Oracle vs. Google (was Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?)

  • From: Alex Hall <mehgcap@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:12:15 -0400

True. This move could scare plenty of people away from using, or
continuing to use, Java for commercial applications, and there goes
its usefulness to future developers and companies...

On 8/18/10, DaShiell, Jude T.  CIV NAVAIR 1490, 1, 26
<jude.dashiell@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> To the best of my knowledge, Android is G.P.L. and wasn't even
> originally developed by or at google.  Where the development started was
> at Carnegie Mellon University and that operating system was made
> available to google by the University.  Very likely the University
> didn't charge for the operating system so that along with the G.P.L.
> licensing could substantially weaken Oracle's case.  Another
> consideration here is that if Oracle starts demanding licensing fees
> from every java application on the planet, that'll shut the development
> off hard fast and permanently of new technologies done with java.  The
> solaris operating system which Oracle bought is a true security turkey
> having more problems than Linux even to this day.  I know that because
> of other contacts I have at work and they've had occasion to use it and
> clean up too many of its messes.  That won't be a cash cow for that
> reason, at least not for a while and several major releases.  Just
> because a predatory firm has jingle in its pocket doesn't necessarily
> entitle it to do strip mining on acquired resources but in Oracle's
> specific case, the acquisition crew didn't do sufficient due diligence
> and had more jingle in their pockets than operational brains in their
> heads.  So far as I'm concerned, couldn't happen to more nicer and
> deserving people.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Don Marang
> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 13:19
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>
> Now that is a rational angle I had not considered.  Unfortunately,
> Oracle
> seems to think they bought a cash cow.  It is possible they might
> require
> paid licences for Java used anywhere.  I have not checked the license
> terms
> that Sun has placed on this software.  I assumed that it was a GPL Open
> Source type.  Does anyone know?  It seems kind of strange to change
> license
> terms after years and years.
>
> Don Marang
>
> There is just so much stuff in the world that, to me, is devoid of any
> real
> substance, value, and content that I just try to make sure that I am
> working
> on things that matter.
> Dean Kamen
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "DaShiell, Jude T.  CIV NAVAIR 1490, 1, 26"
> <jude.dashiell@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:45 PM
> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>
>> Well, maybe Oracle can make a case.  What I'd like to see the Courts
> do
>> is to give Oracle a provisional victory such that for as long as
> Oracle
>> actively supports Android software development they can continue to
>> collect money.  When they discontinue support, their time to collect
>> money from Android would also properly end.  Now if such a precedent
> as
>> that were extended to cover the rest of the software industry, I think
>> we would witness the end of the days when titles were being added to
> the
>> abandonware list.  Also, in that way a collection right comes with a
>> software development support responsibility.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alex Hall
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:21
>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>>
>> Well, Oracle bought Sun Micro Systems, so they bought Java along with
>> everything else owned by Sun. Now, since Android is written in Java
>> and runs atop a virtual machine, Oracle is trying to say that they are
>> entitled to some of the money made by Android since it is written in a
>> language Oracle now owns.
>>
>> On 8/18/10, katherine Moss <plymouthroamer285@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Holy moly!  What's going on there?  What's Oracle suing Google for?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Don
> Marang
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 2:38 AM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is all Android app development based on Google's version of Java?
> Are
>> there
>>> reasonable resources I can point developers to for Android
>> accessibility
>>> implementation?  As a potential user / tinkerer, I would like to know
>> as
>>> well and hopefully be in a better position to provide positive
>> feedback.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Will the threatened Oracle lawsuit of Google over Java damage
>> Android's
>>> success?  Will it destroy inovation and Open Source if they win?
>>>
>>> Don Marang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is just so much stuff in the world that, to me, is devoid of
> any
>> real
>>> substance, value, and content that I just try to make sure that I am
>> working
>>> on things that matter.
>>> Dean Kamen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Ken Perry <mailto:whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 7:52 PM
>>>
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> Subject: RE: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is sort of what Android is doing even if they have not went far
>> enough
>>> yet.  They have an accessible event that is thrown by all controls
>> excepting
>>> static and some other problems but at any rate if you use basic
>> controls you
>>> get the accessible events if however you want to make a custom action
>> you
>>> can also throw accessible events that the screen readers like talk
>> back will
>>> catch and speak or the accessibility tools like kick back and sound
>> back can
>>> catch and do something with.  So its part developer putting in
> special
>>> access and part developer using the controls that are already
>> accessible.
>>> The unfortunate problem is what you get is only part accessible in
>> most
>>> cases.  I am not saying Android is not accessible I am saying what
>> Android
>>> is once again proving is if you leave it up to the developer at all
> us
>> as
>>> developers are too lazy to do it.  Take me for example if I as a
> blind
>> coder
>>> wrote a scrabble game I would not think of special cases for high
>> resolution
>>> graphic cards to have spinning tiles or something to make the game
>> more
>>> interesting for a sited player.  I would be shooting for my target
>> audience.
>>> The reverse is even worse not only are sighted programmers used to
>> rapid
>>> development and anything that slows them down out, but they wouldn't
>> know
>>> what we need to have sent to make something accessible unless we
> point
>> it
>>> out.  Here is an example under the Android platform.  The default
>> media
>>> player has very accessible artist and song lists. But when you open
>> them
>>> they say nothing for example When you open the media layer you are on
>> a tab
>>> screen and when you arrow left and right it says artist albums and
>> songs.
>>> If you click on artist nothing happens or at least as a blind person
>> hears
>>> it nothing at all happens.  If however you are sighted you will
> notice
>> that
>>> a whole list below opens up sort of like a tree but it's more like an
>>> expanded list.  If you don't know what you're doing and you click on
>> it
>>> again because you thought nothing happened it would close the list.
>> Now a
>>> sighted coder wouldn't know this is a problem and the current access
>> frame
>>> work doesn't take this into account.  What should have happened is a
>> open
>>> event should have been thrown even though focus didn't change there
>> should
>>> have been a notification.  Well it would have cost maybe 10 lines a
>> code to
>>> make this work but those lines are not easy to find and if you don't
>> know it
>>> needs to be there well you're not going to go looking in the
> View.java
>> class
>>> and the accessible_inf_event.java class to figure out how it works
>> because
>>> you don't know you need to.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So how do we fix this?  My answer is better thought out tool kits.
>> Once the
>>> developers can just use and it will be accessible.  If they make
>> accustom
>>> control then don't do something for accessibility it will error.
> Will
>> this
>>> ever happen.  My answer is no but shrug I hope I am wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jay
>> Macarty
>>> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:29 AM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One of the ideas I have been toying with for the java screen reader
>> (either
>>> we4java or jac) is providing a set of runtime annotations which could
>> be
>>> used to enhance an application's accessibility by allowing the app
>> developer
>>> to put in self voicing annotations. There are differing schools of
>> thought
>>> on self voicing. Some say it is good because the developer knows the
>> app
>>> best and where self voicing would be helpful. On the other hand,
>> putting in
>>> self voicing without providing the user a way of controling it or
>> turning
>>> off certain levels of it, takes away from the user's control over the
>>> accessibility feedback. If we put self voicing annotations into the
>> java
>>> screen reader, a developer could add them in if desired but the base
>> screen
>>> reader code base would still have control and could provide a common
>>> mechanism for allowing the user to adjust the self voicing feedback.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>
>>> From: Ken Perry <mailto:whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 5:20 PM
>>>
>>> Subject: RE: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Chris H.'s answer but I want to point out it's our fault
>> it's
>>> not already accessible.  I wrote a simple talking java screen reader
>> that
>>> did very little but it made it so I could use  Open Office. Crappily
>> but the
>>> buttons talked and all and I did this in like 200 lines of code.  I
>> know
>>> that code got passed around and I have since lost my copy but it  can
>> be
>>> done by replacing the access bridge with self voicing code.  It just
>> takes
>>> someone actually doing it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am interested to see where Open Office goes now that it is Oricals.
>> I am
>>> worried about all Java stuff now that Orical is trying to Sew Google
>> into
>>> stopping Android.  It's a crazy world.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kerneels
>> Roos
>>> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 3:30 AM
>>> To: programmingblind
>>> Subject: Why isn't Open Office on Windows Accessible?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi List,
>>>
>>> Sorry if this question has been raised before and dealt with. Does
>> anyone
>>> know exactly why the Windows version of Open Office is only partly
>>> accessible with a screen reader, while the Linux version is streets
>> ahead?
>>> Because Open Office is written in Java I assume the code base is 98%
>>> identical across platforms. Is the problem mainly with the JAB (Java
>> Access
>>> Bridge) or with the screen readers themselves? Could the JAB not be
>> open
>>> sourced so it can be updated to bridge Java, MSAA, UIA and any other
>> access
>>> middle ware standard?
>>>
>>> NVDA works the best with Open Office, so I would assume it makes the
>> best
>>> use of the JAB. Is there other Java to access technology middle ware
>> in
>>> common use today?
>>>
>>> I can remember a really long thread that in part had some info on
> Java
>>> accessibility, but I just can't justify going through all that to
>> possibly
>>> find out more.
>>>
>>> Keep well
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kerneels Roos
>>> Cell/SMS: +27 (0)82 309 1998
>>> Skype: cornelis.roos
>>>
>>> The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the
> cheese!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>> signature
>>> database 5376 (20100818) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Have a great day,
>> Alex (msg sent from GMail website)
>> mehgcap@xxxxxxxxx; http://www.facebook.com/mehgcap
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>
>>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
>


-- 
Have a great day,
Alex (msg sent from GMail website)
mehgcap@xxxxxxxxx; http://www.facebook.com/mehgcap
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. programmingblind
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2010