[Info-vax] Java on VMS, was: Re: So is there still a hobbyist program or not

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 7/21/2019 7:42 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2019-07-21, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 7/21/2019 8:21 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> I would say they are both in legacy status as opposed to dead.
>>
>> I would not consider big data and Android devices to be legacy.
> 
> If Oracle keep attacking Google in the way they are, it could be
> interesting to see how long Java on Android lasts in anything
> other than legacy mode.

Oracle's suit was about Google's reimplementation of Java API's.

Google switched to use OpenJDK library in Android 7 (released in 2016).

So that legal dispute is entirely about 2008-2016.

I can not see why that should impact decisions going forward.

> Google have been making a heavy move towards supporting Kotlin
> as an alternative to Java.

Yes.

But that is because the language is better. Especially for async.

It does not help with the license issue as Kotlin for JVM use the
same Java API's that were a problem.

But since 2016 that should no longer be an issue (see above).

> Oracle's very short sighted actions are in very serious danger of
> killing off Java for future development work.

I don't see that.

>>>                                   especially given the stunts
>>> that Oracle are pulling over its licencing.
>>
>> As I explained in that long post there is really not that
>> big change: Oracle simplified from having a commercial version,
>> a free close source version and a free open source version to only
>> have a commercial version and a free open source version.
>>
> 
> The major change is that on Windows you used to get a nicely
> packaged and known good version of Java for free directly from
> Oracle and directly ready to install by the end user.
> 
> Now, Windows sites are either going to have to choose a vendor out
> of one of the various organisations supplying OpenJDK and hope the
> oraganisation they choose can be trusted or they are going to have
> to start paying Oracle for Java.
> 
> The version of OpenJDK for Windows from the Oracle website is not
> packaged in a Windows installer (or at least it wasn't the last time
> I looked).

java.net which Oracle links to only have ZIP.

AdoptOpenJDK provide both ZIP and installer. And AdoptOpenJDK
is backed by IBM, Amazon, Microsoft and Redhat.

Amazon Coretto also has both.

Azul Zulu also got both.

There are options.

But OK - some may be scared a bit by having to download from a new site.

I would expect most Java developers to prefer the ZIP.

Arne