Company Journey: From Oracle Java to OpenJDK

Company Background and Challenge

GlobalRetailCo (a Fortune 100 U.S. retailer with ~100,000 employees) relied heavily on Java-based systems across its e-commerce, supply chain, and in-store applications. For years, the company used Oracle’s Java Development Kit (JDK) under the assumption that Java was “free.” This status quo was disrupted when Oracle fundamentally changed its licensing model.

In 2019, Oracle began requiring paid subscriptions for Java SE in production (ending free updates for Java 8 and above). By January 2023, Oracle introduced a Java SE Universal Subscription priced per employee, meaning the company would owe Java fees for every employee on payroll. This was a seismic shift: Gartner observed that many enterprises’ Java costs would jump 2x to 5x under the new model. For GlobalRetailCo, the “all employees” metric translated into a multi-million-dollar annual expense.

With Oracle’s list price starting at $15 per employee per month (and only scaling down to ~$5 at large headcounts), even a negotiated rate would have meant paying $5–6 million per year for Java. This cost had not existed before.

Sticker shock set in when the IT procurement team ran the numbers. Under the prior model (per processor or desktop), GlobalRetailCo’s Java costs were negligible or limited to a few specific servers. Under the 2023 model, one real-world scenario illustrates the impact: a company with ~42,000 employees would see its Java fees explode from about $85,000 to $2.65 million annually.

GlobalRetailCo’s estimate for 100k staff was even higher. Continuing with Oracle Java threatened to consume millions in the IT budget overnight. Moreover, Oracle’s rules required licensing every employee if even one Oracle JDK instance was in use, a policy one architect bluntly called “not reasonable” – e.g., “you could have 10,000 employees, only 500 need Java… but you have to license your entire employee count”. With this predicament, GlobalRetailCo’s CIO and procurement leaders identified a strategic imperative: migrate off Oracle’s JDK to avoid an unplanned, recurring cost.

In addition to cost, there was a compliance alarm. Oracle’s licensing terms had become a maze of restrictions (OTN, NFTC, etc.), making it easy to inadvertently violate terms – for example, running Oracle JDK 8 or 11 in production without a subscription was now considered a breach. The risk of a surprise audit was growing.

In fact, by 2022, Oracle was aggressively monetizing Java: 52% of Oracle’s license audits that year were Java-related, and even Fortune 200 companies began seeing Oracle’s “Java police” show up in 2024. For the CIO, this raised a red flag – millions in potential audit penalties were “lurking” in their environment if they stayed on Oracle’s JDK. The combined pressure of skyrocketing license fees and compliance risk set the stage for GlobalRetailCo’s journey to OpenJDK.

Read Oracle Java SE Licensing Migration Checklist.

Procurement Evaluation of Alternatives

GlobalRetailCo’s first step was to evaluate all available options. The CIO formed a task force with procurement, finance, and senior architects to assess whether to pay Oracle or switch to alternatives.

Key considerations included cost of ownership, support, and technical feasibility. The options considered were:

• Status Quo (Oracle Java SE Subscription): Enter into Oracle’s Java SE Universal Subscription, incurring an estimated $4+ million/year licensing cost. This would guarantee official support and quarterly updates from Oracle, but at the price of vendor lock-in and perpetual fees. Negotiation did not yield substantial relief: Oracle’s model would remain a seven-figure annual expense even with volume discounts, since charges scale with employee count. The team also worried about Oracle’s history of price increases and “true-up” costs over time. In short, paying Oracle was seen as high-cost with unpredictable long-term TCO.
• Migrate to OpenJDK (open-source Java, via another provider or in-house): Adopt the free OpenJDK reference implementation of Java across all systems, eliminating license fees. OpenJDK is functionally equivalent to Oracle JDK, since Java 11, Oracle’s own JDK is a repackaged OpenJDK build. The task force confirmed that using OpenJDK would cost $0 in licensing. The only direct costs might be optional: e.g., a support contract from a third party or allocating internal resources for updates. Multiple vendors (Amazon, Red Hat, Azul, Microsoft, etc.) offer their supported builds of OpenJDK at far lower costs than Oracle, often 50–80% less expensive. This option promised massive savings and independence, but the team needed to ensure compatibility and support.
• Hybrid Approach: Continue using Oracle JDK only for a small subset of applications that might strictly require it (for example, if a third-party vendor application was only certified on Oracle’s JDK), and transition the majority of workloads to OpenJDK. This approach could contain licensing scope. Oracle’s employee-based licensing, however, made partial use tricky – any use would technically require licensing everyone. GlobalRetailCo’s lawyers explored whether isolating Oracle JDK to a segregated environment or an older contract might avoid triggering the new model, but this was complex. Ultimately, the team kept this as a fallback scenario: in practice, it would resemble migrating to OpenJDK for ~90% of systems and paying Oracle only for the exceptions.

A cost-benefit analysis favored the OpenJDK route. One retail industry peer had reportedly been quoted ~$4 million annually under Oracle’s model, but by migrating most systems to OpenJDK, they slashed 90% of that cost. GlobalRetailCo’s CFO was keenly aware of this example, seeing “millions saved annually” and a flatter cost curve in the future.

The procurement team also noted that if they needed enterprise support for OpenJDK, they could subscribe to services from vendors like Red Hat or Azul at a fraction of Oracle’s price, on the order of hundreds of thousands per year, versus millions.

After weighing the options, the company decided to pursue an OpenJDK migration. This path aligned with the company’s broader IT strategy to reduce dependency on single vendors and cut unnecessary costs. The remainder of the initiative focused on executing this migration prudently.

Licensing and Compliance Analysis

Before deploying, GlobalRetailCo undertook a thorough licensing and compliance analysis to map out its Java usage. This phase answered “Where are we running Java, and do we truly need Oracle’s JDK there?”. Key steps and findings included:

• Java Inventory: The IT asset management (ITAM) team ran an enterprise-wide scan to locate all instances of Java on servers, VMs, and employee devices. Taking a comprehensive Java inventory is often the most time-consuming part of such a migration. GlobalRetailCo discovered dozens of Java versions, from legacy Java 6/7 in a few old systems up to Java 8 and 11 in most modern applications. Many business units had installed Oracle JRE/JDK over the years without central tracking. This inventory confirmed that hundreds of servers and developer workstations had Oracle JDK installed – a footprint that would have made Oracle’s subscription unavoidable if left as-is.
• Use Cases & Scope: The analysis identified which Java installations were needed in production versus those for development or bundled in third-party apps. Oracle’s licensing has exemptions for certain uses (development, testing), but the lines are narrow. In GlobalRetailCo’s case, almost all critical systems (e-commerce, warehouse management, point-of-sale) ran Java in production, meaning Oracle’s licenses would apply. A few instances of Java on employee laptops were used only for internal tools or dev/test, but treating those as non-production wouldn’t significantly reduce the employee count metric. The bottom line is that virtually the entire Java estate was in Oracle’s commercial licensing scope if it was not replaced.
• Compliance Risks: The team cross-checked each Oracle JDK instance against Oracle’s licensing terms. They found that many systems were running Oracle Java 8 update versions beyond 8u202, which Oracle had marked as needing a subscription for commercial use. In other words, the company was already unknowingly out of compliance in several areas – a ticking time bomb if Oracle were to audit. This realization added urgency: staying on Oracle Java not only cost money but also meant legal exposure to back licensing fees or penalties. Oracle’s audit tactics had grown more aggressive; the vendor’s License Management Services (LMS/GLAS) team reportedly used methods like tracking downloads and network scans to find Java deployments. GlobalRetailCo wanted to eliminate this risk.
• Exception Analysis: One important part of the compliance review was identifying applications that explicitly required Oracle JDK. Some third-party software vendors (and Oracle’s products) mandate Oracle’s JVM in support contracts. The team found that one legacy point-of-sale (POS) system in stores was certified only on Oracle JDK. This was a potential roadblock – replacing Java here might void support from that software vendor. Knowing this, the team planned for a possible exception: they could keep Oracle JDK for that POS application (with minimal, isolated usage) while migrating everything else. This would be revisited during vendor negotiations, but it was crucial to pinpoint such exceptions early.

By the end of this analysis, GlobalRetailCo had a clear picture of its Java landscape and the stakes. The findings were presented to executive stakeholders, framing the migration as a cost-saving measure and a compliance safeguard. The analysis phase also sets a baseline for success: the company aims to remove or replace all Oracle JDK installations except where unavoidable.

Vendor Management and Strategy

Switching to OpenJDK was not just a technical endeavor; it required careful vendor management to transition support and maintain enterprise-grade service. In this stage, GlobalRetailCo addressed how to support Java without Oracle, and managed communications with Oracle and other vendors:

• Engaging Oracle: Early on, GlobalRetailCo opened a dialogue with Oracle to understand their stance and options. Oracle’s sales team, unsurprisingly, pushed the Java SE subscription hard. They emphasized the value of Oracle’s support, tools like Java Flight Recorder (which, notably, had been open-sourced already), and fear of the unknown with “unsupported” OpenJDK. However, GlobalRetailCo’s negotiators were prepared with data: they highlighted that OpenJDK is the reference implementation of Java and that many large organizations run it with no issues. When Oracle quoted an initial price (on the order of several million dollars annually), it only reinforced GlobalRetailCo’s resolve to migrate. Little flexibility was offered due to the uniform per-employee model. Ultimately, the company signaled to Oracle that it would opt out of renewal for most Java licenses. (For the one critical POS system requiring Oracle JDK, they sought a specialized arrangement, potentially a limited-use license or older metric, to avoid company-wide fees.)
• Selecting an OpenJDK Distribution: GlobalRetailCo’s architecture team evaluated various OpenJDK distributions to choose the right fit. Key candidates were Eclipse Temurin (the free, community-driven build from Adoptium), Amazon Corretto (AWS’s free long-term supported OpenJDK build), Azul Zulu (commercially supported OpenJDK with optional paid support), and Red Hat OpenJDK (supported for RHEL subscribers). All these options are based on the same OpenJDK code and pass the Java TCK compatibility tests, meaning the Java applications would run the same way on any of them. The team’s criteria included: long-term support for Java 8 and 11 (since some apps were stuck on those), ease of deployment, available support if needed, and cost of support. After evaluation, Amazon Corretto was selected for most systems (due to its free long-term updates and the company’s comfort with AWS tooling), and Eclipse Temurin for developer workstations. Both are free and have no usage restrictions. This multi-distribution approach provided flexibility and no single-vendor dependency. The team took confidence from industry reports that swapping one Java runtime for another is technically “relatively simple” and that many enterprises had already done so smoothly.
• Optional Support Contracts: GlobalRetailCo decided to contract a third-party vendor for support on OpenJDK to mitigate risk. They solicited bids and found that vendors like Azul and Red Hat could provide Java support (patches, troubleshooting) at far lower cost than Oracle. One offer from Azul came in roughly 70% cheaper than Oracle’s quote for equivalent support. Given the company’s large Java footprint, they signed a support agreement for mission-critical environments (production servers), using community support for lower environments. This hybrid support model ensured that if any JVM-level issues arose, they had experts to call, but at a small fraction of what Oracle had demanded. Vendor management was about maximizing leverage, because the company was no longer tied to Oracle, it could negotiate competitive rates among multiple OpenJDK support providers. The independence gained by migrating meant no more monopoly pricing; if one support vendor underperformed, GlobalRetailCo could switch to another, or even back to Oracle in the future if necessary, with minimal friction. This flexibility was a new bargaining chip.
• Communication and Approvals: Internally, the CIO’s team framed the move as a positive, strategic initiative. They communicated to executives and auditors that OpenJDK is the same technology as Oracle Java, just without the license fees – a point backed by Oracle’s JDK and OpenJDK are almost identical since Java 11. Messaging focused on cost reduction, risk avoidance, and alignment with open-source practices. By highlighting that even Oracle recommends transitioning to OpenJDK in its documentation for those who opt out of subscriptions, they eased any fear that this was an unsupported path. This helped secure board-level approval to proceed with the migration plan.

GlobalRetailCo maintained an independent stance throughout vendor management: the goal was to do what was best for the company’s technology and budget, not what suited any particular vendor. The tone with Oracle remained professional but firm, and the cost was unjustifiable. With new support partners and stakeholders on board, the stage was set to execute the technical transition.

Technical Transition to OpenJDK

The migration from Oracle JDK to OpenJDK was approached in phases to minimize risk. GlobalRetailCo treated this as a standard IT migration project, with planning, testing, and rollout stages. The key activities and challenges in the technical transition were:

• Pilot and Compatibility Testing: Given that OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are binary compatible for a given Java version, the team expected minimal code changes, echoed by industry analysts and Oracle itself. To verify this, they conducted pilot tests. A few non-critical internal applications running on Java 11 were deployed to a staging environment using OpenJDK (Temurin). Developers ran full regression test suites and compared performance metrics. As expected, the applications behaved identically on OpenJDK. No code modifications were needed, and performance and memory usage were on par with Oracle’s JDK. This successful pilot built confidence that a broader rollout would not break functionality. It also helped identify any environment-specific tweaks required (for example, pointing application servers to the new Java home path, updating monitoring scripts, etc.).
• Environment Preparation: The infrastructure team automated the installation of OpenJDK on servers and desktops. They used configuration management tools to deploy Amazon Corretto 8 and 11 to all Linux and Windows servers that previously had Oracle JDK. In parallel, Oracle JDK was uninstalled or deactivated on those machines to avoid accidental use. One challenge was ensuring that managed systems (like build servers, CI/CD pipelines, and container images) were updated to use OpenJDK base images. They worked closely with DevOps to update Docker images and VM templates to an OpenJDK base. In development environments, the switch was communicated to programmers – e.g., all developers were asked to use the new OpenJDK distributions on their workstations. This was facilitated by providing an internal portal to download the standard OpenJDK build, along with guidelines on configuring IDEs and tools (which turned out to be straightforward).
• Phased Rollout: The migration was done in waves. After the pilot, the next phase targeted internal backend services and microservices (mostly Java 11) running in the company’s data center and cloud. These were updated over a series of maintenance windows. Because the runtime behavior is the same, deployments on OpenJDK went smoothly in most cases. The team closely monitored application logs and performance after each cutover; no significant issues were reported. The next wave included customer-facing applications (website and mobile backend services). Here, extra caution was taken to perform a performance test under load on OpenJDK before switching over, to ensure throughput and latency were unaffected. Results showed negligible differences. Finally, the remaining peripheral systems were migrated, including desktop Java applications and job schedulers. Hundreds of applications were transitioned to OpenJDK in a few months. This aligns with industry observations that most OpenJDK migrations (for those who plan thoroughly) can be done within 12 months. Indeed, 75% of organizations in one survey migrated off Oracle Java in under a year.
• Handling Edge Cases: A few challenges did arise. One was the legacy POS system in retail stores, which, as noted, was only certified on Oracle JDK 8. For this, the team temporarily left it on Oracle JDK while engaging the POS software vendor. They negotiated with that vendor to officially support OpenJDK or at least allow it under its support agreement. Given the industry’s momentum (with most customers pressuring vendors to drop Oracle-only requirements), the vendor agreed to test their application on OpenJDK. In the interim, GlobalRetailCo isolated those POS devices and ensured they did not inadvertently force a company-wide Oracle license. Another challenge was ensuring security updates continued seamlessly: previously, the company relied on Oracle’s quarterly CPU (Critical Patch Update) releases. Now, they configured internal processes to consume patches from the OpenJDK community updates or their support vendor. Fortunately, vendors like Red Hat, Amazon, and Azul synchronize their OpenJDK security fixes with Oracle’s releases. The company’s patch management had to adjust slightly (e.g., applying an Amazon Corretto update versus an Oracle patch), which was handled through automation.
• Training and Knowledge Transfer: The switch to OpenJDK also had a human factor – operations staff and developers needed to be comfortable with the new setup. The team held brief training sessions to explain that nothing significant had changed: the Java language and tools remained the same. They pointed out that OpenJDK’s version strings and behaviors were equivalent. This helped dispel any staff myths that a new runtime might require re-learning. The build and release processes were updated to fetch OpenJDK binaries from trusted sources (e.g., an internal artifact repository seeded with OpenJDK packages), instead of Oracle’s site. By demystifying the change, the organization quickly embraced the new normal.

Throughout the technical transition, a guiding principle was to keep risk low: test thoroughly, change one thing at a time, and have rollback plans. Rollback was rarely needed in practice – none of the migrated apps experienced critical failures on OpenJDK. The runtime swap proved to be largely a “non-event” technically, confirming that moving from Oracle JDK to OpenJDK is far simpler than migrating between programming languages or platforms. One Gartner report noted that “moving from one Java runtime to another is relatively simple”. GlobalRetailCo’s experience echoed this fully.

Post-Migration Benefits

By the end of the migration, GlobalRetailCo achieved notable benefits that validated the decision to move off Oracle Java:

• Massive Cost Savings: The most immediately visible benefit was cost. The company avoided an estimated $X million in annual fees (where X was the Oracle quote for 100k employees). Even after accounting for the one-time migration effort and the new support contract with a third party, the net savings were 80–90% of what Oracle’s model would have cost. These savings translate into millions of dollars freed up annually, directly improving the IT budget. In CFO terms, this was a cost avoidance success – money that can be reinvested into innovation rather than paid as a Java “tax.” Over a 5-year horizon, the cumulative savings are enormous, and importantly, predictable. OpenJDK’s cost curve is flat; there are no per-user fees to creep up. The only ongoing expense (support) is negotiable and subject to competition. This budget predictability is golden for financial planning.
• No Licensing Headaches: Post-migration, the legal and compliance burden around Java virtually vanished. The company no longer fears Oracle’s audits or complex license terms. Using OpenJDK (GPL with classpath exception) means no usage fees and no audit teams chasing usage. The CIO commented that this brought peace of mind as valuable as the cost savings. Internal software asset management now reports Java usage with no red flags; even if Oracle’s auditors come knocking, GlobalRetailCo can demonstrate that they have no Oracle JDK in production, thus no licenses required. Removing this compliance risk has greatly relieved the legal and IT teams. It also saves manpower – previously, staff spent time on license tracking and true-up negotiations, which is no longer necessary.
• Vendor Independence and Flexibility: By breaking free from Oracle’s JDK, GlobalRetailCo improved its strategic positioning. Java is now a commodity for the company – they can run it on their terms. They have multiple support options and aren’t beholden to a single vendor’s pricing or policies. This vendor-neutral stance echoes what many enterprises desire: similar to how companies prefer Linux over proprietary UNIX, the company now treats Java as an open infrastructure component. Should any issue arise with their current OpenJDK provider, they can switch to another (Azul, Red Hat, Amazon, etc.) with minimal impact, since all are compatible.
  In contrast, staying with Oracle would have meant deeper lock-in; Oracle could bundle or tie Java support with other offerings in the future. Now, GlobalRetailCo retains control and leverage in vendor discussions. This independence also aligns with the company’s culture of embracing open-source solutions to avoid being stuck in a proprietary ecosystem.
• Smooth Operation and Performance: Post-migration, the company observed that application performance and stability remained on par (or improved) with OpenJDK. There were no significant production incidents attributable to the JDK change. In fact, by moving some systems to newer Java versions under OpenJDK (e.g., upgrading from Java 8 to Java 11 or 17, which they felt more free to do once off Oracle), they gained performance enhancements and new language features for developers. Developers reported that builds and tests ran just as before. Any minor issues (like a difference in default TLS cipher order or font rendering) were quickly tuned. The operational impact was minimal, as many other companies have also found when standardizing on OpenJDK. This validated that the fear of “needing Oracle for quality” was unfounded – an observation consistent with other organizations that have switched and found the experience “smooth” with “no real differences” in functionality.
• Long-Term Agility: With Oracle’s constraints removed, GlobalRetailCo can adopt Java updates on its schedule. Oracle’s free tier (NFTC) would have forced them into a rapid upgrade cycle (every one to two years) or face paying for LTS support. Now, using OpenJDK LTS releases supported by the community and partners, they can stay on a stable Java version as long as needed while still getting updates. For example, they plan to use Java 17 (an LTS) for several years and know that Amazon and others will provide patches. This flexibility in upgrade timing means less disruption and testing effort compared to Oracle’s imposed timelines. It also means the company can skip Oracle’s every-version licensing dance and only upgrade Java when there is a compelling technical reason.

Importantly, GlobalRetailCo’s success is not an isolated case. Industry trends show an exodus from Oracle Java: 86% of organizations using Oracle Java plan to move some or all workloads off Oracle after the recent price changes. Analysts predict that by 2026, over 80% of Java applications will run on non-Oracle JDKs. GlobalRetailCo has now joined this growing majority. The case proved that large enterprises can reclaim control of their Java deployments, save money, and remain fully supported. The CIO considers the Java migration a highlight in their IT optimization efforts, demonstrating a win-win for cost and technology.

Recommendations for CIOs and Procurement Leaders

GlobalRetailCo’s journey offers valuable lessons for any CIO or procurement professional considering a move from Oracle Java to OpenJDK. Based on this experience, here are the key recommendations and actionable insights:

1. Perform a Comprehensive Java Inventory: Start by identifying where every Java instance runs in your organization. Use ITAM tools or scripts to map out all versions on servers, VMs, desktops, and within third-party applications. This inventory will reveal your true exposure in terms of licensing liability and the scope of migration needed. Expect to find outdated versions and untracked installations. This step is critical for planning and for making the case to executives.
2. Analyze Licensing Impact and Risks: Quantify what staying on Oracle Java will cost under current and future conditions. Include the new per-employee subscription model in your calculations. Showing a concrete $$ figure (often in the millions for large firms) builds urgency. Also assess compliance risks – determine if you’re inadvertently out of compliance (e.g., using Oracle JDK 8 in production without a subscription). Highlight the potential audit penalties you eliminate by migrating. This risk analysis is a powerful motivator for change.
3. Evaluate Alternative JDK Options: Research and compare at least a few OpenJDK distributions. All OpenJDK-based options are license-free but differ in support offerings and update policies. Consider community builds like Eclipse Temurin for a free solution and vendor-supported ones like Amazon Corretto, Azul Zulu, Red Hat OpenJDK, or Microsoft Build of OpenJDK for enhanced support. Verify their support timelines for the Java versions you need (e.g., long-term support for Java 8, 11, 17, etc.). Most will meet enterprise needs, as they are Java-for-Java replacements. The key is to pick one that aligns with your environment (for instance, if you are an AWS shop, Corretto is a natural choice).
4. Build a Business Case Focused on Cost Savings and Neutrality: Present the migration as a cost-saving initiative with a clear ROI. Use real examples or case studies – for instance, peers saving 70–90% by switching. Emphasize how OpenJDK adoption frees you from future price hikes and vendor lock-in. Also, note the soft benefits: no more audit fears and alignment with open-source usage (which can be considered modernization). Ensure the CFO and legal team understand the “black and white” difference in cost (Oracle = $$$ vs OpenJDK = $0 license). A strong business case will secure executive buy-in.
5. Engage Stakeholders and Communicate Early: Involve your legal, security, and application owner teams from the outset. Address concerns like “Is OpenJDK the same as Oracle JDK?” by providing factual assurance (e.g., citing that Oracle’s JDK is built from OpenJDK source). Communicate with any third-party software vendors to confirm support on OpenJDK – many vendors have already shifted to officially support OpenJDK due to customer demand. Internally, prepare FAQs or briefings for developers and admins to set expectations (mostly that nothing will fundamentally change in how they write or run Java). Proactive communication smooths the transition and avoids resistance born of uncertainty.
6. Plan a Phased Migration and Test Rigorously: Treat the switch like any other major infrastructure change. Start with a pilot on non-critical systems to validate compatibility and performance. Use that to refine your playbook. Then roll out in phases (by application group or environment), rather than a big bang. Ensure you have rollback plans (even if you won’t likely need them). Test applications thoroughly on OpenJDK in a staging environment – regression test for functionality and load test for performance. The transition should be transparent in nearly all cases, but diligence here ensures confidence. Leverage available guides and community knowledge on migrating to OpenJDK. Many organizations report completing migrations within 6–12 months, so set a realistic timeline that balances speed with caution.
7. Secure Support for Your OpenJDK Environment: While OpenJDK is free, consider how you will handle updates and issue resolution. Decide if in-house staff will manage updates, or if you want to purchase a support subscription from a vendor (or use a mix of both). Third-party support can be very cost-effective and gives you 24×7 help if something goes wrong, which can reassure management. GlobalRetailCo’s approach was to use a vendor for production support and rely on community/internal efforts elsewhere, striking a balance. If you engage a support vendor, negotiate terms and price aggressively – you have leverage since multiple companies provide OpenJDK support (unlike Oracle, which was a sole source). Also, plan your patching process for security updates (many vendors release synced patches on a public update schedule).
8. Manage the Transition Away from Oracle Tactfully: When you are ready to migrate, inform your Oracle account team of your intent to reduce or not renew Java licenses. Be prepared for counter-arguments or offers; stick to the fact that the cost is unsustainable and alternatives meet your needs. If you need to maintain a small number of Oracle JDK instances (for legacy compatibility), see if Oracle will allow a small-scale subscription (though the new model may not easily accommodate that). Companies have sometimes negotiated custom terms or relied on older agreements to cover limited use. Involve your legal team to explore these if needed. However, aim to minimize any continued Oracle JDK footprint to avoid opening the door to future compliance issues.
9. Monitor and Celebrate Post-Migration Results: After completing the switch, track the outcomes. Ensure all old Oracle installations are removed or retired to prevent accidental usage. Monitor application performance and stability closely for a few release cycles – you’ll likely find it unchanged, which is a win to publicize. Calculate the exact cost savings achieved and report that to leadership. Also, highlight intangible gains like risk reduction. Documenting the success is important, as this builds confidence for future tech independence moves. For instance, GlobalRetailCo shared internally that they saved millions and improved their flexibility, framing it as a modernization story. Positive results will validate your decision and make it easier to undertake similar initiatives.
10. Stay Informed on Java Roadmaps: Finally, keep abreast of Java developments even after migrating. Oracle’s policies may continue to evolve, and new OpenJDK distributions or support offerings may emerge (e.g., Microsoft entering the fray with its build). Keep your options open – one advantage of being on OpenJDK is that you can evaluate and shift to new distributions if they offer better support or features. Also track the Java release roadmap (LTS versions, etc.) and align your upgrade plans accordingly, using the freedom you now have to upgrade on your timetable. By staying informed, you ensure your organization remains on a secure and cost-effective Java path for the long term.

Conclusion: Migrating from Oracle Java to OpenJDK is a highly achievable and often financially prudent move for large enterprises. GlobalRetailCo’s case demonstrates that with careful planning and stakeholder engagement, even a company with 100,000 employees can execute this transition within a year and reap substantial rewards.

The key drivers – licensing costs and compliance risk – are effectively addressed by an OpenJDK strategy, all while maintaining the reliability and performance that enterprise Java workloads demand. The message for CIOs and procurement leaders is clear: you do not have to pay the “Java tax” to Oracle to run your business-critical systems. Viable, vendor-neutral alternatives exist that can meet your technical needs and favor your IT budget.

Taking a customer-centric, independent approach can turn a vendor-driven change into an opportunity to optimize and future-proof your Java estate.