John Reynolds's Blog: Open Office and Java

"As OpenOffice.org 2.0 approaches version 2.0 final it is being meet increasingly with opposition by free software advocates over its dependency on Java."

I am delighted that Open Office is finally leveraging Java. While early attempts to create pure Java office suites failed (Lotus tried this back in the 90's), Netbeans 4.1 has demonstrated that Swing is up to the task of producing a high quality user interface.

I think we're long past due in seeing an office suite that takes advantage of Java's capabilities (I know OOo is far from embracing this idea, but you can't blame a guy for dreaming).

I know that relying on Java causes ethical conundrums for those who want complete freedom of distribution, but Java is free for download (cost to the end user is not really an issue). It's surprising to me that the many Sun employees who are paid to work on the project use anything other than Java.

If Java really makes you cry, as a short-term solution there's always KOffice. It's really quite nice. Forking OOo is also a great short-term option (and I understand that many of the Java dependencies can be dealt with by using Classpath). Long-term, my bet is that Sun will OS Java, and we can put this issue behind us (or maybe Harmony will really happen).

If you think that we're way overdue for an office suite that embraces Java, please let Sun (and the other OOo contributors) know. If the OOo folks only hear from those who believe that Java is a trap, then Open Office will be sucked into C/C++ hell forever.

Comments

Comments are listed in date ascending order (oldest first) | Post Comment

By saying that "but Java is free for download" I think you miss the point.
Yes, it is free to download and I was thinking along the same lines. Recently I switched to Linux (Ubuntu) as my main desktop, both at home and at work, and now I start to understand where the real problem is. Java is not free to distribute or to recompile. And this is huge.
What this means is that Java cannot be included into the main repositories of the Debian distributions (for example). If it is not in the repository then it does not exist. Period.
The result is that more and more C# desktop applications are being created for Linux. If I select to install a C# based application it automatically checks the dependencies and also installs Mono if needed. This is not possible with Java.
I hope Sun will smarten up before it is too late.
To conclude, I am all for Open Office and Java but only if it is a free version of Java. Otherwise it does not make sense. Most Linux distros these days are including Open Office, if the new version will depend on Java then they will have to drop Open Office completely.

Reply from John: Marius, you missed the point of the point that I missed... Uh... never mind ;-)

I have no experience with Debian Linux. If you can download a version of Java that will work with it for free, then I stand by my statement. Cost to the end user is not really an issue (although there is a bit of inconvenience). You're worried about the principal of the thing, and what may happen in the future. I'm certainly not going to insult your principals or ridicule your fears.

If you cannot download a version of Java (for free) that works with Debian, then I'll have to modify my thoughts a bit. I still want a Java office suite... but I'd lean ever-so-slightly towards your position.

Posted by: mariuss on May 12, 2005 at 01:28 PM

Mariuss: please, take into account that there are people working on making OO and GCJ (one of the free runtimes).. read http://gnu.wildebeest.org/diary/index.php?p=73 and follow it and you will notice that if everything runs smoothly, all the gaps will be solved for the 2.0 release. More important to note is that OO developers are open to make accept the fixes neccesary to allow free runtimes. I think that using Java is a good decission, It is really easy is to take already existing Java code (or new) and integrate with an OO document
Posted by: robmv on May 12, 2005 at 02:40 PM

Who knew there could be such intollerance among supposed free thinkers?
Posted by: rabbe on May 12, 2005 at 02:50 PM

I noticed that both the JRE and the JDK are available in the Ubuntu (a Debian distribution) repositories. JRE is in hoary-extras/restricted repository, and JDK is in hoary-extras/restricted [STAGING]. Hey, it's a start!
Posted by: gordyt on May 12, 2005 at 03:30 PM

What Marius meant is that Debian is unable to package a Java runtime in their packaging system and distribute it the "Debian way" (Debian's packaging system retrieves files from a central repository, so you don't have to go to a different website for each program you want to install). This means that installing Sun's Java on a Debian system is a real pain; it's doable (I'm switching to Debian for my Java development, in fact, so it is doable), but it's way more painful than it would be if Sun's implementation were open, and Debian could re-arrange the components to fit into its packaging system.
Reply from John: You get what you pay for! ;-)
I have to laugh when I think back to all the times I have been flamed for criticising various Open Source applications because they were difficult to install.

Posted by: afishionado on May 12, 2005 at 03:44 PM

i for one, very happy about more Java involvment with OOo. We developed a plug-in for OOo in java and it is a big pain in 1.1.x versions. People should wake up and smell the coffee. End users, or big corporates do not care about whinings of a bunch of GPL zealots who knows nothing about current situation of Java... What they care is reducing costs and using stg that just works.. This comment seems a bit harsh and offensive, but this is how i feel too.
Posted by: ahmetaa on May 12, 2005 at 04:01 PM

The problem is that, when the JRE/JDK has restrictions on how it can be packaged, redistributed, etc., it's difficult for linux distributions to make it "just work". I can 'apt-get install myMonoApp', but I can't 'apt-get install myJavaApp'. Java applications are a "special case", and as long as that is true, OOo will also need to be a "special case".
Reply from John: Sounds like this is a problem for the Linux distribution to solve. It sounds like the packaging system is rather unflexible... Java is a special case, but I still don't grasp why you couldn't simplify it's explicit installation. But as I said before, I don't have experience with Linux distributions that don't include Java.

Posted by: richunger on May 12, 2005 at 04:20 PM

I think it's more a problem for Sun's lawyers to solve. If debian is not _allowed_ to package the JDK with the base system (even in the non-free repository), then they can't package java apps like OOo that depend on it. I think Sun loses more than Debian does in this scenario.
Posted by: richunger on May 12, 2005 at 04:52 PM

John, since you keep saying that If you can download a version of Java that will work with it for free, then I stand by my statement. I still think that you miss the point. I would have said the exact same thing a few months ago, before I switched to Linux. The way applications are distributed and installed under a Debian system is totally different from what we are used under the Windows world. In the Debian world to download a free application means to be able to apt-get it, and this is not possible for Java. Also, in this Debian world download/install is the minor issue, the big one is tracking dependencies.
robmv, thanks for the link, it is really good news.
gordyt, I enabled all the extra repositories mentioned on the Ubuntu Guide and there is still no Java in sight. Anyhow, it should be in the main repository not in a custom one. Otherwise you have to move OpenOffice to that custom repository as well.
ahmetaa, I am not a GPL zealot, I am just looking at the facts. As I said, mono is free and more and more apps are using it. Who is going to lose?
My general impression is that Sun is deliberatly neglecting the desktop, for whatever reason.

Reply from John: Sounds like Debian needs to improve their installation process ;-)

Posted by: mariuss on May 12, 2005 at 05:18 PM

Mariuss, you make my point so much better than I did :) I would add to it, however. It's not just the desktop. If I want to create a website on a debian box, and I want to use java, I can't just 'apt-get install jboss'. However, I can 'apt-get install php', point a browser to http://localhost/phpsamplepage.php. Also, I did a search on rpmfind.net for a sun JDK, and I found a version for SuSE, but not redhat/fedora. So, I don't think Debian and their "zealots" are the problem here.
Reply from John: I really do see your point, I'm just egging you and Mariuss on. I beg forgiveness.
Is this inconvenience really a reason to boycot OOo and brand Java as a trap? I don't think so, and I doubt that you or Mariuss do either. I'm still betting this is all temporary... either Sun will OS Java, or IBM will do it for them. Peace ;-)

Posted by: richunger on May 12, 2005 at 05:29 PM

We have been using Java on Debian (Knoppix installer), Mandrake, or RedHat for a long time and it is not so difficult to install.
But I agree that even if Java is not lgpled or gpled it should have less restrictions on distribution and more system should have a port, that's the road to success on the desktop.
By the way I've just read that mono won't be packaged by RedHat, so the raod is not much clearer there.
I love the idea of Java into OO, the java community is huge with tons of great code and many developpers so it should help OO becoming a great professional tool.
Posted by: ehsavoie on May 13, 2005 at 12:59 AM

Powered by
Movable Type 3.01D

java.net RSS Feeds