[ryandvm]

Nah. Those are the reasons that an organization would like to list for using Java. But "kls" nailed it above. It's mainly inertia and labor availability at this point.

The reality is that most enterprise projects are generally so many layers of lasagna code that JVM performance is about 20 down on the list of things to blame for poor performance.

[nupark2]

Nah. Those are the reasons that an organization would like to list for using Java. But "kls" nailed it above. It's mainly inertia and labor availability at this point.

... except those are the reasons our organization uses Java.

Unfortunately, it seems like this doesn't fit the narrative that some people want to have about the JVM and Java.

[mseebach]

If anything, they are reasons that enterprises aren't in any kind of hurry to abandon Java.

[kls]

Right which was my point above in setting the history of how we got here and why no one is really interested in leaving. The history is very important to how Java became dominate and created the top reasons, which I would content are inertia and labor pool. The reasons bullet pointed above are why no one is in a hurry to move on, it does what it is supposed to do and the enterprise is happy with it. Until the cost/benefit is blown away, they will continue to be happy with it.

[vannevar]

It's mainly inertia and labor availability at this point.

Perhaps, but you can't ignore the reasons that the inertia and labor pool came to be in the first place, many of which nupark2 lists and which are still valid.