Interviewing the JBoss Team: "Sun Needs Us"

Discussions

News: Interviewing the JBoss Team: "Sun Needs Us"

  1. Interviewing the JBoss Team: "Sun Needs Us" (85 messages)

    Steve Anglin interviews JBoss' Marc Fleury, founder and lead developer, and Nathalie Mason, director of business development about JBoss and J2EE certification, the open source community, and more

    The article is here:
    http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2002/03/20/jboss_interview.html

    What do you think about the comments? I found the comments about Jakarta interesting: "Jakarta is not an open source project in the pure community sense anymore. It is dominated by Sun/IBM employees"

    Threaded Messages (85)

  2. Hi Dion,


    I would not focus on the part of the interview talking about Jakarta. Even within the open source community there's room for critique. And certainly Jakarta is a strange beast.
    But the main point of the interview is to certify JBoss to help it compete against dotNET. I'm not that fearful that dotNET will destroy the whole J2EE camp. But as weve talked before there has to be more support by SUN for JBoss. Marc and Nathalie position JBoss as the low-end base of J2EE. And that's correct. JBoss and perhaps other open source app servers are needed to help IBM and BEA sell their high-end (read high price) servers. This may sound strange but to use a somewhat flawed image- open source is the forest to stop a dotNET landslide right at the beginning.
    And a certified forest is by far more harder to overrun (hmm, let me try to explain it German next time :).

    And back to Jakarta- what really was amazing to me was that this one was the only real flame-bait in a Fleury article. Strange, normally he's trying to upset a dozen groups per sentence ;)

    Nevertheless, SUN, please certify JBoss.
    If not then please explain your strategy on how to defend J2EE from becoming obsolete.
  3. I agree that Sun needs to support JBoss in its efforts to get J2EE certification. And here's a reason (picked up from the Ant mailing list) why:

    Somebody was asking whether Ant would work with Visual J# (i.e. JDK 1.1.4). Obviously he was asked why he wanted to do this. His reply was:

    'Our customers now are asking to run the app on .NET,
    for two reasons: one [of which is] because they'd like not to have to pay for an app server'

    but he added 'None of our customers is interested in running a free appserver.'

    This is how MS is likely to pick up customers for .NET: They are perceived as being much cheaper than the main J2EE vendors, but not 'unsupported' which is how the free offerings are viewed.

    Certification for JBoss would help change that view and anything that keeps customers in the J2EE camp has to be good.

  4. What I don't get is:
    a.) Jboss wants free J2EE certification
    b.) Marc and the others want to earn money buy selling services and add ons to Jboss (They charge $10000 for one year support. They charge $2500 for 3 days training).
    c.) They don't want to pay for a Sun service

    Couldn't it be, that they want to be J2EE certified, because it's easier to sell services and add ons for a certified server ? I think it's morally unacceptable to use the open source argument against Sun to earn money yourself.

    bye
    -stephan
  5. Stephan,

    when I read the articel I thougth of the same thing:

    On the one hand Marc wants to make big money with JBoss and on the other hand he says give me a free certification so I can promote my product better. The battle against .NET will not be easier or more difficult whether JBoss is certified or not. Building a company saying it is a real Open Source project, benefit from free developers and thousands of free beta tester and now turning into a marketing company is bad. Don't make intviews, propaganda and marketing stuff...as the lead developer Marc should help JBoss 3.0 come out...I can't see JBoss in the technical leader now, where the last real build is 4month old...and this is not Sun's and IBM's fault... By the way, it would be interesting what Rickard Öberg says to this interview, I think he is the one who really made JBoss a success...why did he leave the project...?

    Mirko
  6. oh, c'mon, it's not about getting the certification for free. It's not about money. It's about SUN not wanting to certify an open source appserver even for money.
    Stephan, Mirko I don't see your point. What's wrong with earning money? Selling services on top of open source may not be compatible with RMS-style purism. But it's the only chance to compete with the big guys. Do you write an app server in your spare time? No chance.
    For JBoss becoming a viable alternative to BEA/IBM and dotNET they need two things:
    - certification
    - professional services and support
    The second part can be done without outside help (as you can see, read, whatever) but for certification they need SUN.
    To get this message across you need interviews, you need marketing and even a little propaganda. Even great technology needs some polish.

    (now getting back to my mud hut writing some real open source code...whoa catch the rat)
  7. Has it ever been an issue of Marc not wanting to pay for it? I thought the issue was the Sun won't do it.

    Marc says, "Today we can afford this certification." Perhaps I am misunderstanding this.
  8. <quote>
    Has it ever been an issue of Marc not wanting to pay for it? I thought the issue was the Sun won't do it.
    </quote>

    Well, read for yourself. The following was posted by Marc Fleury:

    <quote>
    JBoss long ago informed Sun that we were interested in obtaining the J2EE certification suite so that we could apply Sun's certification mark to the JBoss software. Sun quoted a price for that certification suite that is beyond the current financial resources of the JBoss team. As a result, we have chosen not to "certify" our software. Nevertheless, JBoss fully complies with Sun's published standards. JBoss customers can be confident that they are using a complete, J2EE-compliant server implementation despite the absence of Sun's certification mark.
    </quote>

    See Sun Licencing and JBoss for the source.

    IMO, it does not sound right when JBoss Group wants to charge quite a bit of money for support and have a free certification at the same time. No one rides for free.
  9. <quote>Has it ever been an issue of Marc not wanting to pay for it?</quote>

    I've lost track of what we are talking about here. JBoss certification or getting someone to S***k his you know what.
  10. <quote>They charge $10000 for one year support.</quote>

    I hope it is good - for free you'll get this ;-)
  11. Ohh... this was disgusting
    Marc Fleury need some strong PR after that
  12. Ohh... this was disgusting

    >Marc Fleury need some strong PR after that

    Yeah. At least the tech support guys at Sun, BEA, Microsoft etc. will wait until they get off the phone before saying such things about you.

    damn, that thread was funny. :-D


  13. How many times have every one of us wanted to say that?

    If you are a current or former client of mine the answer is uuuhhh....NEVER.
  14. <quote>How many times have every one of us wanted to say that? If you are a current or former client of mine the answer is uuuhhh....NEVER. <quote>

    I can see how Open Source could have its frustrations, clearly we all suck it up when we're getting paid but I can't imagine dealing with "users" who start acting like clients.
  15. <How many times have every one of us wanted to say that?>

    Probably all of us. That is not the point. The point is that most of us have enough professionalism to NOT say something like that.
  16. Professionalism my ass.
    Aw come on man, don't get all self-righteous on us. I think it's the difference in mentality between staff employees and independent consultants. Been a part of both worlds.

    There is a client-management approach that works for some people called "whip it good." Walk in there, say they are all dumbasses who couldn't write a line of code to save their miserable lives. Say this directly to their faces and their bosses faces to prove that you really don't give a **** about their internal politics and you have enough business to give it to them straight. I personally have seen experts at this approach in action. The client starts trembling in anticipation and throwing dollar bills like there's no tomorrow.

    Style is personal, but everybody likes a straight shooter.
  17. After being told to s**k Marc Fleury's d**k, was this guy from Norway supposed to start 'trembling in anticipation' and buy commercial support contract? After all, he could have been a prospective client, and everybody likes straight shooters.
  18. If he was a prospective client (which I seriously doubt), I don't think that they'd be interested in his business. Obnoxious people are not fun to deal with, and there are thankfully enough normal people to afford not to.

    Chip, I agree with you. Telling it straight is a much more productive way to get things done. Now, of course there are many ways to do this, and you don't necessarily have to be offensive in order to get desired effects. The truth is often more than enough. It's rarely practiced (just look at all the proponents of "shut up and put up" in this thread) and can give startling effects. The wake-up process is of course painful, but the choice can be either that or a dead end. Or "end dead" rather.

    /Rickard
  19. Rickard, with all due respect, I disagree. What kind of a business is this if it decides not to deal with 'obnoxious' people in such a rude and offensive manner?

    I am all for telling the truth, and lately, thanks to the recession, we see more and more of that. People stopped massaging each other's shoulders and telling each other how brilliant everybody is, and began to "wake up" - yes, for some it is a painful thing to do. However, this was not the case - it was arrogance, plain and simple.
  20. Rickard, with all due respect, I disagree. What kind of a

    >business is this if it decides not to deal with 'obnoxious'
    >people in such a rude and offensive manner?

    When talking to a child, use a child's language.

    /Rickard
  21. When talking to a child, use a child's language.


    Normally, that means directing the lost child to the right place where he can post his code and ask questions, not asking him to perform un-natural sexual acts.
  22. Normally, that means directing the lost child to the right

    >place where he can post his code and ask questions, not asking
    >him to perform un-natural sexual acts.

    Coincidentally, that is exactly what he did. Using a child's language of course (metaphorically), so as not to be misinterpreted.

    /Rickard
  23. Coincidentally, that is exactly what he did.

    >Using a child's language of course (metaphorically),
    >so as not to be misinterpreted

    Well, how do you interpret "Suck my dick." (I apologize for posting this, but I pasted it from the JBoss forum). Even metaphorically, I cannot translate this into a valid URI - according to you, Marc was trying to point the lost child to the right place.
  24. For those who don't understand this thread (Oleg M - Rickard Oberg), here's a little backing context information:

    http://main.jboss.org/thread.jsp?forum=52&thread=2649&message=119591

    I think everyone around here should be clever enough to make up their mind...

                    Yann
  25. Well, how do you interpret "Suck my dick."


    That translates, roughly, into "take a hike". Pretty easy to interpret I'd say.

    /Rickard
  26. Interviewing the JBoss Team: "Sun Needs Us"[ Go to top ]

    Even metaphorically, I cannot translate this into a valid

    >URI - according to you, Marc was trying to point the lost
    >child to the right place.

    Uuh, maybe we are too hard on Marc. Maybe it was really a support offer to s*** his d***. One seldom gets such an offer for free by a <cite>president of an elite service company</cite>
  27. <quote>
    I hope it is good - for free you'll get this ;-)
    </quote>

    Now THAT is what we call "open source". I am sure we would see a lot more of this if we had the open source version of Steve and Bill or Scott.

    J
  28. The problem is not about money. Flery and the other folk from JBoss group stated that they could raise the money to pay for the certification, *if SUN allows them to do so*. Sun is simply refusing to test JBoss for certification.
  29. "The problem is not about money. Flery and the other folk from JBoss group stated that they could raise the money to pay for the certification, *if SUN allows them to do so*. Sun is simply refusing to test JBoss for certification."

    I want to see the refusal from Sun for the JBoss certification request.

    bye
    -stephan
  30. Sun created lucrative market and bad JBoss want to take piece of cake. JBoss is cool piece of code, it is great platform, especially for development (you don't need to wait forever to compile EJB like in commercial servers) and Sun don't want to admit that it is good. But bad Microsoft is coming and the game will be over. If Sun does not understand that they need low end J2EE server I won't even regret them. They will have to sue MS again for .Net monopol. J2EE can't be only high-end platform becouse it is margin and number of J2EE apps will shrink. Peapole will swithc to .Net which is inexpensive and sufficent platform for 95% of solutions. If there won't be cheap alternative for .Net J2EE will disappear. It will be standard for banks and telecoms. Or maybe even not.
  31. well said....sun has to come with a solid answer(thru business deals ?!$#). Its the decision going to affect the entire java based industry. Which client wants a free uncertified app server ? Which client will prefer .NET when there is a free certified alternate?
  32. maybe the jboss team should sue sun.

    and maybe microsoft, too just because.

    sue everybody just get J2EE certified!

    ;-)

    what a silly thing for Sun to do. sun has provided ZERO reasons why JBOSS shouldn't at least be ALLOWED to be tested for certification.
  33. Fleury's no fool. He's using the popular .NET as the big bad wolf theme to push his own agenda here. Personally, I think he's way too alarmist. I haven't seen .NET as a market reality yet. Would be interested to get others opinions about how much a threat it currently is.

    Also, to the person who pointed out the hypocrisy of the JBoss Team earning money from services and "not wanting to pay for certification." They clearly state in the article that they are "willing to pay for certification." Open Source business models usually depend on subsidization by big corporations or VCs. What the JBoss people appear to be saying is that they want to keep their independence and they don't want any handouts. That is where they differentiate themselves from Apache.
  34. Here's an idea, HP needs to get into the J2EE fray so why don't they work out some sort licensing deal like Oracle did with Orion and have JBoss certified. I know HP's got their own app server (BlueStone) but it's a dead end afaik. So HP can at least make some waves and sponsor JBoss certification in exchange for something that will get their name at least mentioned.

    About money. Everybody likes to get paid. Developing an app server is a very extensive task. So there's nothing wrong with charging ppl for the higher end support and training. JBoss team states it up front anyway so it's not like they are trying to bait-and-switch.

    About dotNET. I've used MS technologies (DNA,VS,SQL) before I started doing Java. dotNET is very impressive. Ppl, stop bashing them and face the reality. JBoss is very needed to grab the low- and mid-level market share from MS by using a prolifiration of Linux servers on the backend.
  35. I see that in companies where decision making and technical knowledge is not combined in the same person .NET projects with .NET have started and I have seen that various Java projects have been stopped due to this. .NET may not be production ready but is definitly marketing ready.

    Regards
  36. Ok. They can afford the certification. What's the problem then ? I want to see a certification request with the money from JBoss and a letter from Sun that tells them "Sorry we won't certify OSS App Servers." There is so much propaganda around here and no facts. If Sun doesn't certify JBoss I want to see a letter that says so.

    The argument with the intelectual property doesn't hold. If that's the reason, the argument would prohibit an OSS implementation of J2EE, not the certification.

    bye
    -stephan
  37. "The argument with the intelectual property doesn't hold. If that's the reason, the argument would prohibit an OSS implementation of J2EE, not the certification."

    that's exactly the case. Sun thinks that it is in their best interest to 'protect' their 'property' (sorry, RMS).

    same reason orion had about releasing their code

    "In fact, if we did, Sun might sue us since they see any implementation of the J2EE specification as their intellectual property that we can not show to anyone."

    Case closed, Sun can s**k Marc's d**k, uh, i mean, take a hike. honestly, with the other thing with apache, sun is stunning Java's growth.

    Chicoy#13
    ~the keyboard is mightier than the pen~

  38. "that's exactly the case. Sun thinks that it is in their best interest to 'protect' their 'property' (sorry, RMS)."

    Your're only in trouble releasing stuff as open source, when you use parts of the reference implementation from Sun.

    bye
    -stephan
  39. <I>We are more focused on growing our own professional services organization through JBoss Group. As such, we form a hyper-efficient consultancy, where our open source product base enables us to achieve an unparalleled degree of efficiency in sharing and communicating knowledge.</I>

    Damned! It sounds like he's recently been injected some marketeer genes or gone through a larryellisonotherapy. :)

    Seriously, it is great to see that more and more open-source software based companies are proposing valid business plans. If JBoss is not yet much used in critical projects, it is mainly because of a lack of confidence in open source support or the impossibility to complain to any tangible body. This is slowly changing. JBoss is probably the number one product for J2EE applications prototyping. It has made a lot of progress now and does not deserve being overlooked any more. The fact that they are adopting a more commercial tone should add commercial credibility so it was funny reading that statement above. The fact that IBM, Sun or Oracle are considering giving away their application servers (if you buy the server/database package yes) is a sign...

    However, I'm afraid they won't be backed by anybody for the certification, they wanted to play the game with OSS, it's a dary bet in a capitalist world. But now, JBoss qualities speak for themselves and it's very likely that they are about to become serious competitors in the J2EE playfield. IMO, the snowball effect is only starting. If they were on the Nasdaq, I'd probably buy tons of shares NOW.

    As to the .NET argument, I honestly doubt that it is valid. Of course, Sun, as J2EE official, needs support from the JBoss and the likes against competing technologies. But come on, do you seriously think that when JBoss is certified (which is a matter of time IMO) all of the sudden, companies are going to switch from BEA or WebSphere to JBoss ? As many people already pinpointed many times on TSS, application server costs are not relevant at the enterprise scale and to my knowledge, IBM WebSphere 3.5 was not certified so certification may not be the problem. Also, architects *know* that JBoss is a good product technically speaking that solve most of the *abilities issues now (especially after the awaited clustering feature were made available in version 3.0). Problem is not there and JBoss has a problem: they need to be big to gain credibility, they need to be credible to be big. They have this problem now but not for much longer if they decide to invest more resources in support and service. I think they are on the verge of reaching their critical mass.

    Time to IPO ? ;-)

                    Yann
  40. Damned! It sounds like he's recently been injected

    > some marketeer genes or gone through a
    > larryellisonotherapy. :)

    Or McNeally-runs-his-mouth-ism... Maybe Fleury's hyper-cocky attitude can be explained by his being an ex-Lieutenant in the French paras and his elite bourgeois education! Hmmm... Did he ever really see action, or just "elite hyper-training"? See his bio blurb in his latest book "Jmx: Managing J2ee Applications with Java Management Extensions"! Tres interesant...

    On a more serious vein, I still can't see which version of EJB, and what parts of it, does JBoss precisely support? For example, just try getting the getCallerPrincipal() from a bean's SessionContext. What gives guys? Why can't I get it?


    -- Samuel

  41. <quote>Or McNeally-runs-his-mouth-ism... Maybe Fleury's hyper-cocky attitude can be explained by his being an ex-Lieutenant in the French paras and his elite bourgeois education! Hmmm... Did he ever really see action, or just "elite hyper-training"? See his bio blurb in his latest book "Jmx: Managing J2ee Applications with Java Management Extensions"! Tres interesant...</quote>

    Funny typical Sam Adams Americans don't use words like "bourgeois." Haven't read the JMX book, but as for Fleury's "elite bourgeois" education, it's elite in the sense that it's available to anybody in France who passes the highly competitive exams, and is not based (as in the US) on one's abililty to pay.

    Nor do I find Marc typical of his French background the way McNealy might be for the US. Frankly, Fleury seems to have always chosen the path of greatest resistance. Vis-a-vis the military service, the point is not seeing action but that he didn't pick the easy assignment. Back to the career, with little more than exhibiting a pulse he could have stayed at Sun France and had a reasonable shot at running the place in a few years. People who go to Marc's school tend to become administrative technocrats in big French companies. They have relatively little incentive to export themselves since life is pretty good for them back in the homeland. Then, how many Sales people with no computer background go into deep code? Not many. It's usually the reverse. Most engineers are made to feel so inferior once they're in the US that they are usually itching to get their MBAs and join the rank of zombies.

  42. Yann,

    Still talking sense as always and still playing guitar?

    Drop me a line dave at linksw dot co dot uk. It'd be good to touch base again.
  43. I just don't understand Sun position concerning JBoss!
    In about 1-2 years, all PC in the worlds will have .NET installed on their PC by default with no JVM, and maybe VisualStudio.NET (which is better that most java IDE) installed also.
    This mean that almost all 'normal' devellopers will have an instant access to .NET, and what Sun will offer as alternative?:
      - goto http://sun.java.sun and download a 85 Meg for JVM+Forte IDE
      - for a branded J2EE app server buy a 1500-15000$+/CPU from BEA,IBM or Sun.
    It doesn't take a PHD to make a smart choice for a devellopement platform. This attitude will leave to M$ all the low-end market, which will make J2ee in 4 to 5 year a platform like Corba: a solid platform that is only used by an elite (<5%)...
    Company like HP (and maybe IBM) will slowly move to .NET(HP alredy did it by supporting the Mono project).

    The key for Sun is to make EJB-JMS affordable.. all devellopers should be able to devellop with strong branded J2ee tools, if they are free, it's even better.
    - Tomcat is free, and branded as RI of Servlet/JSP specs. That's nice
    - There is no affordable branded EJB container available. The Sun RI sucks, nobody use it... common guys, just brand JBoss as RI
    - Forte/Eclipse need strong pluging to improve integration with J2ee containers

    I sincerly hope that Sun is not going to reat too late, bc EJB are the heart and soul of J2ee platform.
  44. I don't know what is the reason for not letting JBoss be certified. But I know the JBoss is not up to the standard for certification. They claimed to have full J2EE compliance, written to specs, but if you look closely, it is not the case. Case in point, they don't have a J2EE client container - which is part of the J2EE 1.2 specs; the JBossMQ is buggy and in beta (as of 2.4.4 - the "stable" version).

    I thought the project started off in a true community direction with super developer Richard Oberg writing most of the core code. Now, Marc and his group are trying to make "BIG BUCKS" out of the project contributed by many people in the community.

  45. Err... WebLogic 7.0 is in beta, it is J2EE 1.3 certified. So is WebSphere 5.0. You can be in beta and certified. JBoss 3.0 beta could be potentially certified even though it would be more cost-effective to certify only their final release given their budget. :)

    What's wrong with making money out of open source ? Isn't it what VA Linux, Red Hat, Suse, you name them, are trying to do ? What they are making money with is service, consulting, doc, not software. I don't see your point.

                    Yann
  46. "I thought the project started off in a true community direction with super developer Richard Oberg writing most of the core code. Now, Marc and his group are trying to make "BIG BUCKS" out of the project contributed by many people in the community."

    The problem with these forums is a lot of people express opinions on things don't know anything about or haven't looked at closely. As far as I could tell from looking at JBoss in the early days, Rickard was PAID as an employee by Marc for his early and important contribution to JBoss. When the first money dried up, so did Rickard's participation. AFAIK, Rickard has not made an active contribution to JBoss in a long time. So some of this Open Source myth needs some de-mystification. As far as I can tell there is no exploiting going on here. What Marc and the current JBoss community get paid for is selling their pound of flesh of services on top of JBoss--something that anybody can do.

    There are three attributes that make an Open Source project a success. 1) Good code 2) Community-building 3) Salesmanship, ability to communicate their vision. Rickard and a lot of other folks in JBoss contributed to 1. For all the crticism he gets (some of it well-deserved), Marc F's ability to add 2 & 3 is rare among top developers. IMHO, this is the reason JBoss is as successful as it is today.
  47. Pierre,

    "The problem with these forums is a lot of people express opinions on things don't know anything about or haven't looked at closely. As far as I could tell from looking at JBoss in the early days, Rickard was PAID as an employee by Marc for his early and important contribution to JBoss. "

    Yes and no. I wasn't in the beginning, but when Telkel got started, yes my work was paid for.

    "When the first money dried up, so did Rickard's participation."

    Yes, but these two things are not even closely related.

    "AFAIK, Rickard has not made an active contribution to JBoss in a long time."

    Absolutely true, since I started XDoclet and WebWork instead. Unfortunately I can't both stay on one project all my life and at the same time come up with cool new stuff. Just as I left JBoss when the time was right, I "left" XDoclet when the time was right (and both projects are now successful beyond my wildest imagination). Natural progression.

    "So some of this Open Source myth needs some de-mystification. "

    I appreciate your desire to demystify things, but I'm afraid you fell into the same trap, although from a different angle ;-)

    "There are three attributes that make an Open Source project a success. 1) Good code 2) Community-building 3) Salesmanship, ability to communicate their vision. Rickard and a lot of other folks in JBoss contributed to 1. For all the crticism he gets (some of it well-deserved), Marc F's ability to add 2 & 3 is rare among top developers. IMHO, this is the reason JBoss is as successful as it is today."

    I would have to agree to that.

    /Rickard
  48. I see many ambiquous statements in this thread. Please someone confirm the following.

    a) JBoss wants certification for free or SUN doesn't want JBOss to be certified even for money( becoz it is opensource ) ?

    I agree SUN needs JBoss & JBoss needs SUN but everyone missed a big person here . He is LINUX. IF linux wouldn't have been there, then there is no argument of a entry level J2EE stack :-) Hats off to Linux.

    So the best way to resolve this is SUN should come down & certify JBoss( Not for free of Cost ). Marc has to generate the revenue for this certification through some means ( Selling the courseware ,manuals etc ).

    What benefits does SUN get by doing this.
    a)SUN gets money from certification :-)
    b)Low level & Mid level applications can use JBoss-Linux stack as their primary platform. So by doing that we can save our customers in getting into M$.

    >> It doesn't take a PHD to make a smart choice for a devellopement platform. This attitude will leave to M$ all the low-end market, which will make J2ee in 4 to 5 year a platform like Corba: a solid platform that is only used by an elite (<5%)...

    Well said...





  49. From the interview:
    > A lot of people approach us as JBoss consultants
    > when they are evaluating J2EE vs .NET.

    In other words - "JBoss consultants" could earn more money if JBoss was certified. Then pony up! You don't think RedHat might be interested in helping out? RedHat Linux/Redhat DB(postgresql)/JBoss. Talk about a competitive 'low-end' offering.

    From previous message:
    > JBoss wants certification for free or SUN doesn't want
    > JBOss to be certified even for money( becoz it is
    > opensource ) ?

    This is what I want to know. The best I can tell is that JBoss has a problem paying the rumoured $500K. If Sun gives it away to JBoss, do they turn around and refund the commercial vendors?

    from the jBoss website:
    > 100,000+ DOWNLOADS PER MONTH

    Do they believe their own stats? Then they certainly have the interest volume to generate cash - even if they just ask for a $2 paypal donation to help certify the thing.

    Sun doesn't "need" JBoss to compete with .NET... there are other low-price containers (Orion for example). Its not like .NET is open sourced.

    cheers,
    Markus

  50. Obviously, some folks need to actually read the interview, as opposed to casually scanning it, before making comments like those below.

    Direct Fleury quote from article:

    "....we feel that mainstream acceptance of J2EE would be enhanced by Sun's backing of JBoss. We also feel that being certified would help us compete against Microsoft .NET. Today we can afford this certification."
                                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The issue apparently isn't money.

    -- jason

    ----------------------------------------
    In other words - "JBoss consultants" could earn more money if JBoss was certified. Then pony up! You don't think RedHat might be interested in helping out? RedHat Linux/Redhat DB(postgresql)/JBoss. Talk about a competitive 'low-end' offering.
    -----------------------------------------
    From previous message:
    JBoss wants certification for free or SUN doesn't want
    JBOss to be certified even for money( becoz it is
    opensource ) ?
    -----------------------------------------
    >This is what I want to know. The best I can tell is that JBoss has a problem >paying the rumoured $500K. If Sun gives it away to JBoss, do they turn >around and refund the commercial vendors?
    ------------------------------------------
  51. In about 1-2 years, all PC in the worlds will have .NET >installed on their PC by default with no JVM, and maybe >VisualStudio.NET (which is better that most java IDE) >installed also.

    >This mean that almost all 'normal' devellopers will have >an instant access to .NET, and what Sun will offer as >alternative?:

    Hey, don't worry about that!!! You can't run personal
    web server from Microsoft XP Home (unlike Windows 98),
    so they locked a ton of people out of doing .NET programming
    without upgrading to Windows XP professional ($199).

    BTW--I have access to .NET studio through work, and I
    am unable to install the IIS server-side components like
    I could with Visual Studio 6.0 on NT/2000.

    The good news in all of this is that it seems that it will
    take a while for .NET development to penetrate the
    every day developer, while you can download a JDK and
    netbeans for free, and JBoss, even, and get started
    right away. Then move to Weblogic/Websphere/iPlanet on the
    server side with some minor changes if so required by
    the customer. Or use xdoclet, etc...

    IMHO, Microsoft is about a year away from being equivalent
    in market share to EJB 1.1 servers two years ago.

    So keep evangalizing out there, because we have
    less than one
    year before people understand enough of .NET to be
    more than dangerous...

    Ken
  52. Hi Ken
    >> Hey, don't worry about that!!! You can't run personal
    web server from Microsoft XP Home (unlike Windows 98),
    so they locked a ton of people out of doing .NET programming
    without upgrading to Windows XP professional ($199).

    I don't see that M$ is trying to make all windows users as developers .If so then there should be atleast ( 300 Million Windows developers ).So i don't see your point here.

    I think we have to accept that there is going to be a big impact on the Java Programming Crowd. The entry of new Java programmers will come down.Programmers prefer to work with better tools ( even they are also humans :-) )

  53. The lack of free support, which can usually be found in most open source efforts (although JBoss and Zope come to mind) seems to be the whole point of open source: it's a community, and it's free.

    The kind of dialogue mentioned above seems to be in the same category as Thought, Inc.'s reaction to JDO. I saw the Thought, Inc. booth at BEA eWorld and all I could think of was that employee they have that went off. The last thing I wanted to do was listen to their sales pitch. If you treat your possible customers as stupid, then they'll go away. They'll find another solution that works from people who know how to deal with people as human beings, and possible customers.

    I think this raises the question of how important the "Most Downloads Ever" brag that JBoss tries to push. Sure, I can download it for free, but if abuse is the standard response in an attempt to be involved in a open source community, there are plenty of other places I would go. The actual penetration rate into the actual market will never match the download numbers.

    No, Sun does not need JBoss. JBoss needs some customer relations people. A manager who decides which product to use is going to go with the people who behave in a professional manner. The pointy-haired-boss will never ever put up with that kind of behavior from employees, from vendors.
  54. <quote>The pointy-haired-boss will never ever put up with that kind of behavior from employees, from vendors.</quote>

    I don't think the JBoss download numbers are in question. Sourceforge is the one responsible and they are independent.

    Look at them. The JBoss forums are a zoo. They receive hundreds of demands like that a day from people who don't pay them a dime. Real Open Source is not a popularity contest. It's about a quality product for free. How that community functions may not be your idealistic Santa Claus version, but it apparently works.

    They do for-pay support. Big deal. They most certainly don't insult the people who pay them. People say they don't want a product from people starving in a closet so it's completely logical that people who provide a free product aren't in the free services business. You got to charge for one or the other.
  55. I wasn't questioning the download numbers themselves. :) Just the number of people who are successfully getting all their questions asked to the point where they want to put it in production.

    I'll check out the JBoss forums again. Last I checked most questions were for 2.4, not 3.0a.
  56. Bullshit. You do not expect, and do not see this kind of behaviour from bsd, linux, apache, postgres, mysql, jakarta - list goes on and on - people.

    And with this kind of attitude towards [supposedly] fellow developers they expect Sun to bless them to compete against .NET for the lower end of the market? Hahahaha. Ah-hahahaha. Ha. Haha.
  57. If you really need support go to http://www.pramati.com/forums.htm
  58. Have you tried Paramati App Server ? Its damn cheap. Peanuts to what WebLogic or WebSphere costs. Besides its the first and i guess (iam not sure) which is certified by SUN for the latest J2EE norms.Check it out.
  59. I believe a lot of people are missing the point of this whole fiasco. Don't quote me on this, but I believe money is not the issue, as it is stated in the article...they can now afford to pay for certification.

    If any of you have followed Enhydra, you already know they had to withdrawl their application server from being open source to be allowed to get certification from Sun. Sun's Licensing to get certified has requirements which make the certification of an open source app server impossible.

    THAT is the issue.

    Can anyone with real knowledge weigh in on this issue?

    -Pete
  60. Following is a quote from OrionServer.com regarding whether the code will ever be released as open source:
    ------
    In fact, if we did, Sun might sue us since they see any implementation of the J2EE specification as their intellectual property that we can not show to anyone.
    ------

    There I believe is the real issue, but we don't have enough information from either Sun or JBoss.

    -Pete
  61. As noted before, the civil tone used here doesn't sound like Marc. Cool pledge to get Sun weeping and caughing up some dole or a test suite.

    On the other hand, JBoss has always been a little tight-lipped when it came to what is supported and what's not.
    Which gave me the impression they are in some aspects of
    the J2EE spec still catching up.
    My understanding is that JBoss doesn't fully support
    the new J2EE spec, forgive me if I'm wrong here.
    In particular the CORBA compatibility was not there.
    So the whole thing boils down to politics again, since
    I'd expect JBoss to fail certification as we speak,
    and that wouldn't do anybody any good.

    Sun should make the certification suite available for
    free. The value in the branding is a different story,
    but I still think they should cut a deal with JBoss.
    The stakes are high regarding .net.

    In the Enhydra fiasco Lutris wound up with thae part of the
    bad guy good when they basically wanted to use (pieces
    of) Sun's RI for free.
    I don't think that the JBoss story will end the same
    way, first because JBoss Org won't squeeze the
    tooth paste (open source) back into the propietary tube
    like Lutris did. And if Sun manages to disgust Marc and
    friends, they'll get their fair share of the blame.

    Couple of questions:

    1) 'We can now afford certification'. Is this a typo or
       a general change in direction? So far JBoss couldn't
       afford certification.

    2) There's still the myth that Sun is not willing for
       legal or business reasons to certify JBoss. It's in
       Sun's own interst to dispell these rumours.
       What exactly 'is not possible' in terms of J2EE
       certification of an open source implementation?
  62. <quote>As noted before, the civil tone used here doesn't sound like Marc. <quote>

    Noticed the new tone as well. That's probably where Nathalie Mason, the Director of Business Dev (and incidentally his wife if you look her up on the JBoss site) comes in. Although it's not a surprising evolution since they're interested in working with Sun and growing a services business.

    <quote>There's still the myth that Sun is not willing for
    legal or business reasons to certify JBoss. It's in Sun's own interst to dispell these rumours. </quote>

    Agreed, it's been said many times on this site that even Microsoft comes here to directly discuss their positions, but Sun (guardian of J2EE and this is "your online J2EE community") doesn't even show that courtesy with the exception of one interview with Bill Shannon and Karen Tegan. The legal clarification and position statement can only come from Sun as they set the rules for J2EE certification and everyone else can only interpret their position and react to it. The Lutris incident was all kind of fishy because a lot of people felt they used Sun as an excuse to pull Enhydra out of Open Source. With JBoss it's a different story.

    Sun needs to take the "compete, don't hide behind litigation" statements currently being made about them to heart and start showing leadership here.
  63. an other Open Source J2EE server[ Go to top ]

    JOnAS ( http://www.objectweb.org/jonas/ ) is an other EJB container, twice faster than JBoss ( really, run benchmark ).

    Do you think it's a good or bad thing to have more than one J2EE open source server ???

  64. There were several interesting issues brought up in the onjava article and all people can focus on in the end is some colorful language dredged up on an old JBoss forum: exactly what I would expect from a bunch of tittering housewives on the Oprah Winfrey hour.

    Have any of you read some of the internal mails sent by Linus Torvalds? He trashes, insults, diminishes and so on. You may not like it, but that's often the way things work in Open Source. With 10,000 new users a day there has to be some language that stands above the background noise. All of you taking the high road on "professionalism" likely deal with a few paying clients a week if you're lucky. Well, duh..of course the communication is different.

    Rickard is the only person to post here who works in Open Source and developed a significant part of JBoss. His response was clear. The rest of you are a bunch of whiners who want a free quality product delivered to you with free first-class service by a bunch of Buddhist monks. At the end of the day, Marc's personality is irrelevent (in fact he's a clever manipulator of the media because all he has to do is say s__ m_ d___ to get JBoss an order of magnitude more posts than any other app server here). At the end of the day "it's the product, stupid" (to echo Clinton in the '92 election campaign).
  65. "S__ m_ d___ ...(to echo Clinton in the '92 election campaign)."

    Just caught that. Guess there's no way to get away from the puns:)
  66. I didn't know that Linux said that kind of stuff. But it doesn't really prove your point. Linus by himself (although we owe him a lot) didn't bring Linux into real business use. It's only when tried and true companies (IBM, etc) started supporting Linux did it really start to blossom.

    And although we owe Marc Fleury a lot for JBoss (which is a beautiful product) it won't be until a large corporation supports JBoss that it will start to be used in companies other than the real cutting-edge companies. I'd love to be able to sell JBoss to my boss, but it's not there yet. No one ever got fired for buying IBM, and in the post-bubble era managers are really squeamish about buying something from a company that is less than 5 years old.

    So which company will push JBoss? Not BEA, not Oracle, not IBM. Maybe HP? Not Sun, since they're still trying to keep iPlanet afloat, and they want to keep the other Java App servers happy.

  67. No one got fired for buying IBM[ Go to top ]

    Keep in mind that five years ago, BEA, the current market leader was a pretty dull middleware company that was on nobody's radar until they purchased WebLogic, a start-up on the bleeding edge of a yet unproven field, J2EE.

    No one ever got fired for saving their company thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars in licensing fees either.

    Who will implement JBoss? Companies sensitive to budget, with the ability to recognize the quality of the product, who have in-house engineers comfortable working with Open Source or who supplement their in-house knowledge with services from JBoss Group.

    Sure, it would speed up the process if a major player pushed JBoss. Agreed that IBM, BEA, Oracle and HP are not likely candidates. Ironically, Sun would be the company with the biggest vested interest in pushing JBoss. Of course, that would take admitting that the trash heap is where iPlanet and their reference implementation belong and humility, even when it's in their interest, is not a quality of big corporations (I can write off a lot of attitude from someone who brings me a great product for free. What is truly annoying is when you get it from a company that charges significant money for crappy software). However, there is the example of Oracle scrapping their container for Orion (a vastly superior product) so there are some examples of good sense prevailing in the corporate world.

  68. No one got fired for buying IBM[ Go to top ]

    <I can write off a lot of attitude from someone who brings me a great product for free>

    Perhaps. But the product we are talking about is not free. The product we are talking about is not JBoss, it is JBoss Support. And JBoss Support costs a lot of money. I don't care how brilliant the JBoss Support team is, if you don't like them, you are not going to buy their product. And if the JBoss Group business model is correct, that most users of JBoss will need to buy JBoss Support, then it follows that people that don't have a good relationship with JBoss Support will not use JBoss.
  69. No one got fired for buying IBM[ Go to top ]

    Yeah, you're right on that point that Sun should adopt JBoss. They should take it over as their RI and toss iPlanet.

    Which brings up an interesting point: What would have happened if iPlanet was a valid product that could compete with WebSphere and WebLogic? Would J2EE have stayed as consistent if BEA had to compete with Sun while using Sun-standardized architectures?

    If Sun supported JBoss as much as it has supported WebLogic/WebSphere, you might find more splintering in the Java world. Because it would (and should) scare the pants off of every Java application vendor, if Sun took JBoss under its wing. It'd be the equivalent of writing Word on Windows and then releasing the OS API to the rest of the word processor vendors. Sun could and would gain a Java app server monopoly if it started pushing JBoss.

    So for now JBoss is stuck going on technology and open source. I think they've competed well so far.
  70. <quote>
    They should take it over as their RI and toss iPlanet
    </quote>

    AFAIK, Tomcat is a part of the RI, not iPlanet. This whole thread sounds like JBoss is the only free/low-cost alternative to BEA/IBM offerings - this is simply not true. There are quite a few of excellent offerings such as JOnAS, Resin, Orion, Pramati, ... I do like and use JBoss, but it is not the only viable solution out there - for example, Caucho doesn't make big headlines, but the product (Resin) is superb, and it is used in production by many organizations.
  71. Yes, I meant to say that take it over as their RI (tossing their current RI) in addition to tossing iPlanet. I'm fully aware that iPlanet is not a reference implementation. I can see how you might have gotten that. I apologize.

    How do the JMS offerings of the lower cost servers you mention match up to BEA/IBM? This is an honest question, since I just don't know. BEA is *almost* there to having a full failover yadda yadda yadda JMS, and IBM has MQSeries. I think as J2EE gains larger applications the "plain vanilla" JSP/EJB combo will grow towards JMS-centric applications, at least within the container itself.

    I'll check in to resin. :)
    Thanks for the reference.
  72. No one got laid off[ Go to top ]

    <quote>
    How do the JMS offerings of the lower cost servers you mention match up to BEA/IBM?
    </quote>

    http://www.swiftmq.com
  73. No one got laid off[ Go to top ]

    Nice prices! Very cool. Thank you very much.
  74. SwiftMQ[ Go to top ]

    Wow. It was absolutely free just recently ;-( It looks like since 3.0.0 release it is no longer free.
  75. No one got laid off[ Go to top ]



    <quote>
    How do the JMS offerings of the lower cost servers you mention match up to BEA/IBM?
    </quote>

    The answer is "it depends". It really does depend on what you want/need out of your messaging implementation. In general, the "free" ones dont fare so well in terms of reliability and performance (few support clustering).
    (SwiftMQ is no longer free!).

    First thing to note is that MQSeries is not part of Websphere - its a seperate product. Also, the bundled JMS in the upcoming Websphere5 is not MQSeries. Moreover, MQSeries is not very well suited to pub-sub.

    BEA's JMS implementation is quite respectable. It provides a solid implementation, though its lack of non-Java bindings and lack of WAN clustering prevent it from competing as a global messaging infrastructure provider. However, for messaging within an application and between applications on the same LAN, it is quite ok.

    The one thing that you must consider when using a bundled JMS when messaging between applications is that in general if the appserver is down, then so is the JMS server - somewhat negating the high-availability advantages of using asynchronous messaging. (clustering will obviously alleviate this)
  76. <At the end of the day "it's the product, stupid">

    That is dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. I don't care if you have the greatest product since sliced bread, if the person or manager you are selling to doesn't like you you are not going to make the sale! Go try to sell your great product to the Chinese where new relationships are very difficult to cultivate and see how far you get.

    At the end of the day, it the relationship, stupid !!
  77. "it the relationship stupid."

    Omigod, it's the Oprah Winfrey daytime television hour again.

    First of all I'll bet you a lot of people use Oracle who don't personally like Larry Ellison's style or use MS Windows even if they are offended by Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer. But you know what? Nobody is selling you JBoss. All you have to do is go to Sourceforge and download it. As for the Chinese, I hear that they absolutely love getting great software for free. I don't think they're asking to have a tea ceremony with Marc to use his product.
  78. <First of all I'll bet you a lot of people use Oracle who don't personally like Larry Ellison's style or use MS windows even if they are offended by Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.>
    Yea, when was the last time any of these people walked into a manager's office to sell something. Its the salesman out there making the calls, the person that the buyer has the actual relationship with!!

    <All you have to do is go to Sourceforge and download it.>
    Already done that. But if I had to reccomend JBoss for a production site, I would look into what kind of support I could get and that is where the relationship comes in, and the thread from JBoss Forum that started all this would defintely enter into the decision. And thats the point of this thread. Sorry, your missed it.

    <I don't think they're asking to have a tea ceremony with Marc to use his product.>
    They would do the same as me if they were deciding on JBoss for a production site.
  79. This is sales 101 bullshit, from people who chirp about sound bites because they don't want or are not capable of understanding the larger issues.

    If you actually took the time to read the thread, the insult was for somebody looking for free support who had an attitude when he didn't get any. Not surprisingly, no one took the time to dig up the other JBoss forum threads where tons of good free support is dished out.

    You don't have a relationship with a 100,000 people who download a product for free every month.

    As for buying JBoss Group support, I don't think Fleury and the others in the group insult people who pay them. And how many people here can give rave reviews about their amply paid for BEA, IBM, Sun support experience? I've heard plenty of horror stories there.
  80. The attitudes that eminate from the jBoss team are disgustingly arrogant. Some vendors can get away with this (Oracle, Microsoft), but not all.

    Good luck boys, you'll need it. You have good technology, but your public face is atrocious.


  81. I think, Sun should be Sue for monoply on Java. This is should certainly be stronlgy criticezed, what Sun did against JBoss. By doing this Sun showed and proved their monoply on Java. After this how can Sun claim for J2EE to be an open standard platform.

    Farooq Hameed
  82. this is not a monopoly, its a product we choose to use. furthermore, 2 days ago, sun reached agreement to allow jboss to get tested for free. apache and jboss called them on it, and Sun listened.
  83. Unless you read the fine print. There are loop holes in there. The agreement was specifically designed to please Apache/Jakarta, but nothing more.

    I believe it when when it's actually done.

    /Rickard
  84. If it is true that Sun has "refused" to certify JBoss, I would be very interested to see their official response. Has Sun just been tardy, and JBoss will be certified in due course, or is there a definite Sun stance towards JBoss?

    Tristan Bergh
  85. The problem is there is no one to sue if the Jboss code/license exposes j2ee so that it can be ripped off legally by microsoft!

    you open-source advocates should watch Greta Van Susteren sometime. Would you trust MS and the OJ jurors to do the right thing????

    Wake up!
  86. ok, I read antiPatterns(Subject bitterjava) before I read this thread; now:
    1.) JBOSS team;we all; need to get it certified(2$, we love you LONG time)
    1.1) Sun will keep an eye on development.

    2.1) JBOSS master committers can do what they like.
    2.1.1) Stop moaning, YOU could make money consulting, the code is there/here. dissing the jboss team... what a laugh.

    3.1) who gives! who cares who wrote the core? seems like nobody are downloading the CVSROOT anymore.
    3.1.1) If you want to complain, change it! this is the world of opensource ppl, not big company bulltwang. [see 2.1.1) and this.this.this.] if it is buggy! and you can see it! then you must be able to debug and change/make suggestions, if not, you are not sure. then you are speculating.... mmmm... programmer speculating...

    microsoft is rocking the radius of this world, lets not give them volume.

    and so the thread will go on.

    Thanks
    ousie