The distinction from other builds:<p>> Microsoft Build of OpenJDK 11 binaries may contain backported fixes and enhancements we deem important to our customers and our internal users. Some of these may have not yet been formally backported upstream and are clearly signposted in our release notes. This allows us to expedite improvements and fixes much faster while we proceed to upstream those changes in parallel. Updates will be free and available to every Java developer to deploy anywhere.
The salient piece:<p>Microsoft deploys over 500,000 Java Virtual Machines (JVMs) internally – excluding all Azure services and customer workloads – with needs that go from back-end microservices to Big Data systems, message brokers, event streaming services, and gaming servers. More than 140,000 of these JVMs are already based on the Microsoft Build of OpenJDK.
Good and welcome progress - eventually I hope there will be better interop between .NET and Java platforms.<p>Meanwhile most Microsoft shops view any non-MS technology as if it were a plague.
So happy to see Java have broad support from various vendors. I've always been a fan despite it's shortcomings. I'm wary of using "captive" corporate languages like Go, C#, Kotlin. And there aren't any other options with the combination of speed and ease of use for high level work
I want to believe it's a good thing, but having to support a platform that doesn't support good ole symlinks is incredibly aggravating. Npm too would be much easier to work with if it could have had symlinks. If only there weren't some weird platform-I-don't-want-anyways's limitations gumming thing up. Microsoft extending their Microsoftisms into every software platform is a frustrating limitation to keep facing.<p>I'm fine with the general attitude of harmony and oh yay, a bigger tent for everyone, it doesn't bother me, and platform flexibility has it's upsides. But there really is a downside to this all too, and it goes unremarked. I want to at least put down some words, somewhere, to remark that Windows support is constraining & limiting. OpenJDK of course is cross platform & already supports Windows, but the sign that this is a proper & well supported thing in Windows will quite likely amplify Windows user's expectations that all the libraries & tools they run across are going to be catered to them & their experience. It increases a library maintainer's burden, supporting this new class of usually-not-that-expert users. I encourage us to reflect on this as a mini Eternal September event, of Microsoft extending the reach of their community into something that used to be a little more deliberate; that's maybe putting it a little strongly, but I think we can recognize the parallel.<p>To summarize, are more prevalent technical constraints, and re-emphasized demands upon open-source Java authors, in this shift to further allow & encourage Windows based Java development.
For those looking for pure open JDK builds : <a href="https://openjdk.java.net/install/" rel="nofollow">https://openjdk.java.net/install/</a>
>Please do send us your comments, thoughts, and ideas to help us improve this. Visit our GitHub page (Some link here: <a href="https://github.com/microsoft/openjdk/discussions" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/microsoft/openjdk/discussions</a>) to send us your feedback.<p>The link is 404
This is a good thing. Even though my shop has mostly moved on from Java (to Python and other things), we still run plenty of software that depends on it.<p>I wonder how badly Oracle's attempt to monetize Java is going.
there are plenty of vendors providing builds of OpenJDK. I am not sure how are they different from one another and what distinguishing features they could provide. Wishing for a comparison matrix!
I have heard that switching from a JDK vendor to another can alter runtime performance.
It is to be expected as the JVM is a C++ codebase, its performance depends on the compiler flags.<p>Hence I wonder if there is a vendor that has found the optimal configuration e.g
-03 + x86-v3 (AVX) + LTO + PGO (e.g autofdo) + BOLT