Hacker News Reader

Comment by chrisseaton | Hacker News Reader

> My company for technical reasons can't switch to OpenJVM

The OpenJDK (not 'OpenJVM', that's not a thing) is literally 100% the same build as Oracle JDK now. There can't be any technical reason.

It might be the magic "support" word - random openjdk builds don't bring any commercial guarantees.

This said, the likes of RedHat, Amazon and Azul are pretty happy to offer those guarantees, and I bet their prices are lower than Big Red O.

Yes, but that wouldn't be a 'technical' reason, would it?

It's why we are paying for Java.

It's the same now, but in previous versions there were important differences. Might be legacy code that's hard to make forward compatible.

AWS is maintaining separate releases of the JDK to help offset the release shenanigans of Oracle.

And there are other concerted efforts to keep control from Oracle in releases and the validity of the JDK.

As long as a sufficiently large majority (and AWS is helping here a lot, admittedly) maintain such regimented discipline, the JDK will be ok.

Oracle mostly wanted it to sue google for billions. That suit is basically dead, and Oracle knows the JVM isn't worth any large scale revenue.

Corretto is decent, but AWS just doesn't get non-Amazon devs/tooling, and so e.g. almost a year later, there is still no alpine docker image: https://github.com/corretto/corretto-8-docker/issues/1

But there is: Some software checks the name and version (major and minor) of the JVM vendor against a whitelist.

Guess which One Rich Asshole company has this practice.

> One Rich Asshole company

This is just personal abuse.

“Do not make the mistake of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison!” - Bryan Cantrill

couldn't his software be written on a relatively older version of the JDK that would preclude this?