Oracle doesn't want to shut down Android. On the contrary, they want to collect royalties for Android, and to be worth their while they want Android to succeed.
It's rational guess. But let's not state these guesses as if we want what Oracle really wants. We are not Larry Ellison. How do we know what he really wants?
The level of detail in Mueller's blog is what keeps me going back there, but his bias is so increasingly self-evident that it's getting hard to wade through to the straight facts.
What other blogs would you recommend for coverage on these topics?
That's an issue if your only interest is who's doing what to Google or one of it's Android partners as I'm sure you've found. That seems to be his sole focus lately, and you're right about his inclusion of facts. He posts detail that others don't often mention, and that's definitely worth the visit. But he's also sometimes selective on what facts he reports, thus the need to search out multiple sources if you want the entire story, at least IMHO. If instead you have a general interest in researching patent law or keeping up with the latest patent news, I've found PatentlyO is a pretty good source.
I mentioned somewhere the other day that some of my more commonly-visited sites are the above-mentioned PatentlyO, EWeek, 9to5Mac, Groklaw, and SEOByTheSea. My normal pattern is just doing some Google phrase searches as new topics come up, as well as visiting those sites I just listed. Probably not so different than some of the other posters here.
I'm perhaps less "intelligent" than some here, but I can research with the best of them, and a whole lot more careful with my claims than most.
Why would oracle want to shut down android. (I think thats what you mean Android is an OS and Droid is a line of phones released on Verizon's network.) Their is no gain in oracle getting android stopped. If anything they would want it to be as successful as possible. They want royalties not to shut it down. Only apple and Microsoft stand to really lose by android OS being more powerful.
Oracle has expressed that their first goal is to kill dahlvik. Android has to implement Oracles jvm in Android for it to continue and license it and pay triple damages and ongoing licenses. Anyways dahlvik java is just a bastardised java according to Oracle which is why its seeking full injunction. That means dahlvik java isnt really 1to1 compatible with Oracle jvm. If Oracle dont succeed on the permanent injuction then damages (money, billions of it) is just a consolation price.
Q:What is Android without java,? A: An operating system without applications!!!
It dont look pretty for Goog.(nor Samsung, etc.) Even if they paid up and implemented Oracle jvm it would be the end of "free bier" for the chiepoes and bums and every app would have to be tested on that jvm and changes made for it to work.
If Oracle were privately held I'd agree with you 100%. Ellison is, shall we say, "unpredictable".
But as a publicly held company, it seems unlikely that Ellison will be able to get Oracle to take a position not in the shareholders' interests.
There, I feel confident in disagreeing with you. How to negotiate (or not) with Google is a decision entirely in Ellison's hands. It is not something shareholders vote on at the AGM (no more than Apple shareholders would vote on whether to sue Samsung, or design of the next iPhone). If Ellison chooses the *maverick* route (which he has done many times, as I believe you'd agree), the shareholders have the option to bring up a motion at the AGM to force him out. But will they? Such a scenario is unlikely at any company. At Oracle, where Ellison is a demi-God, it's simply not going to happen.
There, I feel confident in disagreeing with you. How to negotiate (or not) with Google is a decision entirely in Ellison's hands. It is not something shareholders vote on at the AGM (no more than Apple shareholders would vote on whether to sue Samsung, or design of the next iPhone). If Ellison chooses the *maverick* route (which he has done many times, as I believe you'd agree), the shareholders have the option to bring up a motion at the AGM to force him out. But will they? Such a scenario is unlikely at any company. At Oracle, where Ellison is a demi-God, it's simply not going to happen.
Agreed. He's his own man, and unpredictability comes with him. He reminds me of a more refined Mark Cuban.
given that their stock is up about 50% in less than 2 years, they seem to be doing better than that. Looks like they are thriving, rather than fighting for survival.
Given that the market is up about 90% in that same span, it doesn't look like they rode the groundswell too effectively. Losing pace by a factor of nearly two wouldn't be something to be proud of.
Do you think that Foxconn designs and engineers the phones too, or are you on board that Apple designs and engineers them, while Foxconn then assembles the production units from components bought from other suppliers? If so, does that still make Apple just a software company in your view?
You're absolutely correct, but Apple this is NOT a phone manufacturer.
You're absolutely correct, but Apple this is NOT a phone manufacturer.
I was disputing your claim that they are just a software company. Phone manufacturer was not part of the argument. Anyway - you are, at best, splitting hairs, and more likely, having read your other posts, trying, again, to imply that Apple had nothing to do with the hardware. Not helpful to the discussion except to stir the pot.
Comments
Oracle doesn't want to shut down Android. On the contrary, they want to collect royalties for Android, and to be worth their while they want Android to succeed.
It's rational guess. But let's not state these guesses as if we want what Oracle really wants. We are not Larry Ellison. How do we know what he really wants?
The level of detail in Mueller's blog is what keeps me going back there, but his bias is so increasingly self-evident that it's getting hard to wade through to the straight facts.
What other blogs would you recommend for coverage on these topics?
That's an issue if your only interest is who's doing what to Google or one of it's Android partners as I'm sure you've found. That seems to be his sole focus lately, and you're right about his inclusion of facts. He posts detail that others don't often mention, and that's definitely worth the visit. But he's also sometimes selective on what facts he reports, thus the need to search out multiple sources if you want the entire story, at least IMHO. If instead you have a general interest in researching patent law or keeping up with the latest patent news, I've found PatentlyO is a pretty good source.
I mentioned somewhere the other day that some of my more commonly-visited sites are the above-mentioned PatentlyO, EWeek, 9to5Mac, Groklaw, and SEOByTheSea. My normal pattern is just doing some Google phrase searches as new topics come up, as well as visiting those sites I just listed. Probably not so different than some of the other posters here.
I'm perhaps less "intelligent" than some here, but I can research with the best of them, and a whole lot more careful with my claims than most.
Why would oracle want to shut down android. (I think thats what you mean Android is an OS and Droid is a line of phones released on Verizon's network.) Their is no gain in oracle getting android stopped. If anything they would want it to be as successful as possible. They want royalties not to shut it down. Only apple and Microsoft stand to really lose by android OS being more powerful.
Oracle has expressed that their first goal is to kill dahlvik. Android has to implement Oracles jvm in Android for it to continue and license it and pay triple damages and ongoing licenses. Anyways dahlvik java is just a bastardised java according to Oracle which is why its seeking full injunction. That means dahlvik java isnt really 1to1 compatible with Oracle jvm. If Oracle dont succeed on the permanent injuction then damages (money, billions of it) is just a consolation price.
Q:What is Android without java,? A: An operating system without applications!!!
It dont look pretty for Goog.(nor Samsung, etc.) Even if they paid up and implemented Oracle jvm it would be the end of "free bier" for the chiepoes and bums and every app would have to be tested on that jvm and changes made for it to work.
If Oracle were privately held I'd agree with you 100%. Ellison is, shall we say, "unpredictable".
But as a publicly held company, it seems unlikely that Ellison will be able to get Oracle to take a position not in the shareholders' interests.
There, I feel confident in disagreeing with you. How to negotiate (or not) with Google is a decision entirely in Ellison's hands. It is not something shareholders vote on at the AGM (no more than Apple shareholders would vote on whether to sue Samsung, or design of the next iPhone). If Ellison chooses the *maverick* route (which he has done many times, as I believe you'd agree), the shareholders have the option to bring up a motion at the AGM to force him out. But will they? Such a scenario is unlikely at any company. At Oracle, where Ellison is a demi-God, it's simply not going to happen.
There, I feel confident in disagreeing with you. How to negotiate (or not) with Google is a decision entirely in Ellison's hands. It is not something shareholders vote on at the AGM (no more than Apple shareholders would vote on whether to sue Samsung, or design of the next iPhone). If Ellison chooses the *maverick* route (which he has done many times, as I believe you'd agree), the shareholders have the option to bring up a motion at the AGM to force him out. But will they? Such a scenario is unlikely at any company. At Oracle, where Ellison is a demi-God, it's simply not going to happen.
Agreed. He's his own man, and unpredictability comes with him. He reminds me of a more refined Mark Cuban.
given that their stock is up about 50% in less than 2 years, they seem to be doing better than that. Looks like they are thriving, rather than fighting for survival.
Given that the market is up about 90% in that same span, it doesn't look like they rode the groundswell too effectively. Losing pace by a factor of nearly two wouldn't be something to be proud of.
Do you think that Foxconn designs and engineers the phones too, or are you on board that Apple designs and engineers them, while Foxconn then assembles the production units from components bought from other suppliers? If so, does that still make Apple just a software company in your view?
You're absolutely correct, but Apple this is NOT a phone manufacturer.
You're absolutely correct, but Apple this is NOT a phone manufacturer.
I was disputing your claim that they are just a software company. Phone manufacturer was not part of the argument. Anyway - you are, at best, splitting hairs, and more likely, having read your other posts, trying, again, to imply that Apple had nothing to do with the hardware. Not helpful to the discussion except to stir the pot.
What formula did you use to arrive at 2 weeks, given that the *attack* contains 3 paragraphs?
Is it
W = 2P/3
with W = # of weeks and P = # of paragraphs?
Or is it a nonlinear function?
I think it should be explained using exponential functions to be honest.
*busts out the differential equations*
I think it should be explained using exponential functions to be honest.
*busts out the differential equations*
I favor step functions. ƒ(not asshat) = No vacation, ƒ(asshat) = Vacation. Simple. Worked for Ackerman and others.