Eidorian
May 3, 12:27 PM
If the monitors cannot daisy chain, you need a hub for the port(s) to which you connect multiple such displays.Thanks, I was just curious.
BRLawyer
Sep 5, 03:15 PM
It's Showtime. Obvious reference to movies. What do (consumers) want? What does apple like to sell? HARDWARE. Steve will introduce some sort of on-line movie service. I have no idea what it will be, other than different from other options. To me, the on-line movie store is not a bit sexy.
What will be sexy are the other three devices he will introduce that will use that service...
1) True Video iPod. With some sort of wireless transfer method. There is no point in on-line service (for apple) if it ain't mobile.
2) The Apple Movie Machine, probably looking a lot like a Mini, to interface wirelessly to your computer with your TV seamlessly, using an improved Front Row. It will have DVR capability and ability to work with streamed high quality video from iTunes movie store.
3) 23" iMac with a TV tuner, and the ability to pickup streamed movies from the ITunes movie store, and built-in DVR capacity upon which to view those nice movies.
Indeed it is. Microsoft is simply DEAD after 12th of September...Apple is finally gonna reach the status of market leader in media and computers...this is gonna be mindblowing.
What will be sexy are the other three devices he will introduce that will use that service...
1) True Video iPod. With some sort of wireless transfer method. There is no point in on-line service (for apple) if it ain't mobile.
2) The Apple Movie Machine, probably looking a lot like a Mini, to interface wirelessly to your computer with your TV seamlessly, using an improved Front Row. It will have DVR capability and ability to work with streamed high quality video from iTunes movie store.
3) 23" iMac with a TV tuner, and the ability to pickup streamed movies from the ITunes movie store, and built-in DVR capacity upon which to view those nice movies.
Indeed it is. Microsoft is simply DEAD after 12th of September...Apple is finally gonna reach the status of market leader in media and computers...this is gonna be mindblowing.
Fraaaa
Apr 22, 12:11 PM
Should I be pissed having bought the new SSD MB Air 4 months ago?:confused: I deserved some TB speeds.
You'll be fine.
You'll be fine.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 30, 12:00 PM
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
What I understood is that the word "App" by itself is not the reason for the lawsuit, but the term "App Store" is; both words used together.
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
What I understood is that the word "App" by itself is not the reason for the lawsuit, but the term "App Store" is; both words used together.
donlphi
Sep 5, 04:49 PM
isn't the resolution going to be terrible. I don't see these movie downloads working with a hi-def TV. The television shows are pretty pathetic on my old 42" panasonic. 320x240 is going to look terrible on a beautiful sony 1080p television...
this whole idea sounds like a lose lose situation.
You are going to be transfering these choppy looking movies, which will look great on the current ipod video, but lame as heck on a any screen larger than 5 inches.
what's the point? Who wants to buy that? I'd rather rent a movie from netflix or if I really like it, buy the movie at best buy and rip it onto my hard drive, and drop it into my iPOD and watch it later.
I hope there is more than just a new VCR or DVD player.
How about an on demand service through the device, which lets you watch it for one price or copy a lower resolution version of it to your iPOD for another price.
I don't know, but it seems like we are barking up the wrong tree.
Bring on the new processors for the macbook pro!
this whole idea sounds like a lose lose situation.
You are going to be transfering these choppy looking movies, which will look great on the current ipod video, but lame as heck on a any screen larger than 5 inches.
what's the point? Who wants to buy that? I'd rather rent a movie from netflix or if I really like it, buy the movie at best buy and rip it onto my hard drive, and drop it into my iPOD and watch it later.
I hope there is more than just a new VCR or DVD player.
How about an on demand service through the device, which lets you watch it for one price or copy a lower resolution version of it to your iPOD for another price.
I don't know, but it seems like we are barking up the wrong tree.
Bring on the new processors for the macbook pro!
donlphi
Sep 5, 04:49 PM
isn't the resolution going to be terrible. I don't see these movie downloads working with a hi-def TV. The television shows are pretty pathetic on my old 42" panasonic. 320x240 is going to look terrible on a beautiful sony 1080p television...
this whole idea sounds like a lose lose situation.
You are going to be transfering these choppy looking movies, which will look great on the current ipod video, but lame as heck on a any screen larger than 5 inches.
what's the point? Who wants to buy that? I'd rather rent a movie from netflix or if I really like it, buy the movie at best buy and rip it onto my hard drive, and drop it into my iPOD and watch it later.
I hope there is more than just a new VCR or DVD player.
How about an on demand service through the device, which lets you watch it for one price or copy a lower resolution version of it to your iPOD for another price.
I don't know, but it seems like we are barking up the wrong tree.
Bring on the new processors for the macbook pro!
this whole idea sounds like a lose lose situation.
You are going to be transfering these choppy looking movies, which will look great on the current ipod video, but lame as heck on a any screen larger than 5 inches.
what's the point? Who wants to buy that? I'd rather rent a movie from netflix or if I really like it, buy the movie at best buy and rip it onto my hard drive, and drop it into my iPOD and watch it later.
I hope there is more than just a new VCR or DVD player.
How about an on demand service through the device, which lets you watch it for one price or copy a lower resolution version of it to your iPOD for another price.
I don't know, but it seems like we are barking up the wrong tree.
Bring on the new processors for the macbook pro!
unobtainium
Apr 30, 01:38 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
So previous iMac design lasted 4 years...it's been 3. Previous MBP design lasted, what, 6 years? Rumors are meaningless until we see leaked shots or something (remember the iPad 2 rumors?)
I don't think that overhauling the exterior of iMac or MBP is high on Apple's priority list at the moment and I'd be surprised if it happened within the next year.
So previous iMac design lasted 4 years...it's been 3. Previous MBP design lasted, what, 6 years? Rumors are meaningless until we see leaked shots or something (remember the iPad 2 rumors?)
I don't think that overhauling the exterior of iMac or MBP is high on Apple's priority list at the moment and I'd be surprised if it happened within the next year.
bushido
Apr 25, 01:46 PM
would be nice timing to put my late 09 mbp to rest
YEMandy
Sep 12, 03:22 PM
Apple has a 10 day return policy if they updated a product you just bought within 10 days. They will give you a full refund, or cash difference if the price is lowered (which it is)
tylersdad
Apr 4, 12:04 PM
OMG.. I'm with Felt. "Security Guards" shouldn't carry guns, and if they do there should be training and good sense that goes into using it. Shooting the suspects in the head is criminal.
Anybody responsible for guarding should have a gun. If the person isn't qualified to carry a gun, they he/she isn't qualified to guard anything and shouldn't be a guard.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Anybody responsible for guarding should have a gun. If the person isn't qualified to carry a gun, they he/she isn't qualified to guard anything and shouldn't be a guard.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Manic Mouse
Jul 16, 03:23 PM
There is no way apple with go with Merom for the imac. One huge factor you are all ignoring, is price. Merom cost alot more than conroe for the same speed. Apple will try to lower cost, and that means going with Conroe.
The CPU is probably the single most expensive component of the iMac, so if they use Conroe they not only have faster processors but they are also saving money which means more profit for Apple.
The million dollar question is whether or not the thermals of Conroe allow it to be used within the constrained iMac design. At the very least it'll need a new motherboard, or possibly a re-design.
Conroes are the most power efficient desktop processor currently available, so fingers crossed!
The CPU is probably the single most expensive component of the iMac, so if they use Conroe they not only have faster processors but they are also saving money which means more profit for Apple.
The million dollar question is whether or not the thermals of Conroe allow it to be used within the constrained iMac design. At the very least it'll need a new motherboard, or possibly a re-design.
Conroes are the most power efficient desktop processor currently available, so fingers crossed!
ValSalva
Apr 30, 01:47 PM
So previous iMac design lasted 4 years...it's been 3.
Isn't this iMac design from fall of 2009? That's less than two years.
Isn't this iMac design from fall of 2009? That's less than two years.
cere
Apr 14, 12:20 PM
Err... no.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380954,00.asp
Same reply as previous quote. Exactly what do you think that article is telling you?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380954,00.asp
Same reply as previous quote. Exactly what do you think that article is telling you?
jimmyjoemccrow
Jan 12, 01:14 AM
Windows user here for at least a decade. This is obviously propaganda to promote some sort of upcoming suite of software for OSX to prevent "viruses" lol. Yawn. I am right now on my Windows box as I don't have a Mac at the moment but I have owned several. The only way your Mac can be infected with anything is through stupidity.
Lovehow to be , when you more
and I love you more than
I love you even more than
dicho Love+you+more+than+
Love+you+more+than+
OdduWon
Sep 26, 11:44 AM
I would just like to say that i had said this exact same thing a couple weeks ago-apple would probably initally only sign on with one carrier and everyone else would be left out in the cold-so to al those who said it wouldn't happen it appears that it will be happening
well, also it makes perfect sense since cingular is the only provider that i know of that has itunes capable phones. really no suprise here. this is why when my dog ate my ericson t637 i just got a $50 referb and held off on buying a new phone. telepod is going to be great!
well, also it makes perfect sense since cingular is the only provider that i know of that has itunes capable phones. really no suprise here. this is why when my dog ate my ericson t637 i just got a $50 referb and held off on buying a new phone. telepod is going to be great!
Leej
Sep 26, 10:12 PM
Already have a Cingular deal. Sweet!
Jaro65
Apr 4, 12:37 PM
OMG.. I'm with Felt. "Security Guards" shouldn't carry guns, and if they do there should be training and good sense that goes into using it. Shooting the suspects in the head is criminal.
You're right. Perhaps the security guards should instead be trained in negotiation and psychology, so they would try to persuade the would-be criminals from committing crime. :D
You're right. Perhaps the security guards should instead be trained in negotiation and psychology, so they would try to persuade the would-be criminals from committing crime. :D
GGJstudios
Mar 19, 02:17 PM
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
cirus
Apr 19, 10:40 AM
Between Samsung on the hardware and Google on the software, I can't believe anyone in their right mind actually saying with a straight face that the Samsung phone in question is not stealing from Apple. Get a grip.
What Samsung is going to do is say that individually none of these little similarities are relevant.
Can apple prevent anyone from using the colour balck? No.
Metal edges-No.
Bottom is the best place for home button because of how the device is held. At the top you would block part of the screen. The Prada had the same ear speaker.
A four by four grid. They are simply going to argue that this is the best size for icons. Three by three is too large and 4 by 5 or 5 by 5 is too small.
Dock: this is the only logical place to place a dock. Seriously, what...you want it on the side, top, or back?
White page dots: this is too similar, might have a case here as there are many ways to have page indicators.
Green phone icon: looks similar but the icon is so simple that its going to be hard to defend. Basically a phone on green. What, so everyone else can't have a green background. What would they use for a phone icon except a phone icon.
Clock symbols always look like that.
What Samsung is going to do is say that individually none of these little similarities are relevant.
Can apple prevent anyone from using the colour balck? No.
Metal edges-No.
Bottom is the best place for home button because of how the device is held. At the top you would block part of the screen. The Prada had the same ear speaker.
A four by four grid. They are simply going to argue that this is the best size for icons. Three by three is too large and 4 by 5 or 5 by 5 is too small.
Dock: this is the only logical place to place a dock. Seriously, what...you want it on the side, top, or back?
White page dots: this is too similar, might have a case here as there are many ways to have page indicators.
Green phone icon: looks similar but the icon is so simple that its going to be hard to defend. Basically a phone on green. What, so everyone else can't have a green background. What would they use for a phone icon except a phone icon.
Clock symbols always look like that.
gleepskip
Apr 20, 10:03 AM
If this is your biggest worry on people being able to track you...hmph.
Tinfoil hats are going to be all the rage here soon.
I didn't mention what my biggest worry is.
Tinfoil hats are going to be all the rage here soon.
I didn't mention what my biggest worry is.
VespR
Sep 13, 06:32 AM
Pretty weak update to the "flagship" pod. I bought a nano last month (glad I did, hate the colours, and wouldn't feel happy about paying �100 more just to get it in black). I'll assume black nanos/vpods have been booming so they thought they'd slap a premium on it this time, bit harsh really.
The software update is, well, a software update. They could have rolled that out anytime over the last year but it always bodes well with a new 'product'. Also all the talk on battery life, I suspect that has nothing to do with a different or better battery but rather Apples default settings on brightness/volume. I find everytime I play my ipod on Apples default volume setting, I get more or less what's said on the tin. Shame it's too quiet for the London Transport System (tubes/trains) to listen to so I'm forced to turn it up and lose a few hours. I suspect the default brightness level will be lower than what it was initially which has resulted in the increase in life.
I do want an vPod, and around the 60/80GB mark (30 -> 80 jump is crazy?!), but not with that size screen. I'll wait till it's in wide, and then tune into Lost/24 on the commute so I can actually see what's going on. Plus I'm sure they should be getting slimmer these days... Steves year of HD really isn't working out like I thought...
The software update is, well, a software update. They could have rolled that out anytime over the last year but it always bodes well with a new 'product'. Also all the talk on battery life, I suspect that has nothing to do with a different or better battery but rather Apples default settings on brightness/volume. I find everytime I play my ipod on Apples default volume setting, I get more or less what's said on the tin. Shame it's too quiet for the London Transport System (tubes/trains) to listen to so I'm forced to turn it up and lose a few hours. I suspect the default brightness level will be lower than what it was initially which has resulted in the increase in life.
I do want an vPod, and around the 60/80GB mark (30 -> 80 jump is crazy?!), but not with that size screen. I'll wait till it's in wide, and then tune into Lost/24 on the commute so I can actually see what's going on. Plus I'm sure they should be getting slimmer these days... Steves year of HD really isn't working out like I thought...
justinLONG
Mar 22, 03:56 PM
I bought a refurbished a month ago. I needed one and couldn't go with out a
computer any longer.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC509LL/A?mco=MjEwNTc0ODc
meh.
computer any longer.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC509LL/A?mco=MjEwNTc0ODc
meh.
tdream
Mar 29, 11:39 AM
LoL. Yeah guys just predict the next 4 years, no probs :p
Where were you guys when I needed you in 2007 :eek:
Where were you guys when I needed you in 2007 :eek:
McGiord
Mar 29, 01:30 PM
Oracle's lawsuit against Google is airtight. Android's use of a non-compliant virtual machine (the Dalvik VM) is a clear violation of the Java license agreement. And there's legal precedent: Microsoft paid Sun $20 million back in 2001 when Sun successfully sued them for trying to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Well I missed this news. Can you please share a link/source about this?
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Well I missed this news. Can you please share a link/source about this?
