|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 08:55 AM EDT |
Wasn't that suit about the use of the brand name and calling MS's software
"Java Compatible" and using the coffee cup logo? Also, I think MS
shipped some version of Java that failed the compatibility tests while it was
under contract from Sun.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 06 2012 @ 10:37 AM EDT |
What Microsoft did was make a product that started out Java-compatible, and they
used "Java" in its name and when talking about it. And then they
started extending and changing it to make it incompatible with Sun's product.
This was part of a deliberate Microsoft strategy that they've used successfully
against a lot of other competitors: "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish". In
other words, Microsoft was trying to seduce away some of Java's marketshare with
their own Javalike product, and then deliberately fragmenting Java.
Sun sued them to make them change the name, and not call it "Java"
anymore (since it wasn't completely compatible).
So this is the context in which Sun was afraid of "fragmentation" of
the Java platform. When Google came along and wanted to make Android, Sun had
no problem with that as long as they didn't call it Java.
By using Apache Harmony, Google achieved compatibility for all of the parts of
the class libraries that were part of both Java and Android. A lot of programs
from one eco-system would need some porting effort in order to be migrated to
the other eco-system (because of using packages that only one system provides)
but at least by sharing the core, that effort was minimized.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|