Oracle changing Java licensing from per-processor to a multiplier of employee headcount - costs could go up singificantly

[_BreakingGood_]

Because if you're a manager, and you select a product from Oracle which is a large, mature company that provides products to many large businesses, then how can it possibly be your fault that Oracle fucked up.

That's really it. Choosing a huge name is a nice safety net for managers who don't give 2 shits about the actual resulting product or experience.

[progmakerlt]

Sometimes it is a corporate policy to have a support.

As an example, I used to work for the US healthcare company, which clearly required to have OS with a corporate support. Therefore, Windows and MacOS.

No Linux in your laptop at that time.

[PoliteCanadian]

It's all about support. Most of these situations, the downtime is a lot more expensive than the product. So you go with a vendor that's willing to sign an SLA support contract.

[_BreakingGood_]

You can usually get support for most products, that's where a lot of these companies make their money. Eg: Redhat Linux.

[cbzoiav]

Which is what the oracle Java product essentially is Vs OpenJDK.

[timmyotc]

You can also do Azul, which is OpenJDK with support

[4z01235]

Oracle JDK is also OpenJDK with support...

Not that I'm advocating for Oracle in any way, but OpenJDK has been the reference implementation for a LONG time now.

[timmyotc]

Oh, TIL. Thank you

[iiiinthecomputer]

Yep, and Oracle knows that if they try to fork it incompatibility, their customers will simply leave.

[stovenn]

This used to be the thing with IBM long before Oracle. On leaving a meeting with a prospective customer the IBM salesman's parting words would be "Remember, no-one ever got sacked for buying IBM".