Re: [fsf-community-team] What is up with (Sun) Java?

[Brandon Lozza]

Java will eventually become free, allegedly starting with 1.7 (Java 7)


On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:48 PM, James Phillips <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In a recent reply I suggested that the Windows JRE was free software. I
> am mistaken: it is proprietary software in the worst sense:
>   Linkname: Java Technology Licensing
>   URL: http://www.java.com/en/download/license.jsp
> "                      Sun Microsystems, Inc
>                  Binary Code License Agreement
>  for the JAVA SE RUNTIME ENVIRONMENT (JRE) VERSION 6 and JAVAFX
>                        RUNTIME VERSION 1"
>
> I guess I was under the impression that Java was free because I heard
> about the "Free and Open Source Java" (OpenJDK) that should not be
> confused with Sun's own implementation.
>   Linkname: Free and Open Source Java - Overview
>   URL: http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/
>
> I don't know if I should be publicly mentioning this, but I have been
> invited to talk with some Sun representatives via telephone about their
> "Java Warehouse"/"Java Store" they are working on. I had clicked on an
> advertisement for it an read the FAQ. I commented that I am not
> comfortable recommending that people install programs like Open Office
> if the JRE installs a root-kit to facilitate the Java "App" store. I may
> have [del]said[/del] implied something about vi/emacs being better
> anyway (well vi, because I metioned bloat).
>
> I also pointed out that any Apple-style app store breaks the "compile
> once, run anywhere" promise. (Only available for Windows or MacOSX, US
> residents (due to presence of DMCA?))
>
> One thing I am unsure of I how much I should push the concept of free
> software if I choose to participate. Sun appears to do many things that
> show support for openess (such as opening the design of thier old
> server chips), but then then do things like this as well. I
> don't know what to think.
>
> Regards,
>
> James Phillips
>
>
>
>
>