Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Aug 2010 22:58 UTC, submitted by Alex Forster
Permalink for comment 436837
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
This is totally different from the Mono situation. If Google had made something Mono-like, i.e. binary compatible with the official Java runtime, there would be no problem. On the other hand, the Davlik VM purposefully breaks compatibility with the official Java runtime. It can easily be argued that Google is employing lock-in tactics here, which is a Bad Thing (whether or not that is actually Google's primary motivation). So Oracle actually has grounds to be pissed.
Mono on the other hand is generally a good little boy when it comes to sticking to .NET compatibility, so MS suing would seem like a much less reasonable thing to do.
Edited 2010-08-14 19:35 UTC