* Posts by CharlieM

3 posts • joined 19 Jan 2012

Reactive? Serverless? Put to bed? What's next for Java. Speak up, Oracle


Hasn't Java EE been long dead?

From where I am sitting Java EE has been dead for a long time. The principle of a monolithic spec has lost out to just bringing along the frameworks you need. Maven has made managing that practical. A spec written by committee can't keep up with the vast ecosystem of frameworks and libraries. Which rightly or wrongly, rise and fall in the time it takes them to agree a single draft of the spec.

The big question now is the Java language dead as well? Oracle has been far too slow to evolve it. Compared to Scala and Kotlin, Java looks archaic. Its the productivity that is killing it. Everything is just far more keystrokes than in Scala or Kotlin. Java 8 was a step in the right direction. Unfortunately that productivity horse seems to have long since bolted.

The JVM and the vast ecosystem of libraries are worth hanging on to. So I am sure the Java platform will still live on. Oracle just needs to recognise that. After all its the platform that it cares about, not what you write the source in.


10gen bags another $42m for MongoDB roadmap


They would be crazy to sell now

As a developer who has started using MongoDB recently. I can't tell you how great a product they have. Its a perfect mix of NoSQL architecture with many of the features of a regular SQL DB. I have treid several other NoSQL DBs and this is by far the easiest to work with. Not only that it scales so well and is so fast.

Sure Oracle is better for situations were multi record transactions are essential but a lot of the time they aren't needed, particularly on the web. They also don't scale well.

10Gen also seems to be doing everything right to build a viable business around the product. If they were to sell now they ought to make sure they get a really good price. This company really has a chance to be the next Oracle.

Selling now would be like taking the first billion offered for Facebook. They should bide there time and ride it all the way to a later IPO.


SOPA is dead. Are you happy now?


Copyright Wasn't Designed for the Digital Age

I know that sounds weak but there is one big difference, people seem to miss when this subject comes up.

In the Digital World distribution & consumption requires copying. With the law as it is every time you copy something the copyright holder gets the option to stick there hand out and ask for more money or tell you to stop.

If you want to sell an old CD you no longer use that's fine. But try selling an MP3 you bought from Amazon (even if you delete the original).

Personally I think some massive reworking of the copyright laws are require. Perhaps moving away from the concept of making individual copies evokes copyright and more towards copying between users. So copy it all you like but you can't sell it, without loosing access to the original. That's how most people think copy right works, they have bought the legal right to us something.

Also the copyright length needs shortening. It needs to be 15 years or so. There's no reason Cliff Richards and the like should expect to get paid for work he did 50 years ago. Virtually no other profession expects this outside of the "Creative Industries". Could you imagine an Architect wanting a yearly payment for every year the building he designed is still standing and I am sure they consider them selves "Creatives".