Having started off being a bit negative about the whole idea of JavaOne disappearing I've read the points posted here and my view is swinging more into line with the consensus. If those that have been (I have not, but was starting to think about it for '10 or '11 now that I work freelance) think it isn't really serving its purpose best, then reform is probably due. I'm simply concerned that Java is given the weight it deserves by Oracle going forward - after all its not just what powers Oracle Apps but also what powers a significant percentage of ongoing IT development around the world. People want to see (OK, I want to see ;-) that Oracle aren't just going to sit in their laurels, but keep Java high profile and moving forward. Once I'm convinced, then I'll not be concerned about Oracle purchasing Sun.
That said, I think the EU investigation should be resolved by Oracle agreeing to divest itself of MySQL... On Oct 9, 8:57 pm, Chris Adamson <[email protected]> wrote: > That's a really good point: there's huge symbolic meaning in how > Oracle handles the JavaOne name and content. If they show it's still > important to them, and incorporate it as a main pillar of their > message, developers will be encouraged. If it's shoved off to the > side as a sort of red-headed stepchild, they'll send the message that > Java isn't important to them. Ellison has spoken many times about how > the value of Java is essential to the Sun deal; if we take him at his > word, we should expect Java to be very prominent, whether or not it > has its own official conference. > > FWIW, I thought JavaOne had become massively bloated and a huge > distraction for Sun. It was crazy how much work Sun put into demos and > announcements that would only be seen by J1 attendees, people they'd > already won over. Had Sun remained independent, eliminating J1 would > have been something I'd have hoped for anyways, as its costs likely > far exceeded its benefits (both tangible and intangible). Still, this > isn't how I wanted things to turn out. > > -Chris > > On Oct 8, 10:57 am, Fabrizio Giudici <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Agreed, of course. But Oracle just needs to properly define tracks. BTW, > > at this point the way Oracle organizes next conference will be a good > > indicator of their attitude towards the community. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
