4 ms·

How is Java more open than C#?

pjmlp 2y ago
Its features are driven by a consortium of Java companies, even if Oracle does the majority of the development. This allows for a spectrum of JVM implementations, where basically any CPU capable of running some form of Java implementation has a JDK available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines Likewise, most frameworks are driven by set of companies, based on industry standards, where .NET due to its culture, most Microsoft shops tend to only adopt what comes from Microsoft. It is a long discussion problem in the .NET community that when many FOSS projects finally manage to get enterprise adoption, Microsoft ends up coming with their own solution, which said enterprises then switch to, thus killing those FOSS efforts. Listen to big podcasts like .NET Rocks, where this tends to be often discussed with their guests.
- naasking 2y ago
  I don't see how any of that means that C# is less open. Microsoft drives C# feature evolution from community feedback, so is that less open than a consortium of commercial interests? Does Microsoft somehow prevent anyone from developing a CLR implementation for CPUs they don't support? The only reason the JVM is everywhere is because they had first-mover advantage. How does Microsoft developing their own solution to a problem "kill" FOSS efforts, exactly? Microsoft's solutions are almost all also FOSS. Is competition some kind of inherent problem? Or is a large corporation creating and maintaining FOSS a problem? Why aren't you annoyed at those enterprises that started adopting the original FOSS projects, but didn't contribute dev time to maintaining them? Instead you're annoyed at Microsoft for creating its own FOSS and paying to maintain it for the community for free. I just find most objections to .NET so bizarre, it's almost always knee-jerk Microsoft hate.
  - taylodl 2y ago
    It's been 25 years since the release of C# and 30 since the release of Java. The fact C# isn't everywhere Java is has nothing to do with "first-mover advantage" as you call it but is due to the fact that C# is open-source software, which is not the same as Free Software. Java, even Oracle's Java, is controlled by the community; .NET is controlled by Microsoft. That's the difference.
    - naasking 2y ago
      C# and VB compiler suite, MIT license: https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn .NET virtual machine, MIT license: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime https://github.com/dotnet/runtime SDK, MIT license: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk https://github.com/dotnet/sdk You were saying?
      - taylodl 2y ago
        It's Microsoft-driven, not community-driven. For the past 25 years the Microsoft camp has either never understood, or hasn't cared about, that distinction.
        naasking 2y ago
        Each of those links shows thousands of contributors not connected to Microsoft, but do go on believing there's no community, or that it's a terrible thing that people rely on Microsoft to produce a free, open source, solid product they can depend on. That's the reason it's Microsoft-driven, because they've mostly been doing just fine as a steward, and it being MIT licensed means MS knows the community can take over if they step too far out of line.
        taylodl 2y ago
        Not the point. Who's leading? That's the point. Not impressed with your example of a corporate behemoth using free labor. That's the wrong kind of Free.
        naasking 2y ago
        > Not the point. Who's leading? That's the point. No, the point is, who cares as long as everyone is happy with the direction?
        taylodl 2y ago
        Not quite the same thing though, is it? And if you're not happy with the direction then you're stuck.
  - cess11 2y ago
    Why would MICROS~1 hate be something bizarre? I find such hate quite understandable. I might not share it, but I would not put any trust in MICROS~1 either, especially not in a professional setting. When I develop applications for MICROS~1 platforms, I do it in Java, betting that the Eclipse foundation and a plethora of corporations, including MICROS~1, aren't going to suddenly team up and do something nasty to the language and important libraries. With MICROS~1 as the lone manager of a language and most of its 'ecosystem' this seems like a real risk.
    - naasking 2y ago
      > With MICROS~1 as the lone manager of a language and most of its 'ecosystem' this seems like a real risk. Why? All of the code is MIT licensed. If MS does anything untoward, forking it is trivial.
      - cess11 2y ago
        Sure. Organising a community to care for the fork is not.
        naasking 2y ago
        Ximian and Mono were built almost immediately after .NET was released and provided a decent multiplatform community-supported alternative for years, but you somehow think that forking an existing and working codebase would be more difficult than a completely independent reimplementation? Look, there are obvious differences in how Java and the JVM are maintained and evolved as compared to .NET, but to continue claiming that these differences really matter all that much is just FUD, to put it politely.
        cess11 2y ago
        I made no such comparison. No, it's not. Is Mono independent today?
  - Nullabillity 2y ago
    So far I haven't had jdb refuse to open because it wasn't running inside of an Oracle-provided mystery meat build of NetBeans.
- nickpsecurity 2y ago
  Oracle’s lawsuits, esp copyrightable API’s, makes me default on staying away from anything they make. I’d leave any platform they acquire, too. There’s many open platforms whose owners or backers aren’t as aggressive in lawsuits as Oracle is. Many have strong communities of contributors, too. The only reason I’d use or contribute to Oracle I.P. is if I was paid to do so. The other is porting off Java but that’s legally risky if minima changes. CPAChecker was the one I was thinking of. Past that, I’d try to avoid Java.

Its features are driven by a consortium of Java companies, even if Oracle does the majority of the development. This allows for a spectrum of JVM implementations, where basically any CPU capable of running some form of Java implementation has a JDK available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines Likewise, most frameworks are driven by set of companies, based on industry standards, where .NET due to its culture, most Microsoft shops tend to only adopt what comes from Microsoft. It is a long discussion problem in the .NET community that when many FOSS projects finally manage to get enterprise adoption, Microsoft ends up coming with their own solution, which said enterprises then switch to, thus killing those FOSS efforts. Listen to big podcasts like .NET Rocks, where this tends to be often discussed with their guests.

naasking 2y ago
I don't see how any of that means that C# is less open. Microsoft drives C# feature evolution from community feedback, so is that less open than a consortium of commercial interests? Does Microsoft somehow prevent anyone from developing a CLR implementation for CPUs they don't support? The only reason the JVM is everywhere is because they had first-mover advantage. How does Microsoft developing their own solution to a problem "kill" FOSS efforts, exactly? Microsoft's solutions are almost all also FOSS. Is competition some kind of inherent problem? Or is a large corporation creating and maintaining FOSS a problem? Why aren't you annoyed at those enterprises that started adopting the original FOSS projects, but didn't contribute dev time to maintaining them? Instead you're annoyed at Microsoft for creating its own FOSS and paying to maintain it for the community for free. I just find most objections to .NET so bizarre, it's almost always knee-jerk Microsoft hate.
- taylodl 2y ago
  It's been 25 years since the release of C# and 30 since the release of Java. The fact C# isn't everywhere Java is has nothing to do with "first-mover advantage" as you call it but is due to the fact that C# is open-source software, which is not the same as Free Software. Java, even Oracle's Java, is controlled by the community; .NET is controlled by Microsoft. That's the difference.
  - naasking 2y ago
    C# and VB compiler suite, MIT license: https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn .NET virtual machine, MIT license: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime https://github.com/dotnet/runtime SDK, MIT license: https://github.com/dotnet/sdk https://github.com/dotnet/sdk You were saying?
    - taylodl 2y ago
      It's Microsoft-driven, not community-driven. For the past 25 years the Microsoft camp has either never understood, or hasn't cared about, that distinction.
      - naasking 2y ago
        Each of those links shows thousands of contributors not connected to Microsoft, but do go on believing there's no community, or that it's a terrible thing that people rely on Microsoft to produce a free, open source, solid product they can depend on. That's the reason it's Microsoft-driven, because they've mostly been doing just fine as a steward, and it being MIT licensed means MS knows the community can take over if they step too far out of line.
        taylodl 2y ago
        Not the point. Who's leading? That's the point. Not impressed with your example of a corporate behemoth using free labor. That's the wrong kind of Free.
        naasking 2y ago
        > Not the point. Who's leading? That's the point. No, the point is, who cares as long as everyone is happy with the direction?
        taylodl 2y ago
        Not quite the same thing though, is it? And if you're not happy with the direction then you're stuck.
- cess11 2y ago
  Why would MICROS~1 hate be something bizarre? I find such hate quite understandable. I might not share it, but I would not put any trust in MICROS~1 either, especially not in a professional setting. When I develop applications for MICROS~1 platforms, I do it in Java, betting that the Eclipse foundation and a plethora of corporations, including MICROS~1, aren't going to suddenly team up and do something nasty to the language and important libraries. With MICROS~1 as the lone manager of a language and most of its 'ecosystem' this seems like a real risk.
  - naasking 2y ago
    > With MICROS~1 as the lone manager of a language and most of its 'ecosystem' this seems like a real risk. Why? All of the code is MIT licensed. If MS does anything untoward, forking it is trivial.
    - cess11 2y ago
      Sure. Organising a community to care for the fork is not.
      - naasking 2y ago
        Ximian and Mono were built almost immediately after .NET was released and provided a decent multiplatform community-supported alternative for years, but you somehow think that forking an existing and working codebase would be more difficult than a completely independent reimplementation? Look, there are obvious differences in how Java and the JVM are maintained and evolved as compared to .NET, but to continue claiming that these differences really matter all that much is just FUD, to put it politely.
        cess11 2y ago
        I made no such comparison. No, it's not. Is Mono independent today?
- Nullabillity 2y ago
  So far I haven't had jdb refuse to open because it wasn't running inside of an Oracle-provided mystery meat build of NetBeans.
nickpsecurity 2y ago
Oracle’s lawsuits, esp copyrightable API’s, makes me default on staying away from anything they make. I’d leave any platform they acquire, too. There’s many open platforms whose owners or backers aren’t as aggressive in lawsuits as Oracle is. Many have strong communities of contributors, too. The only reason I’d use or contribute to Oracle I.P. is if I was paid to do so. The other is porting off Java but that’s legally risky if minima changes. CPAChecker was the one I was thinking of. Past that, I’d try to avoid Java.