tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post5342643660224394169..comments2024-03-11T10:18:55.852-05:00Comments on Headius: My Thoughts on Oracle v GoogleCharles Oliver Nutterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06400331959739924670noreply@blogger.comBlogger109125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-25467418738675959942010-12-24T01:00:48.183-06:002010-12-24T01:00:48.183-06:00Very interesting and informative in deed. Thanks f...Very interesting and informative in deed. Thanks for sharing your opinions.Ogun TIGLIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02261348571919724941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-37180843447741555922010-11-12T11:07:24.949-06:002010-11-12T11:07:24.949-06:00Hello charles,
its been a while now.
How about...Hello charles, <br /><br />its been a while now. <br /><br />How about an Update?<br /><br />Looks like google is going to bust somebodies nuts. They have a very deady strategy and its going cost the frivolous offender a heavy toll. <br /><br />Actually I think LPOD has maneuvered himself out of a Job, he has become an obvious liability. <br /><br />What would be very cool is a high level strategic alliance between SAP, Google and HP even if it were only informal one. <br /><br />CheersAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-53565597020230909122010-11-09T05:08:29.173-06:002010-11-09T05:08:29.173-06:00good post thank yougood post thank youanehra63http://webhostingreview.infonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-76246510700844716832010-10-29T09:10:01.424-05:002010-10-29T09:10:01.424-05:00What a disgusting article.
4000 words instead of ...What a disgusting article.<br /><br />4000 words instead of a paragraph stating that you know all about java.<br /><br />More bleating about what the patents mean.<br /><br />No discussion on the rest of the suit.<br /><br />No research.<br /><br />I asked a patent attorney at my company what he thought of it, and you know what he said: "It depends on how long Oracle wants to drag it out"<br /><br />Now get back to your petty coding while the adults drum up customers.<br /><br />Don't take that the wrong way :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-37933912892053036522010-09-19T01:39:06.734-05:002010-09-19T01:39:06.734-05:00Excellent post! thanks.Excellent post! thanks.Jayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05252300016332171402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-78744264404656752582010-09-16T18:53:05.468-05:002010-09-16T18:53:05.468-05:00Fantastic article.
It would seem that everybody w...Fantastic article.<br /><br />It would seem that everybody wants a slice of the pie that is Android and its phenomenal success.<br /><br />What's the bet that had Android failed, Oracle would not be pursuing this case?Lawrencehttp://www.baxterip.com.aunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-62486495593726252932010-09-08T13:35:40.247-05:002010-09-08T13:35:40.247-05:00Larry: I won't go into great detail, but none ...Larry: I won't go into great detail, but none of the VMs you list come anywhere near to current JVMs for robustness of GC, optimization, threading and more. And LLVM is really just a compiler framework (albeit a very nice one). I'm sure the JVM is going to remain the strongest VM option for many years to come, and I hope I'm able to help keep it moving forward.<br /><br />Also, JRuby has managed to do great things for Ruby without VM-level dynlang support. We're looking forward to Java 7 and invokedynamic, but I know we can do a lot to improve JRuby on Java 6 too.Charles Oliver Nutterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06400331959739924670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-48170292974356196672010-09-08T13:25:36.079-05:002010-09-08T13:25:36.079-05:00Thanks for a very thought provoking blog ...
Some...Thanks for a very thought provoking blog ...<br /><br />Somewhat off topic, I was very interested in your remarks ecapsulated by the quote: <br /><br />"You see, many of us at Sun had been actively trying to change the perception of the platform from that of a corporate, enterprisey, closed world to that of a great VM with a great OSS ecosystem and an open-source reference implementation"<br /><br />I have long, and increasingly, thought that the value of the JVM as a platform has been overlooked (not by you and the JRuby team) <br /><br />As we continue to see advances (and predictions thereof) in server hardware trends and distributed computing models it seems like the JVM is an ever better fit for distributed systems with large physical memories, CMP, faster interconnect, and distributed computation ...<br /><br />It seems as though we really need JDK 7 for both dynamic language support in the JVM and perhaps also for language level features such as closures.<br /><br />How do you think the JVM compares to Rubinus or V8 or other technologies such as LLVM?Larry Cablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04347398978168612489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-54738369589869566412010-09-08T03:27:13.985-05:002010-09-08T03:27:13.985-05:00Nice article! The best so far on the subject.Nice article! The best so far on the subject.My Open Source Software Development Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03159373258525179787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-5168965294333524552010-08-29T00:01:58.077-05:002010-08-29T00:01:58.077-05:00Nice read.
I would like to know your thoughts on t...Nice read.<br />I would like to know your thoughts on the where Java(in general, non-android) is headed.<br />Not just from the Oracle takeover perspective. Are we going to see a lot of added cost by some sort of new licenses from Oracle? <br />Technically, Java has already stagnated a lot. Will this improve? Oracle is not a company that is known for innovations. Is Java's future bright?<br />I think you should have an article on this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-58413283517672694932010-08-26T03:39:21.777-05:002010-08-26T03:39:21.777-05:00Google did not argue against software patents in r...Google did not argue against software patents in re Bilski. <a href="http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/08/googles-bilski-brief-didnt-advocate.html" rel="nofollow">Here's an analysis of the brief Google submitted</a> to the US Supreme Court jointly with some financial services companies. It stops <b>far</b> short of arguing that software shouldn't be patentable. It just says some software patents are too abstract, some are too "conventional", but of course, Google's own patents would not be affected by what they proposed. Not at all.Florian Muellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13298342449544124176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-60414410290655673582010-08-25T08:09:13.884-05:002010-08-25T08:09:13.884-05:00<< What Might Happen? >>
I don't t...<< What Might Happen? >><br />I don't think its enough to just defend, sometimes a sufficiently wicked offensive is the best defense of all. <br /><br />If somebody starts feeling some pain close to home it might make them downright peaceful. <br /><br />There are so many ways to do this as there are in the art of war.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-35651004389741522792010-08-25T07:45:31.669-05:002010-08-25T07:45:31.669-05:00I have written a short post on the copyright aspec...I have written a short post on the copyright aspect of the case, especially as it applies to the specifications involved. If you are interested it is <a href="http://www.spyfoos.com/index.php/2010/08/24/oracle-vs-google-implementing-the-java-specification/" rel="nofollow">here</a>maaclhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03957062577673090902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-18366076290176372412010-08-25T07:43:11.604-05:002010-08-25T07:43:11.604-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.maaclhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03957062577673090902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-28375963350296635602010-08-25T07:37:23.677-05:002010-08-25T07:37:23.677-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.maaclhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03957062577673090902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-65610533418635771392010-08-24T12:09:29.677-05:002010-08-24T12:09:29.677-05:00here's a sketch of a fairness argument support...here's a sketch of a fairness argument supporting Oracle's suit. first, Sun spent a lot of money developing Java. A lot. Sun struck a balanced approach for those interested in using Java: share everything you derive from Java, or take a license. Google imitated or cloned much of Java, but didnt' take a license, and didn't make their code available as opensource. Sun-Oracle sues Google for taking some of the benefit of Sun's investment in Java without paying. Google in effect jumped the turnstyle.<br /><br />When you inject product into the marketplace, you have to consider fairness to competitors. Legal realities aside, Google, a profitable company, should have just licensed Java (EE?) like so many other players in the marketplace. If they wanted a homemade "hybrid" JVM that is compatible yet built in ways google prefers, that's fine, but take a license from Sun-Oracle, as many others have. Java didn't appear out of thin air, and it is undeniable that there are some fine unobvious innovations introduced by Sun (why is Java successfuly anyway? because it's wholly lacking in novelty?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-86197774666880552642010-08-21T17:21:08.391-05:002010-08-21T17:21:08.391-05:00The Open Invention Network (OIN) and its allies no...The Open Invention Network (OIN) and its allies now try to create confusion about whether the fact that Sun never signed the OIN patent agreement (which Oracle and Google did sign) plays a role. I've <a href="http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/08/open-invention-network-oin-oracle-vs.html" rel="nofollow">commented on this matter and other OIN-related aspects of the dispute on my blog</a>. The bottom line is that Oracle's acquisition of Sun made Sun's patents part of the OIN pool, but it doesn't help Google because Dalvik doesn't fall under the OIN's scope.Florian Muellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13298342449544124176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-51316728410112206222010-08-21T07:25:33.285-05:002010-08-21T07:25:33.285-05:00Thanks for a decent review of this issue. As an O...Thanks for a decent review of this issue. As an Oracle employee and a programmer, this wasn't the best news I've ever seen. I still can't believe we bought Sun. I wish your blog post had been the focus on Slashdot instead of the drivel that was used as the article basis. One detail that I've seen is that there were a lot of Sun "defectors" over to Google. Conventional wisdom is someone violated an NDA and provided technique from existing, proprietary code. Which, if even remotely true, means the code monkeys out there (hey, guys) really can leave a footprint on the moon of a boardroom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-78529942436578684442010-08-20T21:41:10.116-05:002010-08-20T21:41:10.116-05:00@headius: you really try to be neutral on that ma...@headius: you really try to be neutral on that matter, and this post is really the most extensive and fair account I read about that matter.<br /><br />However, even if I also think that software patents only work to prevent any innovation, I think that a few things must be stated here (my only POV of course):<br /><br />1) On a moral point of view, regardless of patents, google does not stand on high grounds at all. They took a Java Open Source implementation that was free and happened to be on an Apache licence, + the Dalvik trick, because they wanted nothing to do with Sun, they even did not warn them on what they would do. I presume Sun execs knew of this as eveyone. They wanted to save money, and they wanted to have total control. And they succeeded, even in the view of peole. Even now everyone praise Android to be a huge leap foward in the Java world,completely forgetting that none of this would have happened i Sun had not invest lots of lots of money and time in the Java platform.<br /><br />2) This move from Google may have precipitated the end of Sun. JavaME licences one were one of the only profits Sun could make with Java, Sun could gain nohing with Android because google made it that they had no part in it at all, so their propective future profits were very dim<br /><br />3) Had Sun been bought by IBM qnd bnot Oracle, all would probably have ended the same way. Harmony was mainly an IBM effort to gain control over the Java future, shattered by the fact that it became LGPL.<br /><br />4) It would have been very simple for google to work with Sun on the Java part in Android, but they thought (like for a lot of other matters), that they could do as they pleased and that they could just take the ideas and the code and dont give back anything to anybody. At the end they have this huge problem because they were too much greedy and were alright to take but not to give anything in return.<br /><br />5) For us Java users and developers, using a different bytecode and not base the code on the reference implementation is really a big hassle. As usual, and ;aybe as for Linux zere they did the same thing, there is no real way to the main JavaSE line and the Android fork of Harmony to align sometime in the future. This is a waste of money and a waste of time. <br /><br />So qt the end, even if I really thing software patents are not a good thing I still thing that Google deserve what happens now.Herve Girodhttp://incanusonrails.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-54547257800368755852010-08-20T20:58:44.005-05:002010-08-20T20:58:44.005-05:00I think Oracle has a fiduciary duty to their share...<em>I think Oracle has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to have these lawsuits.</em><br /><br />Not if there is a good argument that it would be a net wash or a losing proposition in the long run. Oracle might lose more sales through ill will alone than this lawsuit gains them in licensing fees.Mark D.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-1253404509198995522010-08-20T13:40:02.479-05:002010-08-20T13:40:02.479-05:00i think the level of work and the professionalism ...i think the level of work and the professionalism of both groups make a big differenceSeo solutionhttp://www.promotionking.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-70515719776772756182010-08-20T13:37:05.251-05:002010-08-20T13:37:05.251-05:00Patents are rarely overturned on obviousness. It&#...Patents are rarely overturned on obviousness. It's so rare it's not even worth looking at normally, consider for example 'one click purchase.'<br /><br />Prior art is usually not easy to find either, and you have to look at the claims and find something that matches them exactly. The claims are all that matter. Andrew Tridgell made a presentation on how programmers can deal with patents from a legal perspective here: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/03/24/022209/Tridgell-Recommends-Reading-Software-Patentsphantomfivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12825051005762309891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-87148813640980971752010-08-20T12:32:12.613-05:002010-08-20T12:32:12.613-05:00Great article and saved.
Google bought Android wh...Great article and saved.<br /><br />Google bought Android which most people don't seem to know. More details about that as well as the sale of Dalvik before and after would be very useful.<br /><br />The problem with Android app development is developers mostly seem to do it for fun because there is no clear profit path yet. This does not help that situation at all.<br /><br />People like Google/Android but hardly anyone really likes Oracle. So you see a lot of knee jerk reactions because people don't want Android messed with. But I think Oracle has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to have these lawsuits. Thats life in the big city.<br /><br />Google is not your firend and never has been. if you were not aware of that before then you should be now with their scheming with VerizonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-50199321281537865402010-08-20T11:15:03.149-05:002010-08-20T11:15:03.149-05:00<< The UCSD p-System used to allow mixed mod...<< The UCSD p-System used to allow mixed mode execution. You could mark sections of code that could later be compiled to native code when deployed on a physical machine. >><br /><br />Are there more specifics and sources for that one?<br /><br />All the groudbreaking conceptual and inventive work for VM's, Emulators, incremental compilers was pretty much done in the 70's already, thats how old these techniques are. Nothing new here its all prior-art. Some of the more derivative stuff traces back to Xerox Parc, Smalltalk.<br /><br />I hope Google see's this thru, they could probably recover their costs just by selling the movie rights to this story.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20975090.post-70803265450046869012010-08-20T10:26:23.718-05:002010-08-20T10:26:23.718-05:00Excellent article. Just wanted to second what anon...Excellent article. Just wanted to second what anonymous said: J9 definitely _does_ have a mixed mode interpreter.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com