Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #32337 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-17 17:17 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-08-17 19:53 -0400 |
| Articles | 7 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Does anyone understand this? Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 17:17 +0100
Re: Does anyone understand this? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2015-08-17 19:06 +0200
Re: Does anyone understand this? Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 19:00 +0100
Re: Does anyone understand this? e.d.programmer@gmail.com - 2015-08-17 12:39 -0700
Re: Does anyone understand this? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-08-17 20:07 -0400
Re: Does anyone understand this? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-08-17 20:02 -0400
Re: Does anyone understand this? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-08-17 19:53 -0400
| From | Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 17:17 +0100 |
| Subject | Does anyone understand this? |
| Message-ID | <mqt1al$ss$1@dont-email.me> |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33927848 particularly ...In its legal papers, Oracle said the ongoing success of Android was in danger of "destroying" interest in Java. Does anyone understand why the success might destroy interest in Java, I'd have thought it was the other way around ? ...The "widespread dominance" that Android had achieved in the mobile phone market had done "irreversible" damage to Java's potential market, said Oracle. Why? I don't get it -- Laughing Spam Fritter
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 19:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <d3eiklF37olU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #32337 |
On 17.08.2015 18:17, Eternal Hope wrote: > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33927848 > > particularly > > ...In its legal papers, Oracle said the ongoing success of Android was > in danger of "destroying" interest in Java. > > Does anyone understand why the success might destroy interest in Java, > I'd have thought it was the other way around ? What they probably mean: it will destroy the interest in the _right_ (as in "one and only") Java because people only see and use the _wrong_ Java (i.e. the on used on Android devices). > ...The "widespread dominance" that Android had achieved in the mobile > phone market had done "irreversible" damage to Java's potential market, > said Oracle. > > Why? I don't get it On a more abstract level I think Oracle is struggling and that's why they turn to lawsuits more and more. The blog post recently about how Oracle intends to deal with people who find vulnerabilities in their products show a similar attitude (the post was removed later). Here is a summary: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/08/oracle_cso_mary_ann_davidson_doesn_t_want_to_hear_about_software_vulnerabilities.html Cheers robert -- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 19:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mqt7da$qsu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #32338 |
On 17/08/2015 18:06, Robert Klemme wrote: > On 17.08.2015 18:17, Eternal Hope wrote: >> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33927848 >> >> particularly >> >> ...In its legal papers, Oracle said the ongoing success of Android was >> in danger of "destroying" interest in Java. >> >> Does anyone understand why the success might destroy interest in Java, >> I'd have thought it was the other way around ? > > What they probably mean: it will destroy the interest in the _right_ (as > in "one and only") Java because people only see and use the _wrong_ Java > (i.e. the on used on Android devices). Oh, OK >> ...The "widespread dominance" that Android had achieved in the mobile >> phone market had done "irreversible" damage to Java's potential market, >> said Oracle. >> >> Why? I don't get it > > On a more abstract level I think Oracle is struggling and that's why > they turn to lawsuits more and more. The blog post recently about how > Oracle intends to deal with people who find vulnerabilities in their > products show a similar attitude (the post was removed later). Here is > a summary: > > http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/08/oracle_cso_mary_ann_davidson_doesn_t_want_to_hear_about_software_vulnerabilities.html Good grief ... I've never really fully understood why Sun and now Oracle pour(ed) what must be large amounts of cash into Java and then continue to give it away free. I know Oracle bought up WebLogic and flog it for a big wedge but I can't see that covering the ex's. If you want the latest specification for C you have to pay for it. I know the 'final drafts' are free but still, if you want the approved documentation AFAIAA you have to stump up the readies. DuckDuckGo "why is Java free" gives all sorts of reasons, I'm not expecting a definitive answer, it's just rhetorical musings really. I've earned a good living for years from Java and never paid a penny to a vendor. It just seems odd given that you have to pay to take a piss these days, someone in the UK has even started flogging cans of Lake District air apparently. Go figure -- Laughing Spam Fritter
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | e.d.programmer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 12:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2b829aff-2991-4a33-b9bd-e5f266bcaae9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32339 |
On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 2:01:03 PM UTC-4, Eternal Hope wrote: > I've never really fully understood why Sun and now Oracle pour(ed) what > must be large amounts of cash into Java and then continue to give it > away free. I know Oracle bought up WebLogic and flog it for a big wedge > but I can't see that covering the ex's. If you want the latest > specification for C you have to pay for it. I know the 'final drafts' > are free but still, if you want the approved documentation AFAIAA you > have to stump up the readies. > > DuckDuckGo "why is Java free" gives all sorts of reasons, I'm not > expecting a definitive answer, it's just rhetorical musings really. I've > earned a good living for years from Java and never paid a penny to a > vendor. It just seems odd given that you have to pay to take a piss > these days, someone in the UK has even started flogging cans of Lake > District air apparently. Aren't most things free these days? I can get Java free and write code that runs on any device that supports a full Java install. I can get C# free and write code that runs on any device that has Windows. There's usually a catch paid for by someone. Do you have to pay to put Java on a device ie a blu-ray player? Don't they also have a paid Java, with extended support life? I wonder how much they get from that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 20:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55d2775f$0$299$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #32339 |
On 8/17/2015 2:00 PM, Eternal Hope wrote: > I've never really fully understood why Sun and now Oracle pour(ed) what > must be large amounts of cash into Java and then continue to give it > away free. I know Oracle bought up WebLogic and flog it for a big wedge > but I can't see that covering the ex's. If you want the latest > specification for C you have to pay for it. I know the 'final drafts' > are free but still, if you want the approved documentation AFAIAA you > have to stump up the readies. > > DuckDuckGo "why is Java free" gives all sorts of reasons, I'm not > expecting a definitive answer, it's just rhetorical musings really. I've > earned a good living for years from Java and never paid a penny to a > vendor. It just seems odd given that you have to pay to take a piss > these days, someone in the UK has even started flogging cans of Lake > District air apparently. Most languages, development frameworks and development tools are free today. PHP is free. C# and .NET is free. C/C++ is often free. Java would lose out in competition if SUN/Oracle had/started to charge for it. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 20:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55d27632$0$299$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #32338 |
On 8/17/2015 1:06 PM, Robert Klemme wrote: > On a more abstract level I think Oracle is struggling and that's why > they turn to lawsuits more and more. The blog post recently about how > Oracle intends to deal with people who find vulnerabilities in their > products show a similar attitude (the post was removed later). Here is > a summary: > > http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/08/oracle_cso_mary_ann_davidson_doesn_t_want_to_hear_about_software_vulnerabilities.html Well - the headline is not true - and the content is grossly misleading. Let us pick a couple of quotes from: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/oracle-security-chief-to-customers-stop-checking-our-code-for-vulnerabilities/ <quote> This is why we require customers to log a service request for each alleged issue (not just hand us a report) and provide a proof of concept (which some tools can generate). </quote> So Oracle indeed want to hear about software vulnerabilities if people follow Oracle's process for it. The real beef seems to be: <quote> A customer can’t analyze the code to see whether there is a control that prevents the attack the scanning tool is screaming about (which is most likely a false positive) </quote> <quote> She dismissed such reports, saying that "we don’t just accept scan reports as 'proof that there is a there, there,' in part because whether you are talking static or dynamic analysis, a scan report is not proof of an actual vulnerability. Often, they are not much more than a pile of steaming … FUD. (That is what I planned on saying all along: FUD.) </quote> Which seems to say that she is very tired of receiving a stream of vulnerability reports based on some analysis tool claiming there is a vulnerability. That is very different from the headline used many places. So I think the conclusion is that: * Oracle do accept vulnerability reports * Oracle has a process for things [no surprise] * Oracle do not have a problem threatening with legal action [no surprise] * Oracle has a CSO that is clueless about PR * The internet is full of misleading information [no surprise] Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-17 19:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55d2740a$0$301$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #32337 |
On 8/17/2015 12:17 PM, Eternal Hope wrote: > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33927848 > > particularly > > ...In its legal papers, Oracle said the ongoing success of Android was > in danger of "destroying" interest in Java. > > Does anyone understand why the success might destroy interest in Java, > I'd have thought it was the other way around ? > > ...The "widespread dominance" that Android had achieved in the mobile > phone market had done "irreversible" damage to Java's potential market, > said Oracle. > > Why? I don't get it Android is not a complete and certified Java, so in Oracle's world it is not Java. So you should read it as: <translated> The "widespread dominance" that Android had achieved in the mobile phone market had done "irreversible" damage to the potential market for Java ME and Java SE Embedded products from Oracle. </translated> Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web