Email from Jobs re Java on OS-X

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Michael Neale

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 12:44:40 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse

opinali

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 6:01:36 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Why did Apple insist on having control of the Mac JVM years ago, when
Sun wanted do do that?

I only hope they will release to Oracle their improvement/porting
work, so Oracle can resume where Apple left it and there is no
discontinuity in the support of a high-quality Mac JVM.

Anyway, there is no solution:
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici/archive/2010/10/21/apple-possibly-deprecated-java-community-nice-test-you#comment-387574

A+
Osvaldo

Fabrizio Giudici

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 6:08:10 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com, opinali
On 10/22/10 12:01 , opinali wrote:
> Why did Apple insist on having control of the Mac JVM years ago, when
> Sun wanted do do that?
>
As Chris said, unfortunately in this case Sun is to blame for the poor
engineering and integration, at the time.

--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 7:30:47 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
And in 1997, it was pretty understandable why Sun wasn't that
interested in the Mac: a lot of people didn't think Apple would still
be in business by 2000. Sun was perfectly happy to let someone else
carry the Java banner on Mac. For a while, Sun even put a few of its
engineers at Apple to work on MRJ, although they were among the first
layoffs as Sun started its slow decline.

On Oct 22, 6:08 am, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it>
wrote:

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 7:38:12 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
The one thing that makes me think this might be legitimate is the
focus on release schedules. Since Apple has shipped Java as a system-
level framework, their policy has been to include one Java version
with the x.0 release of OS X -- ideally the most current Java, but
they failed to do so with Snow Leopard -- and then add any new Java
version as a system update during that OS' lifetime. This can make it
difficult for developers who have to target a certain version, like
keeping you on Tiger (OS X 10.4) if you need to run against a Java 1.4
VM for some reason.

Granted, if you really need to work with arbitrary Java versions, or
many of them at once, I suppose you would probably need to be on LInux
or Windows, at least in Parallels or VMWare.

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 7:43:29 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Its time for Oracle to step up to ITS responsibility and make the JVM
for the Mac. If they do it for Linux and Windows then they damn well
should do it for the MAC.

Jess Holle

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 7:54:48 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com, CKoerner
The Mac is becoming nothing but a big iPhone (without the phone or touch
capabilities) for your desk. It's no longer a general computing
platform -- it's becoming just another form factor for an utterly closed
consumer device with a walled garden market.

I don't think Apple wants Java on it any more than they want it on the
iPhone -- and it's unclear whether it is worth Oracle's while to fight this.

Sure we all want Java to be ubiquitous. But when a vendor goes this far
to drive everyone else off their platforms and, unlike Microsoft, does
not dominate desktop computing, how far do you go?

Perhaps there's a backroom deal floating that will come to light soon,
but it really sounds like any attempts at such a deal just plain fell apart.

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:01:26 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
"The Mac is becoming nothing but a big iPhone (without the phone or
touch
capabilities) for your desk."

That is the dumbest thing anyone has ever written about a Mac.
Congratulations!

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:03:02 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
I think the point of Sun/Oracle making their own JVM/JDK for a given
OS is to keep or gain developers.

So the question is: if you couldn't develop Java on a Mac, how many
developers would they lose? Would current Mac-based Java developers
change machines or change languages? I think most, like Fabrizio,
would dump the Mac. But some of us went the other way.

I don't see it as a matter of responsibility. Like most things, I
think it's a question of rational self-interest. Apple has apparently
decided that Java isn't worth its time or money anymore. Oracle may
or may not feel the same about the Mac.

Kirk

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:03:11 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
It was never Sun's intention to provide platform specific JVMs. They wanted each platform to do that on their own. MS tired to adopt and extend and deployments started making demands for Linux which left a huge gap in VM providers which... Sun decided to fill out of necessity.

Regards,
Kirk

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>

Christian Catchpole

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:05:39 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Maybe you're holding it wrong? :)

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:09:36 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse

Well the cats out of the bag now. They were lucky that Apple did their
work for so long.

opinali

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:22:38 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse

Christian Catchpole

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:23:25 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Exactly. I think Apple were very generous (you could argue it sold
Macs, but still). If this has as big an impact as we fear it will you
can blame no one but Snoracle. If anything it points out how painful
Swing integration is. Of course, I'm sure its more than that - NIO,
memory management etc all have platform specific optimisations. But
most of us develop server apps on our Macs but depend on Swing to
power our IDEs.

Oracle, if Java is all you say it is, why should Apple's move be a
problem.

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:32:31 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
To me, one line that stood out in Gosling's blog was this one:

"Sun also provided the VM for Linux because there was no one else to
do it."

There was a Blackdown port of Java, but I believe it was pretty
troubled. Porting all of Java, including AWT and javax.sound and all
that, is *hard*. Again, I think you see Sun stepping in with their
own JDK primarily as a means of attracting developers and legitimizing
the Java platform. They may not have wanted to, but it seems they had
to.

--Chris

Fabrizio Giudici

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:53:21 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com, CKoerner
In perspective, I don't think Jess is that wrong. I suspect Apple's
strategy is precisely that.

--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people

Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it

Fabrizio Giudici

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:54:17 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com, Chris Adamson
On 10/22/10 14:32 , Chris Adamson wrote:
> There was a Blackdown port of Java, but I believe it was pretty
> troubled.

Indeed, it was rather useless for what I recall.


--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people

Fabrizio...@tidalwave.it

phil swenson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:58:55 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
So as I stated before - I guarantee Oracle will port to OS X. 20% of
the US consumer market + 10% of the overall market is too big to
ignore.

The real problem here is apple pulled an a-hole move. They just said
it's deprecated. They didn't inform oracle and come up with a
transition story. That would have been the professional thing to do.

No one would be upset if the story was "Oracle is taking over Mac
development of the JVM".

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 9:09:08 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
On Oct 22, 8:58 am, phil swenson <phil.swen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The real problem here is apple pulled an a-hole move.  They just said
> it's deprecated.  They didn't inform oracle and come up with a
> transition story.  That would have been the professional thing to do.

I think they have a fairly clear transition story. They've changed
the directory structure to allow for multiple third-party JVMs to be
installed at /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines, and provided a new UI
for the user to inspect their VMs by version and vendor and rank them
in order of priority. Screenshot in the Apple Insider article here:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/10/21/apple_deprecates_its_release_of_java_for_mac_os_x.html

The Apple VM will continue to work in Snow Leopard. It sounds like
they're not guaranteeing an Apple VM to be present in Lion, due in
Summer 2011, so interested parties have a little less than a year to
figure out what to do in case it's absent.

--Chris

Fabrizio Giudici

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 9:15:39 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com, Chris Adamson
On 10/22/10 15:09 , Chris Adamson wrote:
>
> The Apple VM will continue to work in Snow Leopard. It sounds like
> they're not guaranteeing an Apple VM to be present in Lion, due in
> Summer 2011, so interested parties have a little less than a year to
> figure out what to do in case it's absent.
Probably there could be one more scenario to consider. It has been said
that probably Apple would need to negotiate Java 7 licensing with
Oracle. Maybe they're just trying to get a lower price. In any case, I
do bet they have been privately discussing the deal with Oracle.

Josh Berry

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 10:03:55 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Fabrizio Giudici
<fabrizio...@tidalwave.it> wrote:
> On 10/22/10 14:01 , CKoerner wrote:
>>
>> "The Mac is becoming nothing but a big iPhone (without the phone or
>> touch
>> capabilities) for your desk."
>>
>> That is the dumbest thing anyone has ever written about a Mac.
>> Congratulations!
>>
> In perspective, I don't think Jess is that wrong. I suspect Apple's strategy
> is precisely that.

Yeah, I'm curious on what makes that a stupid statement. Especially
since, from all I've heard so far, the largest repercussion is that
you can not use Java in their App Store, now.

opinali

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 10:36:50 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
On Oct 22, 10:32 am, Chris Adamson <invalidn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> To me, one line that stood out in Gosling's blog was this one:
>
> "Sun also provided the VM for Linux because there was no one else to
> do it."

...under the conditions of that pre-OpenJDK era - closed code, had to
pay a license etc. Like HP, IBM and others did. RedHat for example
could have done that job. The Blackdown team, as you mention below,
sort of did it, with a special arrangement to have access to Sun's
source code and TCK, but they obviously didn't have enough resources
to do a top-notch port.

A+
Osvaldo

Casper Bang

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 10:41:05 AM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Apple likes to move quietly under the radar, at immense speed... they
do things very differently than most, i.e. changing CPU architecture 3
times in 1½ decade. I simply don't think they are interested in Java
anymore and they don't need another dependency to "tie them down". I
also don't really think Oracle cares enough about client side Java to
do much about it, there's only money in them for JEE. JSE is dying bit
by bit, like JME... tough reality to swallow perhaps, but really just
Darwin's evolutionary theory applied to software.

On Oct 22, 2:23 pm, Christian Catchpole <christ...@catchpole.net>
wrote:

phil swenson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 10:41:11 AM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
you will still be able to sell/distribute/install mac software the
traditional way.

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 2:10:47 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Anyone who thinks the Mac is going to be nothing but a big iPhone is
so unbelievably misguided that it would be a waste of time. Heres your
signs.

Alexey Zinger

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 2:29:01 PM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
This may or may not be an accurate assertion, but please support it some with something other than self-assuredness.  On the flip side, there are some signs that do point in the direction of Apple being interested in locking down each of their platforms as much as possible.  While the company has changed over the years, they appear to have always been of a mind that end users are to be kept at arm's length for fear of tinkering.  I understand that their processor architecture was appealing to many hobbyists, but compare that world view to the PC clone market that emerged at the same time.  Clearly, it shows two very different philosophies emerging in two very different ecosystems: one is open (perhaps more through circumstances than philosophical conviction) and the other is closed.

Fast-forward to today.  Apple is an active player in several segments: major ones being personal computing, mobile devices, and media, such as TV set-top boxes.  Looking at their recent statements and decisions made in those spaces, they move to lock down their products as much as they can get away with and defend it with fear-mongering over fragmentation and poor user experience.  But essentially Apple wants to always present prospective customers with the same choice of trusting the company with the lock and key to the wondrous walled garden or be "out-there" on their own, where who knows what kinds of bad things could happen to them.  I am torn on this.  I am not a zealot and I can see that Google has done some of this in a much milder form of luring people into opening up ever more personal information to them as a trade-off for convenience and ever-lasting supported integration of services.  It can work.  And it can be a worth-while proposition to the consumers.  We can't reject this position merely on the grounds of "it's evil, therefore it'll never work."  People don't always act in their own self-interest.  We have to accept that.  But it isn't as though this philosophy is prevalent in Apple's mobile products and totally alien in their PC's.  It's just harder to implement.
 
Alexey



From: CKoerner <ches...@gmail.com>
To: The Java Posse <java...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, October 22, 2010 2:10:47 PM
Subject: [The Java Posse] Re: Email from Jobs re Java on OS-X

Anyone who thinks the Mac is going to be nothing but a big iPhone is
so unbelievably misguided that it would be a waste of time. Heres your
signs.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 2:53:26 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
While your using your 'Jump to Conclusions' mat, you should figure
that Apple intends to turn everyones TV into a big iphone.

<shakes head>

I bet you main computer isn't even a Mac. I'm not wasting my time
discussing such a misguided view as "Apple is going to turn the Mac
into a big iphone". Enjoy your mat and your tinfoil had, I have better
things to do.

Alexey

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 3:00:27 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Out of respect for your busy schedule, I will refrain from pointing
out the irony of posting one's lack of interest in discussion on a
message board.

Kevin Wright

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 3:07:01 PM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
erm... but you just did!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.




--
Kevin Wright

mail / gtalk / msn : kev.lee...@gmail.com
pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright
twitter: @thecoda

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 3:11:30 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
Sometimes you see something so dumb that you can't help but keep
looking. I'm just not going to try to engage in the argument because
the fundamental assumption of "Apple turn Mac into big iPhone" is
idiocy.

Ricky Clarkson

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 3:33:43 PM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
If you can't be bothered to expand on your argument, perhaps it's
better to keep it to yourself.

CKoerner

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 4:39:27 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
I never made an argument, just a conclusion. Is that ok with you
Forest?

Derek Munneke

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 4:48:40 PM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com

But with the new apple TV running ios with no hard drive, haven't they just turned you TV into a big iPod (non)Touch (not that there is anything wrong with that)?

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.

Phil

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 5:00:43 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
I think this is tied in with the App Store and, significantly, the
software stack on the new Airs.

The T's and C's are clear that developers can only use 'core'
technologies in their applications. The new MacBook Airs are shipping
--without Flash preinstalled-- which allows Apple to bar all Flash/Air
dependent applications, as well as Java.

So, just like iOS you have in essence to use (primarily) Apple dev
tools to write your software --if-- you want to sell it through the
App Store.

Having mulled over the whole situation, and listened to podcast 326
this evening on the way home (London to Shropshire, I needed another
30 minutes guys!) I have come to two conclusions:

Oracle really can't afford for there not to be a JVM and JDK for OS X.

If there is a gap, I will simply run Ubuntu concurrently with OS X and
run my dev environment in a VM instead.

Oracle have a good few months to sort something out.

Rob Ross

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 6:17:20 PM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
What kind of crazy logic is this, to blame Oracle because *Apple* is deprecating their JDK? Are you saying Sun/Oracle should be maintaining a separate port of the JDK for every vendor that does one of their own???

Rob

RogerV

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 8:22:37 PM10/22/10
to The Java Posse
I wonder if Apple charged, say, an additional $200 fee to buy an OS X
Mac with Java JDK pre-installed, if that would generate enough revenue
to pay for the team at Apple that has maintained Java?

IOW, could Apple cater to software developer professionals who like to
use their hardware for developing Java on, and have that burden of
support pay for itself?

Is the Java developer community that likes Mac hardware really too
small a community to justify such an approach?

I wonder if it is even something that Apple would entertain?

Or is it that they actually prefer the anti-Java media attention and
are wanting to stimulate that on purpose?

Is just really strange that this year Apple in particular has embarked
on one move after another that alienates software developers from
their company, brand, and products.

The other strange thing about it is that they evidently don't see any
value in computer science - do they really believe that Objective C is
going to carry their product line the rest of this century? That there
is no need for any innovation to take place on their computers in the
arena of computer science? Do they assume that they alone constitute
enough innovation potential that they can safely ignore inviting other
computer software professionals to embrace their computers and
practice their profession on their hardware?

I can understand Apple wanting to coddle consumers and provide them a
virus-free, safe, and uncomplicated experience. But at the same time
they are steering the future of individual computing products into a
mode to where there will be no room and freedom for experimentation.
Linux will be the last place left to where such freedom exist (am
imagining that other players like Microsoft, Google, RIM, HP will all
eventually embrace the locked down app store approach as a way to
solve the computer virus problem).

Miroslav Pokorny

unread,
Oct 22, 2010, 10:52:05 PM10/22/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
What was the original motivation for Apple taking ownership of the producing and releasing JDK for the Mac ? Was this somehow related to their jealous guardianship of maintaining the Gui libs (AWT, Swing L&F etc)?

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 23, 2010, 5:51:27 AM10/23/10
to The Java Posse
On Oct 22, 6:17 pm, Rob Ross <rob.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What kind of crazy logic is this, to blame Oracle because *Apple* is deprecating their JDK? Are you saying Sun/Oracle should be maintaining a separate port of the JDK for every vendor that does one of their own???

If the value provided by Java isn't enough to make it worth a platform
vendor's time and money to maintain a Java port -- which is apparently
where we now stand on OS X -- then the ball is in Oracle's court.
There are several reasons it would be in Oracle's self-interest to
provide Java for OS X:

* It will keep Java attractive to developers. Without Java on Mac,
some number of developers will stop developing Java, and others in the
future who would have developed Java won't, solely because it isn't
available on their platform of choice. It is impossible to know how
big or small this number is.

* It will maintain Java's perceived legitimacy. Given the order-of-
magnitude division of desktop market share (it's not too far off to
round it to 90% Windows, 9% Mac, 0.9% Linux), not being on Mac
effectively makes Desktop Java a Windows-only technology… which is of
course completely pointless, because at that point, you might as well
just write native Windows apps.

The underlying story here, IMHO, is the final and total failure of
Desktop Java. If it mattered, Apple couldn't afford not to support
it, because there would be a class of users other than Java Developers
who would miss it, and wouldn't buy Macs because of its absence. That
failure really is Sun's fault, and therefore Oracle's problem to fix,
should it choose to.

--Chris

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 23, 2010, 5:58:52 AM10/23/10
to The Java Posse
I answered this in another thread, but briefly:

* Apple was in very bad shape in 1997 (most people expected it to be
acquired or go out of business), so Sun wasn't all that interested in
putting resources into a doomed platform. Their JDK 1.0 was about as
half-assed a release as you'll ever see. They were pretty happy to
let Apple deal with it and, for a number of years, put a few Sun
engineers on Apple's campus to help with the MRJ.

* Most JVMs at that time were provided as a developer tool with an IDE
(Metrowerks CodeWarrior, Symantic Café, Roaster), or as an applet-
runner within a browser (Netscape, MSIE). Compatibility and
performance were all over the map. Apple's stated goal was to provide
a single high-quality VM that browsers and developers could just
standardize on, and count on being present.

On Oct 22, 10:52 pm, Miroslav Pokorny <miroslav.poko...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Kirk

unread,
Oct 23, 2010, 6:48:10 AM10/23/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
humm, the problem is... Java is pretty much used for development tools for Java projects or for Java projects of which the bulk of those are enterprise apps. Objective-C will not replace nor will apple hardware replace what's being used in the enterprise environment. And, most enterprises don't care about using Mac hardware for the development of enterprise applications. Windows is good enough... so I don't see pressure here from that direction. The pressure is; Java is now dead on emerging client platforms. The only hope is that Oracle and Google settle in a way that keeps Dalvik going. If not, Android will live on without it and that will be it for java on client platforms... outside of enterprise applications. And that won't most likely include a whole lot of end user GUIs.. I suspect the bulk will be operational interfaces.

Kirk

Chris Adamson

unread,
Oct 23, 2010, 7:51:51 AM10/23/10
to The Java Posse
BTW. interesting blog entry on this from Matt Drance at Apple
Outsider:

http://www.appleoutsider.com/2010/10/22/java/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Major points of interest include the fact that Apple had a bunch of
people working hard on Java over the years, and that the bulk of that
effort was spent on AWT/Swing, which is a really big job and a really
hard problem in the end. That, and javax.sound, are what Soy Latte
foundered on after all, and clearly they'd be the stumbling block for
a community-developed Mac JVM. Last graf is a killer.

Matt is an indie iOS developer and trainer (he now teaches the Prags
courses along with Daniel Steinberg) who was an Apple iPhone
Evangelist for a number of years. Interestingly, I met Matt when he
was an ADC engineer supporting Java on the Mac; he got assigned to
help me figure out an obscure hang with QuickTime for Java's capture
settings dialog.

--Chris

jitesh dundas

unread,
Oct 23, 2010, 10:40:23 AM10/23/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
Again, I think you see Sun stepping in with their
own JDK primarily as a means of attracting developers and legitimizing
the Java platform.  They may not have wanted to, but it seems they had
to.

======

Clearly all this act is to fend off competition and make money out of
java(read stephen coulborne's blog).

I think Sun was just moving into a trap that it created (with its open
source game & then asking for licensing fees with its testing
kits.).They forgot competition & the other problems that came bundling
together.

They tried to come out of their own trap. Sign, too little too
late.THEY SHOULD HAVE LEANT FROM IBM..

jd


On 10/22/10, Chris Adamson <inval...@gmail.com> wrote:
> To me, one line that stood out in Gosling's blog was this one:
>
> "Sun also provided the VM for Linux because there was no one else to
> do it."
>

> There was a Blackdown port of Java, but I believe it was pretty
> troubled. Porting all of Java, including AWT and javax.sound and all
> that, is *hard*. Again, I think you see Sun stepping in with their
> own JDK primarily as a means of attracting developers and legitimizing
> the Java platform. They may not have wanted to, but it seems they had
> to.
>
> --Chris
>
> On Oct 22, 8:22 am, opinali <opin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Gosling's
>> take:http://nighthacks.com/roller/jag/entry/steve_jobs_comments_on_apple
>>
>> On Oct 22, 8:08 am, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 10/22/10 12:01 , opinali wrote:> Why did Apple insist on having
>> > control of the Mac JVM years ago, when
>> > > Sun wanted do do that?
>>
>> > As Chris said, unfortunately in this case Sun is to blame for the poor
>> > engineering and integration, at the time.
>>
>> > --
>> > Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
>> > Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
>> > java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici -www.tidalwave.it/people
>> > Fabrizio.Giud...@tidalwave.it
>

Casper Bang

unread,
Oct 23, 2010, 1:07:25 PM10/23/10
to The Java Posse
> Major points of interest include the fact that Apple had a bunch of
> people working hard on Java over the years, and that the bulk of that
> effort was spent on AWT/Swing, which is a really big job and a really
> hard problem in the end.  That, and javax.sound, are what Soy Latte
> foundered on after all, and clearly they'd be the stumbling block for
> a community-developed Mac JVM.  Last graf is a killer.

That's why I think it's a mistake that Java insists on a UI layer.
It's a huge complication and frankly, a naive hunt for a common
denominator which can never be low enough. Any Java desktop app which
was just remotely interesting (not a whole lot to choose from), ships
with native bindings of some sort (to be able to restart, integrate
with systray, show proper filechooser etc.). So, like C#, I wish Java
was more focussed around interoperability rather than trying to
encapsulate everything and a kitchen sink. If that was the case, it
would probably be a whole lot easier for Apple to maintain. Nothing's
wrong with "write once, run anywhere"; but a multi-platform UI is a
pipe-dream that can only achieve mediocrity - which we all know Steve
Jobs does not do!

Fabrizio Giudici

unread,
Oct 24, 2010, 12:33:08 PM10/24/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
On 10/22/2010 10:39 PM, CKoerner wrote:
> I never made an argument, just a conclusion. Is that ok with you
> Forest?
>
It's ok for me. For me conclusions without arguments have little value.

--
f.g.

Michael Neale

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 12:28:24 AM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
OK can we turn this thread into a meta argument about bringing up
scala instead of an argument about arguing?

On Oct 25, 3:33 am, Fabrizio Giudici <fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it>
wrote:

Christian Catchpole

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 1:09:07 AM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
Well, you can't have it both ways. How can Oracle claim to have this
great platform that runs everywhere... if someone else does it for
us. I'm not saying they "should" maintain all the JVMs, but without
some kind of agreement with those who do, Oracle can't be surprised
this has happened. But as has been suggested, perhaps Oracle don't
care either. Sure this opens it up to anyone to build a quality JVM
for OS X but the question how quickly can it be done.

Apple are obviously not stupid and have weighed up the lost sales to
the Java community against the odds of them destroying a competitor
technology. Perhaps it’s a positive sign that they actually see it as
a threat now. I think they are happy to lose this battle to help win
the war. I think they are thinking at least 5 years ahead on this
one.

Steven Herod

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 2:19:05 AM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
Wow, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed today.

Casper Bang

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 3:40:05 AM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
> Apple are obviously not stupid and have weighed up the lost sales to
> the Java community against the odds of them destroying a competitor
> technology.  Perhaps it’s a positive sign that they actually see it as
> a threat now.  

I really doubt they are seeing it as a threat though, the typical
reasoning going on in iSteve's head is well known by now and has been
covered in other threads. Java (and Flash) has been deprecated little
by little over the years, in various subtle ways. I think it's no
coincidence that with this last stroke, Java is officially deprecated
by Apple _as_well_ as being locked out of their future app channel.

Few could have any doubt, that Apple does *not* want Java/Flash on in
any way, shape or form. Apple's "we know best" has worked out so well
for them in the past, I think they are simply applying it more broadly
to their advantage. Since they put customer experience ahead of
developers, it goes without saying that the Java developer lost out on
this one.

Phil Maskell

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 6:14:47 AM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
Hi all,

I don't know if this has been mentioned in any of the other posts
about No Java on the Mac, but Rick Ross of Javalobby fame tweeted
about a petition for Apple to contribute the work it has done so far:

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/macjdk

Have a look, I'm going to sign it.

Phil

Mark Derricutt

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 6:23:28 AM10/25/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
If you do - just remember to revoke the OAUTH permissions after you sign up - they spam tweets from EVERYONE whose signed up whenever the petition reaches a milestone.

Seeing upward of 200 "we just reached 1000 votes" earlier was painful.

--
"Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven Wilson, Porcupine Tree



Phil Maskell

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 6:50:27 AM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
Mark,

No worries there, I'm a bit like Tor was in not tweeting (therefore no
followers), just follow Java/Scala and news with it.

Phil
> > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> > .

Les Stroud

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 4:24:45 PM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
Just to add my perspective to this thread...
I think Java is simply being caught up in the collateral damage of the
Apple Flash war. I don't think Apple wants to support installing any
application that is not written using their native tools through their
store. The DOJ seems to have convinced them that they were being
unfair singling out types of apps based on technical limitations
through a store they controlled. So, for their OS store, they said
that you can't depend on optional software (otherwise they would have
to deal with dependency management). Because they didn't want flash
in the store, they made Flash an optional install. But, they might
have problems justifying removing Flash if they left Java in. Since
Java is not longer a part of their strategic plans, they removed it
too. I think it is that simple.

Summary: If they left Java in, then they would have had to leave Flash
in, which would have lead to them having to support Flash apps in
their app store.

Hopefully, the void will be filled. Sure would be nice if apple would
donate their mods to openjdk.

Kirk

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 5:32:49 PM10/25/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
>
>
> Summary: If they left Java in, then they would have had to leave Flash
> in, which would have lead to them having to support Flash apps in
> their app store.

Only problem with this comment is that this has caught Oracle flat footed. If Apple were on this path they might have given Oracle a heads up.

Kirk

Michael Neale

unread,
Oct 25, 2010, 11:04:42 PM10/25/10
to The Java Posse
never fear - sign my petition to stop petitionspot spamming

www.petitionspot.com/petitions/petitionspotspam
> > javaposse+...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> > .

Mark Derricutt

unread,
Oct 26, 2010, 2:15:53 PM10/26/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
hmmm - if I sign this, I wonder if petitionspot will only use this new OAUTH ticket for your petition, and not the previous one I signed as well..

double spam - what does it mean?

--
"Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven Wilson, Porcupine Tree



Mark Derricutt

unread,
Oct 26, 2010, 2:17:21 PM10/26/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
Interesting - I just cancelled the "twitter, facebook" page and it signed the petition without spamming anyone.  Excellent - it makes it look like you HAVE to sign in to one of the services to sign.

--
"Great artists are extremely selfish and arrogant things" — Steven Wilson, Porcupine Tree



Cédric Beust ♔

unread,
Oct 26, 2010, 2:27:42 PM10/26/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
Yes, fortunately, you can log on with just a first name/last name, but it's tempting to choose the Twitter or Facebook Oauth option since it's just a click.

One thing for sure: from now on, I will just stop using the Twitter and Facebook Oauth completely since you can never know what these applications you are granting privileges to will do with these privileges, and the risk of them tweeting or updating a Facebook status behind my back is just too great.

-- 
Cédric


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.



--
Cédric


Josh McDonald

unread,
Oct 26, 2010, 6:29:11 PM10/26/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
Most people don't yet realise that when you give these anonymous companies access to your accounts, you're lending them your reputation. And it just might have a few scratches in it when it's returned.

"It'll buff right out."

-Josh

2010/10/27 Cédric Beust ♔ <ced...@beust.com>



--
"Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee."

Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
   -  jo...@joshmcdonald.info
   -  http://twitter.com/sophistifunk
   -  http://flex.joshmcdonald.info/

kevin.hooke

unread,
Oct 28, 2010, 1:28:19 AM10/28/10
to The Java Posse
But Apple already has a big iPhone, it's the iPad. Maybe a big iPod
Touch would be a more appropriate comparison.

There's only so many snippets of information that Apple has discussed
so of course we're all drawing conclusions from the little we know,
presumably because we're all interested to see where this is heading
because we are either Java developers, Apple users, or both.

As someone in the 'both' category, I won't buy an iPhone because I
can't develop and run Java apps on it - the clear choice for me for a
phone platform right now is Android. Of course this isn't a typical
reason for a 'normal' consumer who would buy a product for other
reasons (price, features, ease of use) rather than the technology the
product uses. That said, I love my MacBook Pro.

The news that Apple will not continue to develop Java for the Mac is
making me consider why I should continue to use a Mac in the future.
The news that an App Store is coming to the Mac, the fact that it will
only deliver native OS X apps presumably controlled by Apple in the
same way as the iPhone App Store, that iOS features to be included in
Mac OS X Lion and that Apple will not continue development of Java for
the Mac is just sounding too much to me like 'Apple is going to turn
the Mac into a big iPhone'. And who can say, maybe this is indeed
Apple's long term plan.

At the end of the day someone will develop and supply Java for the
Mac, so in reality maybe we're all worrying about nothing :-)

Here's a random (and possibly crazy) thought. Apple has done a better
job than most other electronics companies of turning computer
technology into consumer devices, and they continue to move in this
direction pushing the iPad as a device for 'everyone' to consume
media. When you think about it, it's incredibly ineffective that we
continue to interact with computers via a QWERTY keyboard, which was
originally designed to place infrequently combined keys adjacent to
each other so the keys didn't get jammed on your typewriter. The iPad
really is an amazing step to move away from this 'old' input approach.
Ok, so it still has an onscreen keyboard, but it does away with a
physical keyboard and for that matter the mouse too. Who's to say that
Apple's long term strategy is to move away from general purpose
computers, and move entirely in the direction of devices to consume
content like the iPad? If this is true then the statement 'Apple is
going to turn the Mac into a big iPhone' sums up this direction very
appropriately :-)

On Oct 22, 11:53 am, CKoerner <chessm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I bet you main computer isn't even a Mac. I'm not wasting my time
> discussing such a misguided view as "Apple is going to turn the Mac
> into a big iphone". Enjoy your mat and your tinfoil had, I have better
> things to do.

Reinier Zwitserloot

unread,
Oct 28, 2010, 6:23:06 AM10/28/10
to The Java Posse
Let's shoot down some urban myths.

The keyboard is not ineffective. On the contrary, it is amazingly
_EFFECTIVE_. The sheer amount of complicated data manipulation an
expert can apply using just a keyboard is mind-blowing, and other
input methods, even the exotic ones (multitouch, voice, focus
tracking, etc), even assuming those technologies actually work, can't
hold a candle to that old bitty, the keyboard.

QWERTY _was_ indeed designed to avoid hammer jam, but this has no
scientifically measurable impact on layout efficiency. For example,
the Dvorak layout which was specifically designed for faster typing,
has never been proved faster. I know 3 friends of mine who are avid
Dvorak fans and I out-type them by a significant margin - though of
course anecdotes are no substitute for scientific research. At any
rate, the one serious piece of research done on typing speed, by
Dvorak himself, was cooked, and nobody bothered to retry it. Googling
for the research is surprisingly hard (the dvorak is faster myth is
everywhere, it seems, and all the links I followed on that didn't link
to any research, they just repeated Dvorak's unproven reasons why it
should in theory be better), though here's something:
http://reason.com/archives/1996/06/01/typing-errors

Also, if you think someone who drops $2000 on a notebook is going to
be satisfied with iOS, you're delusional. If you think Apple is going
to drop their mac platform, which, if they spun it off as separate
company, would be somewhere in the 100-150 range of top 500 companies
all by itself... you're delusional.

If we're going to scream bloody murder about apple, let's keep the
focus on the sharecropping bullpuckey they are going to extend with
this new appstore. You know the drill: If apple doesn't like your app,
you can't sell it, and you have no recourse of any kind other than to
try and get the tech world riled up. That's a crappy model for
developers. That's worth whining about.

phil swenson

unread,
Oct 28, 2010, 12:11:23 PM10/28/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 4:23 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <rein...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Also, if you think someone who drops $2000 on a notebook is going to
> be satisfied with iOS, you're delusional. If you think Apple is going
> to drop their mac platform, which, if they spun it off as separate
> company, would be somewhere in the 100-150 range of top 500 companies
> all by itself... you're delusional.

110 according to the Apple Keynote. Macs are a $22 Billion revenue
generator according to the keynote as well.


>
> If we're going to scream bloody murder about apple, let's keep the
> focus on the sharecropping bullpuckey they are going to extend with
> this new appstore. You know the drill: If apple doesn't like your app,
> you can't sell it, and you have no recourse of any kind other than to
> try and get the tech world riled up. That's a crappy model for
> developers. That's worth whining about.

Your recourse would be to sell mac apps directly rather than the app
store, this is allowed on the Mac app store model. This is how I
think the iPhone should work too. It's ridiculous that the app store
is the only distribution method.

Jess Holle

unread,
Oct 28, 2010, 12:14:33 PM10/28/10
to java...@googlegroups.com, phil swenson
On 10/28/2010 11:11 AM, phil swenson wrote:
Your recourse would be to sell mac apps directly rather than the app
store, this is allowed on the Mac app store model.  This is how I
think the iPhone should work too.  It's ridiculous that the app store
is the only distribution method.
I'd guess that Apple will try very hard to push everyone on the Mac to the app store over time.

Yes, they'll probably allow other distribution methods for a long time to come -- but they'll also try to convince customers that the only safe, easy way to get apps is from their store, to convince software vendors that this is the only way to be a first-class app on the platform, etc.

--
Jess Holle

Cédric Beust ♔

unread,
Oct 28, 2010, 12:26:24 PM10/28/10
to java...@googlegroups.com
Agree on all counts about the myths surrounding Dvorak. Another negative aspect that is often overlooked is that the Dvorak keyboard was designed to write English text, not coding, and as a consequence, you will find common coding characters such as numbers, parentheses and other symbols located very awkwardly, which will kill your typing speed.

Having said that, a developer should be more focused on keeping their hands and wrists healthy than typing fast (Dvorak helps on neither counts), so if you're considering making changes in your physical coding environment, your first priority should be to get an ergonomic keyboard and make sure your desk and chair are positioned properly.

-- 
Cédric


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.




--
Cédric


kevin.hooke

unread,
Oct 30, 2010, 2:36:10 AM10/30/10