Jury finds Google Android didn't violate Oracle's patents

1234689

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 177
    fuwafuwafuwafuwa Posts: 163member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by androiduser2 View Post


    Yeah, so.. Apple is the BEST. Google AND Android sucks balls! Android is a crappy OS, and iOS is a billion, gazillion times better. Period! There, I said it. I don't want to get banned from this site anymore..



    Please go away, go to androidpolice, android central, xda-developer, etc and bash Apple there, no one will bother to stalk you and refute every your post.

  • Reply 102 of 177
    hjbhjb Posts: 278member
    fuwafuwa wrote: »
    I think your real DPI should be reduced by 1/3 because of the pentile, so the real DPI is 210.

    Um. I am not sure about that. You maybe right. But I cannot see pixels with my phone, maybe my eye sight is not very good. To me dpi is not an issue and i was just replying and commenting to Tallest Skill.
  • Reply 103 of 177
    bizzlebizzle Posts: 66member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


     


     


    what was stolen? 



    I'm also curious about this. This is the first I've read of Android code being copied from Apple.


    Unless it's in reference to the form factor, app drawer, store, things like that? I read the comment to be something in the code, which I'm curious if that's true.


     


     


    As for people asking about clarification of why some might consider Android to be less than open:


    In the sense that an end-user can take a widget and drop it onto the main screen it's more open than other platforms.


    But in the sense that those of us who want to download the code and do things with it and upload it to our devices it's far from open.


     


    The kernel is open, but that's the only thing that is anchored to the GPL. The rest of Android, android proper, is only open in so far as Google deems it should be. It wasn't until the recent ICS code drop that Google was even forthcoming with the code. Honeycomb never saw a public release, for example. There's no mechanism that would preclude Google from refusing to release anything after ICS. Earlier releases of iterations of Android were lagging, to put it in the most favorable description of what Google was doing. In fact, Google picks a vendor and gives that vendor priority for its up-to-date iteration. Google, for all intents and purposes, is in the business of selecting which vendor will benefit the most from its release cycle. These decisions are governed by monetary considerations, which isn't in and of itself wrong.


     


    There is much code that will never see the light of day. It will never be available to the public. This is necessary because the vendors would never have picked up android and invested in it if they could not have retained some proprietary code and monetized their investment. Again, none of this is wrong. What is wrong is how Google went about it. If they have a business model they should be expected to play by the rules. In this case, they should have obtained licensing agreements with Oracle. Their own documentation demonstrates that they suspected they were on shaky ground. Illegal at worst and unethical at best. Even Sun felt "slimed" by Google's actions so you don't have to hinge an opinion on Oracle's perspective. The millions of Java developers who now have to leave Java and move to Android in order to remain relevant might have strong opinions about the matter, too.


     


    I think it's tragic that Google went this route and it's caused me to lose a tremendous amount of respect for their brand.


     


    I fought long and hard to get ICS (and previous versions of android) running on my Captivate. Android was and continues to be open in some ways and closed in others.


    That said, I'm positing this from my MacBook. I could be in Safari 5.2 or I might be using Firefox 12. I'll have to look at the title bar...Safari 5.2 it is.


    For some reason those last points seemed relevant to the thread? I'm not sure how the thread devolved into a metadiscussion over participant behavior but whatever.

  • Reply 104 of 177
    stoobsstoobs Posts: 40member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


    In all fairness, while I agree with your overarching point to a degree, a LOT of articles on this site have zero to do with Apple barring a game of 6 degrees of separation.



     


    True, but it's still content on this site/forum about news from the related industries which might interest readers/members. The difference is that this is an Apple-centric site & forum, and so visitors should at least expect a positive feeling towards Apple from the membership.


     


    Coming in blowing their own trumpets about how superior their pet system/widget/doodad and that Apple or it's customers "suck" is a complete waste of time.


     


    Previous history of pretty much the same argument:


     


    Spectrum vs C64


     


    Amiga vs Atari ST


     


    Amiga vs PC


     


    Mac vs PC


     


    Sega vs Nintendo


     


    Playstation vs Saturn


     


    Sony vs Nintendo vs Microsoft


     


    Canon vs Nikon


     


    Ketchup vs Brown sauce


     


    Red vs Blu (TF2 fans! image)


     


    etc etc etc


     


    It's an old tired, and pointless argument.


     


    Pay your money, make your choice, don't berate those who chose differently.


     


    All that happens is it descends into flame wars, people get banned, people try to subvert the bans, the cycle continues, and nobody wins.


     


    Boring.

  • Reply 105 of 177
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member

    what was stolen? 

    bizzle wrote: »
    I'm also curious about this. This is the first I've read of Android code being copied from Apple.
    Unless it's in reference to the form factor, app drawer, store, things like that? I read the comment to be something in the code, which I'm curious if that's true.

    I agree, I don't think Android uses any stolen Apple code, I would tend to assume that unless reasonably proven otherwise. I don't think that was the intended claim.

    Maybe that impression was made because of the context of the article, but even this lawsuit wasn't really about theft of code, but implementing parts of Oracle's proprietary language without permission.
  • Reply 106 of 177
    lfmorrisonlfmorrison Posts: 698member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post


     


    I agree -- but this is a surprising decision.


     


    Google violated Oracle's JAVA almost in the exact way that Microsoft did with "embrace and extend"



    It's not quite the same violation.  Microsoft used the same basic structure for its virtual machine as Sun, but omitted certain functionality they didn't agree with and replaced it with some of their own proprietary new functionality.  Most "regular" Java applications would run without modification on the Microsoft VM, however, applications written to take specific advantage of Microsoft's extensions wouldn't necessarily be able to run in the stock Sun VM.  This created a tangible fracture in the Java ecosystem.


     


    With Android, on the other hand, Google (and its predecessors) went out of their way to ensure that there wasn't even any partial compatibility.  Every application written for one platform is always 100% guaranteed to require some modification -- including a complete recompile to re-target between a stack-based (Android) or register-based (Java) virtual machine -- before there would even be any potential of possibly running on the other platform.  A completely seperate exercise would then need to be undertaken to make sure you weren't using any APIs which were incompatible or not implemented on one or the other platform.  This was, no doubt, a deliberate effort to establish Android as a completely separate ecosystem from Java, rather than a fracturing subset of the single ecosystem.

  • Reply 107 of 177
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,321member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bizzle View Post


     


    ...It wasn't until the recent ICS code drop that Google was even forthcoming with the code. Honeycomb never saw a public release, for example. There's no mechanism that would preclude Google from refusing to release anything after ICS. Earlier releases of iterations of Android were lagging, to put it in the most favorable description of what Google was doing. 


     


    ...There is much code that will never see the light of day. It will never be available to the public. This is necessary because the vendors would never have picked up android and invested in it if they could not have retained some proprietary code and monetized their investment.



    Your Honeycomb claim is incorrect. Honeycomb source code was released several months ago. Personally I chalk the delay up to Amazon developing a forked Android version for their Kindle Fire tablet and Google not wanting to make it overly easy to grab their tablet-specific build. Once the Kindle was released the Honeycomb source code was suddenly available. No proof that one was related to the other, but given the timing and the poorly explained delayed release of that specific version it seems pretty likely to me.


     


    Too, Amazon's success with using Google's Gingerbread build is proof that the full source code was available. Without it they wouldn't have been able to fork a compatible version of their own.  Add the unauthorized Chinese builds, B&N custom build for the Nook, and assorted off-brand tablets (Coby, etc.) lacking Google services for more proof that published build-able source code has been available all along. So that claim of yours is also wrong.


     


    As for your third claim that much of the Android source code will never be available, part of the approval stipulation for Google's purchase of Motorola Mobility is that the code will be freely available and remain open for at least the next 5 years. If you have some evidence that the complete Android builds aren't available and never will be I'd love to see it. 


     


    IMO, Android is open-source. If some vendor wishes to use it without Google's approval they most certainly can, and Google has never given any indication to the contrary.

  • Reply 108 of 177
    fredaroonyfredaroony Posts: 619member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


     


     


    It;s not so much the validity of Android as an OS...


     


     


    Do you buy things and associate yourself with those who can't be trusted or respected?


     


     


    'Twas an evening in October, I'll confess I wasn't sober,


    I was carting home a load with manly pride, When my feet began to stutter and I fell into the gutter, And a pig came up and lay down by my side.

    Then I lay there in the gutter and my heart was all a-flutter, A high-toned lady, passing by, did chance to say: "You can tell a man that boozes by the company he chooses," Then the pig got up and slowly walked away. Walked away, walked away, He was really too particular to stay. "You can tell a man that boozes by the company he chooses," Then the pig got up and slowly walked away.


     





    All I can see from your post is a bunch of crap but if it makes you feel good then I say go for it.

  • Reply 109 of 177
    euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    You will ALWAYS be called into question, EVERYWHERE you go, if you have a hatred of the content of the place you are, and you're vocal about it.


     


    Why all these newcomers (who actually often turn out to be trolls) are so mystified by the fact that they're being called out for hating Apple on an Apple forum… mystifies ME.



     


    I'll give you it from my perspective.


     


    If I came onto AppleInsider and said 'I hate Apple, Apple products are all crap, Android FTW!' then that would be trolling, and you'd be quite right to ban me. There's no purpose to that sort of comment other than to wind people up.


     


    But I never do that. When I criticise Apple, it is to point out that Apple gear is not perfect, or that competitors make good and popular products too. I try to support my criticisms with facts or rationality. Sometimes I offer a contrary opinion in threads because the prevailing discussion is so far from being balanced or fair. I don't think that's trolling. I think that decent contrary opinions enrich a discussion.


     


    What really doesn't help is when I make a comment departing from the norm, and immediately get multiple posters saying that I 'hate' Apple, that I'm 'deluded', a 'troll' and so on. There is a distinct tendency here for people to place everybody in either the 'loves Apple' or 'hates Apple' category. That attitude is unnecessarily binary and unnecessarily tribal - there is a very fertile middle ground between 'loves Apple' and 'hates Apple', and posters offering those views shouldn't be stereotyped 'Apple haters' when they're not.


     


    I think that this kind of tribalism is often responsible for threads being derailed. Take this thread. I asked an early question about jailbreaking. All I was hoping for was a factual answer about the product which was the subject of the thread: could iOS 5.1.1 be jailbroken? Instead, I got multiple posters making it seem as if I was committing some crime by jailbreaking. I even got some fairly virulent personal attacks. It was as if, after mentioning jailbreaking, I was automatically in the 'anti-Apple camp' and was fair game. Of course, I defended myself, and the thread went completely off-topic.


     


    I don't mind strict moderation. It keeps the signal-to-noise ratio in a forum up. But I can't accept that moderating decisions on dubious posts may be based upon which opinion of Apple is expressed. You need to respect a fair and rational opinion critical of Apple as you would respect one in favour of Apple.  Likewise, you need to deal with an unacceptable pro-Apple post as you would one criticising Apple.


     


    Selectively suppressing voices holding a particular opinion is not moderation. It's censorship. Moderation encourages balanced, meaningful debate; censorship stifles it.

  • Reply 110 of 177

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post


     


     


    It is stolen from Apple.  And Oracle.  But mostly Apple.



    what was stolen? 



     


    The whole thing was stolen.  Google should think of their own ideas instead of stealing Apple's.  


     


    And I don't care what some jury says.  Google stole Oracle's patented tech and infringed on their copyrights.

  • Reply 111 of 177
    island hermitisland hermit Posts: 6,217member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


     


    you forgot


     


    3. iPhone users want to use their phone not spend all their time doing 'cool' tweaks on it to show folks how cool they are.



     


     


    aka "Posers".

  • Reply 112 of 177
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    euphonious wrote: »
    I'll give you it from my perspective.

    If I came onto AppleInsider and said 'I hate Apple, Apple products are all crap, Android FTW!' then that would be trolling, and you'd be quite right to ban me. There's no purpose to that sort of comment other than to wind people up.

    But I never do that. When I criticise Apple, it is to point out that Apple gear is not perfect, or that competitors make good and popular products too. I try to support my criticisms with facts or rationality. Sometimes I offer a contrary opinion in threads because the prevailing discussion is so far from being balanced or fair. I don't think that's trolling. I think that decent contrary opinions enrich a discussion.

    What really doesn't help is when I make a comment departing from the norm, and immediately get multiple posters saying that I 'hate' Apple, that I'm 'deluded', a 'troll' and so on. There is a distinct tendency here for people to place everybody in either the 'loves Apple' or 'hates Apple' category. That attitude is unnecessarily binary and unnecessarily tribal - there is a very fertile middle ground between 'loves Apple' and 'hates Apple', and posters offering those views shouldn't be stereotyped 'Apple haters' when they're not.

    I think that this kind of tribalism is often responsible for threads being derailed. Take this thread. I asked an early question about jailbreaking. All I was hoping for was a factual answer about the product which was the subject of the thread: could iOS 5.1.1 be jailbroken? Instead, I got multiple posters making it seem as if I was committing some crime by jailbreaking. I even got some fairly virulent personal attacks. It was as if, after mentioning jailbreaking, I was automatically in the 'anti-Apple camp' and was fair game. Of course, I defended myself, and the thread went completely off-topic.

    I don't mind strict moderation. It keeps the signal-to-noise ratio in a forum up. But I can't accept that moderating decisions on dubious posts may be based upon which opinion of Apple is expressed. You need to respect a fair and rational opinion critical of Apple as you would respect one in favour of Apple.  Likewise, you need to deal with an unacceptable pro-Apple post as you would one criticising Apple.

    Selectively suppressing voices holding a particular opinion is not moderation. It's censorship. Moderation encourages balanced, meaningful debate; censorship stifles it.

    That is, of course, a very inaccurate description of what happened.

    You provided blanket comments that iOS was crap and refused to provide any backing for them when asked. It is often the case that people come here with no purpose other than to create flame wars and to spread outright FUD. Your post seemed to fall into that category.
  • Reply 113 of 177
    gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,083member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post


     


    The whole thing was stolen.  Google should think of their own ideas instead of stealing Apple's.  


     


    And I don't care what some jury says.  Google stole Oracle's patented tech and infringed on their copyrights.



     


    So no, you don't have any argument, only that you want to believe it

  • Reply 114 of 177
    lfmorrisonlfmorrison Posts: 698member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Hyram Gestan View Post


     


    The whole thing was stolen.  Google should think of their own ideas instead of stealing Apple's.  


     


    And I don't care what some jury says.  Google stole Oracle's patented tech and infringed on their copyrights.





    The jury agrees with you on the copyright front -- now that matter is back in front of the judge to see exactly where things go from here.


     


    We'll see where the patent issue goes on appeal - and it certainly will be appealed.  But you ought to be careful when you make unqualified public statements accusing an entity of a criminal act - there is precedence in some common law countries that anonymous comments made on a web forum may constitute libel, and also precedence for forcing web hosting companies to divulge service logs necessary to determine the identity of people who made the potentially libelous statements.

  • Reply 115 of 177
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,321member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lfmorrison View Post




    The jury agrees with you on the copyright front -- now that matter is back in front of the judge to see exactly where things go from here.


     


    We'll see where the patent issue goes on appeal - and it certainly will be appealed.  But you ought to be careful when you make unqualified public statements accusing an entity of a criminal act - there is precedence in some common law countries that anonymous comments made on a web forum may constitute libel, and also precedence for forcing web hosting companies to divulge service logs necessary to determine the identity of people who made the potentially libelous statements.



    There was an example of that on the local news a few days ago. I believe it was a chiropractor suing an individual for false claims they made at a review site.


     


    The newscaster used a restaurant review for an example of protected speech and where the line is. Perfectly OK to say you don't care for a restaurant's food or service in a restaurant review. But it's not protected speech to say there was a cockroach on your plate if there was not. 

  • Reply 116 of 177
    euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    You provided blanket comments that iOS was crap


     


    Even a rudimentary reading of my posts in that thread would indicate that I didn't make blanket statements about iOS being crap. I criticised specific features of iOS and explained why I didn't like them (in particular, the lack of 3G and wi-fi shortcuts in the Notification Center). Then, on that basis, you came steaming in and called me an 'Apple hater'.


     


    I couldn't have asked for a better example to demonstrate my previous points than this. Your posts are a shining example of the 'binary' approach which divides everyone into lovers and haters. Your posts consistently misconstrue any critical commentary as evidence that the poster 'hates Apple'. Instead of rebutting particular criticisms of Apple, your posts frequently set up an army of straw men: they wildly misrepresent others' arguments and then seek to destroy an argument which never existed. 


     


    Targeted criticism is very different to FUD. It eliminates any hope of meaningful debate when your posts repeatedly misrepresent one as the other. This is precisely why moderators' attention should not only be focused on critical posts.

  • Reply 117 of 177
    powermachpowermach Posts: 90member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


     


    I'm an iPhone and Android tablet user. I had iPad for couple of months, before getting Asus Transformer.


     


    I found it refreshing not having to convert videos sitting on my home server to MP4 in order to watch it on tablet. This was (still is) non-issue for my phone, but I actually do enjoy dumping some old TV shows on my tablet whenever I travel, occasionally in my home as well.


     


    I like having full control over Flash. With a few taps I can completely disable it (iPad style), enable it on demand (tap to play individual Flash) or have it enabled all the time. I like having access to basically any video on the web, without having to think is it HTML5 or Flash. Again, it isn't issue for my phone - screen is too small to really enjoy videos - but I'm finding it really nice to have on a tablet.


     


    I am not missing any app I have on iPhone (so far) - I managed to find same or comparable apps on Android Market. I do have simple app I am finding useful on occasion on Android, unfortunately one Apple has removed from AppStore - WiFi Analyzer.


     


    I also like presence of SD cards, and not having to use iTunes or any other software to copy files to/from tablet. WiFi access to shared folders on my home server is also nice, so I can copy ebook/comic/TV show/... over wifi, at my leisure, without moving my lazy ... from my fave recliner.


     


    Just to name a few.


     


    I enjoyed iPad, but I'm finding my Android experience more complete. My Transformer came with Android 3.x which was a bit sluggish and jerky, however ICS is nice and smooth. I haven't done any direct comparison, but I'd say it still isn't as smooth as iOS - however it is smooth enough not to be distracting in any way. Asus has released 3 or 4 ICS updates since initial release (was it in early March..?), with last one, recently released, finally fixing bugs I had a problem with on initial ICS.


     


    Now, this is my mileage. Your mileage might - likely will differ. That's why I'm finding your question a bit unfair. You might find anything and everything above non-essential for you. But you might also find something else that I don't care for... so you should basically ask yourself that question, and if there is anything you have been missing and would like to have on tablet that is available on Android, that would be the answer to your question.


     


    If your tablet is completely satisfying your needs, and you are not curious (or just don't want to waste time) finding out what else is out there, why, then you really shouldn't bother checking Android. Nor should you be asking such question.





    I have been an iPad user since day 1. I am not embarrassed to say that some of the capabilities/functionality described by this poster are desirable.

  • Reply 118 of 177

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


     


    The only problem is with your logic...  Apple is self-motivated to provide the solutions that they desire -- they aren't driven by competitors.



    Apple are motivated to make money. To state that they take no drive from their competitors is nonsense. Why all the litigation? Why the Android app drawer for notifications?


     


    Not flaming - but this whole "Apple works from within, to pursue a purist design/usability philosophy" is bollocks. Maybe years ago, certainly not now. They make money, like every other company. And like very other company, they watch their competitors like a hawk.

  • Reply 119 of 177
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Stoobs View Post


    Ugh, really?


     


    1 - This isn't a democracy - this is a privately owned internet discussion forum, their site, their rules, their judgement. You agree to this when you sign up.


     


    2 - This is an Apple-centric discussion site. Not Android. No, really. Not Android. We know this. Your hint is in the domain name.


     


    3 - By and large, we simply don't care about whatever the new Android phone megawidget is or does. You paid your money, you made your choice. So did we. Some of us have used just about every mobile system out there at one point or another, and we still prefer the iOS platform. That doesn't make us stupid, sheep, cool, satanic or any other label that some might want to hang around our necks. It's a phone/media device/tablet, get over it.


     


    4 - Google/Bing/Yahoo/etc is only a click/swipe/voice command away - use it if you don't like Apple/Appleinsider/Moderators/The opinions/Members/Colors/Fonts whatever. There are other more applicable forums out there for you to join.


     


    5 - Don't worry about it - there's more to life ;)



     


    Well said!

  • Reply 120 of 177
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member


    I remember a long while back when everyone slammed me for saying Florian Mueller was wrong and a troll.  Just like he was in the SCO case.




    I'm glad that ridiculous shill is eating humble pie today.  I wouldn't have a problem with him if he just flat out admitted to being a fanboy.  Instead he calls his blog FOSS and gets quoted in the media like some kind of actual expert, instead of the troll/fanboy that he is.


     


    Forget the Android-iOS fanboy wars.  This lawsuit was just wrong.  And had it gone through, it would have utterly destroyed the foundations of  Java itself (who'd touch it knowing that Oracle is just waiting to sue when you make something profitable with it?).


     


    As for all those who loudly proclaimed that Larry Ellison was going to destroy Android?  Well, guess today is not your day.  And it was never going to be, even if Google lost.  Ellison's like money more than he hates Android.  He's not Steve Jobs.

Sign In or Register to comment.