How did you come to that conclusion? The point made is that Java 8 incurs costs compared to newer versions, so you need to "budget" for it. If you can't afford to not run it, then Java 8 would be saving you money/time somehow.

Because the first half of the article was praising Java 8 and it’s various benefits.

I didnt read the second half because I couldnt make sense of the negative headline with the positive text.

This is called "judging a book by its cover".

Merely making assessments of an article after only reading a fraction of it (or the title!) is bad enough, but spreading those misunderstandings to other people is even worse - not only are you harming their understanding, but you're also misrepresenting the author's points.

In addition, nowhere near "half" of the article is praising Java 8 - the very first paragraph says "This is one of the reasons why Java 8, almost 7 years after its first release, is still widely used.", which is barely "praise", and then the rest (>80%) recommends that you not use it.

> the first half of the article was praising Java 8

It wasn't though... not sure why you got that impression? (I do think though that the text could use a few edits for easier reading - maybe it just isn't easy to understand when skimming)

The article is about the improvements since Java 8.

In other words the title should be read as "[Java 11/14/etc is so good that] you can't afford to run [i.e., stay on] Java 8"

I agree that the title was a poor choice though.

Thanks for the feedback! (author's here)

I promise to be more careful when picking up the title next time. I hope that the article's content somehow compensated that ;)

No, the author wants people to use versions higher than 8.

I thought the same thing at first. But Apparently there are newer versions of java. For those who learn java in school and don't much touch it again, it can be quite confusing.

It seems java was relatively stable from 2006 to 2016, where there where three versions. But instead of slowing down, there have been 8 since then. They`re on v16 now?!

...I doubt I`ll ever code in java again.

Don't worry, all that's not getting widely used anyway. Cool startups don't touch Java anyway, and places like banks are still firmly at Java 8. My current employer is somewhat progressive, whole system is just a couple of years old, design is very much modern, microservices, event sourcing, reactive, cool reactive frontend on websockets, etc etc.

Still Java 8 for the most part. Java 11 is actually allowed, but not many people care including me. Existing Scala code is getting thrown away and rewritten back into Java.

JDK is different story tho. I think devops are actively experimenting to put 11 into base image by default, but startup time different is funny argument. 1 second, really? By the time your usual spring boot service comes up and connects to all topics and caches and what not it's good part of a minute anyway.

> For those who learn java in school and don't much touch it again, it can be quite confusing.

Is it really _confusing_? The idea that a product might change release cadence probably should not be confusing.

Well, the fact that all of the sudden there are all these new versions is surprising. That makes the title of the article confusing, because one doesnt expect that v8 is considered super obsolete.