Authored by: s65_sean on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 09:46 AM EDT |
Google does not own the majority of the Android apps that are in the
"Android ecosystem". They are mostly created/owned by independent
third party developers that Google has no control over. The third part app
developers are the main reason that Google chose java as the programming
language for the Android ecosystem in the first place.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 10:04 AM EDT |
I echo the previous post and add that such an extreme measure is not needed. The
copyright issue, should they lose, would be resolved by a one-off payment of
damages (I think). The patent violations, should they lose, could easily be
worked around by a code rewrite in the appropriate area. No big deal in money or
effort.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 18 2012 @ 11:37 AM EDT |
Ruby is interesting, but I'm not convinced it would be
suitable as a main/solo development language.
Anyway, the language is almost irrelevant to this - even
Oracle aren't claiming the language, it's the APIs, and they
would be a huge undertaking to change in a compatible way -
depending on the details of a losing verdict, it might not
even be possible to keep compatibility.
I do think there's possibly good argument for adding SDK
support for other languages (Python, Ruby, C#, Go, Dart etc)
that compile down to dalvik bytecode, after there's a firm
ruling on the APIs being fair use, and part of the language.
More languages brings in more developers, and Java/C++
aren't the be-all end-all of languages.
Microsoft have done this well with .NET and the CLR, and if
Google wanted, they could start work on a broader CLR
framework not just for android, but for web and enterprise
too - all supporting multiple languages. Oracle would just
love that... Just don't call it Java.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 02:15 AM EDT |
What is it with you bods in the US and your continued use of
the word "loose" where you mean "lose"? Is it some sort of
refusal to use proper English since the DoI and the ousting of
the Triple George?
Yes, "loose" is a verb as well, but not in the sense used here
- it means to set something loose, it is *not* the opposite of
"win".[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: maroberts on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 06:30 AM EDT |
Rename all Dalvic APIs to openlib.xxxx.yyy instead of java.xxx.yyy so that
people can just "s/java./openlib./" for their library calls. :)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|