Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #9390

Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils?

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/2/2011 2:26 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/2/2011 1:35 AM, BGB wrote:
>> On 11/1/2011 7:18 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 10/28/2011 4:29 PM, jebblue wrote:
>>>> With Oracle on one side suing Google over Android
>>>> and on the other cooing about how many phones
>>>> run Java; I'm wondering if it might be worth it
>>>> to put my ideological views about Microsoft aside
>>>> and consider going back to .Net.
>>>
>>> Why should the question whether Google infringed on
>>> Oracle copyright or patents affect your choice of
>>> programming language?
>>>
>>
>> maybe because it asserts that Java is not a free/open technology, and is
>> essentially a proprietary product owned by Oracle?
>
> First: Google's potential problem is because they are creating
> a Java not using Java - I would expect the OP to talk about
> using Java not creating a Java.
>

it still reflects badly on Java as a whole.

granted, this issue wouldn't likely matter so much to end developers, 
except maybe as a "matter of principle" or similar (say, not to depend 
on products which are purely proprietary or are encumbered by patents or 
similar...).


> Second: Google's legal situation would be a lot better if their
> Java had actually been a Java (been certified as being a Java SE
> implementation after passing the TCK) due to the JCP rules. For
> whatever reasons they are not, but I am sure that if Google
> could turn back time, then they would have gotten it certified
> (adding the standard Java GUI stuff would not cost more than a few
> months of legal bills!).
>

true, but the issue may be that such rules exist in the first place.

in a truly open technology, one is free to use the technology however 
they so well please, including the creation of poor / non-conformant 
implementations thereof.


> Third: there is really nothing changed. If you infringe on anyone's
> copyright or patents then the court can order you to pay - if you don't
> the the court should not do so. It was like that before the Oracle
> suit and it is like that after.
>

yes, this is the case.

however, many people had held the view (mistaken or not) that Java was a 
free and open technology, similar to, say, C and C++. however, this 
isn't really the case, and the Oracle vs Google lawsuit matter serves to 
illustrate this issue.


>> granted, there are always C, C++, assembler, ... which are not
>> particularly "owned" by anyone.
>
> Most of those also enforces copyright and licenses - you try
> pick some code from GCC and embed it in a closed source app - FSF
> lawyers will come after you!
>

but, this is not what Google was doing...

Android was based on Apache's class-library, which used a more BSD-style 
license, and in this case it would be Apache who would be the ones' to 
try to argue about infringing copyrights.

Android, however, was not based on Oracles' source, but instead 
(debatably) violated patents.


GCC then is simply a popular C compiler, but by no means the only C 
compiler, nor do they hold any particular ownership over the C language 
(actually, some have argued that GCC doesn't actually implement C, due 
to its many extensions and minor areas of non-conformance with the C 
standards).


one can implement their own C compiler though (say, from the ground up), 
add whatever the hell extensions they want to the language, and maybe 
leave out whatever features, and no one will come after them with a lawsuit.

for example, no one is getting on MS's case for, after 12 or so years, 
still not having C99 fully or correctly implemented (nevermind whether 
or not this is an annoyance to developers).

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

back to .Net? lesser of two evils? jebblue <n@n.nnn> - 2011-10-28 15:29 -0500
  Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> - 2011-10-28 15:16 -0700
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-02 07:05 -0300
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 22:46 -0400
  Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-01 22:18 -0400
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 22:35 -0700
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Cindy <c.thurston@frell.okb.uwa.edu> - 2011-11-02 03:17 -0400
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 07:58 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:06 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 00:01 -0700
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:48 -0400
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:52 -0400
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 07:21 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-09 20:30 -0500
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 22:48 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? coder <j-code@speak.invalid> - 2011-11-02 17:36 -0400
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 17:13 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Cindy <c.thurston@frell.okb.uwa.edu> - 2011-11-03 00:49 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 00:10 -0700
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Cindy <c.thurston@frell.okb.uwa.edu> - 2011-11-03 04:41 -0400
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 05:36 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? thoolen <tholen01@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 23:13 -0700
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-02 08:28 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 10:04 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-02 10:19 -0700
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 14:32 -0700
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 17:20 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 21:34 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:57 -0400
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 09:25 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-09 20:25 -0500
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 23:05 -0700
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 17:26 -0400
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 15:01 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:18 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:20 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 22:30 -0700
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 21:30 -0400
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 21:40 -0400
  Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-01 23:42 -0700
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 10:22 -0700
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:02 -0400
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 20:10 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:45 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 09:56 -0700
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:01 -0400
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-02 15:26 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:35 -0400
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 20:53 -0700
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 21:45 -0400
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-04 05:50 -0300
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 10:39 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-04 17:38 -0400
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-11-04 18:47 -0300
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 10:11 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-09 20:24 -0500
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 23:42 -0700

csiph-web