|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 06:45 PM EDT |
Ward Cunningham he is not.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Yes - Authored by: Steve Martin on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 06:54 AM EDT
- Yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 07:44 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 03:44 AM EDT |
The whole affair leaves slimy feeling.
Remember that Gosling was the one who tramped all over
Stallman back in day (google for keywords Emacs, Stallman
and Gosling).
He took Stallman's creation, created incompatible fork and
refused to cooperate with "upstream" - and this was
obviously Ok (at least I've never heard any publicly
expressed regrets).
Now Google took Gosling's (and Sun's) creation, created
incompatible fork and refused to cooperate with "upstream".
Gosling calls it's "abuse" but to me it looks more like
"cosmic justice". Do to others as you would have them do to
you, etc.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 06:31 AM EDT |
Android only 'fragments' in the mobile arena and I am not even sure it does so,
there.
Sun had fragmented Java ME into a large number of fragments and any new devices
would have fragmented Java still more. It is a case of one custom-built Java ME
per device.
If James Gosling felt the need to criticise Google for fragmenting, he should
have been incandescent about the massive fragmentation perpetrated by Sun in
exactly the same market. Sun was the company that he worked for and which was
supposed to be respecting his baby.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hardmath on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 06:45 AM EDT |
Link to nighthacks
PJ linked to this and labelled it
"sore loser", but I found Gosling's comments more nuanced than that. There are
three or so pre-verdict posts about Oracle v. Google there, all worth
reading.
For one thing he found himself being misrepresented and made the
remark about being "slimed" by Google in the context of setting the record
sraight about his views.
Also consider
these remarks by him from May 1, 2012:
I certainly think that
the patent system is broken, but the system is what it is. The original basic
theory makes sense to me, but what it's evolved into doesn't. At Sun we had a
near death experience after losing a case with IBM, after that we realized we
had to play the game, no matter how bogus.
The wide implications of Oracle
winning the copyright case are pretty disturbing. But that's a practical
opinion. How it will go in the legal system is anyone's guess. It extends far
beyond Oracle: developers everywhere use APIs defined by many other entities. I
hate to think of what an emerging "copyright troll" industry might be.
---
"Prolog is an efficient programming language
because it is a very stupid theorem prover." -- Richard O'Keefe [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 12:04 PM EDT |
I think he should have some other "beef" with google.
I don't think, anyone at Sun ever had serious expectations about
"selling" Java to anyone.
A few years ago I did attend conference where one of the speakers was Gilad
Bracha. He was one of the other "fathers" of java (he was not at
google at that time).
Among other things he told some "war stories" about java and
programming languages in general. As it turns out, nowadays virtually nobody
earns any money on general programming languages. Neither microsoft nor apple.
And sun knew this.
The real "profit" is developer mindshare. This is a whole point to
maintain those compilers/ide's. Apple gives away its Xcode, Microsoft does the
same with VisualStudio. They also sell some more advanced versions, bet the
revenue is not enough to offset development costs.
Sun was in similar position. They felt increasingly marginalized by Microsoft.
More and more IT departments started to develop for Windows Server (because
hardware and know-how was cheap) and it is very difficult to persuade them to
migrate to Solaris when they grew and actually could afford one.
This was a root of that "write once run anywhere" idea. You start with
some x86 PC's/Servers, then move to "big iron" (like sun enterprise
boxes on Sparc/Solaris) and still have all your legacy cruft happily humming
along. Otherwise it would be practically impossible.
It could be, that Sun wanted to sell Google its Java _implementation_ so google
would not need to develop one itself. But this is entirely different
"problem".
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
