probably not. One way to look at it is like this: Previously, to increase performance of a production Java app you would pay the best Java developer you could find a lot of money to make it run fast. Now, you might still do that, but first you will pay Oracle some licence fee so you can use their commercial JVM options (and good Java developers are likely to insist on using those feature because generally JVM tuning options work very well). That take money out of the budget for Java talent.
  - mseebach 15y ago
    > That take money out of the budget for Java talent. Unlikely: The C# runtime costs money, yet C# devs are as well paid as Java devs.
    - jallmann 15y ago
      The .NET runtime doesn't cost money. The tools to write .NET programs cost money. Some of them.
      - mseebach 15y ago
        The .NET runtime is a part of Windows which costs money. Mono falls in the same category as OpenJDK: Not relevant for this discussion.
        thedeuce 15y ago
        if mono and openjdk are not relevant than neither are 0$ unsupported operating systems to run java on, at which point those operating systems cost equivalent $.
        deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
        dextorious 15y ago
        The money Windows cost are nothing compared to Oracle fees. You can buy Windows server editions for less that a developer's week salary. You'll need MUCH MUCH more than that for Oracle.
        mseebach 15y ago
        It's very unlikely that the license to run the commercial JVM will cost the same as a license to run the Oracle DB. These are two very different beasts. In fact, I would guess that the cost of a Windows server license would be something of a benchmark for the price of the commercial JVM license.
    - 15y ago
- drivingmenuts 15y ago
  Sure, if you have stock in Oracle, otherwise, who knows.
InclinedPlane 15y ago
It's interesting to compare this to Microsoft's languages (e.g. C#). They give away the platform (other than the OS, of course) for free and make their money on development tools (Visual Studio, Team Foundation, etc.)
- qw 15y ago
  They can do that because they have integrated commercial software into the platform. When someone is using .Net, there's a high probability that it will run on a Windows server and probably also use MS SQL. That's where they get their money from. In the Java world they are more likely to use open source alternatives like MySQL and PostgreSQL, rather than Oracle

binarycrusader 15y ago

The important thing to note from the source comments: commercial flags support features for which Oracle charges a fee for production use, though they're free for development and/or evaluation. There's no enforcement mechanism in Hotspot other than that -XX:+UnlockCommercialVMOptions must first be specified in order to use them.

listrophy 15y ago
Should read "Currently, there's no enforcement mechanism..."
- po 15y ago
  They don't need a technical enforcement mechanism. Their enforcement is a pack of license auditors sent into your company to verify compliance.
- Maro 15y ago
  There's no software enforcement mechanism in the flagship Oracle Enterprise DBMS either. You can download it for free on the web. From http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/Oracle_Licensing http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/Oracle_Licensing: A license is the "right to use" (RTU) the software and not the software itself. If you have a license, you can obtain a copy of the software through whatever means - order, download, use the CDs from your last project, etc. Please note that Oracle doesn't use software keys. You can just install the software and use it. It is up to you and your consciences to license the software before using it.
  - markokocic 15y ago
    Does that means that I can legally use their software free of charge if my conscience doesn't prohibit me from using it unlicensed?
    - toyg 15y ago
      No. Every EULA you'll click through will include some clause restricting usage to 30 days for evaluation purposes, except in a few cases (db client, beta versions, XE edition, Technology Network stuff, Linux etc). And they do enforce that clause as soon as they find you're using any of their stuff. Plus, you need an account on their site to download pretty much anything, so they'll know what you download, and from time to time you might get a call to see how that "reviewing" is going, especially if you are not a customer yet. It makes it very easy for people to get access to software and to learn, however, especially if they're covered by a company who is already a customer.

hapless 15y ago

If nothing else, this proves that Oracle is serious about OpenJDK. If they weren't planning to continue to provide the commercial/patented features under the open source license, why have a gate/switch to disable them ?

mseebach 15y ago

The biggest problem here is the risk of the JVM losing its suitability for large, scalable projects. Currently JVM on Linux is $0 in licenses. No matter what $N is, it's ∞% more than 0, and the added cost of scaling to X servers is X * N, not 0. Plus, of course, the ridiculous, soul sucking calls with a "consultant" who will try to sell you Oracle licenses and insists on being your pal and "how about I come out on Wednesday, these discussions are easier face-to-face" to actually procure the bloody licences - and then sends you an Excel sheet with 15 different term and payment options that you then have to spend an afternoon parsing. Better for a cash-strapped start up to go with something free instead. This is exactly the reason Microsoft has a BizSpark™ programme, and Ruby doesn't.

mitchty 15y ago
How exactly does an open source programming language compare to a cloud computing program from Microsoft? I don't really see the link, at all. Or are you equivocating Ruby with Rails running in a cloud platform? Your last sentence doesn't really parse well.
- xorglorb 15y ago
  BizSpark is a program that gives free Microsoft software to startups and small businesses for three years. From my understanding, it has nothing to do with cloud platforms.
  - georgemcbay 15y ago
    BizSpark members get a bunch of free Azure resources as part of the package, but I would guess that isn't really a big part of the selling point for most who actually use the program.
- chc 15y ago
  BizSpark is a program to give software free to cash-strapped developers. He's saying that being free gives you a huge boost from grassroots support. Ruby doesn't need to do anything special to get this support because it is already free. The Microsoft stack is commercial, though, so they need to have a whole specialized program just to almost level the playing field.

mreinhold 15y ago

The -XX:+UnlockCommercialVMOptions flag has been removed from OpenJDK (http://j.mp/u9gAJ9 http://j.mp/u9gAJ9). It was pushed to an open repository by mistake.

lambada 15y ago
Not sure why this hasn't been upvoted more, especially as it is one of the most relevant posts I've read in this thread.

dalibortopic 15y ago

As Mark Reinhold, Chief Architect for Java SE at Oracle, pointed out on Twitter [0], that patch was meant for Oracle's product VM, a minor fork of OpenJDK, which has "commercial features" just like other vendors' VMs. Since it was checked into OpenJDK by mistake, it has been backed out of OpenJDK again within 24 hours[1]. Some of the key points of Oracle's Java SE strategy[2] are: * Oracle plans to contribute the results of the combined Oracle Java HotSpot and Oracle JRockit JVMs to the OpenJDK project. * The Oracle JDK and Java Runtime Environment (JRE) will continue to be available as free downloads, with no changes to the existing licensing models. If you'd like to learn more about it and the ongoing JVM convergence work, I'd recommend reading Henrik Ståhl's blog post from last year here: http://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/oracles_jvm_strategy http://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/oracles_jvm_strategy - Henrik is Senior Director of Java Product Management at Oracle and runs a group responsible for product strategy for Java SE, among other things. Dalibor Topic, Java F/OSS Ambassador, Java Product Group @ Oracle [0] https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142122264220008448 https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142122264220008448 [1] https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142102137130844161 https://twitter.com/#!/mreinhold/status/142102137130844161 [2] http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/173782 http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/press/173782