为清晰起见，经过编辑。OSGi页面给出了一个比我更好的简单答案

一个简单的答案:OSGi服务平台为协作网络服务提供了一个标准化的、面向组件的计算环境。这种体系结构显著降低了构建、维护和部署应用程序的整体复杂性。 OSGi服务平台提供了在各种网络的设备上动态改变组合的功能，不需要重新启动。

在单个应用程序结构中，比如Eclipse IDE，在安装新插件时重新启动并不是什么大问题。完全使用OSGi实现，您应该能够在运行时添加插件，获得新功能，而完全不需要重新启动eclipse。

同样，这不是每天都要做的大事，只是应用程序的小用途。

但是，当你开始研究多计算机、分布式应用框架时，这就是它开始变得有趣的地方。当关键系统必须有100%的正常运行时间时，热插拔组件或在运行时添加新功能的能力非常有用。当然，现在大多数情况下都有这样做的能力，但是OSGi正试图将所有东西捆绑到一个具有公共接口的漂亮的小框架中。

OSGi能解决常见问题吗，我不确定。我的意思是，它可以，但对于更简单的问题，开销可能不值得。但是当您开始处理更大的、网络化的应用程序时，需要考虑这一点。

You can, analogically speaking, change the motor of your car without turning it off. You can customize complex systems for the customers. See the power of Eclipse. You can reuse entire components. Better than just objects. You use a stable platform to develop component based Applications. The benefits of this are huge. You can build Components with the black box concept. Other components don't need to know about hidden interfaces, them see just the published interfaces. You can use in the same system several equal components, but in different releases, without compromise the application. OSGi solves the Jar Hell problem. With OSGi you develop thinking to architect systems with CBD

对于使用Java的每个人来说，有很多好处(我现在只提醒了这些)。

OSGi提供了以下好处:

■基于Java的可移植安全执行环境

■服务管理系统，可用于跨包注册和共享服务，并将服务提供者与服务消费者分离

■动态模块系统，可用于动态安装和卸载 Java模块，OSGi称之为包

轻量级和可扩展的解决方案

I don't care too much about the hotplugability of OSGi modules (at least currently). It's more the enforced modularity. Not having millions of "public" classes available on the classpath at any time protects well from circular dependencies: You have to really think about your public interfaces - not just in terms of the java language construct "public", but in terms of your library/module: What (exactly) are the components, that you want to make available for others? What (exactly) are the interfaces (of other modules) you really need to implement your functionality?

这很好，热插拔是附带的，但我宁愿重新启动我通常的应用程序，而不是测试所有的热插拔组合…

我发现OSGi有以下好处:

每个插件都是一个版本化的工件，它有自己的类加载器。 每个插件都依赖于它所包含的特定jar和其他特定版本的插件。 由于版本控制和隔离的类加载器，同一工件的不同版本可以同时加载。如果应用程序的一个组件依赖于插件的一个版本，而另一个组件依赖于另一个版本，那么它们可以同时加载。

这样，您就可以将应用程序构建为一组按需加载的版本化插件构件。每个插件都是一个独立的组件。就像Maven帮助您构建构建，使其可重复，并由创建它的工件的一组特定版本定义一样，OSGi帮助您在运行时完成这一点。

我还不是OSGi的“粉丝”…

我一直在财富100强公司使用企业应用程序。最近，我们使用的产品已经“升级”为OSGi实现。

启动本地cba部署… [2/18/14 8:47:23 727 EST] 00000347 CheckForOasis

最终部署，“以下包将暂停，然后重新启动” 00000143 AriesApplicat I CWSAI0054I:作为应用程序更新操作的一部分

51分钟……每次代码改变…以前的版本(非osgi)在旧的开发机器上部署不到5分钟。

在一台有16g内存和40g空闲磁盘和Intel i5-3437U 1.9 GHz CPU的机器上

The "benefit" of this upgrade was sold as improving (production) deployments - an activity that we do about 4 times a year with maybe 2-4 small fix deployments a year. Adding 45 minutes per day to 15 people (QA and developers) I can't imagine ever being justified. In big enterprise applications, if your application is a core application, then changing it is, rightly so (small changes have potential for far reaching impacts - must be communicated and planned with consumers all over the enterprise), a monumental activity - wrong architecture for OSGi. If your application is not an enterprise application - i.e. each consumer can have their own tailored module likely hitting their own silo of data in their own silo'd database and running on a server that hosts many applications, then maybe look at OSGi. At least, that is my experience thus far.