Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Sep 2012 16:53 UTC
Google There's a bit of a story going on between Google, Acer, and Alibaba, a Chinese mobile operating system vendor. Acer wanted to ship a device with Alibaba's operating system, but Google asked them not to, and Acer complied. The reason is that Acer is a member of the Open Handset Alliance, which prohibits the promotion of non-standard Android implementations - exactly what Alibaba is shipping. On top of that, Alibaba's application store hosts pirated Android applications, including ones from Google.
Thread beginning with comment 535360
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Wait a minute
by Laurence on Sun 16th Sep 2012 22:16 UTC in reply to "Wait a minute"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

So it is OK for Google to take Java and make it incompatible and call it Dalvik. But it is not Ok when some one else does the same to one of Google's projects.

Double standards much?

People who make this argument are people who don't understand what Java is.

Google took the Java language and made their own runtime (which is akin to taking a French and writing a French novel). Google did not fork nor do anything else to Oracles Java runtime (which is what you're implying with the Android fork comparison)

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Wait a minute
by atsureki on Mon 17th Sep 2012 00:17 in reply to "RE: Wait a minute"
atsureki Member since:
2006-03-12

Google took the Java language and made their own runtime (which is akin to taking a French and writing a French novel). Google did not fork nor do anything else to Oracles Java runtime (which is what you're implying with the Android fork comparison)


This is completely wrong.

Java is not a natural language, and Google did not simply write something in Java. They engineered an incompatible implementation of Java's underlying design. They used Sun's work to create a functional clone because they didn't like Sun's licenses.

It's all right here: http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/features/opening-slides-1592541....

I especially like page 50, where freedom-defending Google talks about how the GPL version of Java is unacceptable because it would infect all their proprietary add-ons (we certainly can't expect the OHA to be stuck producing actually-open phones), and page 81, which shows lines of code fully copied and pasted from Java to Android.

Much of the rest of the document consists of e-mails expressing the need for Java and their unwillingness to use it on Sun's terms, and a deposition in which a programmer is unable to deny accessing and copying Sun's code.

In short: Google forked Java, called it Dalvik, and put up a policy of not mentioning the J-word, and not even demoing Dalvik around Sun employees and lawyers. Yeah. They know full well what they did.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: Wait a minute
by chithanh on Mon 17th Sep 2012 01:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Wait a minute"
chithanh Member since:
2006-06-18

Google forked Java, called it Dalvik
That is not true, they didn't use Sun's Java code. And I don't think that fork means what you think it does.

Quoting Wikipedia: "In software engineering, a project fork happens when developers take a copy of source code from one software package and start independent development on it, creating a distinct piece of software."(emphasis mine)[1]

In contrast, what Alibaba did is take Android code and build their own, incompatible OS from it. So that is a fork.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(software_development)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Wait a minute
by akrosdbay on Mon 17th Sep 2012 02:57 in reply to "RE: Wait a minute"
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09



Google took the Java language and made their own runtime (which is akin to taking a French and writing a French novel). Google did not fork nor do anything else to Oracles Java runtime (which is what you're implying with the Android fork comparison)


Your analogy is deeply flawed. What Google did would be akin to writing novel based on french that no one who is fluent in French can actually read or understand.

Code written for Davlik won't run on a Java JVM. There fore making it incompatible Java.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Wait a minute
by Laurence on Mon 17th Sep 2012 07:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Wait a minute"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


Your analogy is deeply flawed. What Google did would be akin to writing novel based on french that no one who is fluent in French can actually read or understand.

Code written for Davlik won't run on a Java JVM. There fore making it incompatible Java.

True, but the incompatibilities is a side issue as it's not the reason Oracle sued. And quite honestly, I didn't hear people up in arms because Next/Apple took C as the basis for Objective-C then made their new language incompatible.

Personally I don't see the issue with Google making Dalvik code incompatible with JRE code if it means that Android runs better for it. I mean it's not like anyone would want to write an app that works the same on Android and Windows. Plus, and if we're completely honest, code written for Oracles JRE isn't always 100% compatible with OpenJRE. So it's not like things were all cosy on PC land to start with.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Wait a minute
by moondevil on Mon 17th Sep 2012 08:34 in reply to "RE[2]: Wait a minute"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Code written for Davlik won't run on a Java JVM. There fore making it incompatible Java.


It will if the APIs are available.

Don't confuse Java the language with Java the virtual machine.

It was an unfortunate decision, that Sun's marketing decided to call both the same name. At least in .NET and Android, language and VM have different names.

Reply Parent Score: 3