[npalli]

I didn't read the article that way. FTA, the sense is Java is not dead in the same sense COBOL is not dead, that is "legacy" technology that you have now work around because it is too costly to operate and maintain. Ironically, from this article the two main technical solves for the issues with their whole JVM setup are CLP (which is the main article) and moving to Clickhouse for non-Spark logs both of which are written in C++.

With Cloud operating costs dominating the expenses at companies one can see more migration away from JVM setups to simpler (Golang) and close to metal architectures (Rust, C++).

[AtlasBarfed]

"Java is the new COBOL" has always been either a glaring sign of idiocy/ignorance or a bad joke signifying... idiocy/ignorance.

COBOL is exotic syntax and runs on fringe/exotic hardware (mainframes, minicomps, IBM iron).

Java is a c-like syntax that runs everywhere people are shoehorning in Go and Node.JS. Syntax arguments are bikeshedding, but it was a "step forward" for non-systems coding from C and has fundamental design, architectural, breadth of library, interop, modernization, and familiarity advantages over COBOL.

Go is a syntax power stepback, with possibly some GC advantages, and Javascript even with Typescript is still a messed up ecosystem with worse GC and performance issues.

One thing that was interesting was watching the Ruby on Rails stack explode in complexity to encompass an acronym soup nearly as bad a Java as the years moved forward and it matured. Java isn't as complex an ecosystem as it is due to any failings or language failures. It simply has to be as a mature ecosystem.

Syntax complaints I'll listen too, after all I do all my JVM programming in Groovy. But if you complain about java syntax, why would you think Go is "better"?

I think a meta-language will emerge that will have Rust power and checking underlying it but a lot simpler, kind of like elixir and erlang, or typescript and javascript, or, well, Groovy and Java.

[taftster]

Just to probe. COBOL doesn't have many (if any) updates to it, though. And there are no big data architectures being built around it. Equating "Java is Dead" to the same meaning as "COBOL is Dead" doesn't seem like a legitimate comparison.

But I do get your points and don't necessarily disagree with them. I just don't see this as "legacy" technology, but maybe more like "mature"?

[npalli]

Yes, "mature" would have been more accurate for Java, some exaggeration on my end. I was trying to convey the sense of excitement for new projects and developers in Java but it is not fair to Java to be compared to COBOL. Primarily because Java is actively developed, lot more developers etc. Nevertheless Cloud is so big nowadays that people are looking for alternatives to the JVM world. 10 years ago it would been a close to default option.

[lenkite]

Java supports AOT via Graal so you can have non JVM setups already.