Comments on: JavaFX To Be Closed Source, Non-Free? http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/ Simon Brocklehurst's Technology Blog Sun, 12 Oct 2008 05:00:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: peter http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-380171 peter Tue, 20 May 2008 19:04:34 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-380171 You're probably right. The amended statement is very carefully worded. I imagine that if development began on some of the components under the assumption that the source would not be released, they'd need to go through and make sure that everything done so far would actually be compatible with whatever license they're considering and replace anything that isn't, and probably there are a host of other bureaucratic issues at Sun to deal with. I'll have to wait for a more definitive statement from them before sharing your optimism, but I'll remain hopeful - there really needs to be a better, viable alternative to Flash. You’re probably right. The amended statement is very carefully worded. I imagine that if development began on some of the components under the assumption that the source would not be released, they’d need to go through and make sure that everything done so far would actually be compatible with whatever license they’re considering and replace anything that isn’t, and probably there are a host of other bureaucratic issues at Sun to deal with. I’ll have to wait for a more definitive statement from them before sharing your optimism, but I’ll remain hopeful - there really needs to be a better, viable alternative to Flash.

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-380002 simon Tue, 20 May 2008 17:11:14 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-380002 Peter, as I now understand it, the previous wording in the FAQ was a "mistake". Seems that Sun is really going to make JavaFX an open source RIA platform. I'm not going to nit pick the new wording in the FAQ. That the company has modified it to remove the statement that said it would be closed source; and has continued to make statements that JavaFX will be an open source platform elsewhere, is enough for me. Peter, as I now understand it, the previous wording in the FAQ was a “mistake”. Seems that Sun is really going to make JavaFX an open source RIA platform.

I’m not going to nit pick the new wording in the FAQ. That the company has modified it to remove the statement that said it would be closed source; and has continued to make statements that JavaFX will be an open source platform elsewhere, is enough for me.

]]> By: peter http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-379972 peter Tue, 20 May 2008 16:17:43 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-379972 Well, all they've said here is that they've decided not to say anything more about the licensing until this fall (with a paragraph implying that the decision was made because of the public reaction to what they did say about the licensing). Hopefully that means an open-source license for the runtime and the other stuff, but there's nothing confirming that here. "Open source strategy" sounds like "privacy policy"... Well, all they’ve said here is that they’ve decided not to say anything more about the licensing until this fall (with a paragraph implying that the decision was made because of the public reaction to what they did say about the licensing). Hopefully that means an open-source license for the runtime and the other stuff, but there’s nothing confirming that here. “Open source strategy” sounds like “privacy policy”…

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-371713 simon Wed, 14 May 2008 21:41:29 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-371713 There's been some significant clarifications on this from Sun. Seems that all things JavaFX will be free and open source... I've updated the content of the blog to reflect that. For more information on JavaFX, I recommend reading Jonathan Schwartz's blog @: http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/rocking_the_free_world There’s been some significant clarifications on this from Sun. Seems that all things JavaFX will be free and open source…

I’ve updated the content of the blog to reflect that. For more information on JavaFX, I recommend reading Jonathan Schwartz’s blog @:

http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan/entry/rocking_the_free_world

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-369998 simon Tue, 13 May 2008 17:02:26 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-369998 @Peter I agree with you. I'm pretty sure that the top team at Sun wants JavaFX to be free and open source, so I'm hopeful that this is how it will end up. After all the work that Sun and others have done to get make the Java platform open, it just doesn't make any sense to make the "new Java" closed. I suspect that the top team at Sun also understands that making the JavaFX technology and tools free and open is a great way to compete with Adobe and Microsoft for developer mind share... especially when they're coming from so far back in terms of RIA development. After this blog post, it seems that people at Sun are now at least aware of the problem. They have a short while to get this right before they launch JavaFX in a couple of months. @Peter

I agree with you. I’m pretty sure that the top team at Sun wants JavaFX to be free and open source, so I’m hopeful that this is how it will end up. After all the work that Sun and others have done to get make the Java platform open, it just doesn’t make any sense to make the “new Java” closed.

I suspect that the top team at Sun also understands that making the JavaFX technology and tools free and open is a great way to compete with Adobe and Microsoft for developer mind share… especially when they’re coming from so far back in terms of RIA development.

After this blog post, it seems that people at Sun are now at least aware of the problem. They have a short while to get this right before they launch JavaFX in a couple of months.

]]> By: peter http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-369987 peter Tue, 13 May 2008 16:51:03 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-369987 It doesn't really matter what their reasons are. No matter how good it is, the only way this will ever stand a chance against Flash is if they release a version of this under a free-software license, at least for the desktop/browser version. I suppose it could help defend against Flash Lite in the mobile/embedded space, since Java is already fairly entrenched there, and maybe that's the point of it anyway. I'd really love to see it succeed on the desktop, so I hope they'll reconsider the licensing. It doesn’t really matter what their reasons are. No matter how good it is, the only way this will ever stand a chance against Flash is if they release a version of this under a free-software license, at least for the desktop/browser version. I suppose it could help defend against Flash Lite in the mobile/embedded space, since Java is already fairly entrenched there, and maybe that’s the point of it anyway. I’d really love to see it succeed on the desktop, so I hope they’ll reconsider the licensing.

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-367894 simon Mon, 12 May 2008 06:56:32 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-367894 Vinod, of course. Sun can pursue whatever business model it likes. It needs to be clear with people what that is, though. The company's stated strategy is that all Sun software is to be free and open source. This is at odds with what the company has written about JavaFX on the JavaFX web-site. Vinod, of course. Sun can pursue whatever business model it likes. It needs to be clear with people what that is, though.

The company’s stated strategy is that all Sun software is to be free and open source. This is at odds with what the company has written about JavaFX on the JavaFX web-site.

]]> By: Vinod Singh http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-367601 Vinod Singh Mon, 12 May 2008 04:23:38 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-367601 Though I would love to have everything related to JavaFX free and open source. But can anybody expect the same from MS or Adobe? After all Sun is here to do the business not the charity. So they deserve to get some ROI for the effort they are putting behind JavaFX technologies, that could be by charging tools or may be by some other means. Though I would love to have everything related to JavaFX free and open source. But can anybody expect the same from MS or Adobe?

After all Sun is here to do the business not the charity. So they deserve to get some ROI for the effort they are putting behind JavaFX technologies, that could be by charging tools or may be by some other means.

]]> By: Asam Bashir http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-367523 Asam Bashir Mon, 12 May 2008 00:48:44 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-367523 Post JavaOne thunder? Did I miss something? More like post JavaOne projectile vomiting after infection with Norovirus, http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/05/10/javaone_norovirus/ At least with Apple you know the cost is just going to be $99 developer fee, with Sun desperately needing some way of getting an income stream, who knows how much of an arm and leg it will charge in the future, they just seem to want to trap you into the JavaFX world, and once you've invested too much time learning to develop for it they'll spring charges on you. What's the point of Sun developing all this for free then giving it away, it's been doing that for years and look where that got it. Post JavaOne thunder? Did I miss something? More like post JavaOne projectile vomiting after infection with Norovirus,

http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2008/05/10/javaone_norovirus/

At least with Apple you know the cost is just going to be $99 developer fee, with Sun desperately needing some way of getting an income stream, who knows how much of an arm and leg it will charge in the future, they just seem to want to trap you into the JavaFX world, and once you’ve invested too much time learning to develop for it they’ll spring charges on you. What’s the point of Sun developing all this for free then giving it away, it’s been doing that for years and look where that got it.

]]> By: simon http://www.psynixis.com/blog/2008/05/09/javafx-to-be-closed-source-non-free/#comment-367437 simon Sun, 11 May 2008 19:18:02 +0000 http://www.psynixis.com/blog/?p=433#comment-367437 FUD? Hardly. You clearly haven't read any other posts on this blog. I like Sun technology. I use Sun software technology. I buy Sun hardware. I want JavaFX to succeed. I think it would be great for the software industry if JavaFX succeeded. Hiding problems under the rug won't help, though. The point is - if *I* have a problem with this, then for sure other people will. If it's a typo, then it will be super-easy to correct. However, if you follow the links that Weiqi posted, you'll see that Sun people are implying it might not just be a typo. Seems there are other issues that have to be resolved. FUD? Hardly. You clearly haven’t read any other posts on this blog. I like Sun technology. I use Sun software technology. I buy Sun hardware. I want JavaFX to succeed. I think it would be great for the software industry if JavaFX succeeded.

Hiding problems under the rug won’t help, though. The point is - if *I* have a problem with this, then for sure other people will.

If it’s a typo, then it will be super-easy to correct. However, if you follow the links that Weiqi posted, you’ll see that Sun people are implying it might not just be a typo. Seems there are other issues that have to be resolved.

]]>