|
|
|
|
|
by amalter
2464 days ago
|
|
The niche JDK vendors are an order of magnitude off what Oracle needs to fund JDK development. I suppose the closest example is Azul, which is using the same "pay for performance" model of Graal EE. I have absolutely nothing against some kind of commercial model for funding the JDK. My comments were that in my opinion, the model is unfortunately doomed: - Lack of goodwill for Oracle - Enterprises who are not yet Oracle customers really really want to stay away from entering into a commercial agreement. True or not, the perception is that a license agreement with Oracle comes with aggressive and intrusive compliance audits. - Worse is better syndrome - Indeed Oracle is the primary developer on the JDK, but the others entering this space are not hobbyists working on the side. Plenty of serious vendors with serious compiler chops have skin in keeping "free JRE" as the "fast enough" JRE. Redhat natch IBM, Google, Azul, Amazon, apparently Twitter (see pull request). Graal EE is supposedly 30-40% faster on some numeric workloads. But what if these players get that down to 20% or 10% .. or suddenly there might be workloads where CE is faster. Much harder to pitch that license agreement without compelling and unambiguous benefit. I don't have a "problem" with Oracle, I'm just commenting on where I think the industry is right now. Maybe Oracle will prove me wrong - Microsoft sure did. |
|
From those listed by you, IBM and Azul have their own JVM implementations, and just like Oracle require enterprise contracts for the cool features.
Finally, everyone complains about Oracle, yet no one else bothered to make a counter offer to buy Sun.