Oracle just updated their court filings. One content item sorely missing from any Oracle documentation is why Google is being pursued so aggressively. While the Enterprise Java Platform remains pervasive, valiant efforts in the past by Sun to promote mobile device and client side Java development never gained any traction, and this is a problem.

To stop it from becoming this century’s Cobol, Java needs to capture the imagination of the youth, and right now, that means mobile device development. Every kid in college wants to write something for their iPhone or Android device, and the fact of the matter is, the only company succeeding in that space as far as Java is concerned is Google. With this lawsuit, Oracle isn’t just refusing to hold onto the lifeline Google is throwing them, but instead, they’re trying to use that very lifeline to actually strangle their rescuer.
What is Oracle's end game and exit strategy? Read the full article:

This Is How The Lawsuit Ends by Cameron McKenzie

If Oracle manages to win anything or even force a settlement in their favor, it is more likely that Google will drop Java and adopt a new technology. (Microsoft did this with C# when Sun kicked hell over Visual J++).

Expect Android 4.0 to be on python with the *palvik* virtual machine and maybe the dev kit will come with sort of translator for Android 2.x Java apps > Android 4.x Python apps.

Google is so vested in Java though. Android, GWT, Guice...The list goes on.

Google buys Java. They open source the standard Java platform/JDK. They take control of mobile Java, and they hand off the enterprise component of the Java platform to VMWare. Java gets sliced and diced, but people with the most vested interests get the pieces they want.

A dream of mine: Google buys Java

A nightmare of mine: they hand off the enterprise component of the Java platform to VMWare

Hey Mohammad.

I'm not interested in starting a flame war over Spring here, but I'm collecting input from readers about SpringSource, the good and the bad, and what people's big reservations are. If you have any opinions, shoot them to me at cmckenzie at techtarget dot com. 

Google is so vested in Java though. Android, GWT, Guice...The list goes on.

Google buys Java. They open source the standard Java platform/JDK. They take control of mobile Java, and they hand off the enterprise component of the Java platform to VMWare. Java gets sliced and diced, but people with the most vested interests get the pieces they want.

 

Oracle will put at risk their Fusion Middleware brand to Google/VMWare?! Don't think so. Google will settle quickly given Microsoft is now going after them for licensing fees. I can see Google buying VMWare before Java.

Oracle needs to give the java supplier chain(aka dev community & partners) a little group hug. Too much uncertainty and statements like "I work for Oracle and I can assure you that we take java seriously internally" with little to no tangible plan for the future isn't comforting for partners and independent developers alike. If Oracle wants the community to remain engaged in the product line, hanging them out to dry for an indeterminate time "to give Oracle a chance" is asking for way too much. Oracle would not reciprocate with their partner chain if the tables were turned.

The only way for Java to not become COBOL is to stop acting like it's COBOL by accepting the status quo. I don't understand why Oracle doesn't do a short term blitzkreig PR plan with some substantive "show and tells" to assuage a lot of these fears going around. It would serve to protect the Java brand and keep their supplier chain pacified while they work the kinks out.

I'm not sure what the risk freeing Java would have on their Fusion middleware. Java was a core part of their technology long before they acquired Sun, and it would have continued to be even if IBM had acquired Sun instead of them. I don't know what would change so drastically if they freed Java or sold it to Google. Java wouldn't disappear, simply the deed of ownership would change hands, and perhaps the platform might grow stronger, something Oracle and their Fusion middleware would benefit from.

I'm not convinced that Oracle is getting a huge competitive advantage by owning Java. I'll be happy to be convinced otherwise.

"I'm not convinced that Oracle is getting a huge competitive advantage by owning Java. I'll be happy to be convinced otherwise."

They are getting to sue a big behemoth like Google because of the fact that they now own Java...how can you say Oracle is not getting a huge competitive advantage from Java's ownership?

When I say competitive advantage, I mean more along the lines of the fact that when they go in and sell WebLogic, they can't really say to the client 'we own Java, so that makes us better than IBM.' Owning Java in itself isn't a competitive advantage from that standpoint.

Of course, is there a financial advantage? I think that's what you're thinking of. And yeah, if the can license Java, or even sue Google and get a billion dollar settlement, well, I think that's a pretty clear financial advantage.

Really just a semantic argument as to how I differentiate between 'competitive advantage' and 'financial advantage.' YMMV.

Python ROFL.

I agree is the best ending, is really hard for oracle to get any money from java, licensing java is not good business, specially now that is been partially open sourced, for Google will be good business to get java not only because many of its main products are maid in java, is also because they need it for android, java has the biggest development community of any language , which comes with the language with most quality open source libraries , they need this for android, they main reason android is gong to sell is if they have the best apps, having the most popular language will give android the biggest chance to get the best apps, plus experienced developers, plus they have the main java gurus in google which makes  really easy to support java.

And for does who think  google will drop java for another language, forget it not because is imposible is mainly because doing will take some good years to do what they have done with java, I will say at least 2 or years, and there is no time, if they wait they loose, apple and MS will take the market, and they cant loose the mobile market because in a near future people will probably not need laptops they will only have mobile lightweight machines like phones or tablets which is the market where android can become easily dominant if the keep doing as they do

Hi Gabriel,

Wishful thinking :) Successful platforms draw entrepreneurial developers. Look at the iPhone.  Who would have expected Objective-C to see a surge 30 years after it was created? Java is no longer the cutting edge platform of choice. Most Java developers are enterprisey types who want a quite life.

Oracle can make plenty of money out of its Java middleware, so Java is already the new Cobol, and like Cobol, Oracle will be able to milk enterprisey Java for a long time to come yet.

The mobile arena is more dynamic then that. Not sure what will happen there, and I don't think Java is a trump card for Android. J2ME as gone no where and I don't see why Google will fair any better then Sun did.

As time passes the mobile market will probably come to realise that Apple have the right business model, and its all about the user experience and tight hardware/software integration, not portable apps. So Nokia, Motorola etc could end up ditching Android in favour of propriety solutions of their own that make the most of their hardware. For this they can use any technology that is fashionable, and I doubt it will be Java. For those who want portable apps on their phone, well there is always the web...

Paul.

Keep in mind that Android has the market share when it comes to new smartphone purchases.

Your point about Apple doing it right is well taken. But perhaps the same portability thoughts we have on the server side shouldn't be applied exactly the same way on the smartphone side. Maybe a core API with properietary solutions mixed in is a solution in the mobile market? Maybe we need to stop applying the same rules of portability that we apply to enterprise software to micro software, and allow makers to use Android, but at the same time, give them the freedom to create platform specific features? I know such thinking won't make me popular, but it's a thought.

http://vator.tv/news/2010-10-06-android-doubles-market-share-in-six-months

Hi Cameron,

I agree. I think Google needs to box clever here. Nokia left the Android camp for precisely this reason. From the hardware manufactures point of view, their hardware will become nothing more then a standardised commodity, with all the value add in Googles software. Where is the product differentiation?

I'm sure this point isn't lost on Google, and you may have noticed that they didn't make a big noise about their Nexus phone. No doubt not wanting to drive fear into the heart of their "partners". Perhaps they have a clever trick up their sleeve to allow for differentiation. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

As for making you unpopular. We are living in interesting times. Computing devices (notice I didn't say computers) will come in all shapes and forms, and it will be down to the consumer whether he or she values cross platform portability over say ergonomics and usability. The market will decide.

I think we have used so called standards as an excuse in the past to tie customers in. In effect it has led to little choice in many instances (just look at J2ME and the old windows mobile). In the future the power to choose will be with the consumer which is only right IMHO, although it will make our lives as developers a little more difficult :).

Paul. 

Nokia left the Android camp for precisely this reason. From the hardware manufactures point of view, their hardware will become nothing more then a standardised commodity, with all the value add in Googles software. Where is the product differentiation? 

Who cares the hardware manufacturer's perspective. Its what customers want that drives the success of a product. Thats why apple has succeeded. Its offering customers a wonderful hardware platform combined with a best software experience and competitive app platform. When there are hundreds of thousands of apps to choose from and when App sellers are competing each other to win the market, that drives the prices down and quality up for the Apps. That is the reason customers are able to buy quality iPhone apps for couple of dollars a pop !  Why would they care about hardware manufacturers need to differentiate themselves by having their own software platform. Thats what we had until iPhone arrived. And nothing took off like iPhone did. There's a lesson in there for Companies like Nokia. Their best bet is to put their weight behind a cohesive/open/standardized software platform and differentiate with their add on features (both hardware & software) on top of (and wihtin ) that platform ecosystem...not outside of it.  Any phone I buy in future, I am not only going to look for best hardware, I am also going to look for best software platform in terms of app support , market richness (in terms of app sellers) & competition.  If you want to attract me with your own differentiating/niche platform......good luck !

"Nokia left the Android camp for precisely this reason. From the hardware manufactures point of view, their hardware will become nothing more then a standardised commodity, with all the value add in Googles software. Where is the product differentiation? "

Who cares the hardware manufacturer's perspective. Its what customers want that drives the success of a product. Thats why apple has succeeded. 

 

I agree. When you've spent billions on R&D to create a mobile phone industry from scratch, and then you spend even more billions on government licenses, you aren't about to hand over the whole market to a software company that sells advertising or are you?

Nokia, Ericsson, Sony, NEC, Motorola etc. have been pretty slow to respond to the obvious threat and perhaps the game is over for them. I'm not sure though, maybe they do have some fight, we'll have to wait and see.

I agree though if they don't please the consumer then it will be Apple, Microsoft, Google and the commodity Taiwanese hardware manufacturers all the way. It would be a bit of a shame because these companies were pioneers and had the good sense to sort out decent telecom standards when the computer industry was still fighting over character sets :)

(PS. I use to work in the mobile industry and if it was any thing like the computer industry we would still be using two cans and a bit of string to make calls :))

Paul.

As time passes the mobile market will probably come to realise that Apple have the right business model, and its all about the user experience and tight hardware/software integration, not portable apps. 

Yup this strategy did work wonders 20 years ago against the PC.

Hi Alexandre,

This is all guess work, but mobile devices are very different from PCs. In truth PC's are beginning to go out of vogue too. Take a look at the iPad. People don't so much care about computer. What they care about is the content and the power of the medium to connect them with other people. To most the computer is just a device, a necessary evil.

So perhaps Apple were right all those years ago, and it has just taken the rest of us 20 or so years to catch up :)

Good to see you Paul.  I think you've made a couple interesting observations, but it doesn't do anybody any good to say "Most Java developers are enterprisey types who want a quite life." just like it doesn't do anybody any good to say that all old Smalltalk developers live in their mom's basement because they can't find a job.

Now on to the interesting stuff.  The mobile market is interesting for sure, but it's definitely premature to say that the Apple model is right.  Remember that Apple (and especially Jobs) has a history of screwing things up big time.

But I think you have an interesting point regarding Android.  If I was going to wave my hands around with a couple crystal balls in them, I would say that Google will eventually become "the" mobile hardware manufacturer for Android.    Either Android becomes more fragmented with handset customizations or more likely Android 3 brings about a more uniform and intuitive UI, in which case what differentiates Motorola from Nokia from HTC, etc....

In the long run, I think Google comes out ahead with regards to Android and someone like Motorola has tough decisions to make - being beholden to either Google or Microsoft for their software, or cutting their losses all together and doing their own platform.

And I don't agree with the whole PCs are beginning to go out of vogue too.  I've taken a look at the IPad, and it's no PC relacement.  Apple will settle in as having a decent market share of the mobile/tablet platforms, along with Google, Microsoft, and hardware manufacturers having their piece of the pie.

I'll make a bold prediction that RIM and Blackberry will probably go the way of the Dodo bird, sooner than later.

Hi Frank,

Nice hearing from you too. I didn't realise that any of the old crew were still around. Guessed they'ed all be over at some Scala forum or something :) And that's what I meant :)

About your crystal balls.... I agree the PC isn't disappearing! :) The rise of the iPod, iPad, Mac extra is telling though. It's only us Geeks who want our hardware to come seperate from the software. Everyone else it seems wants a bit  of bling that solves their problem out the box (or with a simple down load from the app store!).

The business model for consumer computing devices is changing, and my guess is for the better!

The companies on Android were caught napping by Apple and the iPhone. For some my guess is that Android is a short term fix to stay in the game. The clever ones are busy building their iPhone beater behind the scenes. It will be interesting to see what Symbian come up with in the next couple of years. Also Microsoft is back in the game with Windows 7. So I agree, Apple will get some real competition over the next few years...

Looking at it from a consumer perspective Apple have a really strong story. Also Microsoft. If you are interested in content (like Music), a different device for different things then Apple and Microsoft are going to be pretty hard to beat. The phone is just another computing device, unless of course you just want a phone -which is lots of people. I'm not sure where Google fits in the bigger picture. They don't make phones, or computers. They are an advertising company. I agree with you here.

I thought RIM had the corporate market sown up? Here bling isn't what it's all about, rather data security, and the RIM push technology is second to none. I'm a bit out of touch, but if I was a corporate I would give my staff ugly locked down blackberrys that gave them access to corporate e-mail and nothing else!

Apple have stirred things up by innovating. Innovation is the key (which is how RIM got their start), and Jobs has been great at that. Power is shifting from the computer makers to the consumers. In this new  competitive market the consumer is king. Even Microsoft is waking up to that one!

Not sure were it leaves us developers. Choice I guess, which is something I've always argued for. 

Paul.

Hi Paul,

Actually on the JVM side of things, you'd more likely see me lurking around Clojure forums:)

I agree that mobile has changed the game.   And it's not even mobile, but as you pointed out consumer computing devices.  My Blu Ray player has wireless and YouTube and other services built-in.  On the other hand, if it is "all about" social networking and content creation these days then the multi-touch UI has a ways to go.  Even your casual user still needs the keyboard.

I made a bold prediction regarding RIM and I'll stand by it.  I see  iOS creeping into the corporate realm (usually the young, corporate hipsters).  And I see basically 3 men standing at the end of the day - Apple, Google, and Microsoft as far as the mobile/tablet/etc... OS space goes.  Three seems to be a magic number, and I dont' really see anymore.

The thing that strikes me is how much the dominance of Windows is actually an exception. Or rather, it's not if you look at the wider OS market (games consoles, embedded systems, mobile systems - Psion, Symbian and Palm stole the early lead).

Equally, Apple's 'mistake' doesn't explain why Windows also won against alternative operating systems that were openly licenced to hardware manufacturers. The obvious answer is simply that Windows was backwardly compatible with DOS and the PC architecture - almost everyone else was backing 68000 or Risc-based designs.

Oddly enough, in the early 90s I'd have said the future lay with Unix and RISC architecture systems - I just wouldn't have expected it would happen with phones!

Anyway, if you actually look at how consumers relate to their choice of console, or Blackberry / iPhone / Android, there is actually a fair element of people enjoying exclusivity with their software - at least up until the rival platform gets a Halo, Angry Birds, etc.

And that is where I think Android is lacking so far - I can't think of a single 'name' application, a Hipstamatic or Angry Birds, that is Android exclusive.

I'm not convinced that language popularity is neccesarily relevant - as Paul suggests, the Java programming community doesn't have a great history in the areas that count here (i.e. consumer-oriented application development, games, user-interface design, and yes, eye-candy).

There are exceptions, of course - but in a way they prove that it is not Java (or J2ME) that is the problem, but they are things that are irrelevant to most Java projects.

(An utterly non-technical illustration of this is to look at the default page layouts for a simple data form generated by various web frameworks - Rails, Django, and the major Java ones).

That said, I'm sure plenty of programmers will learn Java through working on Android - just that they will be people coming from the areas where the requisite skills are present - web development and games primarily.

And of course, there will be plenty of line-of-business applications, which won't have to compete in the marketplace on being pretty / usable / well-designed / bug-free.

I loved the article, but thought it could have had more details. As of this day I cannot see a better leader for Java than Google. I wished Sun was bought by Google considering the number of former Sun employees and visionaries Google employs.

I wonder what will happen to the JCP if Google owns Java - I am unaware of any precedent of Google moderating a community process. VMWare / Springsource (though not mentioned in the article) would be a wonderful choice to lead the enterprise Java/JEE standards. VMWare can also lead the JCP process with Oracle / IBM etc.

I just hope all this is not just wishful thinking!!

I loved the article, but thought it could have had more details. As of this day I cannot see a better leader for Java than Google. I wished Sun was bought by Google considering the number of former Sun employees and visionaries Google employs.

I wonder what will happen to the JCP if Google owns Java - I am unaware of any precedent of Google moderating a community process. VMWare / Springsource (though not mentioned in the article) would be a wonderful choice to lead the enterprise Java/JEE standards. VMWare can also lead the JCP process with Oracle / IBM etc.

I just hope all this is not just wishful thinking!!

You really think SpringSource would bring any of their IP to a standards body?  Think again.  Their (in)actions so far have proven otherwise.  They have yet to even attempt to bring any piece of their core technology to the JCP and they've been on the EC, for what?  3+years?  They'd never do it, they already have a perfect vendor-lockin strategy.

Google might be a better home for Java, but, IMO, the jury is still out whether Oracle is a bad steward of Java.  Give them a chance.

Cameron -

The only real strategy that makes any sense here is that Oracle is strong-arming Google into actually taking Java off their hands.

While I cannot comment on the lawsuit, I can assure you that Java is a highly valued and strategic technology (and product) at Oracle. We continue to increase the investment level in Java, and already have more engineers working on core Java than there were before the acquisition.

Oracle gets to focus on their core technologies and strategies

Oracle is focused on Java, because it is one of those core technologies and strategies. Now we have to build on Sun's legacy of creating a healthy community around Java.

Peace,

Cameron Purdy | Oracle Coherence

http://coherence.oracle.com/

Hi Cameron,

from the developer point of view, I would like to see Google taking over Java - you are right when you say that this would be the best way of keeping Java from becoming a next Cobol. However I doubt that Oracle would even mind Java becoming a Cobol - their focus is the enterprise market, and if they can milk that with a Cobolish Java, they will.

In fact, I don't think they even care two cents about whether Java will survive on the mobile market - Oracle has few claims there anyway, and if Google, Apple and (possibly) MS fight it out between themselves, Oracle could be the tertius gaudens.

Moreover, forcing Google to buy Java at an excessive price could even backfire on Oracle: Java has become an integral part of Oracle technology for (at least) the last three major DB versions; Oracle can't affort to lose control over which direction Java is going, and Google could easily take revenge by deliberately neglecting parts of enterprise Java that are vital to Oracle business.

Regards,

Jens

What benefit does google get from buying Java ?

I don't see Google as wanting Java, as much as perhaps being forced to take it. What do they get from acquiring Java? Well, that might get them out of the lawsuit.

If Google loses the lawsuit, this will be a huge claim. Just covering the revenue Oracle would have lost if they had licensed all of those Android apps and made money would be gigantic, but then add on penalties and the such. This won't be a paltry sum.

So, instead of just losing a huge amount of money, Oracle might get them to buy Java for a nice sum. That's how Oracle forces it on Google. Google buys Java and all the IP that goes with it, so the lawsuit becomes moot. Oracle gets a huge wad of cash, and they no longer have the headache of stewarding Java. That goes to Google. But Google gets out of the lawsuit, that's the big benefit to them.

The reasoning has more to do with finances than technology. 

I disagree that Google taking over Java would be a good thing.

For all of their talk, Google, like Oracle, are only interested in the bottom line. Google will 'do no evil' only in so far as it helps maintain their brand image. Oracle don't have a particularly good brand image with developers anyway, only with managers (you don't get fired for buying Oracle), so they needn't maintain an image of being a community player.

Java is used in millions of devices worldwide. Maintaining Java (the core) is complex and taking on Java means taking on all of its historical baggage. People paid Sun to ensure that Java worked on their devices. They are now paying Oracle. With that money comes responsibility not to break the millions of devices Java is running on.

Whereas Google could take on this work, I do not think they would be committed, since it is not core to their business. They are interested in delivering web-based applications to drive their search-based revenue. They got into the mobile market with Android because it gives them some control of web searching on mobiles. They need to be in that loop.

Java is irrelevant to Google's bottom line. Sure, they *use* (and abuse) Java a lot; but they're not in any way interested in its growth or future (in my opinion). It seems to me that they are happy to use the fruits of others' labour, but unwilling to pay for it.

Oracle have a vested interest in Java because of their middleware. They are helping to build enterprise systems using Java. They sell products that use Java. The success Java affects their bottom line.

Not sure what happened to the formatting on the parent post - it should all have the same font size!

If the brouhaha at hand is to end as a win-win for everyone, Google and Oracle must come to some sort of a cross-licensing agreement very quickly, rather than duke it out in court.

Ultimately, it ISN'T about Google's or Oracle's bottom lines (profits) - but it is about answering the question - "How do we use what we've got to serve 6.8 billion people (and counting)?"

If the context in which both Eric Schmidt and Larry Ellison live and operate is one borne of self-centeredness, then Java - the JVM, for mobile + EE - will fail, and another language/platform will take over.

However, Larry Ellison is an altruist - demonstrated by his recent pledge to Warren & Bill's GivingPledge.org, and it is unlikely that he will intentionally screw Java. Beyond that, he is Jewish - and the Jewish people have a special and unique eternal covenant with God unlike any other people - they aspire to holiness and are altruistic as a people. Therefore, I do not fear Java's future at the hands of Oracle, for Larry will not break God's covenant, based on his recent actions.

As far as Google, I am not certain of Eric Schmidt's upbringing or religious beliefs - but Larry Page's mother was Jewish, so that alone brings a Jewish influence in their triumvirate, and will assure that the "Do No Evil" paradigm stretches beyond Google's bottom line (e.g. profits). Larry Page may or may not have realized it yet, but he is under the same covenant with God as Larry Ellison. Whether he chooses to continue honor it with his further actions, remains to be seen.

One has to look at the leadership's core, stated or unstated (religious or otherwise) beliefs, upbringing, current actions - to understand what drives these companies, rather than some temporary motives like who's going to score higher earnings this quarter or sell more phones or RDBMS licenses or whatever....

Having said that, I do not fear Java's future and it is my belief that its future is bright at the hands of both, Google & Oracle.

However, Larry Ellison is an altruist - demonstrated by his recent pledge to Warren & Bill's GivingPledge.org, and it is unlikely that he will intentionally screw Java. Beyond that, he is Jewish - and the Jewish people have a special and unique eternal covenant with God unlike any other people - they aspire to holiness and are altruistic as a people. Therefore, I do not fear Java's future at the hands of Oracle, for Larry will not break God's covenant, based on his recent actions.

As far as Google, I am not certain of Eric Schmidt's upbringing or religious beliefs - but Larry Page's mother was Jewish, so that alone brings a Jewish influence in their triumvirate, and will assure that the "Do No Evil" paradigm stretches beyond Google's bottom line (e.g. profits). Larry Page may or may not have realized it yet, but he is under the same covenant with God as Larry Ellison. Whether he chooses to continue honor it with his further actions, remains to be seen.

Holy shit...are you serious about that crap you just spewed, or did you take too many hits off the peace pipe?

Too many hits off the "peace pipe". Hope that clarified it for you ;).

What do you believe in?

Hey Mohammad. I'm not interested in starting a flame war over Spring here, but I'm collecting input from readers about SpringSource, the good and the bad, and what people's big reservations are. If you have any opinions, shoot them to me at cmckenzie at techtarget dot com.

http://www.divxfilmler.org

No evidence exists in any of the filings to suggest such things. Oracle must ensure to have full understanding of open source licensing before making such claims in first place. Copying code line by line is not forbidden in open source but not apply license correctly is forbidden. 

Apples and oranges.   Every college kid focusing on iphones only is in for a shock.    Enterprise software will not be running on iphones.  Go to dice and see how much of the job market is for smartphone devs.   

Java is not a consumer-market development technology/platform.  It's a player in the enterprise computing market, where oracle is top dog.  It's foolish to suggest oracle would want to offload java, as it fits their MO.  

Also, Google plays in that market too.  thouh they have a consumer focus, where smartphone development is relevant, they need java for the time being to satify developers who aren't working on smartphone trinkets.   

Google on Java gives the confidence to many many companies to invest in Java. Google fighting Oracle, means a thrid comany may come to take front seat, since the fight of 2 companies may weaken both.

I love people of all religions . However because of this and because I have religious education and literacy it sadens me to see a religion promoted , a religion that delivers hell. The Holy Book of several religions recognizes this . Their Holy Books say that their people go to Hell irrespective of good or bad done in life, irrespective of teachings received, irrespective of what they do. However there are good and bad places on Hell . There is a religions that solves both essential problems of humankind, eternal life and entrance to heaven and her Holy Book makes this clear.

Anyhow, google and oracle can and should work together.

If you are looking for a reporting and/or document generation system on Java, take a look at http://www.javareports.info/windward_review.htm - it gives a good picture of its capabilites (good & bad).

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Oracle is probably better for Java than Google.

Google does not have a vested interest in the future Java. Okay, they have used Java a lot for internal and external tools. Google doesn't make money on these things, though. Google does not make money out of the success of Java.

Oracle, on the other hand, does.

This is not about open- vs closed-source. It's only fairly recently that an open version of Java was available. The closed nature of Java didn't stop it becoming sensationally popular.

Having worked professionally with Java for 10 years now, I would say that it's a vocal minority of developers and 'names' (companies and individuals) that are griping about Java under Oracle. Others jump on the band wagon because, hey, who doesn't like a bandwagon when you can sound so moral about the whole darn thing.

The reality, though, is that Java will be successful under whoever can make money out of it, not give it away for free in its entirety. Maintaining Java is a burden. It isn't easy. James Gosling has spoken about this.

So, Oracle isn't perfect. Sun wasn't perfect either. Google certainly isn't perfect. However, Oracle has more to gain from the continued success of Java than Goole, who easily have the resources to write their own VM and language if they were that bothered by it. (Go, anyone?). Oracle understands selling to the large enterprise. They've been doing it for a long time now.

It's far more likely, it seems to me, that Google will come up with a Java killer. It might take a decade to overtake Java, but it could happen, if Google were interested enough. They probably aren't, though. After all, Google could pay for the TCK for Harmony. They don't, though. Why is that?