[Raynes]

I never thought people could argue over companies like they do over languages. I was wrong.

Anyway, if Google is actually guilty of what they're accused of, end of story. It doesn't matter what I think of any of these companies, guilty is guilty is guilty. But I'm not a judge, so I'd much rather keep my mouth shut rather than pretend I am.

[baavgai]

Google went out of it's way to avoid restrictions imposed on them by Sun at the time. They sidestepped the restrictions in a way Sun never saw coming. Google's actions were very well considered and doubtless their legal department made sure they were covered from every possible direction.

Honestly, Oracle looks like it's posturing. Additionally, Google doesn't "sell" the software that would cause any potential infringement. They have no monetary gain from Android; at least, not directly. That's the problem with open source, there's often no head to attack. Oracle will have to establish Android does, well, something wrong. Then they'll have to abuse the biggest users. Probably Verizon.

This is the first move in an extortion play. It's sad. really.

[Tom9729]

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 06:45 PM, said:

It's time Google gets what's coming to them, it's time someone shows them they aren't special and they dont get to live by different rules than any other company does

It's really hard to take you seriously when you say things like this.

[Mike007]

@PsychoCoder - litigation is always a nasty thing. Moves like this always hurt the consumer and developers. That is why I am for google, and I do love that company, I would not deny it. But they have done a few wrong things (street view cars stealing wifi packets...), just not this time. How do you think this can benefit society?

In any case, you reminded me of this video here :
http://blindscientis...ll-you-to-buzz/

[macosxnerd101]

@PsychoCoder: Regardless of any (dis)favoritism towards a particular corporation, look at the ramifications economically and to the developers. Economically, think of the huge business in smartphones that the cellular providers do (providing jobs) as well as the App store and app sales. Just at my internship, I'm working on an Android app (and an iPhone equivalent is being developed as well) for the military. These two technologies have really pulled forward the market for smartphones.

Now for the developers, the Microsoft market for app development is (correct me if I'm wrong) just starting out. So if you remove Anrdoid as a player, you're left with Apple as the only major player, who hasn't done the best job with the hardware end of the smartphones. So unless Microsoft picks up the pace fast, you're left with more or less an Apple monopoly. Plus, a large Java community will be alienated.

Regardless of personal feelings about the corporations, the effects of Oracle winning the lawsuit would do more harm than good. If anything, Oracle should get behind Google so they both can benefit and provide hopefully a better product for consumers. Just my $.02.

[KYA]

I was looking the list of patents that were "infringed upon", none of them (thus far) appear to be anything Java related, in nature.

[PsychoCoder]

Tom9729, on 13 August 2010 - 04:04 PM, said:

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 06:45 PM, said:

It's time Google gets what's coming to them, it's time someone shows them they aren't special and they dont get to live by different rules than any other company does

It's really hard to take you seriously when you say things like this.

And why is this?

Google does think they dont have to follow the same set of laws/rules as everyone else. They think for some reason that because they're Google they can do what they want. I've not made it a secret that I despise Google (and Apple but that's for a different conversation) and at one point even laid out, point by point, why I despise them (So I'm not going into that again here) and I think they need to be brought down a notch or two.

I dont use Google products and it wouldn't hurt me one bit if they just disappeared (Not that that is ever going to happen). Remember one thing as you get ready to insult me, while I despise, them I dont insult those who use their products (nor Apple) I insult the company itself and that's a big difference.

Once again, this is really no different than what Microsoft did (and got sued for) but for some reason it's ok for Google to do it. They both circumvented the JVM and created their own version, but it's ok for Google?

[KYA]

Java was open sourced in May 2007. Microsoft's version of the JVM was written/sued in 1997. Android was unveiled in November 2007. There might be merit, but for the love of God please get your head out of your ass. It's embarrassing, you make the same argument without facts every thread.

Quote

Specifically, Microsoft made the choice last week to ship products it claims are fully Java 1.1 compliant, but which failed to pass the Java 1.1 compatibility tests the company received from Sun in February. "Microsoft embarked on a deliberate course of conduct to fragment Java," said Alan Baratz, president of JavaSoft, during a Sun teleconference today at 10:30 a.m. PST.

From here

As far as I know, and please correct me if I am wrong, android does not make the claim that it is fully Java 'X' compliant.

Quote

# The SDK is Java based. No surprise since they announced it but it is nice to see that this doesn't mean they are doing J2ME but instead use Java as the core implementation platform for all applications on the platform.
# The Linux kernel and native libraries are just there to run applications on top of Google's custom JVM Dalvik which is optimized for running on embedded hardware.
# Google has chosen to not implement full Java, any of the ME variants, or support for the many JSRs (mobile and others). This in my view very bad, unnecessary and will be a barrier to developer adoption.
# Instead a small subset of the Java API is implemented. Probably the closest is the J2ME CDC profile. So why not go all the way and save us developers a few headaches?

From here

[Tom9729]

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 08:37 PM, said:

Google does think they dont have to follow the same set of laws/rules as everyone else. They think for some reason that because they're Google they can do what they want.

The same argument can be made about any company.

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 08:37 PM, said:

I've not made it a secret that I despise Google (and Apple but that's for a different conversation) and at one point even laid out, point by point, why I despise them (So I'm not going into that again here) and I think they need to be brought down a notch or two.

I dont use Google products and it wouldn't hurt me one bit if they just disappeared (Not that that is ever going to happen). Remember one thing as you get ready to insult me, while I despise, them I dont insult those who use their products (nor Apple) I insult the company itself and that's a big difference.

I don't care.

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 08:37 PM, said:

Once again, this is really no different than what Microsoft did (and got sued for) but for some reason it's ok for Google to do it. They both circumvented the JVM and created their own version, but it's ok for Google?

Yep. I pointed this out earlier in the thread (Raynes pointed it out before me). I'm not siding with Google on this one as much as I dislike Oracle.

[Programmist]

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 04:45 PM, said:

It's time Google gets what's coming to them, it's time someone shows them they aren't special and they dont get to live by different rules than any other company does

It's odd how you talk about Google like it's a person. It's not like Google slept with your wife or kicked your dog or something. What's with the vendetta?

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 04:45 PM, said:

...and if it means it costs them millions of dollars then so be it, it wont affect me one bit

The effects could be much more than cost to Google. Just because something does not affect you does not mean it's unimportant or doesn't hurt other people (not just executives).

This post has been edited by Programmist: 14 August 2010 - 05:18 AM

[smacdav]

Thank you, KYA, for finally pointing out that Microsoft was circumventing something that was not open source while Google is working with an open source product; that makes a huge difference whether you like Google or not. Sun's objections to Android rested on the "fracturing" of Java causing difficulties for developers and violating the "write once, run anywhere" promise of Java. This is the same complaint they had against Microsoft, but in a very different environment. Java is now open source.

That said, J2ME is released under GPL (as is standard Java), but while the standard Java GPL includes a classpath exception that allows developers to link to the GPL code without release the software under GPL, the J2ME JPL does not have that exception, which is why Google decided to go another direction. Stephen Shankland at CNET news explained it pretty well, I think:

Quote

Google didn't like the terms under which Sun was offering Java, though, even though it was open-source software. It was governed by the GNU General Public License, and Google didn't want mobile phone makers to worry that using Android would force them to release their software's source code under that license's sharing provisions.

"The thing that worries me about GPL is this: suppose Samsung wants to build a phone that's different in features and functionality than (one from) LG. If everything on the phone was GPL, any applications or user interface enhancements that Samsung did, they would have to contribute back," said Andy Rubin, Google's Android engineering director, in a 2008 interview. "At the application layer, GPL doesn't work."

Sun had taken a more liberal approach with the "Standard Edition" of Java for PCs and servers, including a "classpath exception" that permitted programmers to link to GPL code without worrying whether that might require them to release it under the GPL.

But Sun didn't include the classpath exception in the Mobile Edition of Java, so mobile device companies that wanted to use Java--and there were many--often ended up paying for a more conventional license to use Sun's technology.

Source: http://news.cnet.com...ol;inTheNewsNow

Did Google violate any patents or copyrights in the process? I have no idea and I'll wait for the courts to rule on that one. (Not that the courts are always right, but that's another matter altogether.)

[tor.ment0r]

Quote

If anyone is happy to see one corporation sue another then I would say that person is either a fanboy or just has no sense. This is not good for anyone - except for possibly executives at Oracle and Apple.

Amen

[tor.ment0r]

Programmist, on 14 August 2010 - 04:06 AM, said:

PsychoCoder, on 13 August 2010 - 04:45 PM, said:

It's time Google gets what's coming to them, it's time someone shows them they aren't special and they dont get to live by different rules than any other company does

It's odd how you talk about Google like it's a person. It's not like Google slept with your wife or kicked your dog or something. What's with the vendetta?

that appears to be the case,

[SpeedisaVirus]

Mike007, on 14 August 2010 - 12:06 AM, said:

(street view cars stealing wifi packets...)

From everything I read they only had unprotected data. They never cracked/hacked/broke any encrypted in this collection. This is roughly equivalent to stealing broadcast radio. If anyone is worried someone might collect their wireless packets they should probably use some sort of secure scheme.

[Lemur]

Companies will doubtlessly do whatever possible to advance their own agendas, this has always been the case and will not change. Google did what they thought would benefit their product the most, there's no debate on that, but what is the case is the ethics of their move in line with Oracles agenda.

Anything is fair game in politics and corporations, the sooner one realizes that the sooner one can get somewhere.

There are two major rules to life:

It's who you know, not necessarily what you know
If it helps your company, no matter how underhanded, it will probably happen.