That's the whole case. There's no Java license or trademark involved.
Two enormous differences with the Sun/Microsoft case: 1-- Everything Google built for Android is open-sourced; 2-- No Java license is involved
Google built a VM called Dalvik. Like the Java and.Net VM's, it can run code written in a number of languages, including the Java language. That patents at issue are not related specifically to the Java language, but they do cover common techniques in VM implementation, and if upheld could threaten other VM implementations.
Reading the TFA, it looks like they went to some trouble to model some specific brain structures and synapse properties, including inter-area connectivity and learning, in the model. So it's not "Just a big neural net." However the accuracy of the simulation is limited--both by what we know about the detailed structure of the cat's brain and by the number and complexity of the structures they decided to model.
A non-standard compiler extension that is guaranteed to be supported by the vendor's compilers is pretty much the definition of vendor lock-in, even if the implementation is open-sourced.
If other compiler vendors don't pick it up (and they won't with a standards-based alternative) all code that uses it becomes tied to the vendor.
I'll plug my own open-source project for this:
Browse-by-Query-- it won't help with C/C++(sorry for the original questioner), but it will handle Java or C#.
It dumps the code into a database and lets you query it to find the relationships.
I'm biased, of course, but I've found it's just the thing to understand how a particular piece of functionality in an unfamiliar code base fits into the big picture.
Note that the hypervisor doesn't prevent you from updating the GPL code (the Linux kernel, for example)-- it just prevents you from getting extra access to the machine by updating the code. Thus it allows "tivoization" without violating the letter (or arguably the spirit) of GPL v3. The GPL code you can hack and modify to your heart's content; the hypervisor just makes sure that said hacking doesn't compromise the machine.
Yes, the distinction that they are probably trying to make is that between procedural or algorithmic content generation and the more common situation where content is created individually by artists.
The talk about procedural versus object-oriented programming is moronic bs.
You can fly over all of Mars in realtime 3D/OpenGL with data from the Mars Orbiter MOLA experiment. These flyovers have much nicer hi-res textures, though. http://www.antlersoft.com/demo3d/mars/index.html/
Runs in Linux and MS-Windows and it's open-source, as well.
Having one of the devices in question, I can say that it definitively does have copy protection. There's no way to get the recorded songs off the device: hook the device up to a PC, and you can see the songs are there but you can't play or copy them.
So out of 14,000,000 work hours, 100,000 are lost to frivolous web browsing? That's less than 1%, or less than 5 minutes per person per day. That's remarkably low; the government should be congratulated on effectively policing internet use.
The numbers only look big because there are so many employees in the study.
To plug a personal project of mine-- Browse-by-Query
is a database for code with a query language specifically designed for finding things in code.
I was dissatisfied with fixed-function browsers, so I developed this.
Use expressions more powerful than regular expressions to search through and understand your codebase.
Works only with Java now (there's a standalone version and Eclipse plugin) but I hope I (or someone else) will extend it to others.
Open-source real-time 3d version of mars data
on
Google Goes to Mars
·
· Score: 1
Realtime 3d renders of global Mars MOLA data are here.
It's a Java Web Start app with OpenGL, and will run from most browsers in Windows and Linux (including Linux on AMD 64).
Mars data wants to be free--and in 3D
on
Google Moon Debuts
·
· Score: 1
and open-source
Mars MOLA Viewer
Fly through 3D rendered topographic data, global coverage, launches from your browser (Java Web Start), Linux and Windows compatible
Mars? GPL, Mars in 3D from your browser here
on
Google Moon Debuts
·
· Score: 1
The Mars Orbiter Laser Alitimeter experiment carried on the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft produced a topographic map of the entire surface of Mars. The data for this map is available on the Internet. The Mars MOLA Viewer will download this data for you and render it as a 3-D landscape which you can "fly" through in real-time.
It's open source (GPL), and will launch from your browser (with Java Web Start).
Lots of the problems people have had with stored procedures are because stored procedure languages have sucked. Now RDBMS' are giving you the option of writing stored procedures in real, OO languages that are familiar to most of your developers, Java and C# soon if you've drunk the.Net Kool-Aid. If you decide that portability is an issue (most people don't) and you code carefully, you don't have to decide where the code executes (app server or DBMS) until run-time.
ATI bought the guys who did the chip for the Gamecube, and they did clean paper DX9 design for ATI. ATI went from being a year behind NVidia (DX8 generation) to being a year ahead.
In the R300, ATI decided to do all their calculations in 24 bit floating point: essentially a pure next-gen chip. The NVidia Geforce FX design was based on their DX8 chips, which were far and away industry leaders in fixed-point calculations; NVidia didn't figure that floating-point performance would be very important this generation and tacked it on. What they ended up with was a chip that had a high transistor count, was very good at legacy, fixed-point operations but could not keep up with ATI in floating point. Even then (about a year ago) NVidia's chip might have been competitive but they had process problems that made the chip clock slower than expected and about 9 months late.
ATI's superiority in floating point shaders has been demonstrated by various benchmarks (including some open-source benchmarks, which are the only ones I really take seriously) time and again. NVidia can only be competitive this generation when they 'tweak' their drivers for particular benchmarks. These tweaks sometimes consist of rewriting floating-point shaders to use their legacy fixed-point functionality, and on some occasions of even using pre-generated shadow models to replace the dynamically generated models of benchmarks that run over a known scene.
NVidia's NV3x generation seems weak, compared to ATI, and very weak unless game coders ignore API standards and write custom shaders that do as much as possible in NVidia's legacy hardware. Of course, by historical standards NVidia's NV3x isn't weak at all--they blow away all their competitors and ATI's pre-R300 products. It's just that the design choices made by ATI's new designers allowed them to leapfrog a generation.
In looking at hosting providers, I haven't seen much difference in cost, but I certainly have in capabilities... with the Microsoft providers offering far more for the dollar. SQL Server instead of mySQL, better email support, etc. For whatever reason, software licensing savings doesn't seem to give the Linux providers much of an edge.
Actually, the service providers I've seen charge 20-50% less for Linux hosting than for Windows. SQL Server may be better for some apps than MySQL, but for the types of applications best served by hosting providers it's hard to beat PHP/MySQL. I can't see how the e-mail services provided would be significantly different.
So in the end, I think the hosting provider does pass the licensing savings on to you, and you get more bang for the buck with a Linux host. That may explain why there are so many Linux hosts out there.
Yes. They seem to be arguing that any Unix licensee that makes any contribution to Linux is in violation of their license, since any contribution to Linux is to the detriment of Unix. This is, of course, ridiculous on its face.
Basically, I think the revisions in the suit mean that SCO knows it has no real case at all. Trotting out export violations as a violation of the Unix license is a sure sign they have nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
Two enormous differences with the Sun/Microsoft case: 1-- Everything Google built for Android is open-sourced; 2-- No Java license is involved
Google built a VM called Dalvik. Like the Java and .Net VM's, it can run code written in a number of languages, including the Java language. That patents at issue are not related specifically to the Java language, but they do cover common techniques in VM implementation, and if upheld could threaten other VM implementations.
I meant to say "the actual paper" instead of TFA. You can't tell anything from the article linked.
Reading the TFA, it looks like they went to some trouble to model some specific brain structures and synapse properties, including inter-area connectivity and learning, in the model. So it's not "Just a big neural net." However the accuracy of the simulation is limited--both by what we know about the detailed structure of the cat's brain and by the number and complexity of the structures they decided to model.
Unfortunately, Google's mission "Don't be evil" fundamentally conflicts with Verizon's "Be evil".
A non-standard compiler extension that is guaranteed to be supported by the vendor's compilers is pretty much the definition of vendor lock-in, even if the implementation is open-sourced. If other compiler vendors don't pick it up (and they won't with a standards-based alternative) all code that uses it becomes tied to the vendor.
I'll plug my own open-source project for this:
Browse-by-Query-- it won't help with C/C++(sorry for the original questioner), but it will handle Java or C#.
It dumps the code into a database and lets you query it to find the relationships.
I'm biased, of course, but I've found it's just the thing to understand how a particular piece of functionality in an unfamiliar code base fits into the big picture.
Note that the hypervisor doesn't prevent you from updating the GPL code (the Linux kernel, for example)--
it just prevents you from getting extra access to the machine by updating the code. Thus it allows "tivoization" without violating the letter (or arguably the spirit) of GPL v3. The GPL code you can hack and modify to your heart's content; the hypervisor just makes sure that said hacking doesn't compromise the machine.
Yes, the distinction that they are probably trying to make is that between procedural or algorithmic content generation and the more common situation where content is created individually by artists.
The talk about procedural versus object-oriented programming is moronic bs.
You can fly over all of Mars in realtime 3D/OpenGL with data from the Mars Orbiter MOLA experiment. These flyovers have much nicer hi-res textures, though.
http://www.antlersoft.com/demo3d/mars/index.html/
Runs in Linux and MS-Windows and it's open-source, as well.
Having one of the devices in question, I can say that it definitively does have copy protection. There's no way to get the recorded songs off the device: hook the device up to a PC, and you can see the songs are there but you can't play or copy them.
So out of 14,000,000 work hours, 100,000 are lost to frivolous web browsing? That's less than 1%, or less than 5 minutes per person per day. That's remarkably low; the government should be congratulated on effectively policing internet use. The numbers only look big because there are so many employees in the study.
To plug a personal project of mine--
Browse-by-Query is a database for code with a query language specifically designed for finding things in code.
I was dissatisfied with fixed-function browsers, so I developed this.
Use expressions more powerful than regular expressions to search through and understand your codebase.
Works only with Java now (there's a standalone version and Eclipse plugin) but I hope I (or someone else) will extend it to others.
Realtime 3d renders of global Mars MOLA data are here. It's a Java Web Start app with OpenGL, and will run from most browsers in Windows and Linux (including Linux on AMD 64).
Try my Java web-start version with the global MOLA data.
Has been up for a couple of years here.
Launches from the browser in Linux (386) and windows
http://www.antlersoft.com/demo3d/mars/index.html/
and open-source Mars MOLA Viewer Fly through 3D rendered topographic data, global coverage, launches from your browser (Java Web Start), Linux and Windows compatible
The Mars Orbiter Laser Alitimeter experiment carried on the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft produced a topographic map of the entire surface of Mars. The data for this map is available on the Internet. The Mars MOLA Viewer will download this data for you and render it as a 3-D landscape which you can "fly" through in real-time.
It's open source (GPL), and will launch from your browser (with Java Web Start).
Mars MOLA Viewer is 3D, and it's open source too. Linux and Windows compatible (with appropriate OpenGL drivers)
Try this-- it's open source, Linux and windows compatible, does need Java Web Start
Mars MOLA ViewerSince I've got the flyovers from satellite data down.
Lots of the problems people have had with stored procedures are because stored procedure languages have sucked. Now RDBMS' are giving you the option of writing stored procedures in real, OO languages that are familiar to most of your developers, Java and C# soon if you've drunk the .Net Kool-Aid. If you decide that portability is an issue (most people don't) and you code carefully, you don't have to decide where the code executes (app server or DBMS) until run-time.
ATI bought the guys who did the chip for the Gamecube, and they did clean paper DX9 design for ATI. ATI went from being a year behind NVidia (DX8 generation) to being a year ahead.
In the R300, ATI decided to do all their calculations in 24 bit floating point: essentially a pure next-gen chip. The NVidia Geforce FX design was based on their DX8 chips, which were far and away industry leaders in fixed-point calculations; NVidia didn't figure that floating-point performance would be very important this generation and tacked it on. What they ended up with was a chip that had a high transistor count, was very good at legacy, fixed-point operations but could not keep up with ATI in floating point. Even then (about a year ago) NVidia's chip might have been competitive but they had process problems that made the chip clock slower than expected and about 9 months late.
ATI's superiority in floating point shaders has been demonstrated by various benchmarks (including some open-source benchmarks, which are the only ones I really take seriously) time and again. NVidia can only be competitive this generation when they 'tweak' their drivers for particular benchmarks. These tweaks sometimes consist of rewriting floating-point shaders to use their legacy fixed-point functionality, and on some occasions of even using pre-generated shadow models to replace the dynamically generated models of benchmarks that run over a known scene.
NVidia's NV3x generation seems weak, compared to ATI, and very weak unless game coders ignore API standards and write custom shaders that do as much as possible in NVidia's legacy hardware. Of course, by historical standards NVidia's NV3x isn't weak at all--they blow away all their competitors and ATI's pre-R300 products. It's just that the design choices made by ATI's new designers allowed them to leapfrog a generation.
Actually, the service providers I've seen charge 20-50% less for Linux hosting than for Windows. SQL Server may be better for some apps than MySQL, but for the types of applications best served by hosting providers it's hard to beat PHP/MySQL. I can't see how the e-mail services provided would be significantly different.
So in the end, I think the hosting provider does pass the licensing savings on to you, and you get more bang for the buck with a Linux host. That may explain why there are so many Linux hosts out there.
Yes. They seem to be arguing that any Unix licensee that makes any contribution to Linux is in violation of their license, since any contribution to Linux is to the detriment of Unix. This is, of course, ridiculous on its face.
Basically, I think the revisions in the suit mean that SCO knows it has no real case at all. Trotting out export violations as a violation of the Unix license is a sure sign they have nothing.