3 ms·

Only partially agree here. Ageee that Android wasnt a response to Apple, but don’t think it was a response to MS either. It was a response to Oracle, and their

Only partially agree here. Ageee that Android wasnt a response to Apple, but don’t think it was a response to MS either. It was a response to Oracle, and their tight grip of Java and the devices supported by it. At the time, Java owned most devices and Oracle had tight licensing requirements (you could either GPL all your code or pay Oracle a nice fee). Android created a (semi) compatible runtime that allowed companies to side-skirt Oracles licensing requirements. This of course brought a huge lawsuit from Oracle to Google (touching on fundamentals legal issues on whether large APIs are copyrightable), but Google seems to have come out on top. Android effectively unlocked Java from Oracle, turning it into a (sort-of) open platform, while gaining access to their huge developer base.

GeekyBear 8y ago
I'd have to point out that Oracle never developed a competing search engine and ad network the way Microsoft did, and their CEO had not been publicly quoted as threatening to "kill" Google. Google's fears turned out to be unfounded (given the way things turned out) but it was Microsoft that they feared.
- speedplane 8y ago
  There was never a moment where MS’s search engine was seriously competitive with Googles, whether that’s 2003 or 2018. Google was worried, but it wasn’t about the search algorithm. It was who would control the platform that controlled which search to run. Back then, MS clearly had the desktop (this was well before the widespread adoption of Chrome). Oracle/Java had a shaky but real lead in devices. The answer to desktop domination / MS was Chrome and taking the lead on new web standards that Google could control. But the answer to device / Oracle domination was Android. If Google didn’t wage that battle, every Android advertisement would have a “powered by Oracle” slogan in the bottom corner.
  - GeekyBear 8y ago
    We're going to have to agree to disagree. Hindsight may tell us that Microsoft turned out to be a paper tiger, but as the article I cited points out, it was Microsoft that Google feared a the time.

GeekyBear 8y ago

I'd have to point out that Oracle never developed a competing search engine and ad network the way Microsoft did, and their CEO had not been publicly quoted as threatening to "kill" Google. Google's fears turned out to be unfounded (given the way things turned out) but it was Microsoft that they feared.

speedplane 8y ago
There was never a moment where MS’s search engine was seriously competitive with Googles, whether that’s 2003 or 2018. Google was worried, but it wasn’t about the search algorithm. It was who would control the platform that controlled which search to run. Back then, MS clearly had the desktop (this was well before the widespread adoption of Chrome). Oracle/Java had a shaky but real lead in devices. The answer to desktop domination / MS was Chrome and taking the lead on new web standards that Google could control. But the answer to device / Oracle domination was Android. If Google didn’t wage that battle, every Android advertisement would have a “powered by Oracle” slogan in the bottom corner.
- GeekyBear 8y ago
  We're going to have to agree to disagree. Hindsight may tell us that Microsoft turned out to be a paper tiger, but as the article I cited points out, it was Microsoft that Google feared a the time.