Hats off to JBoss - Port 25: The Open Source Community at Microsoft
< Back to Blogs
Hats off to JBoss by admin on April 14, 2006 03:03PM

Congratulations to Marc Fleury and team for their success this week in selling their company to a like-minded partner that pioneered Open Source business models.

Running a startup is hard.  Keeping it going and focused is harder.  Selling it while maintaining your principles is nearly impossible – but JBoss has scored a hat trick.  From 97-2001, I was in a string of startups in Silicon Valley, and I know first hand just how hard it is to make them work. 

When a company reaches the level of publicity and success that JBoss has achieved, there are pressures to compromise in many dimensions – exemplified by the rumored half-billion dollars that “a large database company” offered them only last week.  Marc could have taken that and walked out of the industry altogether – enjoying a comfortable life on his own private island.  Instead, he has chosen to marry his company to a long-term resident of the Commercial Open Source Software industry that will sustain the JBoss principle of interoperability and heterogeneous support, and is well-aligned to evolve the business model in a pure Open Source tradition.

My lab is working with JBoss on the technical collaboration project that Microsoft announced earlier this year – good, interesting work – and will be exploring new areas to work on interoperability, such as JBossWeb, an Apache-based web server with native support for .NET, Java, and PHP.

We’re continuing to read and sort the suggestions we’re getting – including emails – and looking for clusters of requests that we can turn in to projects.  What would you like to see us do from a Java interoperability standpoint?  What would be most valuable for you? 

Cheers,
Sam

Comments RSS
  1. adude said:

    Maybe you could extend Java with some kind of API that gives java widgets the look and feel of windows, and extends java into the windows programming interfaces.
    Outside of JNI or anything Sun has done of course.
    That would be so cool.

    The mod_mono for apache has already been completed by the Novell mono project and is working pretty well.

    posted at 06:13PM 04/14/2006
  2. I applaud JBoss for their software, but trying to monetize on JBoss' work by selling themselves to another company is just not what opensource is all about. Opensource is not about selling or buying software. Opensource is about freedom. Opensource allows vendor independence, allows anyone to depend on software, on technology, on features, not on stock options, businesses or profitability.

    It's a bit sad to see JBoss spending their efforts on selling themselves out instead on focusing on their products.

    posted at 08:17PM 04/14/2006
  3. adude said:

    Felipe Alfaro Solana,

    RHAT, NOVL, IBM, SUNW.

    None of these have anything to do with Open Source or Linux, nor does the exchange of money by entities, corporate buy outs, or any other economic factor.

    Java is not included in Linux distributions because of the JPL license. Not even in Redhat's. It is not redistributable, and can not be modified or fragmented for use. Proof is Microsoft's attempted fragmentation of the source code in WFC/1998 which resulted in them losing a major lawsuit to Sun Microsystems at the end of the 90's.

    Mono is slowly but surely replacing Java on Linux systems and has been included in more and more Linux OS's like Mandriva, the Fedora Core project version 5, and SuSE Linux in recent months. It can directly interface Apache with a module, without going through tomcat servlets, ect.. And is starting to dominate as the VM platform for Linux since unlike it's brother Java, it is GPL licensed and can be redistributed and fragmented.

    Why is JBoss management/investors selling out of java?

    http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/03/16/032943.php

    http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2006/03/what_will_googl.html

    Those 2 articles should clear up some things.

    Mono, a better choice for interop, is rarely to never mentioned here, because it directly runs programs aimed at the Microsoft TM .NET runtime and even runs business applications programmed with winforms on the free Linux Desktop platform. By allowing people to run .NET programs on a free Linux desktop it will rob microsoft of millions, perhaps billions of dollars in years to come for licensed terminal seats.

    In a choice between bad and worse, they seem to be chosing to highlight java now.

    posted at 08:35PM 04/14/2006
  4. The issue with Java interop is an odd one.  Java is supposed to be "compile once, run anywhere."  And since Sun offers JVM's for MS OS's, I don't really see much you can do with interop of Java as a language.

    However, interop with existing Java components is another ballgame.  I would suggest making a serious attempt to support XML-RPC and many of other standards that Java developers typically use to create communication between products.  (For those that don't know, XML-RPC is not too dissimilar to SOAP.)

    Hope this helps,
    Chris Travers
    Metatron Technology Consulting

    posted at 12:32AM 04/15/2006
  5. aperson said:

    Hi again Chris T.

    Unfortunately Apache has beaten them to the punch. The classname already exists. I actually have to use it for a project with WSDL so it wasn't a stretch to pull out these links.

    http://ws.apache.org/axis/java/apiDocs/javax/xml/rpc/package-summary.html

    http://ws.apache.org/axis/java/user-guide.html#ServiceStylesRPCDocumentWrappedAndMessage">http://ws.apache.org/axis/java/user-guide.html#ServiceStylesRPCDocumentWrappedAndMessage

    http://ws.apache.org/axis/java/user-guide.html

    Much of what has been offered/requested already has some open source solution.

    There is a good reason not to rewrite it as well as 2 conflicting namespaces can be bad rather than good.

    posted at 12:42AM 04/15/2006
  6. aperson said:

    Chris T. I think you meant from the windows side actually. So I was mistaken in linking to axis there.

    XMLRPC can be used with mono & .NET.
    http://www.xml-rpc.net/

    Mono can directly use java classes in http://www.ikvm.net/
    Mono is also cross platform and interfaces directly with M$ .NET namespaces as well as it's own.

    posted at 12:51AM 04/15/2006
  7. Sam Ramji said:

    In response to a few posts here about why we're spending time on Java interop - the answer is simple: our work has been by customer requirements.  As an example, I met with the CTO and Chief Architect of a F100 healthcare company on Wednesday to understand where they need interoperability.  The important topics from their perspective were cross-platform management (Linux and Windows systems under one toolset), Java/.NET interop, and support for their aging UNIX applications.  This is typical of the customers we hear from.

    The point about XML-RPC is an interesting one - in general in the past I've disagreed with the idea that XML should be used in an RPC style (for a few reasons) as opposed to message/document style.  What would you prefer: XML-RPC or a true Java/.NET object bridge?

    posted at 01:05AM 04/15/2006
  8. aperson said:

    "What would you prefer: XML-RPC or a true Java/.NET object bridge?"

    Forgoing XML for an explicit remote proceedure call would and directly wiring Java2Mono meta-data for objects is the network equivalent of lock-in.

    When you leave RPC open with XML data, you can now plug into it with php, perl, python, ect... or simply write a C library and bindings to the other languages to interface that XML RPC.

    The direct passing and casting of bytestream objects over networked protocol between java and .NET or mono or whatever you want to call the CLI spec is not good because it closes off possible interfaces.

    That is not the Linux way. What you're suggesting sounds like COM or .NET remoting with java over networks and remote COM didn't work at all.

    posted at 01:14AM 04/15/2006
  9. Anon said:

    As a developer on Windows I would have like better Java support in Visual Studio. Java support is already present with J Sharp but the Java library provided does not fully implement the Sun Java specs, especially the latest ones. I would have like J Sharp to be a fully conformant Sun Java language and not just a language used for backwards compatibility. This would simplify and consolidate our development work. Since J Sharp already implements most of the Java library why not provide full cmpatibility?

    posted at 03:18AM 04/15/2006
  10. xvasek said:

    Please, please, do nothing with Java. Microsoft did java implementations once and it was a dissaster for many reasons. Instead of java, support Mono development to be more compatible with .NET. Mono is GPL and any code is welcome.

    posted at 03:44AM 04/15/2006
Post a Comment
*
*