What is the difference between google's ImmutableList and Collections.unmodifiableList ()?

No, the immutability is only applied to the amount and references of the objects in the Collection, and does not address the mutability of objects you put in the Collection.

What Immutable list gains over the standard JDK Collections.unmodifiableList is that by using ImmutableList you are guaranteed that the objects referenced, their order and the size of the list cannot change from any source. With Collections.unmodifiableList if something else has a reference to the underlying list, that code can modify the list even though you have a reference to an unmodifiable list.

If, however, you want true immutability, you have to fill the list with immutable objects.

Using Collections.unmodifiableList creates a wrapper around your List. if the underlying list changes, so does your unmodifiableList's view.

As the documentation says, Google's code creates a copy. It's a more expensive computation and consumes more memory, but if someone alters the original list, it cant affect the ImmutableList.

Neither of these will prevent you from changing an object in a list, or it's fields, or fields of fields, etc.

ImmutableList is similar to Collections.unmodifiableList( new ArrayList( list ) ) . Note that the newly created ArrayList is not assigned to a field or variable.