This article needs to do more than simply be unreasonably obsessive with open sourcing Java. The article doesnt have anything that can prove that either Sun or dev. community will benefit from opening up Java. Besides, Java classes are all open source, and I dont think anybody would like M$ or some org to change the source for java.exe and impose it upon the users.
I hope JDJ raises its bar and thinks twice before publishing such cock-and-bull articles that make open-source stuff seem childish.

I don't see that it makes any difference whether Sun open Sources Java or Solaris. As far as Java is concerned, there is currently a re-implementation of it happening that should satisfy the "anti-proprietary" crowd. And I don't see why we need Solaris. We have Linux, 3 BSD's, Dos, and someone working on an NT clone. If Sun wants to open source their stuff, then fine. But if not, they have to live with what they fix, and I don't see that it is anyone elses place to tell them what that should be. If Sun's customers aren't secure with what Sun is doing, then they should find alternatives for themselvs that they are happy with. Again, they need to live with their own choices.

Basically, I believe that choice is good. If we loose the option of a closed source solution we have just as much lost a choice as if we had lost an open source option. Both have advantages. The only thing I would like to see Sun do is to decide what they want to do, and then do it. But then, I'm not on their board, I don't own Sun stock, and I'm not a Sun customer.

However if they made a sparc based laptop that ran a recent linux, I might re-consider. Maybe.

The problems with "getting components to work with Linux" are NOT due to kernel differences. ANY end user who can plunk out "diff" and "/usr/src/linux/scripts/patch-kernel" can be assured of running the latest-greatest, the earliest, or anything they desire...

What does that have to do with "open sourcing Java"? Not much, other than to say that currently it is even easier to switch from one JRE to another...

I would venture to guess that the VAST majority of NOISE one hears about "open sourcing Java" is simply an effort on the part of vendors of closed Operating Systems to muddy the waters in the futile hope of clinging to their shrinking base...

I am growing tired of Sys-Con fueling this. Spend more time on articles that help DEVELOPERS get stuff done!

Seems to me that this publication and IBM are about the only ones crying for Sun to open source java. IBM has an implementation of Java - why don''t they just open source all of that and say to the open source community "here you go, build on this"? We''ve already seen what happens with open sourcing platforms with Linux - some benefits but also lots of problems. JDJ - we''ve heard your cries ad nauseum - enough already - isn''t it time to get back to your core missiong - ie. providing information useful to the Java Developer?

How will it help the Java community to have Java fracture. Because of the lack of standards caused by the fracturing of Java, it will become impossible for 3rd party tool venders to support the Java language.

Example: Linux is a GREAT operating system. However, few people us it (except for the die hard MS haters). Why? Becausae it is too hard for the common user to get components to work on Linux. Why? Because each Linux kernal is different and there are no standards that 3rd party venders can conform to. So, instead we have each kernal vender fighting each other instead of a organized attack to defeat other operating systems like MS windows. This approach is doomed to fail.

Get a life guys!!!

Stop banging on about making java open source and go write some java code.

JDJ should commission some articles that help the community not this endless tirade of tripe about Open Source. I don''t even need to mention that the source is available etc... etc... yawn... yawn...

The source code is available (as nonemouse said) and vendors besides Sun offer JVMs. I see no advantage in having Java open sourced. As a Java developer, if I want additional capabilities not found in the standard distribution from Sun, I go out to the web and get them. No lock-in there.
I would prefer that Sun not open source Java. Especially the core libraries, which define the Java framework. Since an entire industry has built itself around this framework from Sun, it seems to me that Sun is doing an outstanding job. Let''s not try to fix something that is not broken. (And no, I don''t work for Sun.)

Vendors can already add whatever they want in their own namespace.
And they already do.

So what are you saying?

Why does the linux crowd have such trouble understanding that the java
source is already available... the only restriction is that you have to
pass the compatibility test if you want to call your modified version "java".

"Customers don''t want lock-in slavery anymore," yeah!
We don''t want Sun to lock us in. We want Microsoft to take the open-source Java and change it ... uh uh ... inovate on it ... and then force it on all of us through the Windows desktop monoply. Grow up!