I get all the hate for Oracle the company, but they've taken the time to systematically open source every closed source thing they've had: JFR, ZGC, GraalVM (partially), and finally the crown jewel the TCK.
They've even been involved in getting the open community up and running.
I sincerely can't imagine what more you could want from a corporate steward.
They demand their customers pay licencing fees to licenses they don't own, like the Java language itself which is not subject to copyright under US law.
The suit against Google was filed within a month of the Sun acquisition, it was part of their reasoning for buying Sun in the first place: so that they can sue Java users and get tons of money for nothing.
Sun would have tried to squash Google just as they did before with Microsoft, but they were out of cash, sadly as we could have gotten a proper JavaSE mobile platform instead of the craziness of Android development and incompatibilities with OpenJDK.
Delphi, Common Lisp, C, C++, .NET, Smalltalk, SQL Server, Informix, DB 2, Informix, Rational, WebSphere, IBM i, IBM z, ClearPath, Aix, HP-UX,INTEGRITY OS,.....
Basically any software stack sold with a commercial license.
Anyone using pirate versions of Visual Studio, Intel, IBM, HP, TI, ARM,... C and C++ compilers, caught during a software inspection by the respective fiscal authorities.
If it makes you happy that I don't have access to the press or published reports of all countries where fiscal authorities actually do their job, then no.
Not that anyone is happy, but at least I am astounded to know that such a thing exists.
I know Oracle had sued Google for using Java some 3 years ago, and that amount ran into billions, but I thought that must be some issue exclusive to Big Corps.
>>"managed to seize about 40,000 illegal copies of software" recorded on optical disks "containing : videogames "cinematic" musical works and computer programs "as well as 20 computers with the most sophisticated software and hardware for reproduction. This result was all the more important since "File servers" were dismantled and contributed to the "large-scale" public disclosure of such protected material.
This is just normal piracy as we know it.
They don't appear to be developing anything using FOSS like C, C++?
In what sense do you mean a pirate version of C or C++? The languages are not subject to a license and therefore cannot be pirated. The ISO/ANSI standard is a copyrighted document, but that doesn't mean the language is copyright. There are proprietary runtimes and toolchains and if you're using a proprietary toolchain or runtime without a license then you are indeed violating copyright in exactly the same way as anyone doing this with any other sort of software.
That's not what we're talking about Oracle doing here to users of Java.
First of all, yes the languages have a ISO copyright, that you are supposed to pay for if you want to get ISO document, even in PDF.
Any compiler writer that wants to write a conformant implementation needs to buy the ISO document, otherwise there is no guarantee that the compiler is actually ISO compliant.
Additionally most compiler vendors that care about ISO certification need to pay extra to companies that sell ISO validation suits like Dinkumware.
So, where are your examples? Do you actually have concrete example of any case remotely similar to Oracle's persecution of Java users? Or will you keep inventing outlandish and unrealistic hypothetical scenarios without any basis on reality?
> You’ve been able to download msbuild for free for at least 10 years that I’ve been using it. You don’t install Visual Studio on your build server.
There is also, of course, projects such as Mono.
I don't recall Mono developers having ever been sued. In fact I recall that the people behind Mono were actually hired and paid a big chunk of cash to work for Microsoft.
So the difference is, Microsoft bought Mono, whereas Oracle sued their customers... Still not seeing how using .Net would open me up to a lawsuit, but any Oracle license might.
"Microsoft filed a lawsuit late Friday against an IP address, alleging that an individual or group of individuals has been using that IP address to illegally activate copies of Windows, Office, and other products without the proper license."
Microsoft suing Comcast for bruteforce-activating thousands of licenses, is not nearly the same as Oracle suing a customer because their definition of general computing is loosely defined.
Mono has been used by Xamarin and Unity for years, before any Microsoft acquisition. It's been production ready for a very long time. It's also a freely licensed version, even if you don't like it for whatever reason.
And you didn’t have to pay continuing license fees for use or support. I worked for two companies that used Visual 2008 for years after newer versions came out because we had to support ruggedized Windows Mobile devices and that was the last version that supported it.
They just ended support for VS 2008 in April of this year.
You are confused.
Pirated Visual Studio is like pirated IntelliJ: an advanced and optional development tool, not what everybody but you is discussing.
The new commercial JDK is like Microsoft suddenly asking expensive license fees for using .Net "in production" (which they actually do indirectly, and with clear-cut boundaries, through expensive enterprise Windows SKUs)
.Net Framework is clearly on life support. .Net Core is the wave of the future. It’s open source, supported for at least 3 years and no license fees...
Every revision since 4.5.2 follows the support lifecycle of the parent OS (which generally is much more than 3 years)
.NET Framework has never had a license fee. An argument could be made that part of the cost of Windows OS is a .NET Framework licensing fee, but the fact is if you're developing for Framework then Windows is already in your purview.
Admittedly, the .NET Framework is not open source. But a good amount of its source code is available for review:
I’m not saying .Net Framework is going to be abandoned by Microsoft. But few companies are going to invest money in new .Net Framework initiatives, and Microsoft’s energy is definitely focused on .Net Core and just making sure .Net Framework stays up to date with .Net Standard.
I wouldn’t bet my career on .Net framework or desktop development in general anymore than Webforms.
The last time I was looking for a job, there were companies that offering me architect positions paying $10K - $15K more than the job I accepted to lead projects that were doing ASP.Net MVC, Sql server, etc hosted on IIS using .Net framework.
I saw the writing on the wall, I took a job that was more or less a vertical salary move, and “self demoted” so I could jump on newer tech.
Starting with XP, all versions of Windows have included a C# compiler in the .Net framework, if you’re willing to use the command line. And Mono has been usable for most things for a long time. And Microsoft has offered free versions of Visual Studio — which may have feature restrictions, but which can be used for production — for more than a decade. And, if you prefer the command line, you can find free SDKs that include everything you might want.
Although Microsoft makes a lot of money on development tools, it seems to think that giving away versions of those tools can help drive demand for Windows. Sun tried the same thing, but then advertised Java as making the operating system and hardware irrelevant, so free JDKs don’t appear to have sold many Solaris systems.
99% of the typical .NET apps aren't buildable with that bundled compiler, due to lack of associated tooling, windows services and additional libraries.
Those free versions of Visual Studio weren't allowed for production when they were called Visual Studio Express.
Visual Studio Community only allows production use for companies up to 5 employees, with a specific yearly revenue. Better read the licenses.
How so? That same tooling is used on the build server that compiles the app. From looking at job postings, .Net on the desktop is basically dead. Most companies that are still using .Net are doing it on the server.
Completely wrong, WPF is quite active in Europe, specially in health sector for laboratory automation devices, factory management systems, control panels in IoT devices and similar.
And on the server, majority of .NET Web applications are a typically variation of Sharepoint, SiteCore, Orchard and similar CMS, usually deployed on IIS.
.NET Core might do the circles around HN and Reddit, but it is still largely ignored in the typical .NET shops.
> Completely wrong, WPF is quite active in Europe, specially in health sector for laboratory automation devices, factory management systems, control panels in IoT devices and similar.
That's news to me, and not only I'm from Europe but also I've actually worked on developing UI applications for laboratory equipment.
I have seen zero instances of WPF being used anywhere at all. Ever.
At this point I'm thoroughly convinced that you're just trolling HN and wasting everyone's time with a constant stream of jibberish.
As for trolling, I find sad that on a web site created for people starting business, many feel entitled to get their tools for free, unlike every other professionals.
How large is that industry in the grand scheme of things? How many job openings? How much investment in going into making Windows desktop apps in 2018?
You have to compete with the market as it exists. All of the focus of development and all of the money is going into web and mobile. Every platform vendor except Microsoft is giving away their development environment.
I’m a .Net fan but I can’t imagine living in the hell like landscape of doing WPF development knowing that the industry is passing me by.
If I were going to do desktop development in 2018, it’s going to be working in C/C++ writing really specialized, highly optimized software where I could command a huge premium.
The majority of web apps are SharePoint? I’m far away from the HN bubble and it’s true that .Net Core’s adoption is in its infancy. But the oldest corporate web deployments that people are using is Web Forms, then ASP.Net MVC 3/4 on top of .Net framework and the corresponding Web API framework before they were merged into one with ASP.Net 5 (ASP.Net Core)
I don't really think that is accurate... There's a lot of desktop .NET development going on still. And for all the buzz that Core is getting, it's still not feature-complete with the 4.5+ full desktop framework.
Where is all of this desktop .Net development for new projects? There is no momentum for .Net or practically any other desktop development. The only major companies still making any real money on the desktop are Microsoft and Adobe. Anyone else looking for desktop developers are doing internal apps and they are trying to move as quickly to the web as possible.
Those are different terms from what I remember for Express. I don’t know if my memory is faulty or if the switch to Community changed things. Wikipedia says Community was meant to be open source friendly at the expense of some commercial projects.
It looks like today you’re explicitly allowed to use the free Visual Studio for open source work, noncommercial work, academic work, and small commercial work (“small” defined in terms of team size). If that doesn’t cover your project, you have to try to fit in the BizSpark rules for a temporary fee waiver.
> With Visual C++ 2005 Express you can build both native and managed applications. Using the .NET Framework you can easily create Windows Forms, console, and class library applications. By downloading the Windows Platform SDK (freely available) you can build applications that take full advantage of the Win32 API. Web developers should use Visual Web Developer 2005 Express Edition.
I mean, I'm pretty sure Win Forms, Console apps, and class libraries were all most of us were using .NET for back in 2005 (I wouldn't know for sure as I was in high school still).
Don't get me wrong, there were and are advantages to the non-free versions of Visual Studio. Notably, until 2017 I believe, was extensions. But there's just a lot of misunderstanding in this thread about the general licensing model of .NET and its toolchain.
This was not pulling the rug from under you.
This was them clearly stating they where going to pull the rug, you ignoring all their shouts, signs and warnings and then blundering. I think the onus is on us for not reading and listening.
Meanwhile .NET Core is MIT Licensed and the language spec for C# is still standardized and open to re-implement (hence something like Vala is possible). If you didn't want to drink Microsoft's koolaid it's free as in free beer and as in freedom, can't say the same about Oracles.
.NET Core is a nice step from Microsoft, but even 2.1 still only supports a fraction of .NET enterprise software, let alone Java comparable software solutions and host platforms.
We're roughly what 3 years in? It's to be expected, but what it does currently support is fairly impressive. Having used ASP .NET Core on a couple of projects I would say it covers enough for web development, right after Python I'd much rather do web development in C# as a result.
I do agree though it isn't a completed product yet, but what's already there is fairly capable depending on what you're working on.
It's mostly inspired by the syntax of C# but the spec of C# is standardized so I could see them or someone else going further with it. The real value in C# is the underlying stack aka the .NET Framework that gives you all the tools and toys to get things done.
> but they've taken the time to systematically open source
Most of that is so they could wash their hands from the maintenance burden.
> finally the crown jewel the TCK
Can you give me more info here? I heard about EE, but I was not aware the full Java TCK (i.e. the one denied to Apache Harmony) is completely open now.
> I sincerely can't imagine what more you could want from a corporate steward
Simple, don't try to profit from the language itself. Imagine a commercial Go version, or imagine if some AOT parts of the .Net compiler were part of an enterprise edition, or imagine if a test suite for WASM compliance were selectively given only to some, etc.
They've even been involved in getting the open community up and running.
I sincerely can't imagine what more you could want from a corporate steward.