When is Java not Java? Google's cunning plan to bypass the Java license might not be cunning enough, depending on how Sun decides to play it and if they see Android as a significant threat to their Java revenues. The Android platform can run applications developed for Java Micro Edition (J2ME) but to avoid the restrictions of Java licence Google's …
Can anyone explain to me why Andriod is open source?? Taken from
http://www.infoq.com/news/2007/11/dalvik
"The interesting question is, of course, why doesn’t anyone have the courage to ask the same questions of Google, that they ask about OpenJDK? :)
Android is proprietary, despite being marketed as open source. Android has a compatibility pledge, signed and kept behind closed doors. Android has no governance model, nor any indication there will be one. Android has no spec, and the license prohibits alternative implementations, as that’s not a use licensed by Google in the SDK license. Android is completely controlled by Google, and Google reserves the right to kill off competitors applications if they hurt Google financially, etc. It’s only as open as it is in Google’s financial interest to allow openness, by design. Same old proprietary Java wine, in a different bottle.
It’s as if we’re witnessing the rebirth of the JCP, with folks lined up to lend open source community ’street credibility’ to another closed off vendor cartel around a single, proprietary implementation, this time with Google instead of Sun."
So, anyone care to explain how the hell this is open source?? Only an idiot woud think this is anything but bad old proprietory software
Hell, even now Sun are looking better on the open source front than google with this andriod platform, basically, if you want open, openjdk is where you can get it, or icedtea, but anywhere but andriod.
get a clue people
The Android platform cannot run applications developed for JavaME. JavaME as a term does not only relate to the cut-down Java virtual machine (kvm), but also the (pretty crummy) Java libraries built on top of it. Android does not implement any of those libraries.
The JavaME VM runs a slightly modified (preverified) old version of Java class files. Dalvik compiles a recent version of Java class files into Dalvik bytecode. Thus the Dalvik VM provides support enough for someone to write the JavaME libraries on top of the Android Java libraires.
Java SE and Java ME are now covered (for the most part, if not completely) by the GPLv2, if it escaped the reg's attention... Java is open source, so why does google need to dodge what license?
I think some fact checking is in order, Dalvik != Open Source, Java == Open Source
Filed under Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD)
"But if Sun feels Android really is the future of mobile telephony then they will need to protect their revenue stream from J2ME, even if that means taking on Google and the OS community." Surely it is Simpler to Embed within their OS communities to Influence and Direct Progress.
Why Battle whenever U can Forge Ahead Together .... Joint Add Venturing Magical Mystery Turing?
Have you been reading the same article? "Keeps being referred to as though it were [open source]"??
It's explicitely written that their trickery allows them to not open their sourcebook:
<By this ruse ... thus avoid ... being forced to open up modifications under the J2ME open source licence.>
it's a very shallow play to have free implementation, and lock-in too. The problem is it's too early Google are setting themselves up to look very bad for a long time. It's been noted for some time Google uses open source but almost never contributes anything in the way of source code back this sort of behavior is going to get them in hot water. I don't see this working very well anyway, I think they may have a change of heart at some point in the future.
The very same article has this line though:
"Taking on an open source project like Android would be bad publicity for a company keen to show its OS credentials"
An open source project would not need to skirt licenses that require their code to be open.
Perhaps the title should be "When is OS not OS?"
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
