Oracle suing google over its use of Java in adroid, what does this mean for sage?

[AJ Bertelson]

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...ndroid-sdk.ars

I didn't pay much attention when Oracle bought out sun and if there was a discussion on it here. Oracle is really going after Google for money because hey that's what oracle does (money money money).


What does this mean for sage? Did sage's licensing costs go up?

[stuckless]

I don't think sage has to worry... Oracle isn't suing over simply using java... they are suing google because google re-implemented java from the ground up, to be used in their own vm (which is not a java vm). Bottom line... Sage has nothing to worry about... But, expect this to be one of many suits against google, since Android is doing so well these days (surpassed Apple to be in the #3 spot)

[PolloLoco]

Didn't something like this happen with Microsoft over ten years ago? Isn't that the reason why XP didn't ship with Java?

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by PolloLoco

Didn't something like this happen with Microsoft over ten years ago? Isn't that the reason why XP didn't ship with Java?

I think the MS/Sun falling out was a little different. MS was making their own JVM and bytecode that was different and incompatible with Sun's JVM, but they were shipping it using the Java trademark, as if it were java. ie, MS deliberately tried to sabotage Java by creating java bytecode that would ONLY run under Windows.

Google basically uses the Java programming language but they have written their own compiler and runtime (dalvik), which is not a jvm. This is similar to how they use Java for writing web apps, but then they have their own compilers that then turn the Java code into javascript. ie, Android is not pretending to be a java platform, it simply uses the Java programming language as one of the the coding languages, and then everything gets compiled down to google's own vm.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by stuckless

I think the MS/Sun falling out was a little different. MS was making their own JVM and bytecode that was different and incompatible with Sun's JVM, but they were shipping it using the Java trademark, as if it were java. ie, MS deliberately tried to sabotage Java by creating java bytecode that would ONLY run under Windows.

I believe we've had this argument before, but my view from inside MS at the time was that Java was considered a hot new language that people wanted to use for writing Windows apps (among other things), but the performance of the Sun JVM on Windows kind of sucked. So MS built their own JVM, optimized for Windows, with Windows-specific language extensions, so that Windows devs could write high-performance Windows apps in Java. But Sun couldn't have that; the whole point of Java from their point of view was to undermine Windows by enforcing cross-platform portability. So they refused to certify MS Java as "real" Java, and MS eventually abandoned it.

Did MS try to "sabotage" Java? I'd say not in the sense of trying to kill it; they knew that wasn't possible. But they did perceive it as a weapon aimed against them and tried to deflect that attack by simply absorbing Java into the stable of Windows development tools.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

I believe we've had this argument before, but my view from inside MS at the time was that Java was considered a hot new language that people wanted to use for writing Windows apps (among other things), but the performance of the Sun JVM on Windows kind of sucked. So MS built their own JVM, optimized for Windows, with Windows-specific language extensions, so that Windows devs could write high-performance Windows apps in Java. But Sun couldn't have that; the whole point of Java from their point of view was to undermine Windows by enforcing cross-platform portability. So they refused to certify MS Java as "real" Java, and MS eventually abandoned it.

Did MS try to "sabotage" Java? I'd say not in the sense of trying to kill it; they knew that wasn't possible. But they did perceive it as a weapon aimed against them and tried to deflect that attack by simply absorbing Java into the stable of Windows development tools.

Yeah, we've had this debate before I guess sabotage may be have too strong a word, but I think that what they did, did undermined the principles of java. I remember gettting java apps from windows developers, around that time, that simply would not run (on my non-windows platform), and they had no idea that they were using proprietary MS extensions. But, I think with their (MS) failures in java, browsers, html standards, etc, I think they are starting to learn that instead of trying to cripple open standards (and i use that loosely for java), they need to work with the communities and have their good ideas integrated into the standards. We are seeing them do this more and more today than ever before, which is a good thing for everyone.

BTW, no one can disagree that java's biggest failure was the desktop Today, java has come along way with their desktop performance, but it's still not close to native performance. The ideas that MS had for java at the time, were great, it's just too bad those ideas didn't make it into the core libraries.

[Fuzzy]

I think the best thing to happen from the Java/MS disconnect.. is the .NET framework.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I think the best thing to happen from the Java/MS disconnect.. is the .NET framework.

I agree. I wish C# was better supported on Linux because I really like the language.

[Fuzzy]

mono is at a very workable point right now. monodevelop is a very decent IDE as well.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

mono is at a very workable point right now. monodevelop is a very decent IDE as well.

I agree that mono is a decent alternative for linux... but the problem remains... Most code that is written on windows will not run on mono, becuase most developers use the proprietary MS extensions (such as directx, etc) which are not available on the mono runtime. In this sense, MS got their original wish that they tried to do with java... ie, Have an open language, but ensure that 99% of the apps written will only work on a microsoft platform

I know very few C# apps that will run cross platform, unless they were originally written on mono to begin with.

Oh well, in sure java9 will have some cool new features that might we on par with C#

[Fuzzy]

True, mono does not replicate all functions of .net on windows, but mono IS available on windows as well, so cross platform apps, if that is a goal, are easily possible. The point is, the STRENGTH of .net (which is the VM and CLR), plus great languages like C#, are fully available on Linux.

There are also versions of Mono for iOS and Android being developed...