Google is right, people. Competition benefits the consumers. But where they're wrong is in asking the ITC to not do their job when it comes to infringement. Infringing others' IP does not qualify as competition, simple as that.
That's such a blanket term nowadays...everyone everywhere infringes on some form of IP...
And Android hardly infringes on iOS or whatever but some vague patents are sure violated like the fact that if an email has a link/phone number/email address in it it is automatically hyperlinked...MY GOD STOP THE PRESSES THEY ARE STEALING!!!!!!
First of all google did not copy iOS it is really sad some people are to ignorant to understand that. First of all the way the two OSs operate is totally different. Google uses a virtual machine called Dalvic very similar to java in order to interact with the soft ware and the hardware. iOS does not use a virtual machine to interact with software and hardware it is more direct on soft ware communicates with the machine language.
The next thing that is completely different about the OSs is the user interface. iOS goes the way of have no home screen and having the user doing everything directly from the app drawl. Android however does it a differently. Android does it similar to how Blackberry OS and Windows mobile have done it for years. Android has an App drawl that all the apps are placed in. Then it has a seperate homescreen that the user interacts with. this home screen contains the shortcut to applications and widgets this is similar to those previous OSs.
What happened was Android was being developed to compete with the then current heavy weights of the industry and was taking the best things from those OSs and makign android with it. At that time smartphones where keyboard based. Then the iPhone was Released and the demand for smartphones shifted. People did not want the keyboard based any more so as demand shifted so did did the androids offerings. Instead of offering an OS that would not even be desirable to consumers android was made touch orientated and DID COPY MULTITOUCH AND PINCH TO ZOOM however most of the things in the Os where virtually the same. Android being touch based does not make it an iOS copy. Having the grid of Icons is not because that was around far before iOS. If you use them both you will see the differences are vast.
Dude...I don't know which is more convoluted - your sentence structures/spelling or your Android history lesson?
First of all google did not copy iOS it is really sad some people are to ignorant to understand that. First of all the way the two OSs operate is totally different. Google uses a virtual machine called Dalvic very similar to java in order to interact with the soft ware and the hardware. iOS does not use a virtual machine to interact with software and hardware it is more direct on soft ware communicates with the machine language.
You misspelled "Google stole Java from Oracle and is about to get their butts kicked because of it".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung
The next thing that is completely different about the OSs is the user interface. iOS goes the way of have no home screen and having the user doing everything directly from the app drawl. Android however does it a differently. Android does it similar to how Blackberry OS and Windows mobile have done it for years. Android has an App drawl that all the apps are placed in. Then it has a seperate homescreen that the user interacts with. this home screen contains the shortcut to applications and widgets this is similar to those previous OSs.
You misspelled "Google has gone out its way to make Android copy as many things as possible from iOS". You also failed to mention that many of the Android devices are incredibly blatant copies of Apple products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung
What happened was Android was being developed to compete with the then current heavy weights of the industry and was taking the best things from those OSs and makign android with it. At that time smartphones where keyboard based. Then the iPhone was Released and the demand for smartphones shifted. People did not want the keyboard based any more so as demand shifted so did did the androids offerings. Instead of offering an OS that would not even be desirable to consumers android was made touch orientated and DID COPY MULTITOUCH AND PINCH TO ZOOM however most of the things in the Os where virtually the same. Android being touch based does not make it an iOS copy. Having the grid of Icons is not because that was around far before iOS. If you use them both you will see the differences are vast.
This is, of course, silly revisionism. Android had an appearance and look and feel similar to Blackberry - right up to the date that the iPhone was released. Then suddenly, it started to look like iOS. Similarly, Android phones looked like Blackberries until the iPhone came out - and suddenly most Android phones look just like iPhones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe
They never asked the ITC to "allow Android to freely infringe Apple's iOS".
They want ITC to eliminate the strongest penalty against Android phones - which amounts to nearly the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windsor Smith
Conradjoe, I read both Dilger's and Mueller's articles, and it appears that the scenario presented is in accord with the facts. Can you be more specific? Or are you just blowing smoke?
It's Conradjoe. Of course he's just blowing smoke. Nearly 600 posts and I'm still waiting for him to back up a single statement that he's made.
Seriously they purposefully copied Apples iOS devices including the copyrighted or patented aspects. That can not be allowed to stand. Sadly it appears that they did this on purpose because they had no confidence in their own processes and software stack.
What really blows here is that Android had the makings of a really decent iPhone competitor but instead took a turn towards theft. No body at Google should be proud of what Android has become. Rather they should be embarrassed and ashamed that they took the route of the common criminal.
They asked the ITC not to ban Android devices even if Android is found to infringe Apple's intellectual property. Isn't that effectively the same thing?
No. There are an infinite number of other remedies that can be imposed other than the narrow exclusions that were asked for.
Money damages come to mind, as does a temporary stay of the injunction. They never asked for compete immunity.
You misspelled "Google stole Java from Oracle and is about to get their butts kicked because of it".
Guilty before a judgement is made?...of course!!...they aren't Apple.
Besides, even if they did use the code (FROM SUN not Oracle btw, Oracle BOUGHT Sun - who didn't mind the code usage) then decided to sue...in fact Oracle went and terminated/altered plenty of open projects Sun use to support...hence why openoffice is now libreoffice (stupid name).
Google never infringed upon Oracle, Oracle saw success and acted in the interest of their wallets.
Quote:
You misspelled "Google has gone out its way to make Android copy as many things as possible from iOS". You also failed to mention that many of the Android devices are incredibly blatant copies of Apple products.
Let me know what parts of Android the OS are like iOS...I'll be waiting...also if today phone maker A modifies Android to look and act EXACTLY like iOS...that is not Google's fault...and you know that...sooo.
Quote:
This is, of course, silly revisionism. Android had an appearance and look and feel similar to Blackberry - right up to the date that the iPhone was released. Then suddenly, it started to look like iOS. Similarly, Android phones looked like Blackberries until the iPhone came out - and suddenly most Android phones look just like iPhones.
This is pretty much what he just said...also no Android phone in it's early stages looked anything like an iPhone other than being mostly full touch screen with icons. The only phones that look remotely iPhone like are some models of Samsung Galaxy phones.
Also from it's inception Android was meant for many form factors and hardware styles...they also had a prototype that was all touch way back when the blackberry style version was around...conveniently people here always seem to miss that.
Twins???:
Not at all.
Quote:
They want ITC to eliminate the strongest penalty against Android phones - which amounts to nearly the same thing.
Not at all. "Since he can't get the death penalty you're pretty much setting him free." see how stupid it sounds in another context?
Quote:
It's Conradjoe. Of course he's just blowing smoke. Nearly 600 posts and I'm still waiting for him to back up a single statement that he's made.
T-Mobile was surely very cautious in the wording they used and in the arguments they selected. Parallels can be drawn to the impending AT&T/T-Mobile takeover regarding competition, consumer choice and ideas related to monopolies. It will be interesting to see not only how this plays out, but if it somehow plays into the litigation involved with the merger. If anything I am sure that the arguments Google presents will help bolster the DOJ and Sprint's defense in the merger suits.
Funny how they never mention that Apple applied for a patent on this technology before Android even existed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Guilty before a judgement is made?...of course!!...they aren't Apple.
Besides, even if they did use the code (FROM SUN not Oracle btw, Oracle BOUGHT Sun - who didn't mind the code usage) then decided to sue...in fact Oracle went and terminated/altered plenty of open projects Sun use to support...hence why openoffice is now libreoffice (stupid name).
Google never infringed upon Oracle, Oracle saw success and acted in the interest of their wallets.
What a stupid argument. Oracle owns the code and doesn't allow Google to use it, so Google stole from Oracle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Not at all. "Since he can't get the death penalty you're pretty much setting him free." see how stupid it sounds in another context?
First, banning imports is not the death penalty. Google will survive - as will Samsung and HTC.
Furthermore, ITC doesn't really have any options other than "ban" or "don't ban". So if they don't ban an obvious infringer, then they no longer have any options.
Funny how they never mention that Apple applied for a patent on this technology before Android even existed.
So Apple patented Android's notification system yet never implemented it before Android existed (before 2005, which is when it was bought, not made)?
Quote:
What a stupid argument. Oracle owns the code and doesn't allow Google to use it, so Google stole from Oracle.
Google can't steal from someone who didn't own what they were allowed to use at the time they used it. Infringe? sure...steal? Literally impossible.
Also, I wonder if you realize that you just admitted that you believe patent trolls are not trolls and are 100% just in what they do. lol...
GO LODSYS!!!!!
Quote:
First, banning imports is not the death penalty. Google will survive - as will Samsung and HTC.
Furthermore, ITC doesn't really have any options other than "ban" or "don't ban". So if they don't ban an obvious infringer, then they no longer have any options.
But there are other options...just like "kill" or "let walk free" aren't the only two options in a murder conviction.
Also you never commented on the "Twin OSes" that I posted above...
I think this question of yours pretty much sum up your utter lack of rationality. Yes, of course they are guilty "before judgement (sic) is made". Guilt doesn't depend on judgment, it's entirely independent of judgment. Just because the U.S. legal system declares that there is a presumption of innocence, doesn't mean that one's guilt is like Schrodinger's cat and indeterminate until judgment is made.
They're guilty, everyone knows it, and their entire legal strategy is based on finding or creating some sort of loophole to nullify their guilt. But you are so completely and habitually lacking in the smallest amount of honesty, intellectual and general, that you come here day after day to engage in acts of transparent sophistry that reflect only the pettiness and emptiness of your own soul and what must be the utter misery of the life that is yours.
So sad, really, that there are people like you in the world.
I think this question of yours pretty much sum up your utter lack of rationality. Yes, of course they are guilty "before judgement (sic) is made". Guilt doesn't depend on judgment, it's entirely independent of judgment. Just because the U.S. legal system declares that there is a presumption of innocence, doesn't mean that one's guilt is like Schrodinger's cat and indeterminate until judgment is made.
They're guilty, everyone knows it, and their entire legal strategy is based on finding or creating some sort of loophole to nullify their guilt. But you are so completely and habitually lacking in the smallest amount of honesty, intellectual and general, that you come here day after day to engage in acts of transparent sophistry that reflect only the pettiness and emptiness of your own soul and what must be the utter misery of the life that is yours.
So sad, really, that there are people like you in the world.
Why are they guilty again? Oh yea. They stole Java which is open source from a company that said they were happy to have them on board then said company was bought by oracle and oracle decided to sue.
Also, since all of your posts are blindly rabidly hate filled when you speak to me do me a favor and don't speak to me.
I'm at the point where i hate google. Too bad they have the best search engine and i can not ditch them.
Actually, I get by just fine with Yahoo or Bing. Only rarely do I have a search that I have to resort to Google.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Why are they guilty again? Oh yea. They stole Java which is open source from a company that said they were happy to have them on board then said company was bought by oracle and oracle decided to sue.
Funny how you distort the facts to further your agenda.
Oracle owns the technology. Google does not have a license to use the technology. That's all that's relevant. The fact that someone else might have let them use the technology in the past is completely irrelevant - unless their license to use it is permanent.
Furthermore, Google didn't have a license from Sun, either. Sun offered Google a license and Google declined:
Actually, I get by just fine with Yahoo or Bing. Only rarely do I have a search that I have to resort to Google.
Funny how you distort the facts to further your agenda.
Oracle owns the technology. Google does not have a license to use the technology. That's all that's relevant. The fact that someone else might have let them use the technology in the past is completely irrelevant - unless their license to use it is permanent.
Furthermore, Google didn't have a license from Sun, either. Sun offered Google a license and Google declined:
Anyways you are the same people who think Android looks like iOS, Android copied notifications from WebOS, HTC devices look like iPhones and a plethora of other easily falsifiable claims.
Either way oracle is in it for the money.
And lol @ you losers abandoning all things Google because you really think you work for Apple and Steve was your homeboy
But anyways. Who will you hate next now that Steve's light is extinguished? You must feel so cold now that the usher of your soul and mind is non existent.
Since when are Oracle and Sun patent trolls? And even if they were, U.S. patent law allows you to sue someone under a patent even if you don't use it in your own products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Anyways you are the same people who think Android looks like iOS, Android copied notifications from WebOS, HTC devices look like iPhones and a plethora of other easily falsifiable claims.
Seeing as how Apple's first patent applications on notifications predate Android, your story doesn't ring true (just like your claim that Sun was OK with Google using Java - even though it only took me a second to find an article showing that Sun tried to sell Google rights to use Java and Google refused).
Furthermore, there are big differences. The idea of notifications is an old one and has been around for many, many years. The look and feel of iOS is proprietary. Look at many of the icons that Android uses - those are near exact copies of Apple's icons - just as one example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
Either way oracle is in it for the money.
So? What's wrong with wanting to make money off of technologies that you own? It's OK for Google to steal it because Oracle only wants to make money with it????
Even more importantly, Sun offered Google a license for $100 K and Google refused. Does THAT make it OK for Google to steal the technology? (and, based on those facts, just how in the world could you possibly reach the conclusion that Sun was OK with Google doing so?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
And lol @ you losers abandoning all things Google because you really think you work for Apple and Steve was your homeboy
But anyways. Who will you hate next now that Steve's light is extinguished? You must feel so cold now that the usher of your soul and mind is non existent.
I dislike criminals. It has nothing to do with Jobs or anyone else. Google has shown an incredible disdain for anyone's intellectual property but their own. I started to really dislike them when they started copying every printed work they could get their hands on it and wanted to sell access on the Internet - without having the authors' permission. They're a dishonest company and I refuse to support them.
It's really interesting that for a Google phandroid like you, it all comes down to personalities, while I (as well as most Apple users I know) have specific reasons for the things we do. Seems to me that it's not the Apple fans who are drinking Kool-aid.
Comments
That's such a blanket term nowadays...everyone everywhere infringes on some form of IP...
And Android hardly infringes on iOS or whatever but some vague patents are sure violated like the fact that if an email has a link/phone number/email address in it it is automatically hyperlinked...MY GOD STOP THE PRESSES THEY ARE STEALING!!!!!!
First of all google did not copy iOS it is really sad some people are to ignorant to understand that. First of all the way the two OSs operate is totally different. Google uses a virtual machine called Dalvic very similar to java in order to interact with the soft ware and the hardware. iOS does not use a virtual machine to interact with software and hardware it is more direct on soft ware communicates with the machine language.
The next thing that is completely different about the OSs is the user interface. iOS goes the way of have no home screen and having the user doing everything directly from the app drawl. Android however does it a differently. Android does it similar to how Blackberry OS and Windows mobile have done it for years. Android has an App drawl that all the apps are placed in. Then it has a seperate homescreen that the user interacts with. this home screen contains the shortcut to applications and widgets this is similar to those previous OSs.
What happened was Android was being developed to compete with the then current heavy weights of the industry and was taking the best things from those OSs and makign android with it. At that time smartphones where keyboard based. Then the iPhone was Released and the demand for smartphones shifted. People did not want the keyboard based any more so as demand shifted so did did the androids offerings. Instead of offering an OS that would not even be desirable to consumers android was made touch orientated and DID COPY MULTITOUCH AND PINCH TO ZOOM however most of the things in the Os where virtually the same. Android being touch based does not make it an iOS copy. Having the grid of Icons is not because that was around far before iOS. If you use them both you will see the differences are vast.
Dude...I don't know which is more convoluted - your sentence structures/spelling or your Android history lesson?
Dude...I don't know which is more convoluted - your sentence structures/spelling or your Android history lesson?
what is wrong with the history in his post?
I'm on a site where people have said Android's notification panel is a rip off of WebOS's so forgive me if I want some clarity.
First of all google did not copy iOS it is really sad some people are to ignorant to understand that. First of all the way the two OSs operate is totally different. Google uses a virtual machine called Dalvic very similar to java in order to interact with the soft ware and the hardware. iOS does not use a virtual machine to interact with software and hardware it is more direct on soft ware communicates with the machine language.
You misspelled "Google stole Java from Oracle and is about to get their butts kicked because of it".
The next thing that is completely different about the OSs is the user interface. iOS goes the way of have no home screen and having the user doing everything directly from the app drawl. Android however does it a differently. Android does it similar to how Blackberry OS and Windows mobile have done it for years. Android has an App drawl that all the apps are placed in. Then it has a seperate homescreen that the user interacts with. this home screen contains the shortcut to applications and widgets this is similar to those previous OSs.
You misspelled "Google has gone out its way to make Android copy as many things as possible from iOS". You also failed to mention that many of the Android devices are incredibly blatant copies of Apple products.
What happened was Android was being developed to compete with the then current heavy weights of the industry and was taking the best things from those OSs and makign android with it. At that time smartphones where keyboard based. Then the iPhone was Released and the demand for smartphones shifted. People did not want the keyboard based any more so as demand shifted so did did the androids offerings. Instead of offering an OS that would not even be desirable to consumers android was made touch orientated and DID COPY MULTITOUCH AND PINCH TO ZOOM however most of the things in the Os where virtually the same. Android being touch based does not make it an iOS copy. Having the grid of Icons is not because that was around far before iOS. If you use them both you will see the differences are vast.
This is, of course, silly revisionism. Android had an appearance and look and feel similar to Blackberry - right up to the date that the iPhone was released. Then suddenly, it started to look like iOS. Similarly, Android phones looked like Blackberries until the iPhone came out - and suddenly most Android phones look just like iPhones.
They never asked the ITC to "allow Android to freely infringe Apple's iOS".
They want ITC to eliminate the strongest penalty against Android phones - which amounts to nearly the same thing.
Conradjoe, I read both Dilger's and Mueller's articles, and it appears that the scenario presented is in accord with the facts. Can you be more specific? Or are you just blowing smoke?
It's Conradjoe. Of course he's just blowing smoke. Nearly 600 posts and I'm still waiting for him to back up a single statement that he's made.
Now they are just taking the piss... Seriously.
Wow, just no shame what so ever
Seriously they purposefully copied Apples iOS devices including the copyrighted or patented aspects. That can not be allowed to stand. Sadly it appears that they did this on purpose because they had no confidence in their own processes and software stack.
What really blows here is that Android had the makings of a really decent iPhone competitor but instead took a turn towards theft. No body at Google should be proud of what Android has become. Rather they should be embarrassed and ashamed that they took the route of the common criminal.
http://androidandme.com/2011/06/news...d-lock-screen/
so yeah.........
They asked the ITC not to ban Android devices even if Android is found to infringe Apple's intellectual property. Isn't that effectively the same thing?
No. There are an infinite number of other remedies that can be imposed other than the narrow exclusions that were asked for.
Money damages come to mind, as does a temporary stay of the injunction. They never asked for compete immunity.
http://androidandme.com/2011/06/news...d-lock-screen/
so yeah.........
hey now, according to people here...Apple merely absorbed WebOS (whom Android somehow copied).
Yes...that has actually been said -___-
You misspelled "Google stole Java from Oracle and is about to get their butts kicked because of it".
Guilty before a judgement is made?...of course!!...they aren't Apple.
Besides, even if they did use the code (FROM SUN not Oracle btw, Oracle BOUGHT Sun - who didn't mind the code usage) then decided to sue...in fact Oracle went and terminated/altered plenty of open projects Sun use to support...hence why openoffice is now libreoffice (stupid name).
Google never infringed upon Oracle, Oracle saw success and acted in the interest of their wallets.
You misspelled "Google has gone out its way to make Android copy as many things as possible from iOS". You also failed to mention that many of the Android devices are incredibly blatant copies of Apple products.
Let me know what parts of Android the OS are like iOS...I'll be waiting...also if today phone maker A modifies Android to look and act EXACTLY like iOS...that is not Google's fault...and you know that...sooo.
This is, of course, silly revisionism. Android had an appearance and look and feel similar to Blackberry - right up to the date that the iPhone was released. Then suddenly, it started to look like iOS. Similarly, Android phones looked like Blackberries until the iPhone came out - and suddenly most Android phones look just like iPhones.
This is pretty much what he just said...also no Android phone in it's early stages looked anything like an iPhone other than being mostly full touch screen with icons. The only phones that look remotely iPhone like are some models of Samsung Galaxy phones.
Also from it's inception Android was meant for many form factors and hardware styles...they also had a prototype that was all touch way back when the blackberry style version was around...conveniently people here always seem to miss that.
Twins???:
Not at all.
They want ITC to eliminate the strongest penalty against Android phones - which amounts to nearly the same thing.
Not at all. "Since he can't get the death penalty you're pretty much setting him free." see how stupid it sounds in another context?
It's Conradjoe. Of course he's just blowing smoke. Nearly 600 posts and I'm still waiting for him to back up a single statement that he's made.
like what...we'll be waiting.
It's Conradjoe. Of course he's just blowing smoke. Nearly 600 posts and I'm still waiting for him to back up a single statement that he's made.
Get offa my dik, Ragosta.
Unless you're obsessed, which you might be. In which case, please carry on.
http://androidandme.com/2011/06/news...d-lock-screen/
so yeah.........
Funny how they never mention that Apple applied for a patent on this technology before Android even existed.
Guilty before a judgement is made?...of course!!...they aren't Apple.
Besides, even if they did use the code (FROM SUN not Oracle btw, Oracle BOUGHT Sun - who didn't mind the code usage) then decided to sue...in fact Oracle went and terminated/altered plenty of open projects Sun use to support...hence why openoffice is now libreoffice (stupid name).
Google never infringed upon Oracle, Oracle saw success and acted in the interest of their wallets.
What a stupid argument. Oracle owns the code and doesn't allow Google to use it, so Google stole from Oracle.
Not at all. "Since he can't get the death penalty you're pretty much setting him free." see how stupid it sounds in another context?
First, banning imports is not the death penalty. Google will survive - as will Samsung and HTC.
Furthermore, ITC doesn't really have any options other than "ban" or "don't ban". So if they don't ban an obvious infringer, then they no longer have any options.
What a bizarre POV. Stealing is wrong.
That is my POV stealing is wrong be it by us of by them!!!
Funny how they never mention that Apple applied for a patent on this technology before Android even existed.
So Apple patented Android's notification system yet never implemented it before Android existed (before 2005, which is when it was bought, not made)?
What a stupid argument. Oracle owns the code and doesn't allow Google to use it, so Google stole from Oracle.
Google can't steal from someone who didn't own what they were allowed to use at the time they used it. Infringe? sure...steal? Literally impossible.
Also, I wonder if you realize that you just admitted that you believe patent trolls are not trolls and are 100% just in what they do. lol...
GO LODSYS!!!!!
First, banning imports is not the death penalty. Google will survive - as will Samsung and HTC.
Furthermore, ITC doesn't really have any options other than "ban" or "don't ban". So if they don't ban an obvious infringer, then they no longer have any options.
But there are other options...just like "kill" or "let walk free" aren't the only two options in a murder conviction.
Also you never commented on the "Twin OSes" that I posted above...
Guilty before a judgement is made? ...
I think this question of yours pretty much sum up your utter lack of rationality. Yes, of course they are guilty "before judgement (sic) is made". Guilt doesn't depend on judgment, it's entirely independent of judgment. Just because the U.S. legal system declares that there is a presumption of innocence, doesn't mean that one's guilt is like Schrodinger's cat and indeterminate until judgment is made.
They're guilty, everyone knows it, and their entire legal strategy is based on finding or creating some sort of loophole to nullify their guilt. But you are so completely and habitually lacking in the smallest amount of honesty, intellectual and general, that you come here day after day to engage in acts of transparent sophistry that reflect only the pettiness and emptiness of your own soul and what must be the utter misery of the life that is yours.
So sad, really, that there are people like you in the world.
I think this question of yours pretty much sum up your utter lack of rationality. Yes, of course they are guilty "before judgement (sic) is made". Guilt doesn't depend on judgment, it's entirely independent of judgment. Just because the U.S. legal system declares that there is a presumption of innocence, doesn't mean that one's guilt is like Schrodinger's cat and indeterminate until judgment is made.
They're guilty, everyone knows it, and their entire legal strategy is based on finding or creating some sort of loophole to nullify their guilt. But you are so completely and habitually lacking in the smallest amount of honesty, intellectual and general, that you come here day after day to engage in acts of transparent sophistry that reflect only the pettiness and emptiness of your own soul and what must be the utter misery of the life that is yours.
So sad, really, that there are people like you in the world.
Why are they guilty again? Oh yea. They stole Java which is open source from a company that said they were happy to have them on board then said company was bought by oracle and oracle decided to sue.
Also, since all of your posts are blindly rabidly hate filled when you speak to me do me a favor and don't speak to me.
I'm at the point where i hate google. Too bad they have the best search engine and i can not ditch them.
Actually, I get by just fine with Yahoo or Bing. Only rarely do I have a search that I have to resort to Google.
Why are they guilty again? Oh yea. They stole Java which is open source from a company that said they were happy to have them on board then said company was bought by oracle and oracle decided to sue.
Funny how you distort the facts to further your agenda.
Oracle owns the technology. Google does not have a license to use the technology. That's all that's relevant. The fact that someone else might have let them use the technology in the past is completely irrelevant - unless their license to use it is permanent.
Furthermore, Google didn't have a license from Sun, either. Sun offered Google a license and Google declined:
http://www.cio.com/article/686573/Go...or_100_Million
Actually, I get by just fine with Yahoo or Bing. Only rarely do I have a search that I have to resort to Google.
Funny how you distort the facts to further your agenda.
Oracle owns the technology. Google does not have a license to use the technology. That's all that's relevant. The fact that someone else might have let them use the technology in the past is completely irrelevant - unless their license to use it is permanent.
Furthermore, Google didn't have a license from Sun, either. Sun offered Google a license and Google declined:
http://www.cio.com/article/686573/Go...or_100_Million
So again. Patent trolls are fine?
Anyways you are the same people who think Android looks like iOS, Android copied notifications from WebOS, HTC devices look like iPhones and a plethora of other easily falsifiable claims.
Either way oracle is in it for the money.
And lol @ you losers abandoning all things Google because you really think you work for Apple and Steve was your homeboy
But anyways. Who will you hate next now that Steve's light is extinguished? You must feel so cold now that the usher of your soul and mind is non existent.
So again. Patent trolls are fine?
Since when are Oracle and Sun patent trolls? And even if they were, U.S. patent law allows you to sue someone under a patent even if you don't use it in your own products.
Anyways you are the same people who think Android looks like iOS, Android copied notifications from WebOS, HTC devices look like iPhones and a plethora of other easily falsifiable claims.
Seeing as how Apple's first patent applications on notifications predate Android, your story doesn't ring true (just like your claim that Sun was OK with Google using Java - even though it only took me a second to find an article showing that Sun tried to sell Google rights to use Java and Google refused).
Furthermore, there are big differences. The idea of notifications is an old one and has been around for many, many years. The look and feel of iOS is proprietary. Look at many of the icons that Android uses - those are near exact copies of Apple's icons - just as one example.
Either way oracle is in it for the money.
So? What's wrong with wanting to make money off of technologies that you own? It's OK for Google to steal it because Oracle only wants to make money with it????
Even more importantly, Sun offered Google a license for $100 K and Google refused. Does THAT make it OK for Google to steal the technology? (and, based on those facts, just how in the world could you possibly reach the conclusion that Sun was OK with Google doing so?)
And lol @ you losers abandoning all things Google because you really think you work for Apple and Steve was your homeboy
But anyways. Who will you hate next now that Steve's light is extinguished? You must feel so cold now that the usher of your soul and mind is non existent.
I dislike criminals. It has nothing to do with Jobs or anyone else. Google has shown an incredible disdain for anyone's intellectual property but their own. I started to really dislike them when they started copying every printed work they could get their hands on it and wanted to sell access on the Internet - without having the authors' permission. They're a dishonest company and I refuse to support them.
It's really interesting that for a Google phandroid like you, it all comes down to personalities, while I (as well as most Apple users I know) have specific reasons for the things we do. Seems to me that it's not the Apple fans who are drinking Kool-aid.