Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature: Java
Sun's new licenses: 'Closed open source'
By Chris Preimesberger
on
March 17, 2005 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
Sun Microsystems inched closer to a full open source release of Java code Wednesday but, to the surprise of no one, stopped just short of such a landmark deal. Ultimately what transpired -- as explained to media members and analysts via conference call -- was that the Santa Clara, Calif.-based hardware and software company has merely fine-tuned its stance on Java licensing and is finishing up a trio of new, simplified licenses as evidence of its intent to simplify the legalities of enterprise application development.
Sun announced the availability of a new Java Research License (for academics and researchers), designed for those who want to experiment with changes to Java 2, Standard Edition (J2SE) 5.0, which will ultimately become J2SE 6.0, scheduled to ship in 2006.
Sun also announced that it is in the final phases of issuing two new general Java licenses, JIUL (Java Internal Use License, pronounced "Jewel"), and the Java Distribution License (JDL), both for use with Java source code. The three new licenses will make obsolete the well-entrenched Sun Community Source License (SCSL), the complexity of which has frustrated IT managers and developers for years.
The JRL is available now. The JIUL and JDL are expected to be ready in late April.
"[SCSL] was intended to be the wonderfully perfect license, designed to cover all cases," Sun vice president of Java Graham Hamilton said. "The problem was, everything was all wrapped up in one enormous license, and if you would hire battalions of lawyers, you would find that the license was great. The trouble is, most people don't want to hire battalions of lawyers and find SCSL is too complicated, so there hasn't been much adoption."
Companies will still need a lawyer to understand the JDL, which is the full commercial license for the Java platform, Hamilton said. But it is "much easier to interpret than the SCSL," he added. The JDL includes the Java Compatibility Test, which ensures congruency with other Java implementations.
"The J2SE code will be open and available for all to look at and play with," Hamilton said. "But we also expect people to contribute [to the continued development of the platform]."
Under the JIUL, developers may modify Java source code free of charge, but only for internal company use. The JIUL will operate on an honor system, Hamilton said: Any applications developed must retain Sun's standard-spec J2SE compatibility; the difference is that users will be trusted to ensure that compatibility, and that Sun won't be going around to users to check up.
"There is always a risk of Java forking because of this new approach," but the company is allowing users to take that risk, Hamilton said.
Sun Fellow and Java creator Dr. James Gosling had a few choice words to say about open source licenses in general during the teleconference.
"It's amazing how complicated most open source licenses really are," Gosling said. "And there's a growing number of them -- and they're all hard to decipher. Maybe I'm just an amused armchair quarterback, but I think it's funny, sitting where I am, having watched Sun get all the grief for supposedly complicated licenses, when you consider how truly gnarly some of these open source licenses are. They started out simply, like the BSD license, then the Stallman license ... then they all kind of swirled together. Now some of them have 'contamination' clauses in them -- the GPL is the poster child for that," Gosling said.
"They're causing so much chaos in companies, who tell me: "[Open source licenses] are just too vague. I can't tell you what they mean. A court of law couldn't figure this out.' It's just a mess, and they're going to be a heartache for years to come."
Gosling then explained Sun's position -- again.
"The reason we can't go full open source is a complicated one," Gosling said. "This has always been a difficult road for us to travel. We want to work with the [open source] community, the JCP, and customers, but everybody comes at this from a different angle. When you go out and talk to [corporate] people about these humongous enterprise applications, they want to know that what you sell them will do what it says it will do. They want to know what went into [the development], what kind of testing it's had ... there's no way to know all this in most open source apps.
"Now the Linux kernel and Apache have gained that trust over a number of years -- they're exceptional. But most other open source projects haven't gained that trust yet. Large corporations with these amazingly huge and complicated systems don't want to hear: 'Well, I tested it myself and it seems to work OK for me,' or 'Hi, a bunch of my friends tested it and it worked OK.'"
Gosling described Sun's approach as "closed open source."
"When your company is billing billions of dollars' worth of transactions every day, like an Amazon, credit card company, or whatever, that software has got to work right the first time and every time. In those kinds of situations, small problems can be magnified into tremendously big problems. This is why the issue of testing is gigantic," Gosling said.
Comments
on Sun's new licenses: 'Closed open source'Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
i walked away from java and picked up python. i'm happy. my fingers are happy. my eyes are happy.
i'm not going back.
too true.
the java "platform" is way too bureaucratic for hacker types who just want to get er done. i think it appeals more to lawyers and managers than it does to actual programmers.
Screw Java, I've moved on to Python as well.
Python is awesome.
<A HREF="http://www.python.org/" title="python.org">Python site</a python.org>
<A HREF="http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld/" title="freenetpages.co.uk">Easy Python tutorial</a freenetpages.co.uk>
<A HREF="http://www.hetland.org/python/instant-hacking.php" title="hetland.org">Another easy Python tutorial</a hetland.org>
<A HREF="http://docs.python.org/tut/tut.html" title="python.org">Python tutorial</a python.org>
<A HREF="http://www.cs.usfca.edu/~afedosov/qttut/" title="usfca.edu">Python/QT GUI tutorial</a usfca.edu>
<A HREF="http://www.python.org/" title="python.org">Python site</a python.org>
<A HREF="http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld/" title="freenetpages.co.uk">Easy Python tutorial</a freenetpages.co.uk>
<A HREF="http://www.hetland.org/python/instant-hacking.php" title="hetland.org">Another easy Python tutorial</a hetland.org>
<A HREF="http://docs.python.org/tut/tut.html" title="python.org">Python tutorial</a python.org>
<A HREF="http://www.cs.usfca.edu/~afedosov/qttut/" title="usfca.edu">Python/QT GUI tutorial</a usfca.edu>
Is Python able to fully replace Java?
What I mean is; could I use Python as a solution to every single problem that Java could solve for me?
This is an honest question, I don't support (or know or even work with) either language, yet.
What I mean is; could I use Python as a solution to every single problem that Java could solve for me?
This is an honest question, I don't support (or know or even work with) either language, yet.
Probably.
There are also a few things that Python lets you do, but that Java doesn't support too well. Ex: You can code some speed-critical portion of a program in C and then have Python interface with it.
There are probably a few dozen comparisons out there if you're looking for more.
There are also a few things that Python lets you do, but that Java doesn't support too well. Ex: You can code some speed-critical portion of a program in C and then have Python interface with it.
There are probably a few dozen comparisons out there if you're looking for more.
Maybe you have not heard of JNI
there is no objective answer to that question, so i'll proffer this: programmers solve problems, not languages.
Libraries are more important than languages. I'll wager that majority of the development resources Sun has spent on Java have been on library development. Debates about language syntax are trivial in comparison... who cares? Get a good editor to help smooth over the parts you don't like.
Libraries only get you so far. If a library does everything you're going to do, why write a line of code? If it does not then you need to use the language and it's not only matter of syntax. There are problems which would be much easier solved if you could use multiple inheritance, multiple dispatch, containers that really work with multiple types of objects (at the same time), any editor or IDE is not going to smooth out these bumps, it's going to take your time, nerves and hair pulling.
There are much more advanced and programmer friendly languages out there, you should definitely check them out (take a look at perl, python, lisp, ruby, factor), especially languages with metaprogramming abilities and interactive development (REPL). Writing libraries with them is like resting (not that many of them have pretty extensive set of libraries already).
- SVuori
There are much more advanced and programmer friendly languages out there, you should definitely check them out (take a look at perl, python, lisp, ruby, factor), especially languages with metaprogramming abilities and interactive development (REPL). Writing libraries with them is like resting (not that many of them have pretty extensive set of libraries already).
- SVuori
I'd also recommend "Dive Into Python", a book that is available both <A HREF="http://diveintopython.org/" title="diveintopython.org">online</a diveintopython.org> as well as in print form. It assumes you already have some programming experience with other languages (ie: know what a variable does).
Python is nice for some things if you don't write business database software and don't need mature middleware. Find me the Python equivalent of Spring, Hibernate, and most of the Apache/Jakarta tools, and I'll switch away from Java tomorrow. Until then, realize that Python just isn't ready yet for serious business applications. If your response to that assertion is "try Zope" then you simply don't understand what the needs are.
sun's action of late are getting really fishy these days..
i hope Sun's moving away from linux has no effect on OO.o whatsoever<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
i hope Sun's moving away from linux has no effect on OO.o whatsoever<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
How about asking that question, editingwiz?
To summarize: when will I be able to 'apt-get install' the latest Sun Java?
To summarize: when will I be able to 'apt-get install' the latest Sun Java?
To install it on Linux, we have always had to download the distribution separately and then run the distro's install.
Under this new license, will the install program be able to download Java for us, just like every other bit of software out there?
Under this new license, will the install program be able to download Java for us, just like every other bit of software out there?
Yeah.. can I just have some nice easy Debian packages I can point to in my sources.list? Yes, I know about Blackdown, but I want the latest Sun JDK auto-downloaded and auto-upgraded.
There is no such thing as "open source". It's just a propaganda designed to sell your soul to the devil.
People, wake up! Java is bad. If it's not bad for you, it will be, sooner or later. Guaranteed.
Use Python.
People, wake up! Java is bad. If it's not bad for you, it will be, sooner or later. Guaranteed.
Use Python.
It appears to me that the main reason Sun doesn't much like the GPL is that they can't appropriate someone else's hard work, and claim it as their own. They certainly don't want to share their toys with the other children, but they expect others to share with them.
You can't have the advantages of FOSS without paying the price for it, and that price is sharing. At least Microsoft (with its<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET) isn't pretending to be something it's not. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with proprietary software. I just have a problem with someone pretending that something's not proprietary, when it clearly is.
You can't have the advantages of FOSS without paying the price for it, and that price is sharing. At least Microsoft (with its<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET) isn't pretending to be something it's not. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with proprietary software. I just have a problem with someone pretending that something's not proprietary, when it clearly is.
Re:What's Mine Is Mine & What's Yours Is Mine,
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on March 18, 2005 12:48 AM
I don't understand... they're not claiming they've made Java open source. Are you saying the license has to be all or nothing? I don't agree with you on that.
Re:What's Mine Is Mine & What's Yours Is Mine,
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on March 19, 2005 02:51 AM
I watched Sun use the same 'open source' model on their hardware for about ten years. The hardware specs for sparc chips were always open, but the latest o/s releases only ran on hardware bought from Sun. The other non-sun hardware systems had to be 'certified'.
What does he mean with the GPL being a posterchild for contaminated free software licenses?
Seriously, in what way is the GPL faulty, or even hard to understand?
Seriously, in what way is the GPL faulty, or even hard to understand?
The GPL is intended to strip you of your freedom to keep your changes private. True freedom would allow all to do as they pleased (ala BSD).
Not true - you can keep the changes private but you cannot distribute them without disclosing the sources. Please stop FUDing.
The more I hear from Sun exec's (including Gosling), the less I care about Sun and any of their products. They talk big. That's about the only way most people will ever even notice them.
I'm an owner of a Sparc box, and a longtime user of Solaris.
I'm an owner of a Sparc box, and a longtime user of Solaris.
It also sounds like they Don't Get It in respect to open source, that they're shooting for a short marketing boost rather than any real longetivity for the project itself.
It does seem that Sun knows the right thing to do. They know that infrastructure components should be open and they've opened up many of their projects in the past. They've done the right thing with OOo: they dual-license it and sell and support a closed-source product based on the OOo code.
So why won't they just do that with Java?
I wish they would quit all this ridiculous PR BS and just answer that question honestly. I mean, if the answer is 'we need the money' I could respect that a lot more than all this posturing. Sheesh.
So why won't they just do that with Java?
I wish they would quit all this ridiculous PR BS and just answer that question honestly. I mean, if the answer is 'we need the money' I could respect that a lot more than all this posturing. Sheesh.
Complicated? Nice propaganda Sun. The GPL is simple. You can make changes to the source code and keep the changes secret as long as you don't distribute the code outside your organization. If however, you decide to use the hard work of others as a basis for your own work which would not work without the base of the GPL'd work, then you must distribute the resulting code along with the application or hardware that you include the code with.
You are free to do the work of creating an operating system yourself, or whatever GPL'd work you'd like to use, or you can pay others to do it. If so, then you can release the work under whatever license you wish, as Sun has done. If you don't want to do this and want to use GPL'd work instead, then as part of the bargain of freely using thousands or tens of thousands of other people's work, you must allow your work to be freely used by others. Don't like it? Don't use the GPL'd code. Or use it, but only within your organization without distributing it. Very simple.
As to why Sun can't go "full" open source, it isn't complicated either. They don't want to GPL their work. That's it. Very simple. They don't want to make their software Free Software. They want it to appear "open", when in fact it is not. So they use a tortured term like "closed open source". If it weren't so sad, it'd be funny. But the only thing it really is, is predictable. As I predicted Sun would never release Solaris under the GPL <A HREF="http://newsvac.newsforge.com/comments.pl?sid=42356&cid=102518" title="newsforge.com">here</a newsforge.com> on 11/29/04, well before they made any announcement about the actual license and while they were posting that they were "open sourcing" Solaris. At that time they didn't state that they would need to redefine open source as "closed open source" to fit into their newly expanded definition of open source.
That Sun couldn't bring themselves to open source (in the true sense of the phrase) Java is no suprise, they had the same problem with Solaris.
The bottom line is that Sun is doomed. I'll repost that November '04 post, as well as another separately so it doesn't get cut off.
You are free to do the work of creating an operating system yourself, or whatever GPL'd work you'd like to use, or you can pay others to do it. If so, then you can release the work under whatever license you wish, as Sun has done. If you don't want to do this and want to use GPL'd work instead, then as part of the bargain of freely using thousands or tens of thousands of other people's work, you must allow your work to be freely used by others. Don't like it? Don't use the GPL'd code. Or use it, but only within your organization without distributing it. Very simple.
As to why Sun can't go "full" open source, it isn't complicated either. They don't want to GPL their work. That's it. Very simple. They don't want to make their software Free Software. They want it to appear "open", when in fact it is not. So they use a tortured term like "closed open source". If it weren't so sad, it'd be funny. But the only thing it really is, is predictable. As I predicted Sun would never release Solaris under the GPL <A HREF="http://newsvac.newsforge.com/comments.pl?sid=42356&cid=102518" title="newsforge.com">here</a newsforge.com> on 11/29/04, well before they made any announcement about the actual license and while they were posting that they were "open sourcing" Solaris. At that time they didn't state that they would need to redefine open source as "closed open source" to fit into their newly expanded definition of open source.
That Sun couldn't bring themselves to open source (in the true sense of the phrase) Java is no suprise, they had the same problem with Solaris.
The bottom line is that Sun is doomed. I'll repost that November '04 post, as well as another separately so it doesn't get cut off.
and so is any company that makes the mistake of adopting Sun for their enterprise, be it Solaris, or Linux on Sun.
The only thing one can expect in relying on Sun for their computing infrastructure is that if you continue to resist Linux and adopt or stay with Solaris, you will be choosing a company that is dropping down the ladder in sales and number of units every quarter. Every quarter. Dell has surpassed them in number of units, and depending on the analyst, Dell has surpassed them this past quarter, or will surpass them this current quarter in revenue.
What I'd like to see is the massive discounting and deal-making that went on during the last few weeks prior to the quarter closing (posted in 11/04, so prior quarter to that date) where Scott and Jonathan went apeshit trying to boost the numbers to make sure they didn't close the quarter with another quarter of declining revenue. Props. They made it with a couple of million to spare. That's why they make the big money.
What hasn't changed is that Sun continues to regard Linux as a jalopy. And their plan of attack is to sow FUD about Red Hat, the distro company with the highest market share in the US (as has been made even clearer in recent weeks/months), and close to the highest or the highest in Europe and other markets. And to sow FUD about IBM because they are using the Red Hat distro in the majority of their computer sales (again, as has been made clearer in their more recent attacks on IBM and this alliance thing with EDS and Microsoft against IBM). If Suse/Novell were the market leaders, every comment they'd be making right now would be attacking and sowing FUD about Suse/Novell instead of Red Hat.
What hasn't changed is that Sun is going to continue selling Linux if customers really, really, really want it. And once they succeed in drawing you into their web, they will be continually trying to upsell (in their own minds) you to Solaris.
Open source Solaris? Where is it? Oh, later. Right. (had to come out with their own new license because of how distasteful the GPL was to them, and now the same move with Java). Let's look at a few other open source examples. We have BSD which is going nowhere under a BSD license (sorry BSD users). And we have Apple. Great OS for schools. Great for mom.
Solaris will never be released with a GPL license (was I right, or was I right? Or was I right?). And because of that, Solaris is doomed to failure. GNU/Linux is unstoppable. GNU/Linux is the juggernaut, and Scott and Jonathan are the pavement that GNU/Linux will ride over. Hopefully Sun's employees won't ride the Sun jalopy into the ground. Now's the time to refresh those resumes. Now's the time to start making phone calls. Because if you wait for another mass layoff the next time Sun is in danger of screwing up a quarter (prediction: more bad news soon), you'll be competing with your co-workers for the same jobs. The GNU/Linux community will welcome you into the fold, since we've stolen millions of lines of code from the same code base that Sun used, so we're hacking the same code. The door is still open. Don't wait too long. Sun is doomed, and you know it. You've got to face the facts. The world is adopting GNU/Linux, not Solaris. Double digit increases every quarter for years. And going forward it will be the same thing. For years. Don't wait. When you get home today, start working on that resume. Start looking for phone numbers. Start making calls. Scott and Jonathan are already set for life. Are you? If not, don't wait for destiny. Make your own destiny. A job at Sun was good while it lasted. And will be great on your resume. Unless/until Sun implodes on further declining revenue, further declining unit shipments, further declining market share, further declining profits. What kind of respect will Sun have when Fujitsu overtakes them?
Now's the time, Sun engineers. Pick up the phone and make the move to the GNU/Linux community. Do it. Today. It will be the greatest move you've ever made.
The only thing one can expect in relying on Sun for their computing infrastructure is that if you continue to resist Linux and adopt or stay with Solaris, you will be choosing a company that is dropping down the ladder in sales and number of units every quarter. Every quarter. Dell has surpassed them in number of units, and depending on the analyst, Dell has surpassed them this past quarter, or will surpass them this current quarter in revenue.
What I'd like to see is the massive discounting and deal-making that went on during the last few weeks prior to the quarter closing (posted in 11/04, so prior quarter to that date) where Scott and Jonathan went apeshit trying to boost the numbers to make sure they didn't close the quarter with another quarter of declining revenue. Props. They made it with a couple of million to spare. That's why they make the big money.
What hasn't changed is that Sun continues to regard Linux as a jalopy. And their plan of attack is to sow FUD about Red Hat, the distro company with the highest market share in the US (as has been made even clearer in recent weeks/months), and close to the highest or the highest in Europe and other markets. And to sow FUD about IBM because they are using the Red Hat distro in the majority of their computer sales (again, as has been made clearer in their more recent attacks on IBM and this alliance thing with EDS and Microsoft against IBM). If Suse/Novell were the market leaders, every comment they'd be making right now would be attacking and sowing FUD about Suse/Novell instead of Red Hat.
What hasn't changed is that Sun is going to continue selling Linux if customers really, really, really want it. And once they succeed in drawing you into their web, they will be continually trying to upsell (in their own minds) you to Solaris.
Open source Solaris? Where is it? Oh, later. Right. (had to come out with their own new license because of how distasteful the GPL was to them, and now the same move with Java). Let's look at a few other open source examples. We have BSD which is going nowhere under a BSD license (sorry BSD users). And we have Apple. Great OS for schools. Great for mom.
Solaris will never be released with a GPL license (was I right, or was I right? Or was I right?). And because of that, Solaris is doomed to failure. GNU/Linux is unstoppable. GNU/Linux is the juggernaut, and Scott and Jonathan are the pavement that GNU/Linux will ride over. Hopefully Sun's employees won't ride the Sun jalopy into the ground. Now's the time to refresh those resumes. Now's the time to start making phone calls. Because if you wait for another mass layoff the next time Sun is in danger of screwing up a quarter (prediction: more bad news soon), you'll be competing with your co-workers for the same jobs. The GNU/Linux community will welcome you into the fold, since we've stolen millions of lines of code from the same code base that Sun used, so we're hacking the same code. The door is still open. Don't wait too long. Sun is doomed, and you know it. You've got to face the facts. The world is adopting GNU/Linux, not Solaris. Double digit increases every quarter for years. And going forward it will be the same thing. For years. Don't wait. When you get home today, start working on that resume. Start looking for phone numbers. Start making calls. Scott and Jonathan are already set for life. Are you? If not, don't wait for destiny. Make your own destiny. A job at Sun was good while it lasted. And will be great on your resume. Unless/until Sun implodes on further declining revenue, further declining unit shipments, further declining market share, further declining profits. What kind of respect will Sun have when Fujitsu overtakes them?
Now's the time, Sun engineers. Pick up the phone and make the move to the GNU/Linux community. Do it. Today. It will be the greatest move you've ever made.
and so will your company be doomed if you make the mistake of implementing or sticking with Sun's Solaris, Java or hardware solutions. Doomed. Sun's selling of Linux is only because they're former or about to be former customers are insisting on it or will walk away. So they'll sell you Linux if you really, really want it. But they'll still try to convince you of the error of your ways, and will still pester you to buy Solaris over the life of the hardware you buy.
Do you really want to trust your business in their Solaris focused and pushed environment? Their "closed open source" environment? Do you really want to trust your business with a company attempting to undermine Linux and FOSS at every opportunity? Do you really want to get stuck with a company and operating system that is not supported or sold by any other major hardware manufacturer? Even when their revenue continues to decline? Or invest considerable time, effort and development funds into "closed open source" Java?
The world is migrating to...fill in the blank here. Are you going to join the rest of the world, or join Sun on their little island? An island that has a tidal wave headed in its direction?
Are you going to use or continue to use Solaris and/or Java and <A HREF="http://news.com.com/Developers+slam+Microsofts+Visual+Basic+plan/2100-1007_3-5615331.html?tag=nefd.top" title="com.com">end up in this situation</a com.com>? Or are you going to give your company every opportunity to succeed by moving to a truly open system with developers all over the world? Are you going to make the move now and get an edge on the laggards? Or are you going to be a laggard and watch as your competitors overtake you and your company? Do you want to go down in company history and tech history as a leader who made the right move? Or as a colossal idiot who blew it monumentally?
What's it going to be? Strong and smart leader who deserves the credit? Or the guy everyone points to and whispers about when the blame is layed for the failure of the company's IT backbone, or the failure of portability when Sun 1. jacks prices to meet their numbers one last time, 2. drops more and more support/developers, 3. fades away or implodes?
What are you going to do, make the right decision, or the wrong decision. Sun is doomed. You know it and I know it. Soon enough, every CEO and President will also know it, or be forced to admit it. And then where will you be?
Sun is the next SCO. A shell of a company used as a prop for their litigation machine. Will your company be a shell of its former self too?
And for the litigation machine, all the former (including earlier posts above) is opinion only. Opinion that by judging of dates of past posts and events that actually unfold after the posts were made, appear to be extremely accurate.
Do you really want to trust your business in their Solaris focused and pushed environment? Their "closed open source" environment? Do you really want to trust your business with a company attempting to undermine Linux and FOSS at every opportunity? Do you really want to get stuck with a company and operating system that is not supported or sold by any other major hardware manufacturer? Even when their revenue continues to decline? Or invest considerable time, effort and development funds into "closed open source" Java?
The world is migrating to...fill in the blank here. Are you going to join the rest of the world, or join Sun on their little island? An island that has a tidal wave headed in its direction?
Are you going to use or continue to use Solaris and/or Java and <A HREF="http://news.com.com/Developers+slam+Microsofts+Visual+Basic+plan/2100-1007_3-5615331.html?tag=nefd.top" title="com.com">end up in this situation</a com.com>? Or are you going to give your company every opportunity to succeed by moving to a truly open system with developers all over the world? Are you going to make the move now and get an edge on the laggards? Or are you going to be a laggard and watch as your competitors overtake you and your company? Do you want to go down in company history and tech history as a leader who made the right move? Or as a colossal idiot who blew it monumentally?
What's it going to be? Strong and smart leader who deserves the credit? Or the guy everyone points to and whispers about when the blame is layed for the failure of the company's IT backbone, or the failure of portability when Sun 1. jacks prices to meet their numbers one last time, 2. drops more and more support/developers, 3. fades away or implodes?
What are you going to do, make the right decision, or the wrong decision. Sun is doomed. You know it and I know it. Soon enough, every CEO and President will also know it, or be forced to admit it. And then where will you be?
Sun is the next SCO. A shell of a company used as a prop for their litigation machine. Will your company be a shell of its former self too?
And for the litigation machine, all the former (including earlier posts above) is opinion only. Opinion that by judging of dates of past posts and events that actually unfold after the posts were made, appear to be extremely accurate.
What do you think of the OpenOffice project that Sun gave to the FOSS world? Ever get a chance to use it?
Or maybe this is a case of "thanks ma'am, now I've got everything I need so you'd better get lost"?
Or maybe this is a case of "thanks ma'am, now I've got everything I need so you'd better get lost"?
If all Sun fans have to fall back on is OpenOffice, it's not much. How about addressing the points in the post instead, including the call on the license for Solaris and how that decision is coloring their subsequent decisions on licensing?
OpenOffice is a great OPEN SOURCE project. Not a "closed open source" project, but an open source project.
What I find disturbing is how Sun fans will run to Sun's defense (or in similar examples with Microsoft fans and Microsoft) by pulling a single example out of a much more problematic history to justify their support for a failed or failing company that is lashing out at other business models or development models to elevate themselves in their own eyes and the eyes of their fan base.
OpenOffice, or what was formerly known as Star, is the Hail Mary pass by Sun. Using their extensive marketing research and feedback (and a lot of other information sources including their own sales force feedback) they were able to see the writing on the wall years ago. They saw that Microsoft was seriously eating into their bottom end. Just as Microsoft is seeing Firefox eating away at IE marketshare now and is being forced to release IE early, prior to releasing long-in-the-tooth instead of releaseing their browser with and tied to their latest operating system. They have also already announced or leaked that the new browser will copy competitors' tabbed browsing among other features. Of course, it won't be fully CSS compliant as Microsoft depends on web sites writing to IE so that other browsers break when rendering pages written to IE, like MSNBC (try using an alternate browser like Konqueror and zoom the text, watch the blue left side break color across the text).
Sun bought Star and released StarOffice as one of their first releases. I may still have StarOffice 5.2 sitting on a computer somewhere. As compared to Office 95 or Office 97, it was horrible. But you could still print out a letter or report with it, so it suited some users who didn't have the funds necessary to waste on Office. Or who don't have a windows computer to spare to a Microsoft office suite.
At that point, what were Sun's options? Sun was already losing market share to non-Unix systems. And facing resistance even in their own customer base to continuing to spend lavish amounts on Sun solutions. So they realized they wouldn't be adding developers, they'd be losing developers as they cut their workforce to keep expenses within reason as compared to their declining revenues. Either that or risk the wrath of wall street. And as we have seen, Wall Street hasn't been quiet, more than one analyst who tracks the company has made noise about Sun reducing its workforce. So what are the options? Less developers to work on their current project, how do they get a new office suite out the door?
Sun didn't make OpenOffice open source out of the goodness of their hearts. They didn't make OpenOffice open source as a gift to the open source community. Microsoft placed a gun to Sun's temple and told them through their continued onslaught of Sun's market share, that either Sun's signature was going to be on the open source license, or Sun's brains were going to be on the license. Sun made the right choice and decided to release OpenOffice as open source. But it was at the proverbial gun to the temple. To the benefit obviously of everyone else, not Microsoft.
And what has been their strategy since then? Pollute the office suite with Sun's Java. When open source alternatives are available.
Without the GPL, where would the market be? IBM would still be working on and pushing AIX a proprietary Unix and still selling Microsoft solutions and watching Microsoft eat away at their market share. We'd still have Sun touting their Solaris. And watching Microsoft eat away at Sun's market share. We'd still have HP's Unix and watching Microsoft eat away at HP's market share. Dell would have an even larger market share than it does now, thanks to their push of Microsoft on x86. BSD would still have some decent market share on servers, probably far larger than it has now (but nowhere near the inroads Linux has been making due to the license difference, BSD had some time for their shot prior to the juggernaut that is Linux/GPL). And Microsoft would continue to use major parts of BSD within their own operating systems.
Should we thank Sun for OpenOffice and excuse all their other behavior of attempting to undermine Linux and FOSS for their own benefit? Sure. As much as we should thank IBM for their own Linux efforts while ignoring their push for software patents. While ignoring their assistance in locking up the BIOS under the guise of "trusted computing" for the benefit of the entertainment cartel.
And while we're at it, let's continue to ignore the contributions of OpenOffice developers outside of Sun.
And for the Sun fans, let's continue to tout their cash on hand while totally ignoring their liabilities/debt.
Just in the last few days, we continue to get Sun fud on Linux. This time, they are using an "alliance" to spread their fud on Linux. This is what is being exposed to the public. Imagine what they are telling their customers in private.
As long as Sun continues to fight GNU/Linux, as long as they continue to fight the GPL, Sun is doomed. Can they pull a rabbit out of a hat? If they were to committ to GNU/Linux, maybe. But as Scott has made clear, Sun is not a Linux company. As Scott has made clear, Sun is not a GPL company. Sun is a Solaris company. Sun is a "closed open source" company. While the rest of the world is moving to GNU/Linux and the GPL, they are wrong, Sun is right in Sun's mind.
So an executive has two choices. The first choice is bet the company on Sun as their technology provider. The second choice is to bet the company on what the rest of the world is moving to, GNU/Linux and the GPL.
It boils down to a very simple equation. Either you bet the company on Sun and its continued declining market share and hope that they will turn the company around and dominate the industry, or you choose to place your company eggs in the FOSS basket where the rest of the world is moving to, where there is no lock in, where there is no dependence on a single company for your company's data and future.
Oracle carefully considered their options and made their bet. If your company uses Oracle as its database provider, are you going to bet against your database provider?
OpenOffice or not, Sun is doomed.
OpenOffice is a great OPEN SOURCE project. Not a "closed open source" project, but an open source project.
What I find disturbing is how Sun fans will run to Sun's defense (or in similar examples with Microsoft fans and Microsoft) by pulling a single example out of a much more problematic history to justify their support for a failed or failing company that is lashing out at other business models or development models to elevate themselves in their own eyes and the eyes of their fan base.
OpenOffice, or what was formerly known as Star, is the Hail Mary pass by Sun. Using their extensive marketing research and feedback (and a lot of other information sources including their own sales force feedback) they were able to see the writing on the wall years ago. They saw that Microsoft was seriously eating into their bottom end. Just as Microsoft is seeing Firefox eating away at IE marketshare now and is being forced to release IE early, prior to releasing long-in-the-tooth instead of releaseing their browser with and tied to their latest operating system. They have also already announced or leaked that the new browser will copy competitors' tabbed browsing among other features. Of course, it won't be fully CSS compliant as Microsoft depends on web sites writing to IE so that other browsers break when rendering pages written to IE, like MSNBC (try using an alternate browser like Konqueror and zoom the text, watch the blue left side break color across the text).
Sun bought Star and released StarOffice as one of their first releases. I may still have StarOffice 5.2 sitting on a computer somewhere. As compared to Office 95 or Office 97, it was horrible. But you could still print out a letter or report with it, so it suited some users who didn't have the funds necessary to waste on Office. Or who don't have a windows computer to spare to a Microsoft office suite.
At that point, what were Sun's options? Sun was already losing market share to non-Unix systems. And facing resistance even in their own customer base to continuing to spend lavish amounts on Sun solutions. So they realized they wouldn't be adding developers, they'd be losing developers as they cut their workforce to keep expenses within reason as compared to their declining revenues. Either that or risk the wrath of wall street. And as we have seen, Wall Street hasn't been quiet, more than one analyst who tracks the company has made noise about Sun reducing its workforce. So what are the options? Less developers to work on their current project, how do they get a new office suite out the door?
Sun didn't make OpenOffice open source out of the goodness of their hearts. They didn't make OpenOffice open source as a gift to the open source community. Microsoft placed a gun to Sun's temple and told them through their continued onslaught of Sun's market share, that either Sun's signature was going to be on the open source license, or Sun's brains were going to be on the license. Sun made the right choice and decided to release OpenOffice as open source. But it was at the proverbial gun to the temple. To the benefit obviously of everyone else, not Microsoft.
And what has been their strategy since then? Pollute the office suite with Sun's Java. When open source alternatives are available.
Without the GPL, where would the market be? IBM would still be working on and pushing AIX a proprietary Unix and still selling Microsoft solutions and watching Microsoft eat away at their market share. We'd still have Sun touting their Solaris. And watching Microsoft eat away at Sun's market share. We'd still have HP's Unix and watching Microsoft eat away at HP's market share. Dell would have an even larger market share than it does now, thanks to their push of Microsoft on x86. BSD would still have some decent market share on servers, probably far larger than it has now (but nowhere near the inroads Linux has been making due to the license difference, BSD had some time for their shot prior to the juggernaut that is Linux/GPL). And Microsoft would continue to use major parts of BSD within their own operating systems.
Should we thank Sun for OpenOffice and excuse all their other behavior of attempting to undermine Linux and FOSS for their own benefit? Sure. As much as we should thank IBM for their own Linux efforts while ignoring their push for software patents. While ignoring their assistance in locking up the BIOS under the guise of "trusted computing" for the benefit of the entertainment cartel.
And while we're at it, let's continue to ignore the contributions of OpenOffice developers outside of Sun.
And for the Sun fans, let's continue to tout their cash on hand while totally ignoring their liabilities/debt.
Just in the last few days, we continue to get Sun fud on Linux. This time, they are using an "alliance" to spread their fud on Linux. This is what is being exposed to the public. Imagine what they are telling their customers in private.
As long as Sun continues to fight GNU/Linux, as long as they continue to fight the GPL, Sun is doomed. Can they pull a rabbit out of a hat? If they were to committ to GNU/Linux, maybe. But as Scott has made clear, Sun is not a Linux company. As Scott has made clear, Sun is not a GPL company. Sun is a Solaris company. Sun is a "closed open source" company. While the rest of the world is moving to GNU/Linux and the GPL, they are wrong, Sun is right in Sun's mind.
So an executive has two choices. The first choice is bet the company on Sun as their technology provider. The second choice is to bet the company on what the rest of the world is moving to, GNU/Linux and the GPL.
It boils down to a very simple equation. Either you bet the company on Sun and its continued declining market share and hope that they will turn the company around and dominate the industry, or you choose to place your company eggs in the FOSS basket where the rest of the world is moving to, where there is no lock in, where there is no dependence on a single company for your company's data and future.
Oracle carefully considered their options and made their bet. If your company uses Oracle as its database provider, are you going to bet against your database provider?
OpenOffice or not, Sun is doomed.
Now I'm going to ask you to use your imagination for a moment. This will be a stretch. You ready?
Pretend that you're an executive at Sun in charge of the decision of whether to open up Java under an Open Source or free software license. You do a bunch of research... what happen to the StarOffice project? The first thing you might discover is a bunch of posts like yours. Nobody gives Sun *any* credit for releasing StarOffice. In hindsight, they were forced to do it in reaction to a grave threat from Microsoft, and the code they released was horrible. An absolute travesty. In the meantime, hardly anybody buys StarOffice. Why should they, when there's a "better, free alternative" that "we" developed. (The term "we" itself requires a fair amount of imagination of course).
Don't you think you might conclude that the FOSS community would be talking the same way about Java and a forked Java code base a few years down the road? In other words, there's nothing in it for Sun.
Pretend that you're an executive at Sun in charge of the decision of whether to open up Java under an Open Source or free software license. You do a bunch of research... what happen to the StarOffice project? The first thing you might discover is a bunch of posts like yours. Nobody gives Sun *any* credit for releasing StarOffice. In hindsight, they were forced to do it in reaction to a grave threat from Microsoft, and the code they released was horrible. An absolute travesty. In the meantime, hardly anybody buys StarOffice. Why should they, when there's a "better, free alternative" that "we" developed. (The term "we" itself requires a fair amount of imagination of course).
Don't you think you might conclude that the FOSS community would be talking the same way about Java and a forked Java code base a few years down the road? In other words, there's nothing in it for Sun.
sounds reasonable to me
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on March 17, 2005 10:19 AMMaybe they'll find it's to everyone's advantage to be fully open eventually, but the thinking must be that you can always give away more later, but you can't take back what you've given away. Maybe Sun's opening the Java source on the 20 step plan.
The other thing disturbing about Sun is their love/hate relationship with Linux. McNealy talking out of both sides of his mouth, that stupid consortium that claims that Linux is too risky for enterprise use and so on. But that grandstanding has little to do with this license.
#