Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.swapon.de!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: thinbluernime Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: JDK 1.8.0_20 and JDK 1.7.0_67 released Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:11:27 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <6dv7v9p4lrb9fv2h6g9kft59dhum8pnqn3@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: CdIqXTNCxTvlv2RE3G+Drg.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.10 (MacIntel) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:29783 On Thu, 21 Aug 2014 00:20:12 -0700, Roedy Green wrote: > I think in future all apps, including desktop apps, should be signed. And who do you propose will pay the annual C-note to get/renew the certificates for all of the formerly-free apps? You've just suggested raising the barrier to entry to create and distribute desktop Java apps from "nothing but time" to "$9/month/app for as long as you support each app". And you'd make unsupported apps stop working when a developer stops supporting them instead of simply no longer having the developer's technical assistance or new updates available. The practical effect would be for those apps to disappear behind paywalls as the developer needs to cover the cost of certificate renewals somehow, as well as to create planned obsolescence. All open source desktop Java software would evaporate, and a mob would come for you with torches and pitchforks.