|
Authored by: PJ on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 02:25 PM EDT |
Not at all. He was chatting amiably with
Ms. Katz before the session started. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 26 2012 @ 04:21 PM EDT |
I would rather assume that he is just telling the truth, under oath, as everyone
is obliged to do.
It's Oracle's fault that they got themselves into this situation, where they are
trying to win a copyright case based on a highly distorted (lets say,
"fanciful") narrative about the past. Schwartz happens to have been
there, and made some of the key decisions, and his tale doesn't match the one
Oracle has been spinning for the jury. Instead, it matches Google's tale.
That's going to make things difficult for Oracle now![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 27 2012 @ 08:17 AM EDT |
Schwartz was incompetent, he ran sun into the ground. It is almost
inconceivable how he could have done any more damage to sun, and it's
shareholders.
It is clear the shareholder wanted to get rid of him and if they hadn't sold
the company he would of been fired.
He was so incompetent it's questionable whether had any idea of what he
was doing when he was supposedly running the company.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|