Mr. Mark Reinhold has announced in July 2012 that they were planning to withdraw Project Jigsaw from Java 8 because Jigsaw would delay its release, planned for September 2013 (One year from now). This date is known because Oracle has decided to implement a two years roadmap planning for Java, so September 2013 is actually 2 years after the release of Java 7.
According to Jigsaw’s website…
“The goal of this Project is to design and implement a standard module system for the Java SE Platform, and to apply that system to the Platform itself and to the JDK. The original goal of this Project was to design and implement a module system focused narrowly upon the goal of modularizing the JDK, and to apply that system to the JDK itself. The growing demand for a truly standard module system for the Java Platform motivated expanding the scope of the Project to produce a module system that can ultimately become a JCP-approved part of the Java SE Platform and also serve the needs of the ME and EE Platforms.”
They also say:
“Jigsaw was originally intended for Java 7 but was deferred to Java 8.”
Now they want to defer it to Java 9 :-( More details of their decision making are available in a Q&A post on Reinhold’s blog. You may read and follow the discussion there. Here is my opinion:
Without Jigsaw, I believe that it’s very difficult to put Java everywhere. Without Jigsaw, the idea of multi-platform is getting restricted to servers in a age of smartphones and tablets. Jigsaw may be “late for the train”, but it is letting Java late for the entire platform ecosystem
Observing the market, we can see that development is becoming platform-dependent (iOS, Android, etc.) Only Java can beat this trending because of its large experience on multiplatform implementation, and the time to do it is NOW! Otherwise, in 3 or 4 year there will be no Java on devices, and the development community will have knowledge enough to live with that. Therefore, Java will be basically a server-side technology.
The reasoning behind my prediction is the following: mobile devices are limited in terms of resources and a modular JVM would allow the creation of tailored JVM considering the constraints of each device. I put myself in the shoes of those devices manufacturers: “I wouldn’t distribute something in my products that might impact negatively the user experience in terms of performance”. That was the argument (at least the public one) Apple used to avoid distributing the Flash plugin for iOS’s browser. Probably because of that, Adobe definitively gave up of Flash on mobile devices. A modular JVM would simplify a lot Oracle’s negotiation with a lot of device players. It would be reasonable for Apple to include Java as a language for iPad and iPhone applications; Google would finally embed the JVM into Android to evolve faster with new Java language features, getting busy just with a module to extend the JVM to specific Android’s capabilities; it would be even possible to save Nokia from bankruptcy :D
You may wonder whether Apple and Google would ever adopt JVM as a standard runtime platform. Have you heard about opportunity cost? It states that our current choices and activities are actually blocking other possible choices and activities. The tricky part is to chose the opportunity that is least costly or with the highest profit. Having said that, we can see the scenario considering that Java was not an option because it wasn’t modular when those companies made their decisions. If Java was modular and Apple had adopted it, iOS platform would have at least three times more apps than Android. “Java” was in Google’s strategy to catchup with Apple. Only Java could allow Google to do it in such a short period of time. So, it’s not so simple to ignore Java.
Now, Oracle vs. Google: Of course the effort to move Java forward should be economically viable, and in order to use Java, Google would have to spend some money. Unfortunately, Oracle and Google work with different currencies. While Oracle thinks in terms of licenses, Google thinks in terms of advertising. These currencies are incompatible, very difficult to convert, because while license is cost, advertising is profit. Therefore, Oracle would never reach a deal increasing Google’s cost, but it would be possible to get a deal decreasing Google’s profit. In other words, Oracle could have a percentage of Google’s profit on advertising sold through Java apps in order to make Java available for Android. Google makes this kind of deal with a lot of companies like Yahoo, AOL and others. Why not with Oracle?
If Oracle doesn’t give all resources that the JDK team needs to make Jigsaw a reality in Java 8, Oracle will be completely out of the pervasive game very soon. Without breaking the JDK into manageable and efficient pieces, Oracle won’t have arguments to convince the industry that Java is the way to go on the long run.
Before deciding to drop Jigsaw out, I beg Oracle to think about the consequences! They must ignore the fixed release roadmap and accept the difficulty of the task. We can stay happy with Java 7 (it’s not widely adopted anyway) as long as Jigsaw is on the way for Java 8. This fixed release cycle can actually come back after Java 8.
I would love to be wrong and be taken by surprise with an official Oracle’s announcement of the definitive support for JavaFX on Apple and Android devices during the next JavaOne ;-) However, I think the likelihood is very low :-(
Reference: The Consequences of Deferring Project Jigsaw from our JCG partner Hildeberto Mendonca at the Hildeberto’s Blog blog.
