Sun offers its base application server as free J2EE 1.4 RI

Discussions

News: Sun offers its base application server as free J2EE 1.4 RI

  1. Sun is offering its Java System Application Server (formerly Sun ONE Application Server) as the reference implementation for J2EE 1.4. The basic version of their application server will become free, while versions with added services (e.g. clustering) will still cost money.

    Jonathan Schwartz claimed: "The 1.4 reference implementation will in fact be our [basic-level] application server," offered free of charge. Anybody can get our application server."

    Sun hopes that this will get a J2EE 1.4 compliant application server into developers hands. Then we can get going with the web services support. Jonathon said, "[Version] 1.4 is really the fusing of Web services with the Java platform. Now they are the same thing."

    This enforces the sentiment that the J2EE layer has become a commodity, and that vendors have moved up the stack to compete.

    Schwartz attacked the analyts that suggested they should spin off Java in his comments: "[It would be] like spinning the Internet out of Sun."

    He also went on to discuss where Sun is making profits, which included Java itself, the Java desktop (shortly), and the Java Enterprise System (formerly code-named Project Orion, which includes application server, portal server, directory server, Web server, and more, for $100 per employee, per year).

    Sun To Offer Free App Server As Base For J2EE 1.4

    Sun readies J2EE 1.4, app server

    Sun bets on free Java tool

    NOTE: The news.com article incorrect claims that Sun is replacing their $2k product with a free product.

    Threaded Messages (45)

  2. Free unless you want certain things...[ Go to top ]

    From the Infoworld article:

    ""The 1.4 reference implementation will in fact be our [basic-level] application server," offered free of charge, Schwartz said. However, higher level application servers that are more scalable and fault-resilient also will be available for a price, according to Schwartz”

    So Sun still does not get it:
    - Customers do not want a bait and switch strategy.
    - True Open Source development is much higher quality and lower cost.

    I am wondering if Sun's 5th try at an app server is going to be any better (NetDynamics, Kiva/Netscape, iPlanet, the much maligned RI's of the past, and now this new Sun One, opps I mean N1, opps I mean Sun Java Enterprise Something but not the scalable or fault tolerant one).

    Bob "I love JBoss" Bickel
  3. Free unless you want certain things...[ Go to top ]

    Bob "I love JBoss" Bickel: "True Open Source development is much higher quality and lower cost."

    (Without regard to the particular qualities of the nom-du-jour Sun application server and JBoss ...)

    Look, I know I've already blown my wad on this subject, but this claim is a combination of religious bigotry and intellectual dishonesty. To start with, who defines "True Open Source"? I mean, if someone finds a supposed open source project that has terrible quality, will you say that it isn't really "True Open Source"? Any time I see someone put "True" (especially with a capital T) in front of something, it takes me right back to Guyana and the "big red pitcher guy" with the painted-on black grin.

    Can't we keep the fundamentalist religion out of open source?

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Clustered JCache for Grid Computing!
  4. "Can't we keep the fundamentalist religion out of open source?"
    Short answer: probably not.

    Long answer: We probably have a higher chance of seeing Microsoft admitting to security problems, embracing Linux and telling that they will push hard for Java in the same day..
    Fundamentalism has been around for ages, and isnt going anywhere anytime soon.
  5. Free unless you want certain things...[ Go to top ]

    this claim is a combination of religious bigotry and intellectual dishonesty. To start with, who defines "True Open Source"?

    Please, Cameron. Bob was talking about a product for which the source code is not available. This was not an obscure argument over which license is 'more' open source or free. You don't have to be a religious zealout or intellectually dishonest to agree that Sun's product is not Open Source.

    This is worse than writing an article called 'Why Open Source Sucks,' and then complaining when people feel like you might have been criticizing open source software.
  6. Free unless you want certain things...[ Go to top ]

    Corby: Bob was talking about a product for which the source code is not available. This was not an obscure argument over which license is 'more' open source or free. You don't have to be a religious zealout or intellectually dishonest to agree that Sun's product is not Open Source.

    Sun's product is not open source, although I would guess that some pieces of it are (or will be) available in source form as the J2EE reference implementation (though not "open source" as defined by the FSF.) I didn't realize that this was being argued though.

    I know Bob works for JBoss Group, and I think it's great that he's proud of the software that he represents -- he should be -- but his assertions were ridiculous.

    Corby: This is worse than writing an article called 'Why Open Source Sucks,' and then complaining when people feel like you might have been criticizing open source software.

    Touche. Speaking of ridiculous assertions ;-).

    (Although if you did read it, you know that the title was the only part of that dog that had teeth.)

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Clustered JCache for Grid Computing!
  7. Hey punk, over here we capitalize the first word in a sentence, no matter what it is. And he said 'True Open Source development.' He was talking about a development process, not a bullet point on a cardboard box. Tomcat sucked until *after* it became open source. The reference implimentation servlet container wasn't developed as open source. But Tomcat 4 is. He was expressing an opinion that is fairly well supported by facts. It may not always be true that open source development is always higher quality and lower cost, but in alot of areas where there is an actual comparison, it wins. You're the bigot here.
  8. Tomcat sucked until *after* it became open source.


    Since when doesn't Tomcat suck anymore? Since it starts?
  9. Aaron: Hey punk, over here we capitalize the first word in a sentence, no matter what it is. And he said 'True Open Source development.'

    Yes, in retrospect, I may have misunderstood the meaning of the capital T. Having read Huxley, I should have known better. My apologies if I jumped to an incorrect conclusion. I'm not sure where the "hey punk" stuff is coming from, though.

    Aaron: He was talking about a development process, not a bullet point on a cardboard box. Tomcat sucked until *after* it became open source. The reference implimentation servlet container wasn't developed as open source. But Tomcat 4 is. He was expressing an opinion that is fairly well supported by facts. It may not always be true that open source development is always higher quality and lower cost, but in alot of areas where there is an actual comparison, it wins.

    This assertion is still ludicrous, no matter how many times you parrot it. Some open source projects have good quality; pointing to those does not somehow make "open source" have magical quality attributes.

    Aaron: You're the bigot here.

    I am trying to keep some measure of reason in a discussion about software. If that is bigoted, then you're a few centuries too late to participate in The Inquisition. You are under no obligation to agree with me; should you disagree with me, please explain why instead of claiming that your opinions are "supported by facts" that you do not seem to have the patience to enumerate. I will try to respect your opinions and learn from the experiences and information that you have to offer, as I think it is generally fair to expect of any reasonable participant.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Clustered JCache for Grid Computing!
  10. Free unless you want certain things...[ Go to top ]

    So Sun still does not get it:

    > - Customers do not want a bait and switch strategy.

    Eh? How does Sun's announcement imply bait and switch?

    I propose customers want a low cost-of-entry when initially dipping their toes in the water, but would be prepared to pay for a system when it has demonstrated its value to them.

    > - True Open Source development is much higher quality and lower cost.

    What has Open/Closed got to do with it? There is awful OSS and ClosedSS out there, as well as great OSS and ClosedSS stuff.


    > Bob "I love JBoss" Bickel

    Can I suggest you might like to be careful you don't become pigeon-holed as an unthinking zealot.
  11. Reference Implementations != Open Source[ Go to top ]

    RI's are used to let people quick the tires with new technologies or specifications.

    by giving away the platform Java Appplication Server 7, it gives developers a better platform to learn and tinker with the technology.
  12. This is like an Aprils fools day posting.

    "Schwartz attacked the analyts that suggested they should spin off Java"

    It's not just Wall Street that thinks Sun shold stay away from Java, Open source users wants Sun to spin of Java as well, there has been much discussion on it here at TSS. Companies are quick to flip on issues like this, they have to keep Wall Street happy.
    IBM application server shipps with IBM VM, BEA and Oracle include j:Rockit VM, that leaves the Sun Java VM a smaller pie. Why jBoss does not include jRockit VM, its faster, and better license.

    I wonder what "iPlanet" will be called in Q1 of 2004.

    .V
  13. Giving it away[ Go to top ]

    Is it so bad that they are trying to give it away?
  14. So bad ?[ Go to top ]

    Ahhh, so you think that if something is FREE then it is "bad" ?

    Clearly you don't believe in OpenSource.
    JBoss is FREE ... is that "bad" ?
    Tomcat is FREE ... is that "bad" ?
    I can name you a VERY long list of FREE software that is often very good. This one comes with documentation (unlike JBoss).

    Complain, complain, complain. People clearly have got nothing better to do with their time than say or do something constructive.
  15. So bad ?[ Go to top ]

    You must not forget though Sun have reinvented their app server so many times, one can only assume they are having trouble selling it (whether or not it's bad). This is just a gesture, demo software handy for evaluating not much use after that. They will still want to sell their not so bsaci versions of the app server, this is just a way to try and do it and more power to them!

    This is not bad news, it's just not big news...
  16. So bad ?[ Go to top ]

    bsaci = basic :-)
  17. re: so bad[ Go to top ]

    This is just a gesture, demo software handy for evoluationnot much use after that


    this is related to S1AS 7 (J2EE 1.3)

    - platform version - core of app server

    - standard version - platform version + more managament possibilites (more instances with 1 installataion and stuff like this)
     
    - enetrprise version - standard editon + enterprise features (load balancing, session failover and stuff like this)

    So platform edition is FREE for PRODUCTION with FREE documentation in 3 OSs. The platform edition is a subset of the standard and enetrprise edition.

    !!! SO NO DEMO SW !!!!, but normal comercial SW for FREE

    > This is not bad news, it is just not big news

    Well, the S1AS 7 is ONLY ONE COMERCIAL PRODUCT on market for PRODUCTION, which is FREE.
  18. re: so bad[ Go to top ]

    <damian frach>Well, the S1AS 7 is ONLY ONE COMERCIAL PRODUCT on market for PRODUCTION, which is FREE</damian frach>

    My point was not that it is a 30, 60, or whatever day evaluation. My point was that if they are withholding some features to sell then this is a sales and marketing ploy!
  19. re: re: so bad[ Go to top ]

    they are withholding some features


    1) they are withholding:
  20. re: re: so bad[ Go to top ]

    they are withholding some features


    1) they are withholding:
    - more instances in 1 installation
    - HTTP load balancing
    - session failover

    it is not so painful for me

    2) JBOSS is withholding DOCUMENTAION

    this is PAINFUL for me
  21. hmm[ Go to top ]

    1) SUN as only 1 company on the market (IBM, BEA) gives core version (with out enterprise features) of app server for FREE even for PRODUCTION; now it is app server for J2EE 1.3; next week it will be for J2EE 1.4 too; so 2 products for FREE

    2) and DOCUMENTATION is FREE too; not like JBOSS

    3) BTW part of app server is open sourced, because web container is based on the tomcat

    and peaple still complain ...

    why do not you complain that BEA or IBM do NOT have some FREE product for PRODUCTION
  22. How about J2EE SDK?[ Go to top ]

    How about J2EE SDK?
  23. Content of J2EE 1.4 SDK[ Go to top ]

    The free applicaton server from Sun will be part of the J2EE 1.4 SDK. J2EE 1.4 SDK also includes J2SE SDK, tutorial, samples, tools, etc. J2EE 1.4 SDK will be available from http://java.sun.com/j2ee soon.
  24. hmm[ Go to top ]

    I think with a low priced offering of Java desktop system and free J2ee1.4 RI Sun is paving the way for an excellent avenue for all corporations to adopt j2ee which anyway would benefit even other j2ee vendors.

    I dont know what people are complaining about. J2ee RI till date is used by developers to learn j2ee . Now you can expect even better.

    cheers,
    Sripada.
  25. hmm[ Go to top ]

    Idem! Me too, I have the impression that some of the harsh comments are unfair! I can only see good things about it.

    If we complain about this, we go against one of the arguments that J2EE has on its side: Competition. In every occasion we say that company-independent nature of J2EE increases the quality of the products thanks to the competition in the market. So here we go. Now we have a good product for free.

    My point of view is just a consumer's. If I look for a free application server, I now have Sun's basic one added to the list, where I already had JBoss and Jonas...

    Keep up the good work!
  26. didn't hp use a similar strategy?[ Go to top ]

    and we know where that brought them
  27. hmm[ Go to top ]

    Idem! Me too, I have the impression that some of the harsh comments are unfair! I can only see good things about it.

    >
    > If we complain about this, we go against one of the arguments that J2EE has on its side: Competition. In every occasion we say that company-independent nature of J2EE increases the quality of the products thanks to the competition in the market. So here we go. Now we have a good product for free.
    >
    > My point of view is just a consumer's. If I look for a free application server, I now have Sun's basic one added to the list, where I already had JBoss and Jonas...
    >

    Actually you already had Sun on the list - AS7 Platform Edition shipped over a year ago - it is free for development and production use:

    http://wwws.sun.com/software/download/products/3ec1008e.html
  28. Go SUN!
  29. I think this is a good news. We have seen articles stating small and medium businesses using .net instead of J2EE because of cost. These kind of basic free editions will help those people to look towards j2ee.
  30. Tools Support[ Go to top ]

    It's great that it is free but the only tools support is with Sun's Studio product. Not much of an incentive to use the app server over others like JBoss.
  31. Unless you got some insight...[ Go to top ]

    It's great that it is free but the only tools support is with Sun's Studio product. Not much of an incentive to use the app server over others like JBoss.


    Unless you got some insider information, don't jump to the conclusion that Sun's Studio will be the only IDE for this free appserver. I recently downloaded a plugin for jbuilder 9 off Sun's web site and used it with Sun's free J2EE 1.3 appserver (version 7, platform edition). The combination works fine. I see no reason why Sun will stop providing this plugin when they release the free J2EE 1.4 appserver. jbuilder is the leading IDE, Sun would be stupid to not support it.
  32. I take it back...[ Go to top ]

    It's great that it is free but the only tools support is with Sun's Studio product.

    Ok, I take back my comment. When it was first released there was no way to use other tools. Now there appears to be atleast a JBuilder Plugin and a deployment tool which was missing from the initial App Server 7. Now they just need an Eclipse plugin.
  33. Who will build Eclipse plugin?[ Go to top ]

    Good point about Eclipse plugin. I doubt Sun will build one. It would be great if Sun would provide the source in some way to allow members of the Eclipse community to build a plugin for the new appserver.
  34. Eclipse plugin[ Go to top ]

    J2EE 1.4 supports management (JSR-77) and deployment (JSR-88). So you can develop the plugins without any internal knowledge of the product.

    <quote>
    It would be great if Sun would provide the source in some way to allow members of the Eclipse community to build a plugin for the new appserver.
    </quote>

    Regards
  35. Eclipse is supported by IBM, and not Sun. On the other hand, Sun supports NetBeans, so, I guess, Sun will not implement anything for Eclipse, but instead, I believe you'll see a lot of plugins for NetBeans. Look at the Bundled download for J2SE and NetBeans.

    John
  36. Open Source is dead ...[ Go to top ]

    ... while you guys argue about language semantics and spirtuality for "free" software, everyone else is out making lots of money.

    One day you will wake up and realise that everyone has bought microsoft technologies and "smarter" business users will be running the show.

    ha
  37. why is source needed[ Go to top ]

    if the interfaces are well documented, why should someone need source to build a plugin for eclipse?
  38. why crib about what sun did in the past and why should it spin off java etc..
    they are feeling the HEAT with all free servers in the market , so now they hve come down to the community level and giving sun 1, n1 XXX for free. ( BTW Suns naming standard sucks.) So lets try it out, if it sucks we wont use it. But if its good SUN can make future custmers with paid version.
    Lets give it a shot
  39. This is frigging free! Why are people complaining? Don't use it if you don't like it.
  40. I hate people who hate sun[ Go to top ]

    What's wrong with you people? Why are you bashing SUN? They have done more for Java than any other company, including JBoss Inc, IBM and BEA.

    There is lot of open source Java outside of JBoss. Get over it.

    Java should not be GPLed, BSDed, Apache'ed. It's perfect the way it is. JCP is a good forum. You hate SUN for the control it maintains over JAVA and it's specs. I think it is important contribution by SUN. If you don't like it nobody stops you from implementing your own libraries to do the same things. Standardization plays an important role in bringing everybody on a higher playing field.

    Stop bashing SUN and be grateful to them.

    Declaimer:I own 100 sun shares, loosing 80$ on it. I don't work for sun.
  41. I hate people who hate sun[ Go to top ]

    I'm not a huge fan of Java but I agree with you that open sourcing Java may not be a good idea.

    Face it, there are a lot of pointy haired types making decisions on what platforms to use. My guess is that most of those types would shy away from the risk, real or perceived, of building systems using open source languages/platforms/etc.

    Heck, I think I would tend to shy away from that. Java without a big named backer like Sun, IBM, etc would hurt it.

    Unless, perhaps Java was released to a standards governing body......
  42. Sun chicken[ Go to top ]

    I think if Sun want to make FREE of the product, make all FREE. or they still lose r. Clustering feature, etc, must be free.

    and make it consistent. or Sun will lose the second trust.

    Frans
  43. Sun chicken[ Go to top ]

    he,

    SUN is pissed off because JBoss ***IS*** THE RI with a FREE, PRODUCTION READY, HIGH QUALITY application server with 4 MILLION DOWNLOADS. We got it long time ago, good luck to them.

    The product better be good this time around. Oh wait it is the old product for free? hugh...

    bob is right, open source development when done right does yield superior software, it is not a JBoss thing it is a QA thing. It is not the production side, like in closed source mode, the writing is done by few people. What is superior is the QA. The open source QA is unmatched. Our users, the smart ones that dive in the code, stabilize the codebase through sheer mass of usage. Next.

    marcf
  44. Sun chicken[ Go to top ]

    Still thumping your chest I see
  45. Why not?[ Go to top ]

    It can be used for small business. And yes, Sun will sell the value-added version for the small company when it grows bigger because they will chose a known and trusted appserver.
    Its good for the schools to teach coders. And they will have a documentation not like for JBoss.
    War is over, go back to work ;-)
  46. ISV redistribution rights ?[ Go to top ]

    Does anyone know if Sun's appserver can be redistributed ?

    Can ISVs bundle (or embed ) their software with Sun's appserver and distribute it on a CD ? We can do this with JBoss (within the terms of LGPL -of course), it will be nice if we can do this with Sun as well.