We're finally talking about Objective-C.
-
-
Leonard: Yes, the [European Commission] said Google said that, but I don’t think I’ve seen Google’s file on itself.
-
IT'S DOUBLE HEARSAY
-
Alsup really bothered by it. Very exciting for me. But it stands. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
-
Double hearsay is the most exciting thing
-
Not sure if Leonard's double hearsay play worked out, since Oracle then got to ask, "BECAUSE GOOGLE DIDN'T SHOW IT TO YOU?
-
The European Commission document is NOT in evidence, it's just that the jury just got to hear that crazy quote
-
Oracle now crossing on Rubin's prior testimony, which is all terrible
-
The questions are basically asking if Rubin's testimony goes towards market harm, etc., whether competitive
-
But it's also a great opportunity to go over damning Rubin testimony
-
Oracle: The Open Handset Alliance did not spring fully-formed from the head of Zeus, did it, sir?
-
Hurst is doing her Hurst thing right now
-
like "You read the Rubin testimony? You were aware of it, and yet you came here today and said these products were not comeptitive"
-
Going over the Rubin email about how "the alternatives all suck" Oracle: AND THEN YOU CAME HERE AND TESTIFIED THE APIS HAD NO VALUE AT ALL
-
Leonard: I think you're misinterpreting the document. Oracle has no more questions
-
Leonard is done. I think I saw him do a big sigh as he stepped down.
-
Astrachan back on the stand.
#astrochan -
Remember when Douglas Schmidt conducted build tests to see if Android would run without the API packages?
-
Testimony responding to those build tests.
-
Google: What do you mean, failed to build? Astrochan is describing what it means for code to build (source code to object code)
-
It is a very clear explanation.
-
Not sure I heard correctly earlier but I think Astrachan tested his own builds?
-
Ah yes, he did. So first, when he removed all the Android packages, the platform failed to build.
-
Then he removed one of the 37. He removed one Android packages, and again the platform failed to build.
-
(These are all mirrors of the Schmidt tests)
-
(Wait for the mic drop I think I know what's coming)
-
He removed declaring code, and then that failed to build.
-
Google: Were you surprised? Astrachan: No. Because when you change the source code, it's common for it to fail to build.
-
Astrachan: I don't think this shows that the 37 packages have any more importance or criticality than any other packages.
-
Not sure I understood correctly — Astrachan did this with non-Java packages?
- 59 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.