if Microsoft's sales of Windows and Office and their major server products actually depended on their sales of Visual Studio or their enterprise software lines
So you didn't read what I wrote at all. Not surprisingly. Yes, the sales of Office and Windows is tied closely to their sales of Enterprise Software going forward. As I described but you did not understand.
I think we can safely assume that I know what so-called enterprise tools are for
Apparently not.
The only point I was making was that Microsoft have a history of killing off development platforms
For the enterprise? Examples?
Who is talking about Java?
What is it about "around here" that stumps your comprehension glands?
tend to be tied up with the likes of SAP
And this is where Microsoft is fully aware that they have to muscle in or die. This is why Microsoft is spending so many resources on these areas at the moment, and that is where they use.NET. Again, look at the Microsoft Dynamics offerings. These currently expand at a very high pace, both in terms of features and resources and also market share.
Think about it, where do you think Microsoft is more concerned about stability and scalability in software? Word or CRM Online? Excel or Azure?
In short, if you're a Microsoft executive, the profitability of your company depends primarily on Office and Windows
Some time ago a person, a little bit like you, finished his Business education in the big city and move home to his small town. He wasn't able to find good work there, but the old movie theater was for sale. Given the price, he promptly bought it and decided to figure out how to make it profitable.
After playing with the numbers for a while he discovered that while the candy store on the first floor was making a significant profit, the movies them selves were making a significant loss. Being almost as smart as you he promptly decided to stop showing movies.
So no, it's not really a "significant portion" of the Microsoft Enterprise portfolio
If you don't know what Enterprise Software is, you really should try to close your mouth. Try figuring it out. You'll see TLAs like ERP, xRM etc. Office, for example, is not Enerprise Software, used by the enterprise though it is.
Go to http://www.microsoft.com/enterprise/ and find out what Microsoft is doing in that space. Try to find out what requirements Enterprise software like ERPs have. Then try to figure out why Microsoft would be using its Managed Software systems to build Enterprise Software.
We have been talking about Java around here, in the space that you so ignorantly list above, could you point to some typical Java solutions? Something above and beyond Eclipse? Something that actually would justify the enormous investment that such a huge part of the business world has done in Java? Where is all the Java software, where is the profit? Compared to most programming languages and systems, Java is gigantic. Enormous. Where is the software? Can you name any of it? Of course you can't. Compared to the investment in Java by the business world, there is no Java software out there that you have ever heard about.
Just for fun, try to do the same exercise as you just did but replace.NET or Java with COBOL. Where is all the COBOL software? Where is the profit? Compared to the enormous investment still being put into COBOL solutions, you have never heard of any software written in COBOL.
Why is it that you have never heard of these things? Because you are ignorant. A petulant child in the world of grown-up software systems and their developers.
Oh, and also take a look at the concept of "mission critical" and see how many of the Microsoft Apps you have heard about that fit that description (you have mentioned two above).
get back to me when Microsoft are actually building something they really care about on.Net
If you really think Microsoft is stupid enough to not care about their enterprise solutions, solutions that give Microsoft more or less unbreakable tie-ins with their customers, you are dumber than I thought, and believe you me, that would be hard.
How easy is it to move from Office to Open Office? Not that difficult, leaning towards easy. How difficult is it to move from a fully integrated solution consisting of Dynamics xRM, Share Point, Exchange and Office? Close to impossible.
If Microsoft stops caring about their enterprise customers, their Office sales will plummet. For every Share Point license Microsoft sells they guarantee years and years of continues Office sales. For every Dynamics CRM installation Microsoft sells they tie their customers to Exchange for years years. For every dollar some of these big enterprise invest in the Office software, they invest thousands of dollars in enterprise solutions, lots of them in-house. Here is a small example involving SAP. This is where Microsoft needs to play, or they will die, they know that.
You view of the world is quite limited. Broaden it.
Microsoft themselves have been reluctant to rely on it even for WM7 because of the performance implications
You can't be serious. Really? Please explain to all of us who thought that Silverlight was the development platform for Windows Phone 7 how Microsoft was reluctant to use.NET.
Wow. Let's see what they have under the ERP heading for Microsoft... Nothing? Why? Seems they are about as clueless as you are. How about under the heading of Web Sites... wait, doesn't Microsoft have web sites? How about Web2 frameworks? Hey! Where is WCF? Let's see what they have under Cloud services, Azure should be there right? No Cloud?
You do not remove the fact of your ignorance by documenting the ignorance of others. Microsoft has a serious offering for the enterprise, where.NET is highly important. Microsoft has a significant cloud offering, again.NET. Microsoft has completely re-launched its mobile initiative, entirely.NET.
Please don't try to correct this post by pointing to someone who is at the ignorance level of you and lextrait.com.
Get back to us when Microsoft actually rely on.Net and related technologies for their own flagship products
I am back to you. Do you have anything else ignorant to say or do you just want to continue flaunting your ignorance? Visual Studio, Microsoft Dynamics, Azure, want me to continue? A significant portion of the Microsoft Enterprise portfolio is written in.NET. Sure, things that are not as critical to businesses, such as Word and Excel, are not written in.NET, unsurprisingly, but a significant portion of the highly critical Enterprise stack is.
Why Microsoft would re-write ancient C software in.NET is something of a mystery to me, what would they gain from re-doing from scratch something that does quite fine with no re-doing whatsoever? Ah, now I get it, you didn't know that Microsoft actually had other software. Ah, well, ignorance is easily cured, just google it with bing. Hopefully you are just ignorant rather than stupid, since I have heard that that is rather difficult to cure.
Even Visual Studio is free for.NET development if you don't need the advanced features of the professional or enterprise versions. For a while, for purely Bureaucratic reasons I was using the free version of Visual Studio to develop for Microsoft Dynamics CRM, both extensions to the Enterprise platform and the tailor-made UI components.
The Express versions of Visual Studio are very capable, and Visual Studio in general blows just about any dev environment out of the water with ease.
Here is some advice, when someone has corrected, but not been specific, an assumption you have just pulled out of your ass, I would recommend, before continuing to flaunt your ignorance, that you actually check the matter out. It isn't hard to do now that this new thing called "Google" has come about. You might have heard of it, if not, and if you know how to use a web browser (it may be called Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome or something similar on your computer). Enter the address http://www.bing.com/ and enter the thing you want to Google. You are then doing something quite new, you are "Googling it with Bing".
In addition to the products mentioned below, such as Visual Studio, MS SQL Server Managment, Live etc, you have all of the Microsoft Enterprise stuff that is written in.NET. We are talking about xRM here etc. You know, software for boys who have grown past the Playstation 3 stage of their computer use.
No, I'm not interested in Miguel de Icaza's attempts to get Microsoft's patent-encumbered technologies into Linux
It is always sad when people let their religious ignorance cloud their otherwise presumably functioning thought process. Microsoft in 2010 is nothing like Microsoft in 1995, but then again Java in 2010 is nothing like Java in 2008.
You're not "standing on principle" unless you're willing to risk important things
At the same time, there is a huge difference between standing on something on principle and being a hard-headed ignorant religious fool. He is a hard-headed ignorant religious fool.
Honestly. You are a fool. Moving from Java to C# is dead easy, in many cases you can almost copy and paste code between the two. In addition C# fixes a number of silly problems with Java (like the dumb-ass autoboxing implementation) and improves on it in a number of other areas. Coding in C# is actually almost as fun as coding in Ruby.
Seriously, to let your ignorant religious views ("I don't want to do.NET") determine what you do is about as dumb as it gets if finding a job is your objective. Take it from someone who was part of one of the first companies to deliver commercial software written in Java and who has done real, deployed, commercial software in Java since 1998..NET is not at all bad, and I will take.NET MVC while having a non-sedated root-canal over (for example) Seam and JSF any time of the day.
First JavaFX is for the desktop. Nothing to do with the mobile.
Really? From the JavaXF site:
"And with the JavaFX SDK, developers and designers now have the essential set of technologies, tools, and resources to easily create and deploy their content across browsers, desktops, mobile devices, TVs, and other connected devices.
Seems you missed something.
Android seeks and manages to alleviate those issues.
It does so very well, Dalvik is an excellent mobile platform.
It's not in Sun's interest, it's not in Oracle's interest but who says it's not in the community's interest ?
I do. Even a perceived fragmentation is going to be bad for the platform. Particularly now that Microsoft is entering the playground with a managed-code alternative. There is a huge installed base out there on the MS platform, and honestly, developing for Windows Phone 7 is light years ahead what Android (or even the iPhone) offers.
Oracle is unhappy because their expected revenues on JavaME are potentially reduced.
Which is why they must sue. Which is also why suing is not an "evil" move. They need to protect their platform anyway they can, that is their job.
You can't fix an inappropriate platform. You replace it
For Sun/Oracle that is not an acceptable solution if that solution is using Java. This is why the Microsoft solution was smarter. Make it reasonably like Java, but remove all the mistakes that are in Java. Honestly, C# beats Java on almost any point. Google could/should have done something similar.
To me, the one who is damaging the most the platforms, isn't Google. It's Oracle.
I disagree, Google should have done Dalvik with something better than Java. Something that isn't, in some areas, irrevocably broken, such as the horror that is Java auto-boxing for example. That was a dumb-ass idea, and executed extremely poorly.
Well, Windows Phone 7 is based on the Windows CE 6. Windows CE 6 is an evolutionary move from Windows CE 5.2 on which Windows Mobile is based. There is probably no technical reason for MS not to allow Windows Mobile apps run on Windows Phone 7, but my guess would be that they do not want to maintain backwards compatibility. Given the entirely new UI on Phone 7 that would have been a bad idea.
Really? Can you name 10 aspects of the Win7 UI that Vista didn't have
I can mention one, and one in this case is plenty. The GDI was changed significantly to use DirectX in Windows 7, that is actually a major overhaul. The fact that they re-wrote it to look like the Vista UI is in that case irrelevant.
WinPhone7 is not only completely bears-no-resemblence different from WinMo, it's also different from all its contemporaries.
Seriously, you really have no idea how computers work at all do you? Do you really think that the way something looks is an reliable indicator of how much work went into a potential overhaul? I just finished a move of an application from an old Delphi code base to a new Silverlight interface. The application looks almost identical to the old one with minor touch-ups, but the application was re-written completely from the ground up.
Windows Phone 7 is the good old Windows Mobile with a new UI. The operating system underneath is the same.
Seriously, if you think how something looks is a reliable indicator of how much work went into a potential re-write you need to stop talking about computer related issues.
How much would I be willing to pay to have a viable, platform? Considering what we pay Oracle already for the database, you can be sure we'd be willing to pay them a lot more than they would ever consider charging for a development environment.
They charge somewhere around $10K per processor for the Weblogic stuff with about $2K a year for maintenance. That is a perfectly reasonable price. For the enterprise.
The UI, yes, it is new. Which makes Windows Phone 7 a relase 1.0 in the same way that Windows 7 was a 1.0 release. In other words, not at all. The Windows 7 UI is also completely new, re-written from scratch.
Windows Phone is not Windows Mobile in any way shape or form
Really? You sure about that? Perhaps I should have said BZZZZT! WRONG! Windows Phone 7 is Windows Mobile with a new UI, Silverlight and some features from the old OS not moved to the new UI yet.
Or, to the people who are not as slow as you, they say that with Windows Phone 7 you can accomplish he same or more than you can with the competitors, in less time.
Oh, and please get me right here. I love Dalvik as a platform. I think what Google has done, technically, is excellent. Finally we can actually develop in Java on the mobile platform. The fact that I like it and that you like it should not blind us to the fact that Oracle should not accept it. There is a huge difference between what might be good for you and me and what is good for Java as a platform and the owner of the Java platform.
Really? So the intent makes the result OK? If I intend to have fun in my car and drive around drunk, because it is fun, then it is OK if I kill you since my intent was not to kill you?
Intent is irrelevant, result is relevant. Forking means bad things for the Java Platform, which was badly broken for mobile, we all know, but still. Google forked, which kills the platform, irrespective of intent. Oracle can not, and should not, sit by and watch when another company destroys their platform. Sun didn't when Microsoft tried, no matter what intent Microsoft had.
The weird thing is that it bothers the dev community, it shouldn't. What Oracle (pure motives or not) is trying to do is to protect what is the strength of Java, failing to do so will be the end of Java as a platform. Nobody is better off with Java forked and essentially dead.
I know Google doesn't claim Dalvik is a Java VM, but it claims you do program Android using Java, which is only half true, and very much the same thing that Microsoft did.
This is why Sun (before Oracle) voiced strong reservations about the actions of Google. When Sun voiced their reservations about Java fragmentation Google basically responded with "so, who the fuck cares what you guys at Sun think".
Again, this isn't a new thing, Sun felt it was the same problem they had fought with Microsoft, and I am pretty sure they would, Oracle or not, have taken Google or the OHA to court. They would have no other options.
Sun was the creator of Java both the language and the platform. Dalvik shoots Java ME and probably also JavaFX in the head. That is not in Sun's interest, not in Oracle's interest, and generally not in the development community's interest.
Google/OHA should not be allowed to fragment the Java platform any more than Microsoft should be allowed to, and Android fragments the Java platform in a big way.
Google could have worked with the community to fix JavaME and JavaFX, but Google doesn't foster than kind of an environment internally. Doing it from scratch their own way is the Google way. It is just bad for Java.
LOL - and it is amazing that I have been modded Troll for this. The newbies here on Slashdot have no clue what a troll is and everybody they disagree with are modded trolls. Morons.
Slashdot Mirror
if Microsoft's sales of Windows and Office and their major server products actually depended on their sales of Visual Studio or their enterprise software lines
So you didn't read what I wrote at all. Not surprisingly. Yes, the sales of Office and Windows is tied closely to their sales of Enterprise Software going forward. As I described but you did not understand.
I think we can safely assume that I know what so-called enterprise tools are for
Apparently not.
The only point I was making was that Microsoft have a history of killing off development platforms
For the enterprise? Examples?
Who is talking about Java?
What is it about "around here" that stumps your comprehension glands?
tend to be tied up with the likes of SAP
And this is where Microsoft is fully aware that they have to muscle in or die. This is why Microsoft is spending so many resources on these areas at the moment, and that is where they use .NET. Again, look at the Microsoft Dynamics offerings. These currently expand at a very high pace, both in terms of features and resources and also market share.
Think about it, where do you think Microsoft is more concerned about stability and scalability in software? Word or CRM Online? Excel or Azure?
other than spread vague Microsoft advocacy
Look a little closer.
In short, if you're a Microsoft executive, the profitability of your company depends primarily on Office and Windows
Some time ago a person, a little bit like you, finished his Business education in the big city and move home to his small town. He wasn't able to find good work there, but the old movie theater was for sale. Given the price, he promptly bought it and decided to figure out how to make it profitable.
After playing with the numbers for a while he discovered that while the candy store on the first floor was making a significant profit, the movies them selves were making a significant loss. Being almost as smart as you he promptly decided to stop showing movies.
So no, it's not really a "significant portion" of the Microsoft Enterprise portfolio
If you don't know what Enterprise Software is, you really should try to close your mouth. Try figuring it out. You'll see TLAs like ERP, xRM etc. Office, for example, is not Enerprise Software, used by the enterprise though it is.
Go to http://www.microsoft.com/enterprise/ and find out what Microsoft is doing in that space. Try to find out what requirements Enterprise software like ERPs have. Then try to figure out why Microsoft would be using its Managed Software systems to build Enterprise Software.
We have been talking about Java around here, in the space that you so ignorantly list above, could you point to some typical Java solutions? Something above and beyond Eclipse? Something that actually would justify the enormous investment that such a huge part of the business world has done in Java? Where is all the Java software, where is the profit? Compared to most programming languages and systems, Java is gigantic. Enormous. Where is the software? Can you name any of it? Of course you can't. Compared to the investment in Java by the business world, there is no Java software out there that you have ever heard about.
Just for fun, try to do the same exercise as you just did but replace .NET or Java with COBOL. Where is all the COBOL software? Where is the profit? Compared to the enormous investment still being put into COBOL solutions, you have never heard of any software written in COBOL.
Why is it that you have never heard of these things? Because you are ignorant. A petulant child in the world of grown-up software systems and their developers.
Oh, and also take a look at the concept of "mission critical" and see how many of the Microsoft Apps you have heard about that fit that description (you have mentioned two above).
get back to me when Microsoft are actually building something they really care about on .Net
If you really think Microsoft is stupid enough to not care about their enterprise solutions, solutions that give Microsoft more or less unbreakable tie-ins with their customers, you are dumber than I thought, and believe you me, that would be hard.
How easy is it to move from Office to Open Office? Not that difficult, leaning towards easy. How difficult is it to move from a fully integrated solution consisting of Dynamics xRM, Share Point, Exchange and Office? Close to impossible.
If Microsoft stops caring about their enterprise customers, their Office sales will plummet. For every Share Point license Microsoft sells they guarantee years and years of continues Office sales. For every Dynamics CRM installation Microsoft sells they tie their customers to Exchange for years years. For every dollar some of these big enterprise invest in the Office software, they invest thousands of dollars in enterprise solutions, lots of them in-house. Here is a small example involving SAP. This is where Microsoft needs to play, or they will die, they know that.
You view of the world is quite limited. Broaden it.
Microsoft themselves have been reluctant to rely on it even for WM7 because of the performance implications
You can't be serious. Really? Please explain to all of us who thought that Silverlight was the development platform for Windows Phone 7 how Microsoft was reluctant to use .NET.
Not really ... http://www.lextrait.com/vincent/implementations.html
Wow. Let's see what they have under the ERP heading for Microsoft... Nothing? Why? Seems they are about as clueless as you are. How about under the heading of Web Sites... wait, doesn't Microsoft have web sites? How about Web2 frameworks? Hey! Where is WCF? Let's see what they have under Cloud services, Azure should be there right? No Cloud?
You do not remove the fact of your ignorance by documenting the ignorance of others. Microsoft has a serious offering for the enterprise, where .NET is highly important. Microsoft has a significant cloud offering, again .NET. Microsoft has completely re-launched its mobile initiative, entirely .NET.
Please don't try to correct this post by pointing to someone who is at the ignorance level of you and lextrait.com.
Get back to us when Microsoft actually rely on .Net and related technologies for their own flagship products
I am back to you. Do you have anything else ignorant to say or do you just want to continue flaunting your ignorance? Visual Studio, Microsoft Dynamics, Azure, want me to continue? A significant portion of the Microsoft Enterprise portfolio is written in .NET. Sure, things that are not as critical to businesses, such as Word and Excel, are not written in .NET, unsurprisingly, but a significant portion of the highly critical Enterprise stack is.
Why Microsoft would re-write ancient C software in .NET is something of a mystery to me, what would they gain from re-doing from scratch something that does quite fine with no re-doing whatsoever? Ah, now I get it, you didn't know that Microsoft actually had other software. Ah, well, ignorance is easily cured, just google it with bing. Hopefully you are just ignorant rather than stupid, since I have heard that that is rather difficult to cure.
Even Visual Studio is free for .NET development if you don't need the advanced features of the professional or enterprise versions. For a while, for purely Bureaucratic reasons I was using the free version of Visual Studio to develop for Microsoft Dynamics CRM, both extensions to the Enterprise platform and the tailor-made UI components.
The Express versions of Visual Studio are very capable, and Visual Studio in general blows just about any dev environment out of the water with ease.
Really, shipping products?
Here is some advice, when someone has corrected, but not been specific, an assumption you have just pulled out of your ass, I would recommend, before continuing to flaunt your ignorance, that you actually check the matter out. It isn't hard to do now that this new thing called "Google" has come about. You might have heard of it, if not, and if you know how to use a web browser (it may be called Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome or something similar on your computer). Enter the address http://www.bing.com/ and enter the thing you want to Google. You are then doing something quite new, you are "Googling it with Bing".
In addition to the products mentioned below, such as Visual Studio, MS SQL Server Managment, Live etc, you have all of the Microsoft Enterprise stuff that is written in .NET. We are talking about xRM here etc. You know, software for boys who have grown past the Playstation 3 stage of their computer use.
A very large number, for example a significant portion of their Enterprise stuff. Are you asking to be facetious or just to flaunt your ignorance?
No, I'm not interested in Miguel de Icaza's attempts to get Microsoft's patent-encumbered technologies into Linux
It is always sad when people let their religious ignorance cloud their otherwise presumably functioning thought process. Microsoft in 2010 is nothing like Microsoft in 1995, but then again Java in 2010 is nothing like Java in 2008.
You're not "standing on principle" unless you're willing to risk important things
At the same time, there is a huge difference between standing on something on principle and being a hard-headed ignorant religious fool. He is a hard-headed ignorant religious fool.
Honestly. You are a fool. Moving from Java to C# is dead easy, in many cases you can almost copy and paste code between the two. In addition C# fixes a number of silly problems with Java (like the dumb-ass autoboxing implementation) and improves on it in a number of other areas. Coding in C# is actually almost as fun as coding in Ruby.
Seriously, to let your ignorant religious views ("I don't want to do .NET") determine what you do is about as dumb as it gets if finding a job is your objective. Take it from someone who was part of one of the first companies to deliver commercial software written in Java and who has done real, deployed, commercial software in Java since 1998. .NET is not at all bad, and I will take .NET MVC while having a non-sedated root-canal over (for example) Seam and JSF any time of the day.
You cannot patent or copyright a language
Of course you can. Why not? More importantly though, you can protect the platform, which is what Oracle is doing.
First JavaFX is for the desktop. Nothing to do with the mobile.
Really? From the JavaXF site:
"And with the JavaFX SDK, developers and designers now have the essential set of technologies, tools, and resources to easily create and deploy their content across browsers, desktops, mobile devices, TVs, and other connected devices.
Seems you missed something.
Android seeks and manages to alleviate those issues.
It does so very well, Dalvik is an excellent mobile platform.
It's not in Sun's interest, it's not in Oracle's interest but who says it's not in the community's interest ?
I do. Even a perceived fragmentation is going to be bad for the platform. Particularly now that Microsoft is entering the playground with a managed-code alternative. There is a huge installed base out there on the MS platform, and honestly, developing for Windows Phone 7 is light years ahead what Android (or even the iPhone) offers.
Oracle is unhappy because their expected revenues on JavaME are potentially reduced.
Which is why they must sue. Which is also why suing is not an "evil" move. They need to protect their platform anyway they can, that is their job.
You can't fix an inappropriate platform. You replace it
For Sun/Oracle that is not an acceptable solution if that solution is using Java. This is why the Microsoft solution was smarter. Make it reasonably like Java, but remove all the mistakes that are in Java. Honestly, C# beats Java on almost any point. Google could/should have done something similar.
To me, the one who is damaging the most the platforms, isn't Google. It's Oracle.
I disagree, Google should have done Dalvik with something better than Java. Something that isn't, in some areas, irrevocably broken, such as the horror that is Java auto-boxing for example. That was a dumb-ass idea, and executed extremely poorly.
Well, Windows Phone 7 is based on the Windows CE 6. Windows CE 6 is an evolutionary move from Windows CE 5.2 on which Windows Mobile is based. There is probably no technical reason for MS not to allow Windows Mobile apps run on Windows Phone 7, but my guess would be that they do not want to maintain backwards compatibility. Given the entirely new UI on Phone 7 that would have been a bad idea.
Really? Can you name 10 aspects of the Win7 UI that Vista didn't have
I can mention one, and one in this case is plenty. The GDI was changed significantly to use DirectX in Windows 7, that is actually a major overhaul. The fact that they re-wrote it to look like the Vista UI is in that case irrelevant.
WinPhone7 is not only completely bears-no-resemblence different from WinMo, it's also different from all its contemporaries.
Seriously, you really have no idea how computers work at all do you? Do you really think that the way something looks is an reliable indicator of how much work went into a potential overhaul? I just finished a move of an application from an old Delphi code base to a new Silverlight interface. The application looks almost identical to the old one with minor touch-ups, but the application was re-written completely from the ground up.
Windows Phone 7 is the good old Windows Mobile with a new UI. The operating system underneath is the same.
Seriously, if you think how something looks is a reliable indicator of how much work went into a potential re-write you need to stop talking about computer related issues.
How much would I be willing to pay to have a viable, platform? Considering what we pay Oracle already for the database, you can be sure we'd be willing to pay them a lot more than they would ever consider charging for a development environment.
They charge somewhere around $10K per processor for the Weblogic stuff with about $2K a year for maintenance. That is a perfectly reasonable price. For the enterprise.
The UI is totally new, built from scratch
The UI, yes, it is new. Which makes Windows Phone 7 a relase 1.0 in the same way that Windows 7 was a 1.0 release. In other words, not at all. The Windows 7 UI is also completely new, re-written from scratch.
Windows Phone is not Windows Mobile in any way shape or form
Really? You sure about that? Perhaps I should have said BZZZZT! WRONG! Windows Phone 7 is Windows Mobile with a new UI, Silverlight and some features from the old OS not moved to the new UI yet.
Or, to the people who are not as slow as you, they say that with Windows Phone 7 you can accomplish he same or more than you can with the competitors, in less time.
Oh, and please get me right here. I love Dalvik as a platform. I think what Google has done, technically, is excellent. Finally we can actually develop in Java on the mobile platform. The fact that I like it and that you like it should not blind us to the fact that Oracle should not accept it. There is a huge difference between what might be good for you and me and what is good for Java as a platform and the owner of the Java platform.
Really? So the intent makes the result OK? If I intend to have fun in my car and drive around drunk, because it is fun, then it is OK if I kill you since my intent was not to kill you?
Intent is irrelevant, result is relevant. Forking means bad things for the Java Platform, which was badly broken for mobile, we all know, but still. Google forked, which kills the platform, irrespective of intent. Oracle can not, and should not, sit by and watch when another company destroys their platform. Sun didn't when Microsoft tried, no matter what intent Microsoft had.
I know JavaME was seriously broken, the problem I have with what Google did was that fixing JavaME would have been a good idea, forking was a bad one.
The weird thing is that it bothers the dev community, it shouldn't. What Oracle (pure motives or not) is trying to do is to protect what is the strength of Java, failing to do so will be the end of Java as a platform. Nobody is better off with Java forked and essentially dead.
I know Google doesn't claim Dalvik is a Java VM, but it claims you do program Android using Java, which is only half true, and very much the same thing that Microsoft did.
This is why Sun (before Oracle) voiced strong reservations about the actions of Google. When Sun voiced their reservations about Java fragmentation Google basically responded with "so, who the fuck cares what you guys at Sun think".
Again, this isn't a new thing, Sun felt it was the same problem they had fought with Microsoft, and I am pretty sure they would, Oracle or not, have taken Google or the OHA to court. They would have no other options.
Sun was the creator of Java both the language and the platform. Dalvik shoots Java ME and probably also JavaFX in the head. That is not in Sun's interest, not in Oracle's interest, and generally not in the development community's interest.
Google/OHA should not be allowed to fragment the Java platform any more than Microsoft should be allowed to, and Android fragments the Java platform in a big way.
Google could have worked with the community to fix JavaME and JavaFX, but Google doesn't foster than kind of an environment internally. Doing it from scratch their own way is the Google way. It is just bad for Java.
LOL - and it is amazing that I have been modded Troll for this. The newbies here on Slashdot have no clue what a troll is and everybody they disagree with are modded trolls. Morons.