DO NOT USE JAVA BECAUSE IT IS NOT OPEN SOURCE

[Harry George]

"geletine" <adaviscg1 at hotmail.com> writes:

> Nobody has mentioned that c was proprietary until richard stallman
> wrote gcc in 1987, c is a great for system programming. Just because
> something is originally proprietary does not mean its technically
> rubbish, there are plenty of merits in java escially for new
> programmers or anyone who wants to get a program going very quickly.
> Gcj at the moment can do most tasks apart from swing gui, i believe Awt
> is well supported.
> 
> To further my position, without the proprietary(it was licenced on a
> liberal account at the time) UNIX created in bell labs, they would
> possibly not be linux.
> 
> Miguel de Icaza started implemening mono as he too saw technical
> advantages  in .net, he is freeing the language in my opinion.
> 
> Technology is just as important as polictics, hopefully i am well
> understood
> 

With or without licensing issues, Java causes technical heartburn to
those accustomed to Python.  Adding to that the fact that OSS
developers are sceptical of Sun's strategies (the message changes as
Java's fortunes rise and fall), and you get a significant pushback.

I read Mono as a challenge to Microsoft: You claim this is open? Ok,
we'll implement it and then see where the submarine patents pop up.

Why would I want to let one company's abstract model sit between my
code and every piece of hardware I wish to touch?

-- 
Harry George
PLM Engineering Architecture