Coffeehouse Thread

16 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Android could have been based on .NET

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    cbae

    Interesting.

    Back in 2005, well before Android was released, Rubin wrote, "If Sun doesn't want to work with us, we have two options: 1) Abandon our work and adopt MSFT CLR VM and C# language - or - 2) Do Java anyway and defend our decision, perhaps making enemies along the way."



  • User profile image
    wkempf

    I commented about that on G+ 5 days ago. I don't believe this was ever a serious consideration. More likely it was an off hand comment. Still, even as an off hand comment it's quite interesting coming from Google.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    Would have made more sense than going with Java, IMO. C# is an open standard, Java is not.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    ,Bass wrote

    Would have made more sense than going with Java, IMO. C# is an open standard, Java is not.

    From a technical and legal perspective, sure; however who is to say that Google would pervert the CLR in the same way Microsoft did with Java?

    Remember that Dalvik itself isn't a true JVM, I can only presume Google would produce their own "not-quite-CLR" VM for C# (or a C#-derivative) and Microsoft would sue them over that too in the same way Oracle is now.

  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    ,W3bbo wrote

    ...I can only presume Google would produce their own "not-quite-CLR" VM for C# (or a C#-derivative) and Microsoft would sue them over that too in the same way Oracle is now.

    Er... what?

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    @PaoloM: I guess he supposes that the MCP does not apply to Google.

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

     

    ,JoshRoss wrote

    @PaoloM: I guess he supposes that theMCP does not apply to Google.

    -Josh

    In the scenario I proposed, the MCP would not apply.

    In taking Java for Android, Google made some modifications and called it Dalvik. This is one of the reasons Oracle is slightly peeved with Google (amongst other things).

    If Google took the CLR and made a derivative and called it Dalvik, I'm sure Microsoft would find some way to get mad, such as saying "it doesn't conform to the specifications, therefore it's not covered by the MCP, therefore we can sue". The MCP states: " importing or distributing any implementation, to the extent it conforms to one of the Covered Specifications" - that's my point.

     

     

  • User profile image
    cheong

    ,JoshRoss wrote

    @PaoloM: I guess he supposes that theMCP does not apply to Google.

    -Josh

    Since Google did sue Microsoft over some patent infringement issues before, I think Google is automatically disqualified for rights granted by MCP.

    MCP site wrote

    If you file, maintain, or voluntarily participate in a patent infringement lawsuit against a Microsoft implementation of any Covered Specification, then this personal promise does not apply with respect to any Covered Implementation made or used by you.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    @cheong: Now that's funny as hell.

  • User profile image
    IsThisReally​Beer

    @cbae:

    There was never any danger of this. GWT was already based on Java at the time and was introduced at the Sun One conference in 2006.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Web_Toolkit

    GWT version 1.0 RC 1 (build 1.0.20) was released on May 16, 2006.[2] Google announced GWT at the JavaOne conference, 2006.[3]

    The simple dislike of IE would have kept Google from adopting the .NET CLR.

    Google is and was about thinking and being different, and it would have made a very negative statement to adopt the runtime of a company still under investigation by the DOJ for anti-trust and pushing software on people, like it or not.

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    ,IsThisReally​Beer wrote

    Google is and was about thinking and being different, and it would have made a very negative statement to adopt the runtime of a company still under investigation by the DOJ for anti-trust and pushing software on people, like it or not.

    So what you're saying is that given the choice between implementing an ISO standard which originated from Microsoft and deliberately ripping off Sun Microsystem's technology to avoid having to pay licensing fees, they naturally went with the latter option on moral grounds? Really?

  • User profile image
    Bass

    ,cheong wrote

    *snip*

    Since Google did sue Microsoft over some patent infringement issues before, I think Google is automatically disqualified for rights granted by MCP.

    *snip*

    You can proof of this? I never heard of Google suing Microsoft (or vise versa) directly. If there is lawsuits it's always by proxy. Technology Cold War and all.

    On top of that, some manager type at Microsoft explicitly said they wouldn't sue Google if they decided to use .NET. Even ignoring the CP, that statement alone would complicate any lawsuit at the minimum.

    Evidently all this happened (the CP and these statements) happened after Android was established. Who knows if they would have reacted differently.

  • User profile image
    cheong

    @Bass:

    ,Bass wrote

    You can proof of this? I never heard of Google suing Microsoft (or vise versa) directly. If there is lawsuits it's always by proxy. Technology Cold War and all.

    It depends on how the lawyers interprets "voluntarily participate" for those lawsuits. Even for those "proxy lawsuits" Google could have submitted materials as proof of infringement.

    On top of that, some manager type at Microsoft explicitly said they wouldn't sue Google if they decided to use .NET. Even ignoring the CP, that statement alone would complicate any lawsuit at the minimum.

    What I wanted to say is that the statement makes CP irrelevent to the discussion.

    Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , IsThisReallyBeer wrote

    @cbae:

    There was never any danger of this. GWT was already based on Java at the time and was introduced at the Sun One conference in 2006.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Web_Toolkit

    *snip*

    The simple dislike of IE would have kept Google from adopting the .NET CLR.

    Google is and was about thinking and being different, and it would have made a very negative statement to adopt the runtime of a company still under investigation by the DOJ for anti-trust and pushing software on people, like it or not.

    Yes, because Google would never push stuff onto people's machines... oh wait.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , IsThisReallyBeer wrote

    The simple dislike of IE would have kept Google from adopting the .NET CLR.

    IE has nothing to do with the CLR.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    This is an old thread that was resurrected by a spammer. Just saying.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.