Slashdot Mirror


The Case For Oracle

An anonymous reader writes "In a lucid writeup, InfoWorld's Neil McAllister takes a different angle on the Oracle-Google lawsuit, giving an explanation why Oracle was right to sue Google. McAllister argues that Google is splintering the Java platform, just like Microsoft was doing back in the 90s, and should be held up to the same standards. He further cites Google's Josh Bloch calling for Oracle to take a lead role in steering Java, concluding that Bloch maybe 'should have been more careful what he wished for.'"

8 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I think Google should solve this the easy way by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know why anyone ever suggests this. It would be suicide for Google. The moment they revealed they would even consider blocking search terms in retaliation for anything they're no longer trustworthy as a search engine.

  2. Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google isn't advertising Android as a Java platform. It's a platform that you can write code for in the Java language, yes, but this is a world away from claiming you're shipping "Java", and virtually no end users are under the impression Java has anything to do with the Java platform. Be very clear about this: no applications shipped as .jar (or .class) files for J2ME, J2SE, or J2EE, will run under Android, and nobody thinks they will.

    By comparison, Microsoft was shipping a supposedly compliant, but actually semi-incompatable, JVM with Windows that gave users and developers the idea it was a full implementation, which caused programs supposedly written for Java to often fail if either written for the Microsoft JVM and run under a standard stack, or vice versa.

    If this is the crux of the author's argument, he's an idiot. If Google is "fragmenting" Java by allowing you to write programs in the language for its platform, then I suppose every operating system author, from Microsoft to Commodore, has been "fragmenting" Unix by allowing you to write code in C for their non-Unix operating systems.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by diegocg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What Google has opted to do damages Oracle's trademark by referring to non-compatible software as Java language.

      Oracle disagrees with you. They aren't suing Google because of some trademark issue, they are doing it because of patent infringement. And the patents are more about the dalvik VM than about Java itself - .NET probably infringes those patents too, but Oracle probably won't take Microsoft to court.

      And there is nothing wrong with "forking" Java. What's the problem with the Dalvik VM and the Harmony classes? Maybe it can replace Oracle's Java in the embedded market? Well, I think that's better than letting C# kill Java, like Sun has been doing in the last years.

    2. Re:Not remotely similar to the Microsoft situation by ADRA · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Firstly, on a strictly legal sense, they're suing over Patents and Copyrights. The copyright route seems rather fishy, and I wouldn't be surprised if this argument gets dropped later. The patent suit is like all others, and has little if anything to do with the spirit of java, etc..

      On a philosophical sense, Oracle is correct. Android may never claim to be Java, but anyone who isn't a retard knows that Google is enticing Java developers into their pseudo-compatible platforms. From a personal perspective, it is annoying porting existing java apps into AppEngine / Android. The standard class libs limitations make interoperability between stock java and Google's platforms more difficult. This IS similar to the tack that Microsoft made proprietary core feature additions. Microsoft was never forced to use Java when coming up with their proprietary JVM. They chose java because it had buzz, and they assumed it would be next good language to assimilate and conquer. I don't think Google wants to kill Java, but I think they want to steal the large pool of existing Java developers and coerce them to use their platforms. Does this diversity hurt java (the language) in the end? Yes. Much of the advantage of java is in the rich set of additions built upon existing platforms. If those libraries now have to choose which platform to track against, it means two versions of common libraries, and smaller guys may just not bother to support J2SE,Android,AppEngine,GWT, etc...

      --
      Bye!
  3. What the hell is he talking about? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    McAllister argues that Google is splintering the Java platform, just like Microsoft was doing back in the 90s, and should be held up to the same standards.

    What the hell does that mean? Microsoft got sued because it failed to live up to a contract (huge surprise there.) There are no contractual issues here, so far as I'm aware (if I'm wrong someone please correct me.)

    Java isn't some religious manuscript that needs to be kept "pure" so the true believers won't rise up and slay those who would adulterate it. It's a goddamn PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE. If Oracle is suing Google, it has nothing whatsoever to do with Java being held to some standard (I could believe that of Sun, who held a certain vision for their progeny and a justifiable pride in their work) but is part of a some strategic plan. Matter of fact, that was Sun's strategy: keep Java consistent across all platforms so that "write once, run anywhere" would work. Do you really think that is a part of Oracle's planning? Is it even of the slightest concern?

    Larry Ellison is a lot of things (I've heard appellations such as "real son of a bitch", "bastard", and "prick" applied to him on a regular basis) but he's not exactly a visionary. This is about money and access to specific markets, and trying to spin it as being about the welfare of the Java programming language is ridiculous. If I were a real conspiracy theorist I would have to wonder if one of Google's real competitors in the advertising space were behind this, but I'm not. I leave that to other posters.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  4. MOD PARENT UP PLEASE by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wish that I had mod points left. I would modded you up. The fact is, that if Google were to do what the GP did, well, that would make them JUST LIKE MS. That is why MS was sued, and lost. The last thing that Google needs to do is something that stupid. It helps in the short term, but kills in the long.

    However, Google does not have to help Oracle either. And if I were Google, I would start exploring, along with the other phone companies, another VM. And let it slip that they are now exploring a different route for ALL OF THE SMART PHONES AND PHONES. At that point, Oracle will become VERY concerned about the idea of losing that market. Sun had the same issue. Wanted to make LOTS of money, and they were not content to simply control it as well as be the top money maker. They wanted the largest profits possible in the shortest time. That approach is what Oracle is doing.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  5. Dalvik is not a Java VM by liloldme · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I stopped reading right where it said Dalvik is Java based. It doesn't even run Java byte codes...

    Is it a requirement for a tech reporter to be completely clueless? Is not doing basic research part of the job requirement?

    Following this logic Google Web Toolkit is "Java-based" too. Nevermind that the whole thing compiles to HTML and JavaScript.

    Just because Google provides language bindings in Java (and is able to cross-compile the Java class libraries to another runtime), does not make Dalvik runtime "Java-based". It does mean Google is able to leverage existing developer base on their new platform though. Smart move.

    What's next, Oracle going to sue GCJ for compiling Java to native?

  6. Re:I think Oracle is right by oiron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trademark: irrelevant as long as Google doesn't call it Java

    Copyright: irrelevant as long as Google doesn't use Java code (or infringe other material published under copyright)

    Patents: well, that's what Oracle's suing about; the veracity of their claims is yet to be demonstrated