Oracle and Apple Announce OpenJDK Project for Mac OS X : On a New Road

The second question seems an odd one given that many third-party software providers have had an outside updating method from the Software Updater - Adobe being the most obvious example. So why is Java special in this regard? The first question can only be answered in speculation until the community irons its issues with Oracle out. Hopefully that won't take too long, because enterprises are impatient with uncertainty and will look to other long existing platforms (cough... Microsoft) to base future investments and development projects on. It's in the communities' best interest for Oracle to separate Java from their business concerns by giving control of it to an independent foundation. This is the only way to provide clarity and certainty in the future of Java as a community and as a development platform. Obviously, Oracle probably sees things differently...not unlike Apple...

Posted by Tim Boyden on November 12, 2010 at 09:32 AM PST #

I don't believe the update issue is a problem any longer since Apple has made Java an "optional" part of OS/X. When Java was a core system feature it mattered who updated it and when. Now Java is moving into the Flash category of belonging entirely to an external agency.

Posted by Ted Wise on November 12, 2010 at 10:34 AM PST #

Yes, I'm glad that this facet seems to be getting sorted out in a positive way. Separately I received a spontaneous helpful email from an Oracle staffer in response to a piece I published (involving ARM rather than Apple!), so we can hope for some good results even if for you and many of your colleagues it was bound to be a personal trauma one way or another... Rgds Damon

Posted by Damon Hart-Davis on November 12, 2010 at 02:37 PM PST #

The interesting part will be how Oracle + Apple + The Community will handle the issue of Apple's use of private API's in their Java implementation - are we going to see some of these private API's stabilise and eventually become public? I'm assuming that these were used because what Apple exposes to the 'great unwashed masses' isn't low level enough as to achieve what they wanted. I hope that by WWDC2011 that there will be more clarity as the future direction - if it ultimately means is a superior up to date implementation of Java then I say it is a great step forward. Lets hope that in this movement forward there isn't an onslaught of politics screwing up an otherwise 'good thing'.

Posted by Kawaii Gardiner on November 13, 2010 at 05:15 AM PST #

I'm happy about this new cooperation between Oracle and Apple... and I am surprised Apple opens its Java Sources. @Kawaii Gardiner > The Community will handle the issue of Apple's use of private API's in their Java implementation Well, I don't know. They have to choose between a really fast JVM or a standard and portable one.

Posted by JaKaiser on November 13, 2010 at 07:40 AM PST #

This is one detail we need more information on: http://lists.apple.com/archives/Java-dev/2010/Nov/msg00104.html "There are several parts of our Java SE 6 implementation (like the AWT widgets) that are not contributable" What does this mean? Swing is built on top of AWT? If the OS X implementation of AWT needs to be rewritten, then that means Swing (Netbeans, Cyberduck, etc) won't be ready on OS X until it is, or am I not understanding this correctly?

Posted by Luke on November 14, 2010 at 07:05 AM PST #

Initially IBM joined with Oracle, later Apple with Oracle on OpenJDK; does all these mean Google would join with Oracle to continue with Android development?

Posted by Kamal on November 14, 2010 at 09:05 AM PST #

@Kamal: I don't think that IBM, Apple, or Oracle are very happy about what Google did with Java in Android. IBM abandoned Harmony for a reason (Harmony was used heavily by Google, but IBM which founded the project for the most part gained nothing in return), Apple will not want to work with Google of course, and Oracle just sued Google over Java patents.

Posted by Herve on November 14, 2010 at 11:43 AM PST #

Apple implements Java. Hope Apple's implementation won't end up being another Microsoft's. Azlan

Posted by azlan95 on November 14, 2010 at 10:57 PM PST #

I'm courious about what kind of fight happened inside Apple from SJ's declaration about deprecation of Java on Mac platform until this announcement.

Posted by Tvik on November 15, 2010 at 12:59 AM PST #

On the private API issue - I suspect we will see a mix - some previously private APIs will be stabilised and made public (after all, this is pretty much how Cocoa has evolved so far). If Apple doesn't want them cluttering up the general published Cocoa APIs then they could simply declare them a 'Java Compatibility Framework'. On the other hand, a lot of the dependencies will probably be removed by the new graphical client, which I suspect will be less tightly integrated to the underlying system. (i.e. it will probably render it's own widgets even if they are skinned to look native).

Posted by JulesLt on November 15, 2010 at 02:15 AM PST #

As far as Apple's proprietary graphic extensions go, I can see it going one of three ways; 1) Apple produces a Java API library that will allow developers to hook into native Apple graphic APIs, 2) Apple already has a way to hook into the theme-able graphic APIs of Java 7 to make Java apps look native, or 3) Apple will do nothing and point and laugh at Java applications that look awful on their platform as an example of why you should use native Objective C versus Java. Given Apple's track record, which do you think they will do?

Posted by Tim Boyden on November 15, 2010 at 04:45 PM PST #

So, Jag, you were wrong, apparently all this story IS a truth. :-) I think Jobs and Larry are best buddies. Here is a point where entire story should start, after all...

Posted by BM on November 16, 2010 at 09:24 PM PST #

Recent

Calendar

Navigation

On a New Road