Larry and Steve are friends from way back. None of this matters to Larry except for the chance to make some extra money off something he bought with the aim of controlling the biggest threat he faced to his ancient DB: MySQL. Oracle hasn't really made anything new in many years; they've just been coasting off the lock-in created by the DB they made a very long time ago. That Java came along for the ride with Sun was just fluff for him initially, though recently it's turned into an unexpected potential cash cow if this settlement with Google goes through.
To be fair, Oracle is not stagnate and comes as part of some really big CRM and financial application platforms with very good support. MySql is a roll your own data base with no official support other than a user forum. It should also be noted that Oracle owns MySql.
Us court system likes to use the term reasonable observer and othe rvague language so having people that know what is going on may disqualify the, from being a reasonable observer. So the closer the jury is to "average American" the more apt the court system considers them to be.
thanks. I understand now. oh well we'll see what happens.
Yes, I had noted that Oracle bought MySQL. Under both current and previous ownership, there has always been the option for paid support.
MySQL scales well enough that it had become a credible threat to a sizable segment of Oracle's market. MySQL drives most of the web apps currently in use. In fact, I'd be surprised if this forum isn't run on MySQL. Gaining control of MySQL was the primary objective in Oracle's acquisition of Sun.
Are you familiar with Libre Office? Oracle owns Open Office too, and the rationale for forking it away from Oracle applies equally to MySQL and VirtualBox, no matter how uncomfortable this notion may make people.
Yes, that's the first thing I thought. The way Apple and Oracle frame it, this is a serious threat to open source and in a quite vicious way also to free work. So Andy Rubin worked at Apple and never can work on the same kind of job ever because he might make decisions based on his professional experience? Interesting.
And for those who forget it, Safari is KDE's browser. Open Source. Mac OS X is BSD. Open Source. Don't even go this way.
Yes, that's the first thing I thought. The way Apple and Oracle frame it, this is a serious threat to open source and in a quite vicious way also to free work. So Andy Rubin worked at Apple and never can work on the same kind of job ever because he might make decisions based on his professional experience? Interesting.
And for those who forget it, Safari is KDE's browser. Open Source. Mac OS X is BSD. Open Source. Don't even go this way.
Wrong. Safari is based on KDE, but has been extensively revised - and has a great deal of proprietary stuff, as well.
Mac OS X uses a kernel which is based on the BSD kernel, but is not BSD by any stretch of the imagination.
Your arguments might be interesting if they were factual rather than imagined.
Actually from what I've read, there is very little proprietary changes in Safari from webkit (which is open source and shared freely by Apple) while Chrome which uses webkit adds quite a bit of proprietary tidbits that is doesn't share with the community.
Either way, the original poster is wrong if he is trying to pretend that Apple simply takes from the open source community without giving back. It does so quite a bit.
Actually from what I've read, there is very little proprietary changes in Safari from webkit (which is open source and shared freely by Apple) while Chrome which uses webkit adds quite a bit of proprietary tidbits that is doesn't share with the community.
Either way, the original poster is wrong if he is trying to pretend that Apple simply takes from the open source community without giving back. It does so quite a bit.
WebKit is Apple's open source movement that builds from KHTML. Apple added tonnes of proprietary stuff on top of KHTML and then just went "right! open source that sucker!". Google's only proprietary addition to chrome is the V8 JS Engine. Everything about the Layout engine is just straight up webkit.
Non-lawyer opinion coming up: Personally, I'm not surprised they're objecting. Google intends to object to everything that happens in this trial. Every evening, they'll probably object to the coming of night. I suspect they see a good likelihood of losing this case, and every objection that raise during the trial is a potential item that can bring up later in appeal.
Oracle also objects to everything, and has also outright refused to furnish information from the old Sun Microsystems website.
Actually from what I've read, there is very little proprietary changes in Safari from webkit (which is open source and shared freely by Apple) while Chrome which uses webkit adds quite a bit of proprietary tidbits that is doesn't share with the community.
Either way, the original poster is wrong if he is trying to pretend that Apple simply takes from the open source community without giving back. It does so quite a bit.
From what I understand, the difference between Chrome ("closed") And Chromium is the chrome logo and a few other very small bits. Where did you read otherwise?
From what I understand, the difference between Chrome ("closed") And Chromium is the chrome logo and a few other very small bits. Where did you read otherwise?
Don't remember, but I had completely forgotten about Chromium which is definitely open. Apparently the differences are more than the logo but are good differences. No auto updater, built in flash or rlz tracking.
Comments
Larry and Steve are friends from way back. None of this matters to Larry except for the chance to make some extra money off something he bought with the aim of controlling the biggest threat he faced to his ancient DB: MySQL. Oracle hasn't really made anything new in many years; they've just been coasting off the lock-in created by the DB they made a very long time ago. That Java came along for the ride with Sun was just fluff for him initially, though recently it's turned into an unexpected potential cash cow if this settlement with Google goes through.
To be fair, Oracle is not stagnate and comes as part of some really big CRM and financial application platforms with very good support. MySql is a roll your own data base with no official support other than a user forum. It should also be noted that Oracle owns MySql.
"As previously shown the top brass at Google are lyres...
The do tend to "harp" on about the whole don't be evil thing.
Us court system likes to use the term reasonable observer and othe rvague language so having people that know what is going on may disqualify the, from being a reasonable observer. So the closer the jury is to "average American" the more apt the court system considers them to be.
thanks. I understand now. oh well we'll see what happens.
wouldn't you need a jury who can actually understand the evidence?
And risk an unbiased decision? No way, let's make "using an iPhone and the latest Mac (x2) a prereq. Users need to understand the technology huh?
Yes, I had noted that Oracle bought MySQL. Under both current and previous ownership, there has always been the option for paid support.
MySQL scales well enough that it had become a credible threat to a sizable segment of Oracle's market. MySQL drives most of the web apps currently in use. In fact, I'd be surprised if this forum isn't run on MySQL. Gaining control of MySQL was the primary objective in Oracle's acquisition of Sun.
Are you familiar with Libre Office? Oracle owns Open Office too, and the rationale for forking it away from Oracle applies equally to MySQL and VirtualBox, no matter how uncomfortable this notion may make people.
Yes, that's the first thing I thought. The way Apple and Oracle frame it, this is a serious threat to open source and in a quite vicious way also to free work. So Andy Rubin worked at Apple and never can work on the same kind of job ever because he might make decisions based on his professional experience? Interesting.
And for those who forget it, Safari is KDE's browser. Open Source. Mac OS X is BSD. Open Source. Don't even go this way.
(preventive nuclear strike launched)
I think they're trying to get the jurors from the O.J. Simpson trial.
Nah... Just the judge!
The do tend to "harp" on about the whole don't be evil thing.
I think that's their "angel".
Yes, that's the first thing I thought. The way Apple and Oracle frame it, this is a serious threat to open source and in a quite vicious way also to free work. So Andy Rubin worked at Apple and never can work on the same kind of job ever because he might make decisions based on his professional experience? Interesting.
And for those who forget it, Safari is KDE's browser. Open Source. Mac OS X is BSD. Open Source. Don't even go this way.
(preventive nuclear strike launched)
Good morning... who pissed in your Cheerios?
And for those who forget it, Safari is KDE's browser. Open Source. Mac OS X is BSD. Open Source. Don't even go this way.
Wrong. Safari is based on KDE, but has been extensively revised - and has a great deal of proprietary stuff, as well.
Mac OS X uses a kernel which is based on the BSD kernel, but is not BSD by any stretch of the imagination.
Your arguments might be interesting if they were factual rather than imagined.
that's not an answer.
And you and I have vastly different definitions of evil.
Please note the quotation marks around his reply.
Please note the quotation marks around his reply.
I noticed them...
that's still not an answer...
I noticed them...
that's still not an answer...
He was making a joke from a Google quote soony-jim. Try not to take it so seriously.
Wrong. Safari is based on KDE, but has been extensively revised - and has a great deal of proprietary stuff, as well.
Mac OS X uses a kernel which is based on the BSD kernel, but is not BSD by any stretch of the imagination.
Your arguments might be interesting if they were factual rather than imagined.
Actually from what I've read, there is very little proprietary changes in Safari from webkit (which is open source and shared freely by Apple) while Chrome which uses webkit adds quite a bit of proprietary tidbits that is doesn't share with the community.
Either way, the original poster is wrong if he is trying to pretend that Apple simply takes from the open source community without giving back. It does so quite a bit.
Actually from what I've read, there is very little proprietary changes in Safari from webkit (which is open source and shared freely by Apple) while Chrome which uses webkit adds quite a bit of proprietary tidbits that is doesn't share with the community.
Either way, the original poster is wrong if he is trying to pretend that Apple simply takes from the open source community without giving back. It does so quite a bit.
WebKit is Apple's open source movement that builds from KHTML. Apple added tonnes of proprietary stuff on top of KHTML and then just went "right! open source that sucker!". Google's only proprietary addition to chrome is the V8 JS Engine. Everything about the Layout engine is just straight up webkit.
Non-lawyer opinion coming up: Personally, I'm not surprised they're objecting. Google intends to object to everything that happens in this trial. Every evening, they'll probably object to the coming of night. I suspect they see a good likelihood of losing this case, and every objection that raise during the trial is a potential item that can bring up later in appeal.
Oracle also objects to everything, and has also outright refused to furnish information from the old Sun Microsystems website.
Actually from what I've read, there is very little proprietary changes in Safari from webkit (which is open source and shared freely by Apple) while Chrome which uses webkit adds quite a bit of proprietary tidbits that is doesn't share with the community.
Either way, the original poster is wrong if he is trying to pretend that Apple simply takes from the open source community without giving back. It does so quite a bit.
From what I understand, the difference between Chrome ("closed") And Chromium is the chrome logo and a few other very small bits. Where did you read otherwise?
From what I understand, the difference between Chrome ("closed") And Chromium is the chrome logo and a few other very small bits. Where did you read otherwise?
Don't remember, but I had completely forgotten about Chromium which is definitely open. Apparently the differences are more than the logo but are good differences. No auto updater, built in flash or rlz tracking.