McNealy responds to Java Open Source Movement
GCN is reporting from FOSE 2004 where Scott finally commented on the growing movement to Open Source Java. As Scott unsuprisingly put it: “We’re trying to understand what problem does it solve that is not already solved.â€? And, to remind us of why we love him, his responce to IBM: “Go open source with DB2 and then you can tell me what to do with my assets.”
I read ESR’s letter. While he does have some valid points, some of points are equally invalid. For example, he touts the example of NFS as an example of open source that Sun did right. IIRC, Sun released the specifications of NFS, not the source code (although I could be wrong here).
Secondly, ESR seems to confuse open specs to open code. The C programming language is not “open source” – it is controlled by ISO/IEC/ANSI, in much the same manner that Sun controls the Java specification. Yet I don’t see him (or other open source advocates) saying that C will be replaced by Perl and Python, or that the standard should be made open source.
I fully agree that interfaces should be open and documented, preferably with some way of incorporating community feedback in a controlled manner. In this resepect, Java *is* open.
I totally agree. Sun has always treated Java fairly. Their position has traditionally to keep it tucked under the Sun Micro wing to protect it and objectively guide it along, not to close it off.
Sure, some improvements may come from Open Sourcing, but not many. Sun was accepting of the Open Source/Free Software movement far longer than IBM, or HP, and much longer than most ESR’s been inflicting his babbling on folks… The Open Source debate has been raging inside the walls of Sun for quite some time, I’m sure. The old adage “if you love something, set it free” isn’t a great argument on ESR’s part.