Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

You are mistaken | 101 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

You are mistaken

Authored by: celtic_hackr on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 03:19 PM EDT

I don't have to edit my title either.

You are partly correct. I'm mixing my usage of LISP.

It was a Symbolics LISP machine. But Franz Lisp was by at least 1987 a multitasking implementation, and capable of being run as an OS.

As for LISP as an OS. You are simply wrong and need to do more research and more and more and more.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

You are mistaken - Authored by: bugstomper on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 05:29 PM EDT
- You are mistaken - Authored by: celtic_hackr on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 12:42 PM EDT
  - You are mistaken - Authored by: bugstomper on Monday, August 13 2012 @ 04:56 PM EDT

Forgot to mention

Authored by: celtic_hackr on Sunday, August 12 2012 @ 03:26 PM EDT

When I spoke of the patents involving Java, I should have been more clear I was speaking in general about the patents in the Apple presentation to Samsung. They paraded out about 80 some odd pages filled with patent numbers. It became numbing at one point. As well as nauseating. I don't recommend reading the presentation, as it will surely disgust you. If you are any kind of the sane, rational human being I think you are. There must have been hundreds of patents in there, and at least a few of them appeared to me to be claiming priority or ownership over Java patents. Here's the news link with the presentation.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )