Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0

Discussions

News: Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0

Bookmark and Share Get thread feed

  1. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0 (52 messages)

    • Posted by: Dion Almaer
    • Posted on: June 28 2004 20:58 EDT
    Sun has cut off the "1." to change J2SE 1.5.0 to J2SE 5.0. The reason for the change? Sun claims that "this is the most significant upgrade to the Java platform and programming language since its initial release nearly one decade ago", and that this version is worthy.

    Apparently there were talks to rename to "J5SE", but there was thought that the J2EE brand means too much to change.

    Aren't version numbers fun?

    Read the press release: Sun introduces most significant and advanced Java platform release in 5 years
    Reply to this

    Threaded Messages (52)

  2. meh[ Go to top ]

    Why not drop the '2' while there at it? Or has J2EE become to much of an entrenched buzzword?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  3. had to check the calendar[ Go to top ]

    I thought this was an April fools story.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  4. had to check the calendar[ Go to top ]

    I thought this was an April fools story.
    I thought so too when I saw the headline.

    It's quite hard to come up with more confusing version numbering than Sun. They already made a similar version number jump with Solaris 8, now they're doing it again with J2SE 5.

    Try to explain that to someone: After a lot of marketing on Java *2* version *1.5*, it's now Java *2* version *5.0* which follows up on Java *2* version *1.4*. Don't we love marketing decisions.

    Regarding "the most significant upgrade to the Java platform": It still seems to me that JDK 1.2 was more significant (e.g. Collections API). They should have gone to 2.0 at that point of time.

    I guess this is simply too much for my mathematical, orderly mind ;-)

    Juergen
    Reply to this Reply to original

  5. had to check the calendar[ Go to top ]

    I thought this was an April fools story.
    I thought so too when I saw the headline.It's quite hard to come up with more confusing version numbering than Sun.
    Unless you're Oracle. It's JDeveloper 10g version 9.0.5.2. :-)
    There seems to be a tradition that aims to solve the Dilbertian antagonism between engineering and marketing. It's just less bothersome to explain the versioning confusion to outsiders than to have the two internal camps talk to each other. I can imagine the financial markets even demand that it be handled this way, because otherwise productivity would fall sharply due to infighting.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  6. had to check the calendar[ Go to top ]

    Oh crap. J2EE 5.0. Why is it not J5EE? As the poster above states, this is hardly surprising, considering that Solaris 8 = Solaris 2.8.

    I'm waiting whether I will have c:\j2sdk1.5.0_01 or c:\j2dsk5.0_01 on my hard disk. Probably c:\j2sdk1.5.0_01 so that the confusion will be maximised.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  7. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0[ Go to top ]

    I'm not a marketing person but this seems like a bloody good idea to me.

    I was waiting for Java 3 but this is far more logical.

    Nice one Sun, there is someone in your marketing department then!!!

    -John-
    Reply to this Reply to original

  8. This news is old... :)[ Go to top ]

    I have posted this break news at JavaFree.com.br more than 1 month ago

    Here is the post:
    http://www.javafree.com.br/home/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1315

    And here is the ugly Google's translation from Portuguese to English:
    http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.javafree.com.br%2Fhome%2Fmodules.php%3Fname%3DNews%26file%3Darticle%26sid%3D1315&langpair=pt%7Cen&hl=pt&ie=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

    I have heard this from a friend of mine who works at Oracle and have contacts with people from Sun. :)

    So, how about that? Brazil making break news!

    BTW, I love this idea about change version... :)

    my 2c? :)

    see ya...

    miojo
    Reply to this Reply to original

  9. This news is old... :)[ Go to top ]

    I have posted this break news at JavaFree.com.br more than 1 month ago
    ...
    So, how about that? Brazil making break news!
    ...
    miojo
    I always said Brazil was the place to be these days!!!

    -John-
    Reply to this Reply to original

  10. Don't blame Sun...[ Go to top ]

    Wasn't it Microsoft that started this by jumping from Word 2.0 to 6.0?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  11. Don't blame Sun...[ Go to top ]

    Wasn't it Microsoft that started this by jumping from Word 2.0 to 6.0?
    ... and then on even to Word 97 and Word 2000!
    Reply to this Reply to original

  12. JSE and JEE[ Go to top ]

    just make it JSE 5.0 and JEE 5.0 or maybe JavaSE 5.0 and JavaEE 5.0, cool wat do you think guys?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  13. JSE and JEE[ Go to top ]

    I think going to whole unit numbering (from the 1.x stuff) is an excellent idea. It conforms much more closely with industry practice.

    Which makes only the 2 in J2SE and J2EE a source of confusion.

    So, I agree with Mike, just make it JSE 5.0 and JEE 5.0.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  14. Poor try Sun...[ Go to top ]

    ...as everyone knows it should be 5.1.2 to make clear that it is not a GA version but at least the fourth or so service pack. Gives you peace of mind suddenly, doesn't it :-)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  15. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0[ Go to top ]

    I think this is the worst news in a long, long time to be heard from Sun. It's definitely worse than paying blackmail money to SCO. I mean, it already was stupid to call Java 1.2 the "Java 2 SDK", but why did they choose to skip two versions now? Ahh, well, I see they did not: they call it "Java 2 Platform Standard Edition (J2SE) 5.0".

    Disgusted,
    Lars
    Reply to this Reply to original

  16. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0[ Go to top ]

    Surely, the worst *surprise* from Sun.

    Reminds me of a (humorous) Cameron's blog about IoC renaming:
    <quote>
    It's been a few months since it's been renamed, and I sensed that it was well overdue for yet another change, so I have decided to take it upon myself to rename it to [..], which is [..] for short. This term should last through September '04 or so, so keep in mind that we need to be working on some new terminology somewhere in the August timeframe.
    </quote>
    Reply to this Reply to original

  17. oh my god...[ Go to top ]

    Why they don't call it J(Math.Random()*100)EE version <put-here-any-exaggerated-number>? Wasn't stupid and misleading enough to call JDK 1.2 Java 2 ?

    Is this serious marketing?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  18. oh my god...[ Go to top ]

    Why they don't call it J(Math.Random()*100)EE version <put-here-any-exaggerated-number>? Wasn't stupid and misleading enough to call JDK 1.2 Java 2 ?Is this serious marketing?
    Simple, because (Math.Random()*100) returns a double not an int! :-)

    Anyway with a static import from J((int) sqrt(25))SE you don't need the "Math." part anymore. :-)

    -John-
    Reply to this Reply to original

  19. oh my god...[ Go to top ]

    Simple, because (Math.Random()*100) returns a double not an int! :-)Anyway with a static import from J((int) sqrt(25))SE you don't need the "Math." part anymore. :-)-John-
    Of course you are right, but even more impressive would be to show some decimals... ;) Seriously, I think JDK 1.5 is a big step beyond, it is supposed to be used by serious people, it do not deserves videogame-like advertising, IMHO. I would have better understood from Sun something like "We think JDK 1.5 is so new that it is really a 2.0".
    Reply to this Reply to original

  20. It was inevidable[ Go to top ]

    The need for a radical jump in version numbering was sown way back when someone at Sun decided to market Java 1.2 as Java2. Ever since that very moment, a Java 2.0 was impossible, as it would lead to mass confusion. Sure, maybe Java 3.0 would make sense... but if Java 1.2 was called Java2, why not call Java 1.5 Java 5.0.

    The important thing all this Java2 version numbering nonsense will be over, and we can have sane version numbers from here on forward. Good job Sun!
    Reply to this Reply to original

  21. Be serious[ Go to top ]

    That SUN marketing already made one mistake is no reason to do
    a new one.

    The "Java 2" decision was wrong, because it created a lot of confusion.

    1.4->5.0 will also create a lot of confusion. And is therefore wrong
    as well.

    Basicly I think it shows that the marketing people does not
    understand the Java market. Java is for IT professionals. They
    primarily are interested in functionailty/facts not in marketing.
    If they were convinced by marketing they would be using an Microsoft
    product !

    And I am surprised that those people has not learned from the
    Solaris 8 / Solaris 2.8 / SunOS 5.8 naming disaster.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  22. Be serious[ Go to top ]

    That SUN marketing already made one mistake is no reason to doa new one.The "Java 2" decision was wrong, because it created a lot of confusion.1.4->5.0 will also create a lot of confusion.
    I was in Dublin the other day. The tourist guide there told us a story about the new platform 10 they had built at the local train station. The existing platforms were numbered 1 to 8. The press release issued by the rail authority said that this numbering scheme was put in place "to avoid confusion" :-)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  23. Number 9 must go to Hogwarts . . .[ Go to top ]

    :)

    -gh
    Reply to this Reply to original

  24. Be serious[ Go to top ]

    I think it shows that the marketing people does notunderstand the Java market. Java is for IT professionals. Theyprimarily are interested in functionailty/facts not in marketing.If they were convinced by marketing they would be using an Microsoftproduct !And I am surprised that those people has not learned from theSolaris 8 / Solaris 2.8 / SunOS 5.8 naming disaster.
    You are correct. Java developers are not swayed by marketing. We know we are using a wonderful platform so we use it. But how do you convince those using MS products (The weak willed marketing influenced people as you portray them) to switch. You influence them with superior marketing. This is who sun is targeting. they know you will not stop using Java because of a version number. So they take advantage of your knowledge in the situation and prey on the weak willed easily influenced IT manager who says "ooh v5, we gotta check that out."
    Reply to this Reply to original

  25. It was inevidable[ Go to top ]

    The need for a radical jump in version numbering was sown way back when someone at Sun decided to market Java 1.2 as Java2. Ever since that very moment, a Java 2.0 was impossible, as it would lead to mass confusion. Sure, maybe Java 3.0 would make sense... but if Java 1.2 was called Java2, why not call Java 1.5 Java 5.0. The important thing all this Java2 version numbering nonsense will be over, and we can have sane version numbers from here on forward.
    But neither will the naming nonsense be over, nor will Java 1.5 be called Java 5.0: It will be called "Java 2 Platform Standard Edition (J2SE) 5.0". So, it will essentially be Java 2 (as they don't want to loose all their J2SE, J"EE brands).

    <sarcasm>Why not simply call it Java XP and end the whole misery?</sarcasm>

    Still disgusted,
    Lars
    Reply to this Reply to original

  26. It was inevidable[ Go to top ]

    The important thing all this Java2 version numbering nonsense will be over, and we can have sane version numbers from here on forward. Good job Sun!
    The problem is that there are a *lot* of existing Java environments out, based on JDK 1.3 and 1.4. We will continue to see those for some years to come... There will be lots of products that have to run on both J2SE 1.4.2 and J2SE 5.0, etc. Some level of confusion is inevitable.

    It's too late to resolve the version number issue in a satisfactory fashion; they should have done this long ago. Such a fundamental version number change at this late point of time arguably causes more confusion that it resolves.

    Juergen
    Reply to this Reply to original

  27. As long as they don't count backwards I'm fine[ Go to top ]

    So please Sun, don't let version 4.3 follow version 5, OK?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  28. Significant upgrade[ Go to top ]

    I'm confused by the "significant upgrade" rational. Isn't it just for loop syntax and enumerations? There is no upgrade that actually extends the byte code format, so how significant could it be. Also such a major version change ought to actually obsolete rather than carry forward depricated stuff from a half dozen years ago.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  29. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0[ Go to top ]

    Why do marketing people decide the software versioning/numbering?
    Doesn't a well-established software platform speak for itself?

    Such a cheap trick. Soooo cheap...
    Reply to this Reply to original

  30. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0[ Go to top ]

    Larger numbers help us people who work for a living convince the pointy haired of the world that an upgrade is needed. Unfortunately, it also causes the pointy haired to demand an upgrade where one is not needed.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  31. Eh?[ Go to top ]

    JDK 1.5 (aka Tiger) is the fifth iteration of Java platform.

    The internal version number is 1.5. To the public it's 5. It's not the Java 5 that's messed up but the internal 1.5. The evolution from 1.4 to 1.5 deserves a bigger change than '1st decimal'.

    Why this outrage? Should these be protested too?

    - Borland went to C++ BuilderX from C++ Builder6
    - MS went to 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, ME, NT 3.51, NT 4, NT 2000, XP, whatever.
    - Oracle's four digit scheme 9.0.5.2 (Eh?)
    - Visual Studio 97, Visual Studio 6, Visual Studio .NET 2002, Visual Studio 2005

    This is somehow totally different and incomprehensible?
    Java up to 1.1.x
    Java 2 after Java and up to 1.4.x
    Java 5 after Java 2 and up to 1.6?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  32. But the most important question is...[ Go to top ]

    Is this better or worse than .Net?

    Surely we must have a debate on this!
    5 for 2005, a year early. As opposed to 2000 released in 2001 a year late. Java is a sure fire winner...

    Jonathan
    Reply to this Reply to original

  33. Eh?[ Go to top ]

    The best part of the Java 1.1 -> Java2 (1.2) switchover was that it confused many recruiters, so it made it easy to sort out the ones that knew what they were talking about from the others.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  34. Eh?[ Go to top ]

    This is somehow totally different and incomprehensible?Java up to 1.1.xJava 2 after Java and up to 1.4.xJava 5 after Java 2 and up to 1.6?
    Its not Java 5 after Java 2 its still Java 2, just version 5 (or up until now 1.5). Not confusing, eh? :).
    Reply to this Reply to original

  35. Eh?[ Go to top ]

    Its not Java 5 after Java 2 its still Java 2, just version 5 (or up until now 1.5). Not confusing, eh? :).
    Yes, uh, wait, what was Java 2, version 1 then? :)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  36. Eh?[ Go to top ]

    Its not Java 5 after Java 2 its still Java 2, just version 5 (or up until now 1.5). Not confusing, eh? :).
    Yes, uh, wait, what was Java 2, version 1 then? :)
    There wasn't one. The first version was Java 2 version 1.2.0 >:)

    So now we have Java 2 SDK 5.0 version 1.5.0 and counting >:)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  37. Did they coordinate with thetech guys[ Go to top ]

    So when I do System.getProperty("java.version") will I get 5_0_0 or 1_5_0.

    Kind of like if you've ever seen web logs where a Windows 2000 system still identifies itself as NT5 :-)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  38. Why to change?[ Go to top ]

    It is nonsence to change? It will bring a lot of confusion. Marketing people just need to be seen.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  39. This from the Land of Solaris 9[ Go to top ]

    And since Solaris != the real rev, well, whatever...

    Idjits.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  40. Not good for my cert :)[ Go to top ]

    Employer: Are you certified in Java?
    Me: Why of course. Here is my cert card.
    Employer: It says here you are certified in Java 2.
    Me: Yes that's correct.
    Employer: Well sun just released Java v5. Dont you think its time to update your skills?
    Me: You're a dumbass.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  41. Not good for my cert :)[ Go to top ]

    Employer: Are you certified in Java?
    Me: I have 10 years of programming experience 5 of which is in Java.
    Employer: Maybe you should get certified.
    Me: You're a dumbass.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  42. Not good for my cert :)[ Go to top ]

    LOL
    Reply to this Reply to original

  43. Biggest of the mistakes[ Go to top ]

    Sun has continuously been making mistakes.
    And this is the BIGGEST of em all (Im sure they will break this record with another one soon ;-) ).

    Points against this decision:
    1. Why J2SE or J2EE ??? Why not J5SE @least to be consistent?
    2. Why skip the number 3?? Some one does not like it?? Why not J3SE, J3EE
    3. Look at the number of posts above this one. 99% of all developers hate it.

    I hope Sun actually reads all the replies and retracts the blunder.

    Very Very Very disappointed
    Dushyanth Inguva
    Reply to this Reply to original

  44. Biggest of the mistakes[ Go to top ]

    i think that 30 September all of those developers you`re writing about, will be really happy because of official J2SE 5.0 :-) forget about numbers - its only marketing, developers really don`t care about details like this more than 2 days :-) just enjoy new Java
    Reply to this Reply to original

  45. Wake me up ...[ Go to top ]

    Man, you guys must have even less to do than the Sun marketing guys to expend so much energy on dissecting a version number. Can't comprehend a slightly inconsistent version name? Now onder they needed to simplify the EJB APIs.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  46. Why the inconsistency?[ Go to top ]

    Sure... they can name it Java 10342.23
    But, why the inconsistency?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  47. Not good for my cert :)[ Go to top ]

    Big LOL.

    I'd love to see a transcript of the marketing meeting at Sun where the new naming convention was formulated, and the debate for/against keeping the "J2" part.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  48. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0 ??[ Go to top ]

    j2se5.0 not j2EE 5.0
    Reply to this Reply to original

  49. Time for 5: Java brand changes to J2SE and J2EE 5.0[ Go to top ]

    I think they did it so they had something new to announce :-)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  50. Time for complete re-certification[ Go to top ]

    ...and collect re-certification fees :)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  51. What to call the next major version?[ Go to top ]

    Place your bets gentlemen, the book is now open for the version after the Java 2 Standard Platform Edition 1.5. Which will it be?

    * J2SE 6.0 the uninspired choice at even money.
    * J3SE 5.0 a fighting chance at 3/1
    * J3SE 6.0 the dark horse at 10/1
    * J2SE 1.6 good money at 20/1
    * Or choose any other flavour at 50/1 (Here's a tip: 5 divided by 1.4 is about 3.57. If the next version multiplies by the same amount, that'd be J2SE 17.85.)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  52. even more dramatic naming[ Go to top ]

    Why do we keep the "J" in the name? Drop it off as auxiliary and
    redundant (common, Java is everywhere, guys)! Year numbers are in
    fashion this season, so the whole thing is ready to fly like this:
      * SE Odyssey 2005
      * EE (code named X)

    Linus should be listening too, because Linux naming tradition gets boring, -
    the upcoming 2.7 kernel should be renamed it to Linux-Millenium Edition
    to reflect the significance of the new features and improvements.

    On a broader scope, software industry should adopt this naming convention:
    give each version of your software a distinctive (or better, unique) name
    to imply that the newer version has nothing to do with the previous one:)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  53. Plug my message in here[ Go to top ]

    I think they should go ahead, and follow MS to call it:

    J-Two-SE 2004 and J-Too-EE '04. Why not keep them separate and confusing for everyone just like they did in the past? lol

    Actually I think this is obviously an idea that's been needed for a while. You can't change J2SE to J3SE... they're buzzwords now. However I never did understand why the crap version 2, 3, 4 would be 1.2, 1.3, 1.4... what the crap is the "one" anyway?

    Glad to see SUN is actually marketing java for a change. Give 'em a break guys!
    Reply to this Reply to original