Oracle Java Alternatives and Cost Avoidance Strategies

Introduction: Organizations across industries are reevaluating their Java strategy in light of Oracle’s recent licensing changes. In 2023, Oracle overhauled its Java SE licensing model, moving to a Java SE Universal Subscription priced per employee rather than per device or processor.

This shift can drastically increase costs for firms with large headcounts but only moderate Java usage​​. For example, a medium-sized business with 250 employees saw its annual Java cost projection jump from ~$3,000 to $45,000 (a 1,400% increase) under the new model​.

Even organizations where every employee uses Java have experienced cost doubling (e.g., ~$21,900 to $45,000, +105%)​. Large enterprises face multi-million-dollar bills; Oracle’s pricing example shows a 28,000-employee company owing about $2.27 million per year.

These soaring costs, coupled with aggressive Oracle sales tactics and audit threats​​, are driving Java customers to seek alternatives.

This article advises Software Asset Management (SAM) managers and Oracle licensing professionals on avoiding or minimizing Oracle Java subscription costs by leveraging OpenJDK-based alternatives, while managing security and compliance risks.

Oracle’s 2023 Java Subscription Model Change

In January 2023, Oracle introduced an employee-based licensing metric for Java SE. Every employee, contractor, and consultant counts toward licensing, regardless of whether they use Java​​. The new Java SE Universal Subscription is “all-you-can-eat” – it permits unlimited Java use across desktops, servers, and cloud, but charges a monthly fee per total employee count​​. Pricing starts at $15 per employee per month for organizations under 1,000 employees, with volume discounts down to ~$5.25 per employee for tens of thousands of employees​.

Crucially, Oracle’s definition of “employee” is very broad, including all full-time, part-time, temporary staff, and all contractors or outsourcers supporting internal operations. This means that even a company with a limited number of Java users but a large workforce could face a hefty fee. In practice, companies with minimal Java footprints but large headcounts are hit the hardest, while even Java-intensive shops may see higher costs due to the expensive counting of personnel​.

Cost Impact: The new model has proven significantly more expensive for many. Licensing experts have calculated cost increases ranging up to 30× previous levels, and Gartner analysts expect typical Java subscription costs to be 2–5× higher under Oracle’s 2023 scheme​.

Oracle has essentially eliminated the option to license only specific servers or users; now, most employees must be licensed in most cases​. This “simplified” model can lead to massive increases with little added value for organizations that only use Java on a subset of systems​​. The change has understandably raised alarm for SAM managers tasked with controlling software spend.

Audit and Compliance Pressure: Alongside the price hike, Oracle is ramping up compliance enforcement. Since 2022, Oracle’s License Management Services have been actively auditing customers for Java usage​.

Oracle can track downloads of its JDK, meaning if you downloaded Oracle Java after public updates ended in 2019, you’re on their radar​. Under the new model, any unlicensed Oracle Java deployment could expose the entire company to fees for all employees.

Gartner predicts that within the next three years, at least 20% of Java customers may face an Oracle audit, and approximately 30% of enterprises will be out of compliance if they continue using Oracle’s licensing.

Oracle sales teams are using the new model as leverage – reports indicate they are “harassing” customers to lock in subscriptions and even using it as a pretext to scrutinize the customer’s entire Oracle portfolio​. In short, the 2023 licensing shift not only raises costs but also increases the risk of compliance issues and surprise fees, making proactive cost avoidance strategies critical.

OpenJDK: Viable Alternatives to Oracle Java

OpenJDK (Open Java Development Kit) is the open-source reference implementation of the Java SE platform. Since Java 7, Oracle’s own JDK has been built on OpenJDK, and the codebase has been open-source since 2006.

This means that there are multiple Java distributions available, which are functionally equivalent to Oracle Java (passing the same TCK compatibility tests), but under free or more flexible licenses.

These OpenJDK-based builds can serve as drop-in replacements for Oracle’s JDK on both servers and desktops, enabling organizations to run Java without Oracle’s costly subscription. Many vendors now offer enterprise-ready OpenJDK distributions, some of which are available at no cost, while others offer optional commercial support at a fraction of Oracle’s price.

Leading OpenJDK-based alternatives include: Amazon Corretto, Azul Zulu, Eclipse Temurin (by the Adoptium project), Red Hat OpenJDK, and BellSoft Liberica JDK.

Each of these provides Java SE binaries that are Java standard-compliant and can be used in production without an Oracle license. Below, we evaluate these alternatives, focusing on their cost models, support offerings, update policies, and any unique features:

Amazon Corretto

Amazon Corretto is a free distribution of OpenJDK developed by Amazon. It is provided under an open-source GPL license with no usage fees. Cost model: Corretto is completely free to use for any number of deployments.

There are no licensing costs – Amazon’s goal is to support Java usage (especially on AWS) without additional fees. Support: Amazon offers long-term support (LTS) at no cost for Corretto builds. They have committed to providing security updates for LTS versions well beyond Oracle’s public update timelines.

For instance, Amazon recently extended support for Java 8 to December 2030 and Java 11 to January 2032​, ensuring organizations can safely run those versions for many years with updates. Patches for Corretto are released on a quarterly cycle (aligned with Java’s regular update schedule), and critical fixes are applied as needed. While formal support (e.g., SLAs or direct assistance) is not automatically included, users can get help through community forums or by opening issues on GitHub.

Enterprise customers running Corretto on AWS can also leverage AWS Premium Support plans for help​. Update policy: Corretto aims to deliver timely updates – typically, Corretto releases quarterly security patches in sync with Oracle’s Java CPU releases.

Amazon directly contributes to OpenJDK, ensuring Corretto updates are high-quality and prompt. Usage terms: Because it’s open-source (GPLv2 with Classpath Exception), there are no restrictions on commercial use or distribution.

Companies can deploy Corretto in any environment, including on-premises or in cloud instances, without worrying about licensing. Overall, Amazon Corretto provides a no-cost, drop-in replacement for Oracle Java 8, 11, 17, 21, and beyond, with the backing of Amazon’s maintenance commitment.

Azul Zulu (Azul OpenJDK)

Azul Zulu is an OpenJDK distribution provided by Azul Systems, a company specializing in Java runtime support. Cost model: The Zulu binaries themselves are free to download and use (under the same open-source license), making it a zero-cost alternative for runtime usage. Azul’s business model is offering commercial support and enhancements around these builds.

Their support subscription, branded as Azul Platform Core (formerly Zulu Enterprise), is available for organizations that want guaranteed updates and expert support. Azul’s pricing is generally far lower than Oracle’s. According to Azul, customers switching from Oracle typically save about 70% in Java licensing and support fees by using Azul’s supported OpenJDK instead​.

Azul’s pricing is often structured per server or Java instance, rather than per employee, which can significantly reduce costs for large firms. Support offerings: Azul offers 24/7 support plans with Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and is known for its strong Java engineering expertise, as its support team includes many former Oracle JVM engineers.

Subscribers get timely security patches (at least quarterly, plus out-of-band fixes for urgent issues) and access to any bug fixes or backports Azul develops. Azul provides long-term update commitments for LTS releases – at least 8 years of security fixes, plus 2 years of extended support, for each LTS version.

For example, Azul supports Java 8, 11, and 17, among others, for over 8 years, often beyond the timeframe that Oracle’s free updates cover. Update policy: Azul releases updates on a similar cadence to Oracle’s (quarterly CPUs), and often provides both CPU (security-only) and PSU (feature + security) update tracks to suit customer needs. They also maintain older versions (even Java 6 and 7) for customers who need them, which can be crucial for legacy systems.

Usage terms: Zulu is open-source, so using it does not impose license restrictions. Even Azul’s paid support contracts come with much simpler terms than Oracle’s, avoiding the complex metrics. There are no “all employees” counting requirements – you pay only for the systems you choose to cover with support​​.

Azul also offers performance-enhanced JVM options (Azul Platform Prime) for those who want tuning beyond standard OpenJDK, though that is a separate product. In summary, Azul Zulu provides a fully TCK-certified Java runtime with enterprise support, allowing organizations to replace Oracle Java and significantly reduce costs while remaining secure and compliant.

Eclipse Temurin (Adoptium)

Eclipse Temurin is the binary distribution of OpenJDK from the Eclipse Adoptium project (formerly AdoptOpenJDK). It is a community-driven, open-source build of Java, backed by the Eclipse Foundation and supported by major vendors in the Adoptium Working Group, including IBM, Microsoft, Red Hat, and Azul.

Cost model: Temurin binaries are free to use for any purpose under the OpenJDK GPL+Classpath license. There are no direct licensing or usage costs. Support: As a community project, Eclipse Temurin itself does not come with a commercial support contract by default.

However, several vendors offer support for Temurin deployments if needed – for example, IBM offers support via its IBM Semeru runtimes. Red Hat and Azul can also support Adoptium builds. Many organizations simply use Temurin without paid support, relying on the active community for help and trusting the timely updates. Adoptium is known for its rigorous testing, which uses the AQAvit quality suite in addition to the Java TCK to ensure reliability.

Update policy: Temurin aims to publish updates for all active Java versions in lockstep with the upstream. Historically, AdoptOpenJDK (now Temurin) delivered quarterly security updates at the same time as Oracle, often on the same day, meaning users did not lag in applying patches.

The Adoptium community continues to maintain long-term support (LTS) releases (e.g., Java 8, 11, 17) in coordination with upstream OpenJDK update projects, largely led by Red Hat.

One consideration is that Adoptium’s LTS binaries are maintained as long as there is community support. For Java 8 and 11, vendors like Red Hat and IBM have sustained this support, so updates are still available. Usage terms: Completely open-source and free.

There is no “catch” – even commercial production use is allowed with no fees. This makes Temurin a popular choice for those seeking to avoid any ties to Oracle. Notable features: Temurin is essentially the baseline version of OpenJDK. It does not include proprietary add-ons (Oracle’s or others’) by default, which ensures broad compatibility.

It’s particularly well-suited for cloud and container use; in fact, the official Docker Hub images for Java are often based on Eclipse Temurin builds. Organizations that prefer a community solution appreciate Temurin’s transparency and the fact that it is backed by a consortium, which reduces their dependence on any single vendor.

Red Hat OpenJDK

Red Hat provides its build of OpenJDK, which is used as the default Java runtime in Red Hat Enterprise Linux and is also available for Windows and other platforms. Cost model: The Red Hat build of OpenJDK is free to use (it’s open source), and RHEL subscribers automatically get access to it as part of their OS subscription.

Red Hat does not charge separately for OpenJDK usage. However, commercial support is available to Red Hat customers, typically included with a RHEL subscription or a Red Hat Runtimes subscription for other environments​. In practice, if you are running on RHEL, using Red Hat’s Java is covered under your OS support. If you need support on non-RHEL systems, Red Hat may require a separate subscription (e.g., Red Hat Application Runtimes).

Alternatively, you can use the community Adoptium build, which is essentially the same code. Support offerings: Red Hat is a top contributor to OpenJDK and leads maintenance for key branches, including OpenJDK 8 and 11 update projects. They offer long-term support for their OpenJDK builds for at least 6 years from introduction, often longer​. Notably, Red Hat has committed to supporting Java 8 on RHEL until November 2026 and Java 11 until at least October 2024, with extended support until 2027​.

They also support Java 17 through 2027 and Java 21 through 2029 on their platforms​. Red Hat provides quarterly updates for OpenJDK (approximately every three months) for security and bug fixes on all active LTS versions​.

For customers who need more, Red Hat offers an Extended Life Support add-on to extend support (e.g., an extra 3 years for Java 11). Update policy: Because Red Hat engineers help drive the upstream, their updates are very timely and reliable.

Red Hat’s OpenJDK builds are usually available simultaneously with the upstream release of updates. Usage terms: The builds are under an open-source license with no usage restrictions. One nuance is that to download official Red Hat binaries for Windows, you typically need access through the Red Hat Customer Portal, which requires a subscription.

However, the equivalent OpenJDK code can also be obtained for free from Adoptium or other community sources.

In summary, Red Hat’s OpenJDK is a trusted choice for enterprise Linux environments, offering stability and long-term updates without added cost (beyond any existing Red Hat subscription you might have).

BellSoft Liberica JDK

BellSoft Liberica JDK is another TCK-certified OpenJDK distribution known for its wide platform support and focus on embedded Java. Cost model: Liberica JDK is free to download and use under an open-source license. BellSoft, like Azul, monetizes through commercial support plans for enterprises that need SLAs or extended update access.

They offer flexible subscription plans that cover various platforms (Windows, Linux, macOS, Solaris, etc.) and even special builds, such as Liberica “Lite” for embedded systems and Liberica NIK for ahead-of-time compilation​. Support offerings: BellSoft’s support plans come in tiers (e.g., “Standard” vs. “Premium”), depending on the level of responsiveness and whether 24/7 support is needed.

Pricing is generally per instance (server or desktop) in tiers rather than per user. For example, a Standard support plan for 51–100 server instances costs around $24,500 per year – this can cover a significant Java estate at a fixed cost far below Oracle’s employee-based fees. Premium plans, which may cover desktops or additional features, are more expensive (e.g., approximately $49,900 per year for 101–200 desktops).

These figures illustrate how a supported OpenJDK from BellSoft can be significantly cheaper than Oracle for large organizations. Update policy: Liberica JDK releases quarterly updates (in sync with Java security releases) and offers both CPU and PSU patches (critical and general patches)​.

BellSoft prides itself on a fast turnaround of security fixes (they cite an SLA of patching critical issues within 48 hours on premium plans). They support all Java LTS versions (8, 11, 17, 21) and even maintain older versions, like Java 6 and 7, for those who need them.

Unique features: BellSoft emphasizes embedded and containerized Java. Liberica includes a “Lite” edition – a trimmed-down JRE ideal for container images or IoT devices – and provides Java for uncommon architectures and small-footprint Linux distributions, such as Alpine Linux via musl libc builds. This makes Liberica a strong choice if you have Java running in Docker or on ARM devices, where a compact runtime is needed.

Usage terms: Liberica is free under the same GPL+Classpath license, so you can redistribute it and embed it without legal barriers. BellSoft even encourages use in embedded scenarios (where Oracle would require an expensive OEM agreement)​. With Liberica, a device manufacturer or software vendor can bundle a Java runtime in their product without paying royalties, a key advantage over Oracle’s restrictions on embedded use.

The above alternatives are all Java SE standard-compliant and have been widely adopted. In fact, Oracle’s dominance in the JDK market has dropped sharply in recent years, from a market share of around 75% in 2020 to around 42% in 2023 (some estimates even show Oracle at only around 21% by 2024).

Organizations have realized they can run Java just as well with OpenJDK distributions, avoiding lock-in. Each alternative has its nuances, but all can help avoid Oracle Java subscription fees while still getting necessary updates and support.

Cost, Support, and Licensing Comparison

The table below compares Oracle Java SE (under the new subscription model) with leading OpenJDK vendors on key factors: license and usage terms, cost model, support availability, and update policies.

Table: Comparison of Oracle Java vs OpenJDK Vendors on Licensing, Cost, Support, and Updates​​​​​.

As shown above, Oracle’s model is uniquely restrictive and costly, requiring a subscription that covers all personnel. The OpenJDK-based alternatives all use the permissive GPL+Classpath license, which allows unlimited free use and redistribution in any environment​.

In terms of cost, switching to an OpenJDK distribution can dramatically reduce Java runtime expenses, often to zero license cost plus optional support, at a small fraction of Oracle’s price. Support offerings are available from multiple vendors, including Amazon, Azul, Red Hat, and BellSoft, among others.

These offerings typically use flexible metrics, such as per server or per VM, which are far more predictable and scalable than Oracle’s per-employee fee.

Update policies among the OpenJDK vendors are generally aligned with the Java release train, ensuring that companies can receive critical security patches on time without relying on Oracle. Many of these vendors even extend support for older Java versions longer than Oracle does for free, ensuring no functionality gap.

Security and Patching Considerations

When considering a migration from Oracle Java to an open-source distribution, security and timely patching are top concerns. Oracle’s branding of its patches might lead some to worry that only Oracle can provide critical fixes promptly.

In reality, all Java distributions share the same underlying code base from OpenJDK, and security fixes are contributed to the OpenJDK project by Oracle and others. This means that OpenJDK vendors receive security fixes concurrently with Oracle and can deliver patches on a similar schedule.

For example, when Oracle releases a Critical Patch Update (CPU) for Java, typically quarterly, the OpenJDK community releases updates for those vulnerabilities simultaneously. Vendors like Red Hat, Azul, and Amazon are actively involved in the OpenJDK update process, so their distributions often ship a patched update on the same day the Oracle CPU is released (or within a very short window).

Therefore, organizations that switch to an alternative like Eclipse Temurin or Amazon Corretto should not experience any lag in getting security updates. 84% of organizations that migrated from Oracle Java reported that the process was as expected or easier than anticipated – many found that maintaining security was no harder with OpenJDK than with Oracle.

That said, there are a few security considerations to keep in mind:

• Update Frequency and Discipline: Ensure you have a process to obtain and apply updates from your chosen distribution. Most vendors release updates quarterly; some, like Azul or BellSoft, also issue emergency patches for zero-day issues. Without Oracle’s CPU notifications, you’ll want to subscribe to your vendor’s security advisory alerts or monitor the OpenJDK mailing lists. It’s wise to designate a team or individual to be responsible for tracking Java updates from the new provider.
• Long-Term Support Alignment: Check the support roadmap of the distribution. While all major alternatives support long-term support (LTS) versions for many years, each has its timeline. For instance, if you plan to stick with Java 11 for a long time, ensure your vendor commits to providing patches through your required timeframe. Azul and Amazon now extend Java 11 support to approximately 2031, while Red Hat extends it to 2027 with a possible extension​. If an OpenJDK community build (such as Adoptium) doesn’t plan to support an old version for as long as you need, consider obtaining a vendor support contract or scheduling an upgrade to a newer Long-Term Support (LTS) version in advance.
• Quality of Patches: The quality of patches from reputable OpenJDK vendors is on par with Oracle’s. All distributions must pass the Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK) tests, ensuring that any modifications or backported fixes do not break Java standards. Vendors may occasionally add extra fixes (e.g., backporting a non-security bug fix), but these are tested. In practice, security fixes applied to OpenJDK are the same code Oracle uses. There is minimal risk that migrating to a well-known OpenJDK build will introduce security regressions, especially if you stick to Long-Term Support (LTS) versions and apply updates regularly.
• Support for Security Incidents: One difference when not under Oracle support is who you call if something goes wrong. If you have no support contract (using purely free community builds), you rely on community forums for troubleshooting, which might be slower. However, many organizations find this acceptable given the maturity of Java. If your risk profile demands it, consider a paid support plan with an OpenJDK vendor. They can then be on the hook to assist if, for example, a critical security vulnerability emerges and you need guidance or an interim workaround. The cost of such support is typically much lower than Oracle’s subscription and can be scoped to the systems that need it.

In summary, switching to OpenJDK alternatives does not inherently increase security risk. As long as your team remains vigilant with applying updates, you can maintain a strong security posture.

Multiple sources note that companies have successfully transitioned to OpenJDK, experiencing “smooth transitions” and no loss of security, while also enjoying significant cost savings at the same time​.

Compliance Risks When Mixing Oracle and OpenJDK

Many enterprises today have a mix of Oracle Java and non-Oracle Java in their environment. For example, some older applications might still run Oracle JDK 8, while new services use OpenJDK 11 or 17.

While a mixed environment is technically feasible, it raises licensing compliance complexities.

SAM managers should be aware of the following risks and best practices:

• Accidental Oracle Usage: Oracle’s audit scripts can detect installations of Oracle’s JDK (for instance, specific registry entries or directory names). If even a single Oracle JDK instance is found on a machine that isn’t licensed, it could trigger license fees. Under the new rules, Oracle could argue that any use of Oracle Java requires licensing the entire organization (all employees). This means that if you intend to avoid Oracle costs, you must completely purge Oracle JDK from your environment (or isolate it to fully licensed segments). A common mistake is updating an application with the latest Oracle JDK out of habit; doing so without a subscription immediately creates compliance exposure. It’s crucial to replace Oracle JDK binaries with OpenJDK equivalents across all systems – including build servers, CI/CD pipelines, and developer workstations – to eliminate the need for Oracle licenses.
• “Mixed Use” Audit Trigger: If Oracle finds a mixed deployment, it may be unclear which users or servers require licenses. Oracle’s contracts don’t easily allow partial licensing for Java SE; as noted, the subscription is all-encompassing. An auditor could argue that the presence of Oracle Java anywhere means the company should have a subscription for all employees. While, in theory, one could argue that only certain servers needed licensing (under older rules), the new model blurs that line. Thus, running Oracle and OpenJDK side by side could lead Oracle to claim that you owe licenses for the entire environment. To avoid this, many firms choose an all-or-nothing approach – fully migrate off Oracle, or keep Oracle JDK only in licensed silos (and even then, ensure no cross-use).
• Compliance Tracking Difficulty: Each Java installation might be slightly different (Oracle JDK vs OpenJDK). SAM teams need to maintain an inventory of Java runtimes in use. Tools should be able to distinguish between Oracle JDK installations and others. Fortunately, OpenJDK distributions often have distinct installation paths or package names. It’s advisable to utilize software asset discovery tools that can identify Oracle’s JDK by its specific signatures (for example, the presence of oracle jar or java -version output indicating “Oracle”). Uninstall Oracle JDK where not needed and replace it with an OpenJDK distribution to both save cost and simplify compliance. Document any remaining Oracle Java usage (perhaps required for a vendor’s product) and ensure a subscription or entitlement covers it.
• Oracle Java Components in Applications: Sometimes, third-party applications bundle older versions of Oracle’s Java. If you deploy such software, you might inadvertently be running Oracle JRE without realizing it, triggering a need for a license. Audit your vendor-provided applications – ask if they use an embedded Java Development Kit (JDK) and under what license. Many software vendors have moved to bundling OpenJDK due to Oracle’s changes, but some may not have done so. If an ISV application requires Oracle JDK, ask the vendor for an alternative or check if Oracle usage is covered under their agreement. Oracle offers an “Embedded Java License” for software providers (with royalties), but if the ISV hasn’t secured that, the end customer could be held liable. One way or another, strive to eliminate hidden Oracle JDK instances by either updating the application or switching the runtime.
• Java Features and Add-ons: In the past, certain Oracle JDK features (Java Flight Recorder, Mission Control, etc.) were considered commercial, and usage could trigger license requirements on Oracle JDK 8. While those particular rules changed (Oracle open-sourced Flight Recorder in later versions), it underscores the need to ensure feature parity when switching. The OpenJDK alternatives now have almost all the same capabilities. For instance, Flight Recorder is available in OpenJDK 11+ (and some vendors even backported it to OpenJDK 8). So, feature-wise, there’s rarely a need to keep Oracle JDK. But be cautious that if your team ever enabled a feature in Oracle JDK that wasn’t in OpenJDK 8 (like Advanced Management Console, etc.), that could have been an audit flag. As we advance, using OpenJDK builds avoids such Oracle-proprietary features altogether, reducing compliance risk.

In summary, mixing Oracle and non-Oracle Java in an enterprise makes it harder to ensure compliance. It’s recommended to standardize on one set of Java distributions enterprise-wide (preferably open-source ones) to avoid confusion. If a mix is unavoidable during transition, tightly control and track it.

The ultimate goal should be to reach a state where no Oracle licenses are required for Java, or if they are, they’re fully accounted for. This not only avoids surprise fees but also removes Oracle’s leverage to audit Java and then upsell or cross-audit other Oracle products​. By consolidating on OpenJDK, organizations can significantly reduce their risk profile regarding Java audits.

Java in Embedded Systems and Containers

Java is not only used in traditional IT environments; it often powers embedded systems, IoT devices, and containerized cloud applications.

SAM managers should consider how Java is used in these contexts when formulating a cost avoidance strategy:

• Embedded Systems (IoT, Appliances, OEM software): Oracle’s licensing for embedded Java is particularly restrictive. Oracle Java SE embedded binaries require a separate OEM license – typically a negotiated contract with royalties per device​​. Oracle’s standard free-use terms (OTN or NFTC licenses) explicitly forbid embedding Java in third-party products or redistributing the runtime​. This means if your organization builds hardware or software that includes a Java runtime (for example, a medical device with a Java-based controller, or a software tool that installs Java with it), using Oracle’s JRE without an OEM agreement violates the license. The cost of an OEM Java license can be substantial and is often negotiated on a case-by-case basis. An attractive alternative is to use an open-source Java runtime for embedded use, which comes with no such restrictions. OpenJDK distributions allow free redistribution. For instance, BellSoft Liberica and Azul both offer specialized embedded Java builds and permit royalty-free distribution as part of their support plans​. By switching to OpenJDK on your embedded devices or packaged software, you can avoid needing an Oracle OEM contract. Many device makers have embraced OpenJDK for this reason. The key consideration is testing: ensure the alternative JDK performs well on your device’s architecture, such as ARM or MIPS. Vendors like BellSoft specifically optimize for ARM and constrained environments, making it feasible to replace Oracle even in tiny footprints. Using a slimmed-down JRE (such as Liberica Lite or creating a custom JDK image via jlink) can also help meet embedded constraints without Oracle’s proprietary JRE. Bottom line: If you have Java running inside the products you deliver, moving to OpenJDK not only saves subscription costs but also avoids legal barriers related to distribution.
• Containerized Environments (Docker, Kubernetes): Java is commonly run in Docker containers for microservices and cloud deployments. Oracle’s licensing can also be problematic here. Under the old model, if you ran multiple containers on a host, each with Java, Oracle might count each container’s Java instance for licensing, or count the underlying cores. Under the new employee model, any use would require the whole organization to be licensed. This doesn’t mesh well with ephemeral container scaling. The good news is that the Docker ecosystem has largely standardized on OpenJDK-based images. The official openjdk images on Docker Hub, for example, use Eclipse Temurin (formerly AdoptOpenJDK) binaries, which are free. It is strongly recommended that organizations use base images that contain OpenJDK (Temurin, Corretto, or similar) for all Java containers. Avoid using any Oracle-provided Java base image. Oracle does not even provide official public Docker images for Oracle JDK, since it would be against their license to freely distribute them. If you see an image claiming to be “oraclejdk”, it likely requires authentication to Oracle’s container registry and an underlying license. By using OpenJDK images, you ensure your containerized apps incur no Java licensing fees. Furthermore, OpenJDK images can be smaller and more optimized (for example, using Alpine Linux with a smaller JRE). From a DevOps perspective, treat Java just like any other open-source runtime in containers – include it as part of your image and patch it via your normal CI process when updates are released.
• Cloud and Serverless Services: Even if you are using PaaS or serverless platforms (like AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, etc.) that run Java, you should ensure those environments use OpenJDK. Most cloud providers have switched their managed Java offerings to OpenJDK builds to shield customers from Oracle fees. For example, AWS’s Java on Lambda uses Amazon Corretto under the hood. If you manage any long-running cloud VMs with Java, the same licensing considerations as on-prem apply – install OpenJDK on those VMs.
• Java ME vs Java SE: A quick note on embedded: Oracle also had Java Micro Edition (ME) for very constrained devices. Java SE Embedded bridged the gap for more powerful devices. OpenJDK covers only Java SE (Standard Edition). If you have Java ME deployments, those are outside the scope of OpenJDK. However, many “embedded Java” use cases (like running on a Raspberry Pi or inside a network appliance) actually can use a compact Java SE runtime. OpenJDK distributions like Liberica support a range of profiles suitable for this. It’s rare in modern enterprise IoT to use Java ME (which was more common on old flip phones, etc.), so in most cases, an OpenJDK SE variant can replace Oracle’s embedded Java.

In essence, for embedded and container scenarios, OpenJDK alternatives not only cut costs but also simplify distribution rights. You avoid the need to count container instances or negotiate per-device royalties.

Just be diligent in choosing an appropriate distribution that supports your target environment (for instance, if using Alpine Linux containers, choose a distro that offers musl builds, like Liberica or Alpine’s OpenJDK package).

Many organizations have seamlessly containerized Java apps using OpenJDK images with no issues – performance and stability remain on par with Oracle’s JDK. And they gained the freedom to scale up and down without worrying about licensing headaches.

Real-World Migration Examples and Outcomes

Many organizations have already transitioned from Oracle Java to OpenJDK-based alternatives. Surveys and case studies indicate that the outcomes are largely positive in both cost savings and operational continuity:

• Cost Savings: The primary driver is cost avoidance. According to a 2024 survey by Azul, two-thirds of organizations that switched from Oracle Java to OpenJDK distributions saved money compared to what they were paying Oracle​. In Azul’s customer base, typical savings were around 50–80%. For example, one Azul client (VP of IT at a tech company) noted saving “millions of dollars” by reducing servers and licensing costs after moving to Azul’s Java platform​. While that particular quote relates partly to performance gains (Azul Prime), it underscores that a significant budget impact is possible. Another scenario: consider a company with 10,000 employees that would owe roughly $1 million/year to Oracle under the new model​. By switching to an OpenJDK vendor, they might pay on the order of <$100K/year for equivalent support (or $0 for unsupported), thereby saving around 90% of their Java runtime costs. These are not trivial figures – over 3 years, that could be ~$2.7M saved, which can be reallocated to innovation or other IT priorities.
• Ease of Migration: A common fear is that migrating to a new Java version or distribution will break applications. In reality, these migrations have been very smooth for most. The Azul survey found that 84% of organizations that completed migration off Oracle Java said it was as expected or easier than expected, and 75% managed to finish the migration within one year (23% in as little as 3 months)​​. This reflects that switching to a TCK-compliant OpenJDK build is usually just a drop-in replacement – the Java application doesn’t “know” or care which vendor’s name is on the JDK. For example, the City of Vienna (anecdotally known case) migrated thousands of Java desktops from Oracle JDK to OpenJDK with minimal end-user impact, relying on AdoptOpenJDK MSI installers to push the new JRE. Many companies start by migrating development and test environments to an OpenJDK distro, validating that everything runs the same, then proceed to production. The bytecode compatibility guaranteed by Java standards means that if an application runs on Oracle Java 11, it will run on OpenJDK 11 from another vendor virtually identically.
• Challenges and Mitigations: Some real-world lessons: compatibility issues are rare, but one cited challenge is tooling like Oracle’s Java Web Start (JNLP). Oracle deprecated Java Web Start in Java 11, so those using it on Oracle JDK 8 have to find alternatives (OpenJDK doesn’t include Web Start either, except via third-party implementations). In such cases, the move to OpenJDK coincides with an architectural update (e.g., migrating away from JNLP deployment). Another example is if an application used Oracle-specific APIs or JVM options – these are exceedingly uncommon (Oracle’s JDK and OpenJDK are almost identical code-wise since Java 11). Companies have reported that nearly zero code changes are needed; it’s mostly about deploying a new JDK and conducting tests. There are even automation tools (like the OpenJDK Migration Toolkit by some vendors) to scan for potential discrepancies, but these typically find little to change. Performance is usually equivalent between Oracle and OpenJDK builds at the same version. Some organizations have found that performance improves with certain distributions. For instance, Azul’s builds include some backported enhancements, and Red Hat’s OpenJDK on RHEL is tuned for that platform. There might be slight differences in the default garbage collector or other settings across JDK versions (e.g., switching from Oracle JDK 8 to OpenJDK 11 is both a vendor and version change), so plan performance testing accordingly. Overall, case studies show that with proper planning, migrating to Java alternatives can be done without disrupting business operations.
• Audit Outcomes: For organizations that transitioned fully off Oracle Java, an added benefit is peace of mind. Should Oracle initiate an audit, the company can demonstrate that all Java installations are from non-Oracle sources, thus owing nothing for Java licenses. This has been a real outcome for some companies that were previously at risk. One organization reported that after migrating to OpenJDK, they went from a potential seven-figure compliance exposure to effectively $0 (aside from their low-cost support contract with a vendor). Redress Compliance (a licensing advisory firm) noted that many clients choosing OpenJDK avoided the need to even engage with Oracle’s Java sales team, thus sidestepping the audit/licensing trap entirely. Given that Gartner expects many Oracle Java customers to be audited​, those who preemptively migrate are in a safer position.
• Example – Financial Services: A large bank with ~5,000 internal Java applications undertook a Java replacement project after Oracle’s pricing change. They first segmented applications by Java version and vendor, then systematically replaced Oracle JDK with Temurin across dev, test, and prod. They purchased support from Azul for critical systems but left non-critical ones on free builds. Over the course of 18 months, they managed to eliminate Oracle Java from 95% of their environment. The result was an estimated $3M annual cost avoidance, while paying only about $200K/year to a support vendor for the critical subset. The bank also reported improved visibility into its Java deployments as a side benefit of the project, which will aid future upgrades.

Each organization’s numbers will vary, but the consistent theme is: significant cost reduction and manageable migration effort. The key is to plan thoroughly, test compatibility (which usually passes with flying colors), and perhaps run a pilot on a subset of systems to build confidence.

Recommendations

For SAM managers and Oracle licensing professionals evaluating a move away from Oracle Java, here are clear next steps and best practices:

1. Inventory Your Java Usage: Compile a detailed inventory of all Java installations in your organization. Identify the version (8, 11, 17, etc.), vendor (Oracle vs OpenJDK), and where it’s used (server, desktop, application). This will highlight how much Oracle JDK is in use and where you can replace it. Don’t forget developer machines, build agents, CI servers, and any packaged software that might include Java.
2. Assess Business Impact: For each Java-dependent system, evaluate compatibility with OpenJDK alternatives. Most applications will run unchanged on an OpenJDK of the same version, but note any special cases (e.g., use of Java Web Start, or vendor-certified runtime requirements). Engage application owners to ensure they are on board with a JDK switch and schedule necessary testing.
3. Choose Your Java Distribution Strategy: Decide which OpenJDK distribution(s) to adopt. You might standardize on one (e.g., Eclipse Temurin for all desktops and servers), or a mix (perhaps Amazon Corretto on Linux, Azul Zulu on Windows – depending on support needs). Consider the strengths: for instance, use Amazon Corretto for a free, AWS-aligned option, or Azul/Red Hat/BellSoft if you need vendor support SLAs. Ensure the chosen distribution supports all your required platforms (OS and CPU architecture).
4. Obtain Support if Needed: If your organization requires vendor support for open source software (common in production environments), evaluate support offers from OpenJDK vendors. Get quotes based on your Java footprint (e.g., number of servers or containers). Compare those costs with the would-be Oracle subscription – the savings will likely be substantial​. Select a support partner if appropriate, and budget for their subscription (still far less than Oracle’s per-employee model). If you have a large fleet, you may also engage multiple vendors (for example, use a free solution for most, but pay support for a critical subset).
5. Plan the Migration: Develop a migration plan to replace Oracle JDK with the chosen OpenJDK across the enterprise. This may involve:
   • Rolling out the new JDK to servers (for example, via automated configuration management or container image updates).
   • Switching the JAVA_HOME and PATH on systems to point to the new JDK.
   • Testing applications under the new JDK in lower environments.
   • Staging deployments to production during maintenance windows.
     It’s wise to migrate one Java version at a time (e.g., all Oracle Java 8 replaced with OpenJDK 8, then Java 11, etc.), or one environment at a time, to isolate any issues. In most cases, minimal code change is needed, but treat it with the same rigor as a minor version upgrade in case any behavior differs.
6. Update Policies and Processes: Once on OpenJDK, ensure you have a process for regularly applying Java updates. Subscribe to your vendor’s security bulletins or the OpenJDK update mailing lists. Patch management for Java should be integrated into your regular cycle (e.g., a quarterly patch cycle). If you’re using a support vendor, coordinate with them to determine patch availability. This keeps your Java deployments secure post-migration.
7. Uninstall Oracle JDK and Document Completion: When replacing Oracle Java, remove the Oracle JDK/JRE installations from those systems. This helps prevent accidental reuse and serves as evidence of compliance. Maintain documentation that “System X was switched from Oracle JDK 8 Update 221 to OpenJDK 8 (Azul Zulu build) on Date Y” for audit traceability. The goal is that, by the end, you can demonstrate that no Oracle Java (that isn’t licensed) remains in use.
8. Manage Contracts and Renewals: If you currently have Oracle Java SE subscriptions (legacy model or the new one), time your migration in line with subscription renewal dates. You may be able to terminate your Oracle Java subscriptions at the next renewal, once the migration is complete, and avoid renewal costs. If audits or true-ups are looming, prepare to show evidence of replacement to contest any Oracle compliance claims. Also, review contracts for any mention of Java usage (e.g., some Oracle middleware licenses include Java rights – make sure you’re not inadvertently required to count those if you stop using Oracle Java).
9. Address Third-Party Dependencies: Communicate with any software vendors whose products run on Java in your environment. Let them know you are moving to OpenJDK and ensure it’s a supported configuration. Most modern enterprise software vendors officially support running their apps on OpenJDK builds, with many having published statements since 2019. If any vendor hasn’t, ask for clarification or testing – this can usually be resolved since OpenJDK is Java-standard compliant. In worst-case scenarios, if a vendor requires Oracle JDK (which is rare these days), factor that into your plans. You may want to isolate that application and keep a minimal Oracle license just for it, or push for a change.
10. Monitor and Educate: Finally, educate your development and operations teams about the new policy: Oracle JDK should no longer be downloaded or used. Update internal documentation to recommend the approved OpenJDK distribution for all new Java projects. Monitor your software inventory periodically to catch any strays (e.g., someone might later install Oracle JDK unknowingly – have controls or scans to detect this). By fostering awareness, you reduce the risk of “license creep” back into the environment.

By following these steps, SAM managers can confidently transition their organizations to Oracle Java alternatives, avoiding needless subscription costs while maintaining a secure and supported Java environment.

The result is typically a win-win: freeing up budget (customer advocacy in action) and mitigating the compliance and audit risks that have grown under Oracle’s licensing changes. With proper planning and the strong ecosystem of OpenJDK vendors available, enterprises can run Java on their terms, cost-effectively and without vendor lock-in.​

Do you want to know more about our Oracle Java Advisory Services?

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

Name *

Email *

Company

Message *

Submit