11–20 of 24 posts
Do you think any of the "facts" mentioned on the page are drawbacks for Android? Let's recap: forked Linux, competing with Java ME within Java eco-system and having a non-JVM virtual machine to run the programs.
Is it really widely believed? And how did Oracle shoot itself in the foot with this lawsuit?
It’s widely believed that Oracle has shot itself in the foot by filing this lawsuit. Is it really widely believed? And how did Oracle shoot itself in the foot with this lawsuit?
Oracle finally filed a patent lawsuit against Google. Not a big surprise. During the integration meetings between Sun and Oracle where we were being grilled about the patent situation between Sun and Google, we could see the Oracle lawyer’s eyes sparkle. Filing patent suits was never in Sun’s genetic code. Alas….
I hope to avoid getting dragged into the fray: they only picked one of my patents (RE38,104) to sue over.
source: http://nighthacks.com/roller/jag/entry/the_shit_finally_hits...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your views may differ. But I would take the statement "not developed by Google" as "not born at Google." I would compare that to SQL Server which wasn't born at Microsoft amongst a lot of other things. Also, the fact that Android is not Linux means that you can't take a Linux app and port it to Android...it won't work...amongst other things there is no glibc; there is no windowing system; etc.
This discussion is somewhat turning into pedantry, but if it depends purely on linux then you can probably run it as a native app. The problem is that you're missing a lot of the system dependencies that are extensively used on Desktop linux. Many linux deployments are servers, and they won't run a windowing system - that doesn't make them any less of a 'linux' distro. Programs like Apache for example are a fundament…
Oh come on. First, these are not new at all. Second, they are not interesting facts, they are irrelevant facts.
Oh, come on. First, nobody claimed they were new, just interesting. Second, since when must something be relevant to be interesting? Fine, it might not me interesting to you. It might not be very important or relevant, either. It's easy enough to "vote with your feet" against it. No need to be hostile. Bring something to the table, instead.
It’s widely believed that Oracle has shot itself in the foot by filing this lawsuit. Is it really widely believed? And how did Oracle shoot itself in the foot with this lawsuit?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This discussion is somewhat turning into pedantry, but if it depends purely on linux then you can probably run it as a native app. The problem is that you're missing a lot of the system dependencies that are extensively used on Desktop linux. Many linux deployments are servers, and they won't run a windowing system - that doesn't make them any less of a 'linux' distro. Programs like Apache for example are a fundament…
When we talk about Linux, we're usually talking about GNU/Linux. Android/Linux is a very different beast, and it's not pedantry to draw a distinction between them. The capabilities of GNU/Linux are closer to BSD than Android/Linux.
He is playing with words. "Fact 1: Android runs Linux. But it’s not “the Linux.”" No, It IS "the Linux". A lot of distributions do not use vanilla Linux kernel. You are free to change whatever part you want. It does not change the fact that it is still Linux. "Android was not developed by Google!" Does he think current android platform is developed by only the original members of the Android inc? It has been 5 years.
Your views may differ. But I would take the statement "not developed by Google" as "not born at Google." I would compare that to SQL Server which wasn't born at Microsoft amongst a lot of other things. Also, the fact that Android is not Linux means that you can't take a Linux app and port it to Android...it won't work...amongst other things there is no glibc; there is no windowing system; etc.
I can smell the nerd from the first comment, which uses characters to distinguish differing pronounciations of "th". Is that a peccadillo of his own, or is it a thing?
http://thedutras.blogspot.com/
When did English drop those letters? 400 years ago? If he really wants to use those letters, he should also use the grammar and vocabulary constructs.
http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/8102/pg8102.html
(all that being said, I would mind a few more letters to use in English, particularly the schwa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwa would make everybody's life easier w/r to spelling).