Comments

• NotZed

  2011-09-06 23:24:33

  Roy, ALL distributions have to drop the proprietary JRE because Oracle changed the license and removed the ability of GNU/Linux distributions to re-distribute it.
  
  e.g. (which was in news picks iirc): http://techie-buzz.com/foss/oracle-jdk-license-change.html
  
  (the article has some factual errors - e.g. it is still possible to download the oracle jdk from java.com - just not from redhat/etc).
  
  This is a good thing, and Oracle seem to be de-emphasising the proprietary jdk, and java7 is apparently based on openjdk7 anyway.

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-09-06 23:35:59

  This post was mostly about SUSE propping Mono up. I did not say that the Java step was unique.

• Michael

  2011-09-07 00:11:44

  Mono is a choice.
  
  Choice is good.

• NotZed

  2011-09-07 02:56:28

  Out with the microsoft talking points again?
  
  Choice is good eh? Like the 'choice' of multiple document formats? Rubbish. Choice isn't always good. "Choice is good" is a nonsense statement.
  
  And Mono (like OOXML) is not a choice, it's a wedge. It draws resources and mind-share away from other projects and divides microsoft's competitors.
  
  It's not even a very good choice - .NET just isn't very good technology.

• Michael

  2011-09-07 03:06:16

  "Choice is good" is not a MS "talking point", it is a Linux advocate "talking point".
  
  But Roy, curious, do you agree that there should be only one document format? Hey, why not go with the one which is most accepted: OOXML? Wait... you likely will not like *that* choice and will want people to pick yours. And you do not like Mono. Fine. Do you want to take that choice away from others? What if someone decides Linux is not a good choice on the desktop? Should that choice be removed?
  
  But, yes, of course there are downsides to choice. I have been making that point for years. That does not mean I want to see them limited. If Google and MS want to have their own preferred Linux distros I am fine with that. I am for choice.

• NotZed

  2011-09-07 02:41:45

  You might have meant that, but that isn't how it comes across at all.
  
  Starting with the title of your post, and the title of the relevant post you linked to, and what that post was about.

• Michael

  2011-09-07 02:52:59

  Likely tied to the fact that Roy was recently bad-mouthing OS X for dropping pre-installed Java. I noted that some Linux distros do not have it pre-installed, including Ubuntu, and Roy suddenly went very silent on the issue.
  
  In this post he gives lip-service to it being bad to drop it and then that back fired on him.
  
  Kinda funny. Or maybe just coincidental. Whatever. :)

• Mikko

  2011-09-07 10:10:21

  @Michael
  
  But iso ooxml isn't used by anyone and ms office saves in msooxml
  
  mono programs doesn't work in .net and .net programs doesn't work with mono

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-09-07 14:05:45

  Correct. But these are not so far apart.

• Dr. Roy Schestowitz

  2011-09-07 14:06:17

  In fact, Mono reuses some .NET code (MS-PL).

• Michael

  2011-09-07 14:31:54

  You speak of SuSE as being a Microsoft distro and then talk about the use of Mono in it being a patent risk.
  
  Whose patents? Microsoft's? Microsoft is going to sue themselves perhaps?

• Adrian Malacoda

  2011-09-09 02:20:54

  With all due respect Dr. Schestowitz, this article does make it seem like the decision to drop Oracle JDK was SUSE's and it was done explicitly to push Mono in its stead. In fact, Oracle itself pulled the plug on its distributor license, and I suspect OpenSUSE will continue to offer OpenJDK, which as of Java 7 is the official reference implementation of the Java Platform (see http://jdk7.java.net/java-se-7-ri/)
  
  I distrust Oracle almost as much as I do Microsoft, so I wouldn't touch Java for any of my own projects. Still, a purely free Java replacing the proprietary one is a good thing.