cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From PSA <po...@posom.com>
Subject Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Date Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:52:05 GMT
rubys@us.ibm.com wrote:
> 
> >>If IBM doesn't follow with their VM (wich I believe is ready but not
> >>released), well... that's THEIR problem...
> >
> >Correction, it becomes the problem of all people using IBM (among other
> >platforms) who would also like to be Cocoon advocates. That's me (and all
> >the developers who work for me and several large corporate clients).
> 
> Arg!
> 
> While I may work for IBM, let me state up front that I do not have inside
> knowledge on this particular subject.  With that out of the way, let's
> review the current state for JDK 1.2.2 JVM's for i386 Linux.
> 
>    Sun has chosen to ship a JVM which passes all their tests, but does not
>    support native threads or include a JIT.
> 
>    Blackdown has chosen to make available a JVM which supports native
>    threads and includes a JIT.
> 
>    IBM has not chosen to make available a JVM yet.
> 
> If I was a conspiracy theorist, I would think:
> 
>    Sun is trying to make Linux look bad by producing a JVM which looks like
>    Java, but is suboptimal
> 
>    Blackdown is thumbing it's nose at Sun's compatibility test suite
> 
>    IBM has a rift with Sun and is withholding it's technology in order to
>    gain an upper hand in some ongoing negotiation
> 
> Fortunately, I am not, so this is what I really think:
> 
>    Sun knows that Linux is an important market, but strongly believes in
>    the compatibility test suite, and has made available the first JVM which
>    passes these tests, furthermore, Sun has every intention of addressing
>    the known deficiencies.
> 
>    Blackdown respects the compatiblity test suite (in fact it has not
>    labeled the release as final for exactly this reason), but believes that
>    this is but one factor that people are looking for in a JVM.  For this
>    reason, they are addressing the full problem, and making available
>    intermediate versions even if they aren't complete.
> 
>    IBM has been trying hard to build a reputation for building the best and
>    fastest JVMs for various platforms.  It has no intention of damaging
>    this reputation by prematurely releasing a JVM which is not ready.
> 
> Going back to the original question (should Cocoon2 depend on JDK 1.2), the
> answer depends on the timescale and intended market for this product.
> 
>    If you are going after early adopters, then the answer is easy.  There
>    already are production quality 1.2.2 JDKs on some platforms, and
>    bleeding edge JDKs for most.  This story is only going to get better, so
>    go for it.
> 
>    If you are going after enterprise IT shops, then the question isn't so
>    clear.  Even if a great JDK 1.2.2 implementation were available today on
>    all interesting platforms, there may still be some time (say, 6 to 18
>    months), before they are ready to deploy it.
> 
> >From my perspective, I don't believe that Cocoon is merely a toy, so I
> personally would be more conservative.

Any company waiting 6 to 18(!) months from VM release (the API is
already quite old) to deploy JDK 1.2 will be just as likely to wait to
deploy Cocoon 2.  18 months from now we'll be having this debate about
JDK 1.3 .

Waiting even this long to take advantage of JDK1.2 features is being
pretty conservative on Cocoon's part.  After all, Cocoon targets the
servlet 2.2 spec and the complete reference implementation isn't even
finished (tomcat 3.0 was incomplete, and 3.1 is in "beta").

And if a company is truly conservative about waiting so long to deploy
they are also more likely to be using Solaris than Linux. (No OS
commentary intended.  I use OpenBSD, which has no 1.2 VM available).

By the time of Cocoon 2's release, JDK 1.2 support won't even be an
issue anymore for most people (though I would very much like to see BSD
support).

Paul Anguiano

Mime
View raw message