Page 7 of 10 « First 56 7 89 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
daperl's Avatar
daperl is offline daperl
2010-08-14 , 20:17
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#61
This is all I can think of when Larry Ellison is mentioned:

Today Oracle's databases efficiently maintain corporate America's "information warehouses," but in the company's early years, its products were a mess. An engineer describes the very first version of its software as "the roach motel of databases: the data went in; it didn't come out." Later versions were regularly released long before they were bug-proofed; cross-platform "ports" of programs would be promised long before they could be delivered. Oracle wasn't the only software company peddling "vaporware," but it perfected the art of actually selling products that didn't yet exist. Sometimes, Wilson reports, Oracle would respond to customers' frantic demands by deliberately shipping them blank or unreadable computer tapes to win a few more days' time.

These practices did not emerge in a vacuum: As Wilson tells it, they sprang straight from the personality of Ellison himself. The Oracle founder was himself "extravagantly and remorselessly late." (He'd have merited a long chewing out from Andy Grove.) Ellison "habitually said things that were provocative or demonstrably untrue," from fudging his college record and exaggerating the toughness of his childhood Chicago neighborhood to selling customers products and features that his engineers hadn't started working on.
http://www.salon.com/21st/books/1997...v_18books.html
http://www.salon.com/21st/books/1997..._18books2.html
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to daperl For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
danramos is offline danramos
2010-08-15 , 06:57
Posts: 4,672 | Thanked: 5,455 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#62
I can also attest to personally being awoken at night sometimes whenever Ellison would take off in his private jet at night at full speed against FAA rules back when I lived in Santa Clara, RIGHT next to the San Jose Intl Airport. To us locals, he's gotten a reputation for being kind of an inconsiderate jerk to people in general in addition to his professional miscreant behavior.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post:
v13 is offline v13
2010-08-15 , 08:36
Posts: 376 | Thanked: 511 times | Joined on Aug 2009 @ Greece
#63
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
I can also attest to personally being awoken at night sometimes whenever Ellison would take off in his private jet at night at full speed against FAA rules back when I lived in Santa Clara, RIGHT next to the San Jose Intl Airport. To us locals, he's gotten a reputation for being kind of an inconsiderate jerk to people in general in addition to his professional miscreant behavior.
This is somehow mentioned in his wikipedia page. However, it would be nice if you put the above wording there too.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to v13 For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
danramos is offline danramos
2010-08-16 , 05:02
Posts: 4,672 | Thanked: 5,455 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#64
Originally Posted by v13 View Post
This is somehow mentioned in his wikipedia page. However, it would be nice if you put the above wording there too.
Hah! A wikipedia mention of it. That's funny. I just lived it, didn't know it was a "thing" to be posted anywhere.

I seem to remember it had more to do with noise levels taking off at night--the article says it was a weight issue that he was violating. I used to live VERY close to the airport, heard and saw someone's jet (looked like a Lear to me at the time) and I used to know people that talked to each other placing the blame on Ellison, and it was believable given the way he carried himself. Can't say I'd want to post it on Wikipedia as if it was something I could cite with relevant articles or pictures (wish I had taken some), but I can at least attest to a repeated incident that people kept telling me were Ellison. I personally believe, to this day, that it was probably him.

Edit: Also, just to make it clear, it didn't bother me so much. I tended to be a night owl and up all night most of the time anyway, but it did wake me up a few rare times. More amusing than annoying in my case, but I remember locals not feeling so amicable. But, I guess I did find some relevant articles that might agree with what I remember:

http://www.nonoise.org/news/2000/mar...onal%20Airport
http://airportnoiselaw.org/news/june-23.html

I wish I could search the San Jose Mercury News for it, but they don't go as far back as the years I'd lived there. Aw well.
Last edited by danramos; 2010-08-16 at 05:12.
 
danramos's Avatar
danramos is offline danramos
2010-08-16 , 21:22
Posts: 4,672 | Thanked: 5,455 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#65
From what I'm reading, the details appear to show that there are eight claims, seven on patents, one for copyright infringement. Like I'd said at the start, I got the impression this was more about patents than copyright--my first impression seems to be right, so far.

There's an EXCELLENT study/breakdown of what this is about here on Groklaw:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...00815110101756
 

The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
danramos is offline danramos
2010-08-16 , 21:45
Posts: 4,672 | Thanked: 5,455 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#66
Also, to bolster another point I thought I had right earlier (and apparently did), under the section where it says, "Charles Nutter, explains about what Google did and why he thinks it did it and what might result:"

First, there's the VM. Dalvik is *not* a JVM. It doesn't run JVM bytecode, and you can't ship JVM bytecode expecting it to work on Dalvik. You must recompile it to Dalvik's own bytecode using one of the provided translation tools.
So yeah, as a technical clarification, it doesn't run Java tokenized code--it recognizes Java LANGUAGE that you type in, but it generates DALVIK (Android) bytecode.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post:
Milhouse is offline Milhouse
2010-08-16 , 21:53
Posts: 3,401 | Thanked: 1,255 times | Joined on Nov 2005 @ London, UK
#67
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
Also, to bolster another point I thought I had right earlier (and apparently did), under the section where it says, "Charles Nutter, explains about what Google did and why he thinks it did it and what might result:"



So yeah, as a technical clarification, it doesn't run Java tokenized code--it recognizes Java LANGUAGE that you type in, but it generates DALVIK (Android) bytecode.
Nobody suggested that it did.

The only suggestion has been that Google need to convert from Java bytecode to Dalvik bytecode, thereby implying that Google don't ship a Java language compiler which is capable of generating Dalvik bytecode directly. Rather, they ship a Java language compiler that generates Java bytecode which is then converted into Dalvik bytecode.

I wonder where Google obtained the Java language compiler and tools they're using?
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Milhouse For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
danramos is offline danramos
2010-08-16 , 22:06
Posts: 4,672 | Thanked: 5,455 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#68
Originally Posted by Milhouse View Post
Nobody suggested that it did.

The only suggestion has been that Google need to convert from Java bytecode to Dalvik bytecode, thereby implying that Google don't ship a Java language compiler which is capable of generating Dalvik bytecode directly. Rather, they ship a Java language compiler that generates Java bytecode which is then converted into Dalvik bytecode.

I wonder where Google obtained the Java language compiler and tools they're using?
I don't see that anywhere in the suit. In fact, they seem suspiciously ambiguous about their copyright claims (very SCO-like, in fact) and they didn't list anything specific. According to another part of the article I'm reading so far...

One Gartner analyst says Google used clean room development:
When Google developed Android, it included a Java compatible technology called Dalvik with the phone OS. Dalvik was developed as a "clean room" version of Java, meaning Google built it from the ground up without using any Sun technology or intellectual property, said Gartner analyst Ken Dulaney.
Since that isn't a Google citation, I can't rely on it as a fact, mind you--but if it's accurate (and much of the rest of the other citations and articles they list would seem to concur with this), then it wouldn't make sense for the ADK to produce Java bytecode. (Why compile to tokenized code just to covert to another tokenized code, seems an incredibly weird way for a compiler and development kit to work--and also goes against the explanation that you need to recompile your code into Dalvik binaries.) Still, nothing in here that goes against that particular claim so far--it's just not something that seems likely to me and it's just not something anybody's mentioned, even in the claims.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post:
danramos's Avatar
danramos is offline danramos
2010-08-16 , 22:09
Posts: 4,672 | Thanked: 5,455 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Springfield, MA, USA
#69
Also... I am sooooo totally not a lawyer. I'm just interested in reading up on this and trying to understand it.
 
Milhouse is offline Milhouse
2010-08-16 , 22:22
Posts: 3,401 | Thanked: 1,255 times | Joined on Nov 2005 @ London, UK
#70
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
I don't see that anywhere in the suit.
IANAL but I'd say it's the following copyright claim:

40. On information and belief, users of Android, including device manufacturers, must obtain and use copyrightable portions of the Java platform or works derived therefrom to manufacture and use functioning Android devices. Such use is not licensed. Google has thus induced, caused, and materially contributed to the infringing acts of others by encouraging, inducing, allowing and assisting others to use, copy, and distribute Oracle America’s copyrightable works, and works derived therefrom.
It seems to be saying that Google are inducing end users and device manufacturers to use copyrighted Oracle technology without an appropriate licence, ie. Java compilers, tools and documentation.

Originally Posted by danramos View Post
(Why compile to tokenized code just to covert to another tokenized code, seems an incredibly weird way for a compiler and development kit to work
Possibly two reasons:

1) Google need to convert existing classes from Java bytecode to Dalvik bytecode in order to simplify porting of existing Java apps and classes, hence the existence of the dx tool which takes a Java bytecode class and spits out a Dalvik bytecode class

2) Given the existence of dx, why go to the lengths of creating your own Java/Dalvik language compiler - just use an existing Java language compiler and bolt the dx tool on at the end to convert the newly generated Java bytecode into Dalvik bytecode. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Originally Posted by danramos View Post
also goes against the explanation that you need to recompile your code into Dalvik binaries.)
Which is a fairly ambiguous statement, to be honest. "Recompile" could describe precisely the function performed by the dx tool.

Unless anyone can state categorically that Google have their own clean-room Java language compiler which spits out Dalvik bytecode without generating intermediary Java bytecode I think Google may be on a slightly sticky wicket.

So far I've only seen evidence that confirms the intermediary bytecode approach.
Last edited by Milhouse; 2010-08-16 at 22:25.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Milhouse For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 7 of 10 « First 56 7 89 Last »

Tags
bride-of-darl, chicks roosting, scoracle

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:31.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top