News: James Gosling says Resigning From Oracle Has Been A Full Time Job

  1. Where will James Gosling go next? Will he join the .NET team at Microsoft? Do with Android what he did for Java? Become a Distinguished Fellow with IBM? Return to Calgary and teach at his old University in Canada? Well, with Groucho-Marx-esque quips like this, "resigning has been a full time job," one might think he's preparing to hit the Yuk-Yuks circuit and do a comedy tour.

    But from his latest blogs, it certainly doesn't sound like James is spending too much smiling about his departure. "Before I quit, several friends said I'd need a lawyer because 'this is Oracle we're talking about'... sadly, they were right." More to the point, James describes himself as feeling "pretty burned out and trashed."

    So, what's next for Gosling? "The only thing I know for certain is that I'll be taking some time off." That's probably not a bad thing to do. And if he he ends up spending a significant amout of time with his lawyers, he'll probably feel the need to take a lot of showers, too.

    Threaded Messages (5)

  2. Why don't we all admit and accept that the demise of Sun, in spite of huge popularity of Java language was a technology failure. not just for Sun as a compnay, but also for Java as a language! 
  3. Java is Far From Dead[ Go to top ]

    In that same article, James speaks somewhat to that idea. Here's the quote:

    "Java is far from dead, it's path has become complicated, but still vibrant. I'll still be involved. "
  4. Java is Far From Dead[ Go to top ]

    "Java is far from dead, it's path has become complicated, but still vibrant. I'll still be involved. "
    Noo! Please, please, please.
  5. Are you kidding?[ Go to top ]

    .. the demise of Sun [..] was a technology failure. not just for Sun as a compnay, but also for Java as a language! 

    This makes absolutely no sense to me.

    Business failure? Perhaps.

    Technology failure? Come on, habeus corpus?


    Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence
  6. .. the demise of Sun http://.. was a technology failure. not just for Sun as a compnay, but also for Java as a language! 

    This makes absolutely no sense to me.

    Business failure? Perhaps.

    Technology failure? Come on, habeus corpus?


    Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence


    I am talking about the failure of  fulfulling the needs of commercial dataprocessing.
    Java was indeed an elegant idea to start with. Sun did a great job of giving a working JDK free from day one. This was great. Because anyone could just download the stuff and write a Hello World in 5 minutes.

    But that's it. Since then Sun fell short every time, in spite of the fact that Java was becoming popualr every day.
    1. Sun did not give an  IDE or even a simple editor in the early days. One could use any of the shareware editors or IDEs from other vendors. But still the vendor should have given at least an editor with the package. Any University student could have delivered it to Sun as part of one's project.  The missing editor  later resulted in 'missing IDE' which Sun tried to give later .. too late.

    2. The initial focus was on applet and lively web pages. But applets was ok only for fun programming and simple games. Commercially applets were not usable (security reasons inclusive). Also most of the wonderful things applets claimed to do, one could manage with JavaScript!   JavaScript (with its just 2 manuals) became an integral part of every web page - even the webs developed with Java! This was nice for the user, but not for Java!! It underlines the fact that the product is incomplete to fulfill one’s needs.

    3. Soon Web Servers and Servlets appeared.. Servlet was indeed a nice and safe replacement for applets and provided more functionality. But then you needed Web Server to test and run it. It was not easy to find such a Web Server in the early days. Again one had to resort to open source products.

    4. JSP enters the scene as an answer to asp and php. This itself underlines the shortcomings of the Java model! When you are pioneer you don't mimick and follow others ... we see Sun playing the catching up game..

    5. JavaBean confusion. Sun claimed "JavaBeans are reusable software components  that can be manipulated visually in a builder tool."  This definition is faithfully quoted in many books and on Wiki. I never understood the meaning of it.

    Sun even gave BDK - Bean Development Kit. There was never any updates to this or no one ever talked about it later.  JavaBeans were used with JSP pages as objects providing some kind of persistence for the web pages.  In later years JavaBeans (or just Beans) got new meanings...  I wondered many times, why Sun could not give a simpler definition and implementation for the Bean, JavaBean and the EJB!

    6. EJB – well, dataprocessing is not just writing oo-code. It has to manage data and that is the main purpose. IBM introduces the concept of EJB - Enterprise JavaBeans to provide support for serverside business logic and databases persistence for Java applications. Again everyone was confused with the terminology - and one became a GURU if one could claim that EJB and JavaBeans are not one and the same thing!

    EJB was adopted by Sun,,, but it complicated things. Even after tons of literature and books, no one understood anything, though most were shy to admit so. What is that EJB addressed that could not be addressed by JSP and Servlets?  EJB required a container to run. Sun did not give that container! It is longer Java HelloWorld! Application Servers like Websphere and Weblogic entered the lucrative market! Sun was late even here. A recent document from another vendor claimed Tomcat to be the No 1 Application Server!

    I do n't go into the details of Sun's acquisition of Forte tools, renaming into various stuff in later years. It is sufficient to say that NetBeans and Glassfish were late ... very late in an already crowded market.   The original simple mistake of not providing a simple editor re-appeared as the lack of a full-blown IDE - which Eclipse and others easily occupied.

    7.  Since Java was more than a language  (it was a platform)  Sun should have given an application server (container whatever you call it) much earlier.  With or without web, one should have been able to use a standard application server.  Did Sun expect people to depend upon  Apache's Open Source tools?

    8. The biggest flop was yet to come. EJB failed to meet the market needs. EJB 3.0 appeared. Gurus who claimed EJB to be a panacea for all, backtracked and wrote books criticizing EJB. POJO based new Frameworks  appeared. Sun played a passive role here. Many times tried to catch up with ASPX and .NET.

    9. Scripting languages challenged Java.  Topics like 'After Java what?' were presented in Java Meetings. Ruby,  Groovy, Scala .... there goes the list. Sun tried to recruit JRUBY guys...this effort stopped at academic level…

    A document on POJO framework claims that it supports Groovy and Grails which they claim will give the Java user all the advantages of Ruby and Rails!  It is like your 'xyz brand' car dealer claiming that if you attach this extra 'xyzyz' part you will have all the advnatage of the competing car 'abc'! When do you see a complete product?

    10. Paradox.  Usually a software firm is acquired when the product or platform it supports loses the market. In Java's case Java products and companies disappared or were acquired even while Java continue to be the most popular language. This is the PARADOX! IBM withdrew a popular IDE called VisualAge for Java in preference to the IBM-supported Eclipse. Weblogic was acquired. Sun was acquired. Spring firm was acquired by VMware. What next?  

    11. Java - Relational database impedance mismatch. Where lies the problem? Why is  this a problem after 10 years of commercial usage of Java and 25 years of relational db. Having to resort to seperate ORM tools  is another issue which is going to confuse the Java Application development. 

    One can go on .... Java is a wonderful language to play with ... for doing a lot of wonderful things...  On a commercial level, Java as a platform should have provided  a concrete applcation server with all the basic wirings for database based application development.  And this should have come from Sun. A well defined minimum set of Netbeans/Glassfish with support for databases (without having to use any of the open source ORM tools)  would have been sufficient. But such a minimum set never appeared. 

    Microsoft was able to provide a Visual Studio with integrated support for database and the IIS7 server.  Ado.net Entity Framework also provided a complete implementation of ORM as they see it.  Irrespective of whether other better tools exist or not, a complete toolset and runtime platform is provided by the vendor. One needs this for any commercial product!