this is probably a little touchy to ask...
jrisom at gmail.com
Wed Sep 15 06:53:02 UTC 2010
On 9/14/2010 4:21 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "Jules" == Jules Gilbert<jules.stocks at gmail.com> writes:
> Jules> Now, if Oracle won't adjust their thinking, I intend to look at Java
> Jules> sub-systems that are supplied and built by other people than Oracle.
> Jules> (It's called Open Source.)
> And that's what I tried to say in my last few posts. Given Oracle's
> apparent stance to own Java not by copyright but by patent, it doesn't
> *matter* that Java is "open source". We'll have to wait until Oracle
> v. Google is decided, but unless Google can invalidate Oracle's
> *patents* on Java, Java is effectively dead, unless you want to sleep in
> Oracle's bed.
Google sort of shot themselves in the foot since it's like java enough
that everyone not a lawyer can call it java, except it needs recompiled,
and that Google ignored the patent grant by Sun since they made it a
subset. There's also the issue that Google's not paying licensing fees
to say it's Java capable. Google was intentionally weaseling out of a
potential problem. Sun being bought got Google in trouble. Sun's
patent grant could have protected Google, but Google refused it.
As to the original post, Java, a "portable" "write once run anywhere"
language, doesn't work on FreeBSD, a "standard" type operating system
that mainly runs on "standard" hardware, when used with Xorg, a widely
used "standard," as a plug in for Firefox, a major and presumably the
dominant *nix web browser. Maybe the question should go to Oracle about
why it doesn't work. A java applet probably works on your Symbian smart
phone running on ARM.
More information about the freebsd-questions