Linked List: May 26, 2016

Thursday, 26 May 2016

Google : 2010s :: Microsoft : 1990s 

Jason Snell, writing at Macworld:

As someone in Google’s ecosystem as well as Apple’s, I’m happy that they continue to develop apps for iOS. Unfortunately, every time I open one of them, I’m brought back to the mid-’90s and Word 6.

I don’t know the reason — arrogance, pride, or a lack of desire to do the extra work are all options — but for a while now, Google has insisted on using the Material Design approach when creating iOS apps. Just as Word 6 inflicted Windows conventions on Mac users, Google’s iOS apps inflict Android on iOS users. […]

I’m not saying either design is superior. If you’re on Android, you should expect apps to look like Android apps–Apple Music for Android uses Android’s icons for sharing and offering additional options, rather than the ones you’d see on iOS. And the reverse should be true too. (It’s not. Google Play Music looks the same on iOS as on Android.)

Hear, hear. I find every one of Google’s iOS apps too foreign to bear.

Update: Jason specifically calls out iTunes on Windows as being in the same boat. I’d add the late Safari for Windows, too.

Peter Thiel, Comic Book Hero 

Great take from Ben Thompson:

The tech industry, like Thiel, is no underdog: it is the dominant economic force not just in the United States but in the entire world, both because of the wealth it creates, but especially because of the wealth it destroys. And, to quote another comic book figure, “With great power comes great responsibility”.

In this case, no matter how badly Thiel was personally hurt by Gawker, or how morally wrong their actions were, he is the one with far greater power, and the appropriate approach is not to leverage said power in an act of vigilantism, but to exercise the responsibility of defending the conditions that made his power possible to emerge, conditions that I believe are to the long-term benefit of everyone. That would be an approach worth applauding and emulating, not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because the freedom that made possible the tech industry that made Thiel rich depends on it.

Google Beats Oracle in Java API Case 

Joe Mullin, reporting for Ars Technica:

Following a two-week trial, a federal jury concluded Thursday that Google’s Android operating system does not infringe Oracle-owned copyrights because its re-implementation of 37 Java APIs is protected by “fair use.” The verdict was reached after three days of deliberations. […]

There was only one question on the special verdict form, asking if Google’s use of the Java APIs was a “fair use” under copyright law. The jury unanimously answered “yes,” in Google’s favor. The verdict ends the trial, which began earlier this month. If Oracle had won, the same jury would have gone into a “damages phase” to determine how much Google should pay. Because Google won, the trial is over.

I’m sure they’re out there, but I haven’t seen anyone who was rooting for Oracle in this case.

Update: Florian Mueller, writer of the FOSS Patents weblog, is staunchly on Oracle’s side:

Also, while Google was able to present all of the “evidence” and testimony that helped its defense, Oracle had been precluded from presenting the entirety of its willful-infringement evidence.

Presumably, Judge Alsup will deny Oracle’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL), if his jury instructions are any indication. Then Oracle will appeal again. I predict Oracle is very likely to succeed once again on appeal.

Update 2: Mueller, for what it’s worth, has worked as a “paid consultant” for Oracle on this case. So feel free to take his support with a healthy dose of salt.

What Does Facebook Think About Board Member Peter Thiel Secretly Funding Lawsuits Against a Publisher? 

Kara Swisher, writing for Recode:

What does Facebook, which has been trying mightily to court the media industry to publish on the social networking site, think about Thiel’s actions, especially given he is a prominent director of the company?

And, more importantly, will it do anything about them?

The answer is, not surprisingly, a solid “No comment” from the company and a number of other board members. In fact, insiders are going out of their way to say that Facebook is not responsible for Thiel’s private actions and noting that it had nothing to do with the lawsuit.

Felix Salmon: ‘Peter Thiel’s Dangerous Campaign Against Gawker’ 

Felix Salmon, writing at Fusion, making the case that Peter Thiel revealed his role in the Hogan-Gawker case as a strategic move:

But then the Thiel bombshell dropped. The Hogan case, it turned out, wasn’t a war in which Gawker could emerge victorious; instead, it was merely a battle in a much larger fight against an opponent with effectively unlimited resources.

Gawker could continue to fight the Hogan case; it could even win that case outright, on appeal. But even if Hogan went away, Thiel would not. Thiel’s lawsuits would not end, and Thiel’s pockets are deeper than Denton’s. Gawker’s future is indeed grim: it can’t afford to fight an indefinite number of lawsuits, since fighting even frivolous suits is an expensive game.

The result is that investing in Gawker right now is a very unattractive proposition, since any investor knows that they will be fighting a years-long battle with a single-minded billionaire who doesn’t care about how much money he spends on the fight. And if Gawker can’t raise any new money to continue to fight the Hogan case, then its corporate end might be closer than anybody thinks.