123
-=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- (c) WidthPadding Industries 1987 0|520|0 -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=- -=+=-
Socoder -> On Topic -> Google vs Oracle : JavaFight!!!

Fri, 13 Aug 2010, 14:56
Jayenkai
Oracle says "That's ours!!"

Google says "But.. wha?!"



I'm anti-Java, and pro-Google.. as you know!

But Oracle's claim of "That is Java.. And it is technically ours!!" is pretty much an honest one.

This could be really really interesting.

On the one hand, Oracle could be made to pretty much throw away their huge investment, and agree that Java is too big to be bitchy about. They'd lose a whole bunch of pretty expensive rights, and their whole acquisition of Sun would've been a bit of a waste. (See : ITV buying Friends Reunited!)

On the other, if Google get screwed, I think a whole buttload of Java's Open-Source community are going to be pretty damn peeved about the whole thing. (See : Most Java communities since the Sun buyout!)

Thoughts?!

-=-=-
''Load, Next List!''
Fri, 13 Aug 2010, 17:18
steve_ancell
But isn't Java free to use though ?
Fri, 13 Aug 2010, 23:04
JL235
This isn't about if Java is free to use or not. It's not about who owns Java. It's about Google (supposidly) copying code that was written by employees at Sun (note copying). Of course this also depends on the license on the particular piece of code that Oracle is sueing over. Most of Sun's implementation of Java is open source but bits of it aren't.

The article mentions that Google and Sun were in negotiations about Sun licensing the technology to Google. This implies to me that Google are knowingly in the wrong (why else negotiate?). So if true then Google should remove those sections from their code base and pay out as copying someone's work without their concent is wrong.

Although clearly if false then Oracle should back off. It wouldn't surprise me if the claims were a little weak as it's very common for large technology companies to sue each other these days. For some companies it's even their main source of revenue!
Sat, 14 Aug 2010, 03:52
steve_ancell
Must admit though, Oracle must be brave to go up against a giant organization Like Google !

This may be interesting to watch. Google are big enough to swallow-up most companies and organizations, but then again, Goliath was big enough to stamp on David, didn't get very far though did he ?

|edit| *Imagines the Oracle clan standing outside Google-HQ, throwing beach pebbles at them.* |edit|
Sat, 14 Aug 2010, 04:15
JL235
Er... Oracle are actually bigger then Google (only a bit). They have higher revenue, more employees, own more assets and earn the same amount of profit. It's just they are giant in the enterprise domain whereas Google is giant in the public domain.

|edit| So you don't really hear much about Oracle (and so presume they don't do much) because they are entirely enterprise focused. |edit|
Sun, 15 Aug 2010, 11:08
HoboBen
Oracle killing off OpenSolaris too.

-=-=-
blog | work | code | more code
Sun, 15 Aug 2010, 11:58
steve_ancell
But would Oracle ever do this ?. Evil load of buggers, Google !
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10961776
Sun, 15 Aug 2010, 23:43
JL235
HoboBen Oracle killing off OpenSolaris too.
To me OpenSolaris always seemed to be about getting Solaris to copy Linux: i.e. to create distros that could be used anywhere that Linux is currently used with the same software. It just seemed a little pointless since they weren't adding anything that people would see as an advantage of using OpenSolaris over established Linux-based alternatives. It was yet another Sun project that had lots of good intentions but would only really just waste money.

Solaris' real usage is in the enterprise space. The leaked memo even says that Solaris has more then double the customer base of AIX and HP-UX combined. So IMHO I think this is a good business move as it's about getting Solaris back to concentrating on eating up more of that Enterprise domain. Otherwise it's just not going to help them make money.
Mon, 16 Aug 2010, 09:22
HoboBen
Hmm, I do sort of agree DD, however it leads to questions about continued development of the the ZFS file system, also used by FreeBSD. The majority of the ZFS developers were employed by Sun/Oracle. Not that Oracle are really obligated to continue; it's just a shame.

Additionally, one redditor commented:

OpenSolaris helped tremendously for introducing Solaris into our production environment. I think Oracle is hurting Solaris badly by killing OpenSolaris. I will bring up the issue both with my sales rep and the regional manager and at the next SunRise event, even though I don't have much hope this will change anything.



-=-=-
blog | work | code | more code
Mon, 16 Aug 2010, 10:51
JL235
I don't see this as the end of Solaris, ZFS, DTrace or any of their similar products. I see it as moving the focus from open source and general purpose to solely enterprise and business.

As much as it's 'good for the community', Sun never really made any money from non-Enterprise stuff.
Tue, 17 Aug 2010, 15:45
Scherererer
It didn't, but I think it's open options helped create and evolve some of the things that turned into profitable endeavors. Destroying these research projects only hurts progress on a whole, it's the same thing as when IBM cut all of its labs... such a shame.

-=-=-
YouTube Twitter
Computer Science Series: Logic (pt1) (part 2) (part 3) 2's Complement Mathematics: Basic Differential Calculus