Altering that JRE license to my own ends

General Discussions
#1

While I’m in here and people are ranting here’s some more fuel for the flames:

Do I have to fly to the States and throttle someone to get a free license to distribute a cut-down embedded VM? I mean, all I’m trying to do is spread a concept about. I don’t need the license, I spent my hard earned cash on Jet, which is faster, smaller, and better but I’m still distributing my special VM with Alien Flux just to try and show other developers that a cut down VM is entirely possible and sensible.

And indeed, should I get a license to do this, why shouldn’t anyone else? In fact, why can the licensing terms not be available to any distributor of Java desktop technology?

It’s been a few years now since this question has been asked.

The latest development is that the VM has grown by another 10mb of cruft that we don’t need.

Cas :slight_smile:

ps. If I could get the financial backers I’d be starting up LWJGL.com right now, with an actual bought license to ship a special Java Game Edition VM with the LWJGL built in to it and its own special Webstart. Any takers?

#2

Approximates sizes


1.3.0         7.5MB
1.3.1_03   8.8MB
1.3.1_06   5.3MB
1.4.2_03  14.5MB
1.5 beta1  13.78MB

Which releases are you comparing? I think most of those are the multi language versions (not sure what happened with 1.3.1_06). The file sizes for 1.3.* are taken from the copies on my server, while the figures for 1.4 and 1.5 are from the download page at Sun.

#3

Cas,

The answer is, you can ship a stripped down VM (called Embedded Java) and there is a fee to do so. The reason is simple: stripping the VM causes incompatability if the VM is installed and other apps try to use it. Untill there is a pluggable model and a way to ensure the downloads of those additional components, the license won’t change :frowning:

-ChrisM

#4

You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike

Try 7zipping the expanded 1.4.2 and 1.5 and you’ll see
1.4.2_03: 8511kb
1.5: 15019kb
And that’s the bottom line :confused:

You are in a twisty maze of little passages, all alike

I’ve got two threads going on here:

  1. How am I going to convince developers to go with Java? I get the same response, over and over again, and no amount telling anyone otherwise is going to change the fact that that’s the response I get: it’s Xmb of cruft that I don’t want to have to a) bundle or b) rely on being present. Remember what I said in the JDJ interview? It’s the little guys, the hobbyists, who are your friends here. The next generation of game development has to start with bedroom programmers and indies, because mainstream have no reason to turn to it. It’ll take ages to percolate into Big Studio. The longer you put it off, the longer it will take. You will be shafted when .net is available as standard on XBox and Windows as these developers will (wisely) turn to .net instead.

  2. I’m saying that there is some serious money to be made by the company that puts LWJGL and a cut-down VM together as a piece of licensed technology because of its seriously small size and focussed function. We’re not talking about J2SE here. This is a separate product we’re talking about, based on Java technology. I could, I think, get some financial interests in setting up a technology company to develop this technology. How can you help?

Cas :slight_smile:

You are in a twisty little maze of passages, all alike

#5

…oh no! Haven’t I been here before?..

Cas :slight_smile:

#6

[quote]You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike
[/quote]
Zork rules!

[quote]2. I’m saying that there is some serious money to be made by the company that puts LWJGL and a cut-down VM together as a piece of licensed technology because of its seriously small size and focussed function. We’re not talking about J2SE here. This is a separate product we’re talking about, based on Java technology.
[/quote]
Sounds like the Embedded Java Chris mentioned. If there is serious money to be made as you say then paying a license fee to create your embedded Java shouldn’t be an issue - assuming the cost is reasonable. Have you explored that option? What’s stopping you from going that route?

What about starting with J2ME and working out a ‘profile’ that fits the gaming space? I think that’s what is likely to happen for consoles, if anything happens.

#7

Hey Cas,

it looks like you found out one one reason why Java is not Open Source. ;D

SCNR,

Jens

#8

[quote]Hey Cas,

it looks like you found out one one reason why Java is not Open Source. ;D

SCNR,

Jens
[/quote]
If you are talking about ensuring compatability and standards? Then yes! You have found a key.

Exits are to the north, and west. A closed door with a sign on it leads to the south, and a dark forbidding stairway leads down.

-ChrisM

#9

get license
You pick up the license.
exa license.
You see the license
tear up license
You can’t tear up.
edit license
I don’t know how to edit.

Thread #2, create Java Game VM, I would very much like to explore but I’ve yet to nail down Chris for a serious talk about the business side of things as he’s, er, always washing his hair, or something :-*

Thread #1 is something that needs to be addressed, fast. A year later since I embarked on a “write a proper game in Java” crusade and still I get laughed at by the other indies when I tell them I use Java. We’re not talking about proliferation of nuclear secrets here, just an excellent avenue to spread a bit of mindshare. I’ll say no more about this now, because I’ll go blue in the face if I have to repeat myself again about this point. These guys are used to entire, huge games that are smaller than your bloody VM. Go and see Hamsterball. How was I going to convince this guy to use Java? His game is only 6.5MB. He might conceivably put up with 4MB of bloat to be able to write it in Java but not 14MB. And you can bet he won’t be switching any time soon. Nor anyone like him.

Cas :slight_smile:

#10

Alas, the distribution of the JRE issue has been beaten to death…
There are many things happening here.
Sun can/is looking into modularizing it for online installs.
Webstart can be used so you get the VM once and reuse it for many games - the total download for someone who tries just 2 or 3 games then becomes more reasonable.
Sun is working to get Java pre-installed on more systems.
There is the possibility to do an embedded java or J2ME version that is much more specialized for gaming.
Broadband market share keeps increasing… making the size of a download less of an issue each day.

It is pitch dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

#11

and the Java Update mechanism should mean that once you have a JVM, keeping it up to date should be much less painful in download terms.
It would be nice if the online setup would look for existing JVM and just download the delta from the most recent version it found (perhaps it already does).

#12

[quote]You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike

Try 7zipping the expanded 1.4.2 and 1.5 and you’ll see
1.4.2_03: 8511kb
1.5: 15019kb
And that’s the bottom line :confused:
[/quote]
Ok, so to put this into perspective, let’s look at the argument of moving to Microsoft and XBox because the Java download is too big:

DirectX 9.0a - 35MB
DirectX 9.0a does not ship with current WindowsXP which means that people are either downloading it or it is shipping with games.

.Net - 23.6 MB
.Net only ships with winXP and will still require big downloads by the client.

Why is it, then, easier for a user to download these vs. Java? It isn’t.

The real issue here Cas is your desire to strip out VM in a way that is easier for the business you want to pursue. I am not saying that you are wrong by any stretch, just pointing out that your argument is not really valid.

Now, if your argument is that LWJGL and a stripped down VM is purely a better game solution over anything else, then that is a different argument. But you won’t be able to call it a Java solution as well because it has not passed the qualifications and testing to be classified as a “Java™” component. Then we are back in the realm of excellent technologies that have small groups and no money behind them who can’t leverage the Java name and marketing, trying to become yet another standard. Not saying that you still can’t take over the world, just is more difficult to get traction. :slight_smile:

-ChrisM

#13

[quote]If you are talking about ensuring compatability and standards? Then yes! You have found a key.
[/quote]
I hope you know that this is about the opposite of what I wanted to say. :wink:

#14

[quote]DirectX 9.0a - 35MB
DirectX 9.0a does not ship with current WindowsXP which means that people are either downloading it or it is shipping with games.

.Net - 23.6 MB
.Net only ships with winXP and will still require big downloads by the client.

Why is it, then, easier for a user to download these vs. Java? It isn’t.
[/quote]
I never said it was. I said that when (not if) M$ ships these two components across the entire Windows family - in particular, Desktop Windows and XBox - there’s suddenly a massively powerful reason not to use Java as your VM of choice any more. You’ll have two massive markets to play with. I’d rather have XBox over MacOS and Linux any day. But there won’t be much in the way of competition for mindshare if progress to gain mindshare is still glacially slow. It’s been several years now since I showed that Java technology is ready for the big time but I am still seeing exactly the same attitude to it from The Ordinary Common Or Garden Games Developer.

WRT to Sub-Java + LWJGL and not being able to call it Java - I have a real problem with this. It seems that Sun is entirely allowed to do this (well, why not? Sun invented it after all) and go creating lots of useless cut down specs that are no use to us like CLDC, CDC, J2ME, MIDP, etc etc. I’m saying: I want to create a J2ME profile, and market a reference implementation as a product, and license some of your J2SE code, and call it JavaTM Gaming, and own that product. That is exactly what I want to do*, and I would really like to get the ball rolling.

Cas :slight_smile:

  • and the best bit is, it’s forwards compatible with J2SE. If it runs under “J2GE”, it runs under J2SE.
#15

[quote].Net - 23.6 MB
.Net only ships with winXP and will still require big downloads by the client.
[/quote]
It ships with 2003 server, but wasn’t included with any of my copies of XP as far as I can tell. Windows Update keeps suggesting that I should download it.

#16

Ok, Cas is talking about MY hair? :wink:
http://www.puppygames.net/pics/Crp1.jpg

[quote]Thread #1 is something that needs to be addressed, fast. A year later since I embarked on a “write a proper game in Java” crusade and still I get laughed at by the other indies when I tell them I use Java. We’re not talking about proliferation of nuclear secrets here, just an excellent avenue to spread a bit of mindshare. I’ll say no more about this now, because I’ll go blue in the face if I have to repeat myself again about this point. These guys are used to entire, huge games that are smaller than your bloody VM. Go and see Hamsterball. How was I going to convince this guy to use Java? His game is only 6.5MB. He might conceivably put up with 4MB of bloat to be able to write it in Java but not 14MB. And you can bet he won’t be switching any time soon. Nor anyone like him.

Cas :slight_smile:
[/quote]
Perhaps not, but ask the Chrome guys if distributing Java with their game was worth it :slight_smile:

-ChrisM

#17

Chris, that’s a 300mb demo written by a big studio with a publisher. It’s not going to convince anyone trying to move in on the PopCap / GarageGames / BigFish / RealArcade market which is huge and far more important (financially) than the hardcore gamer market that Chrome is pitched at.

So answer me this: why the persistent refusal to acknowledge that there’s a market, and a requirement, and a demand here? Honestly, if you sold me a license to ship my cut down JRE with my game for $500 (you are, of course, competing with Jet) there’d be a cheque in the post tonight. And from a lot of other developers. Can I have one please?

BTW, .net is not yet built-in to the Windows platform, but it is almost certain to be included in the next major release. What is Sun’s strategy for competing against this, on all levels?

Cas :slight_smile:

#18

btw, I’m really very serious about that $500, I’ve got 3 publishers who want to shove a demo of AF out onto some CDs but I won’t give it to them because they’d be distributing my sneaky VM and I don’t want to do that. Can you do me a deal (phone) or do I go with Jet in the end?

Cas :slight_smile:

#19

Again Cas, Direct X and .Net are moving targets as well, so people will have to continue downloading these technologies to be current. There is really no difference here from a downloading perspective. The issue is what you want to distribute vs. what you would like to distribute.

[quote] WRT to Sub-Java + LWJGL and not being able to call it Java - I have a real problem with this. It seems that Sun is entirely allowed to do this (well, why not? Sun invented it after all) and go creating lots of useless cut down specs that are no use to us like CLDC, CDC, J2ME, MIDP, etc etc. I’m saying: I want to create a J2ME profile, and market a reference implementation as a product, and license some of your J2SE code, and call it JavaTM Gaming, and own that product. That is exactly what I want to do*, and I would really like to get the ball rolling.
[/quote]
So, first of all, CLDC and CDC are both in the J2ME camp and fit 2 footprints with different capabiltiies. Both implementations are supported by the Java Community Process and must pass the verification and testing suites to be labled as Java™ technology.

MIDP, or to be specific the J2ME Mobile Information Device Profile, is a profile built in the Java Community Process, not open source. The technologies in MIDP are described as: “Each Java technology has an API specification, a reference implementation (RI), and a technology compatibility kit (TCK) associated to it.” All of those APIs sit in the JCP.

As well, the MIDP specfication is driven by Dr. James E. Van Peursem at Motorola and had an experts group of 52 companies defining the profile. Where do you see Sun just lumping Java technologies together and creating useless profiles?

Look, if we want to get LWJGL done as a profile, fine. Submit it to the JCP and get the pieces in place to make it an official Java™ technology. Build on it and call it Java till the cows come home. OR, do what we have been discussing: break it down, pay a licensing fee, and build a propritary solution. I do not make the rules on this, there is an executive committee set up for that :slight_smile:

On a personal note, I love that this community wants to push the boundaries of what Java is and should be for gaming but understand that we are talking about a technology standard that has fixed processes around it to protect it globally. I think the work that Cas has done, and many others here, is awesome and sets a great direction but until we formalize the technologies we will run up against these issues.

-ChrisM

#20

[quote]btw, I’m really very serious about that $500, I’ve got 3 publishers who want to shove a demo of AF out onto some CDs but I won’t give it to them because they’d be distributing my sneaky VM and I don’t want to do that. Can you do me a deal (phone) or do I go with Jet in the end?

Cas :slight_smile:
[/quote]
If they want to put the demo onto a CD, what is the problem with shipping a full JRE?

-ChrisM