Microsoft to close Windows Live Messenger on 15 March

Microsoft has announced plans to shut down its Messenger service (formerly Windows Live Messenger/MSN Messenger) and move users to Skype from 15 March 2013. The sad news came in the form of an official email from Microsoft. It is believed that Messenger users residing in mainland China will be unaffected by this closure.

Messenger is dead. Long live Messenger

From March 15 Messenger users will be unable to sign into Messenger and use the service. From this date Microsoft encourage you to download Skype where you'll still be able to exchange instant-messages and have chats with your Messenger friends. Your existing Windows Live ID login will also still work.

Microsoft

A history lesson

To the keen observer the death of Messenger has been a long time coming. Microsoft's costly acquisition of Skype (a cool $8.5 billion) during October 2011, set the wheels in motion. At the time we all wondered whether Skype's communication technology would perhaps be absorbed into future releases of Messenger - after all, it made sense.

A year later and shortly before the release of Windows 8, Microsoft announced it would be renaming its useful suite of free online services and software. Windows Live staples such as Hotmail, SkyDrive, Photo Gallery, Movie Maker and Messenger were all affected by this change.

Not long after that (and in a surprise move) Microsoft ditched the Hotmail brand, instead rebranding it Outlook.

From this point on it was clear that anything could happen. Microsoft still held onto Skype and tech plaudits deliberated how the new service could possibly fit into these increasingly-streamlined plans. Fortunately we didn't have to wait long for the software giant to show its hand - a recent email sent to some hundred million Messenger users has announced ambitions to finally retire the much-lauded Messenger instant-messaging service in favour of Skype.

RIP Messenger

Below you can find the full text from Microsoft's official email:

"On 15th March 2013 we are retiring the existing Messenger service globally (except for mainland China where Messenger will continue to be available) and bringing the great features of Messenger and Skype together. Update to Skype and sign in using a Microsoft Account (same as your Messenger ID) and all your Messenger contacts will be at your fingertips. You’ll be able to instant message and video chat with them just like before, and also discover new ways of staying in touch with Skype on your mobile and tablet.

So, what’s happening between now and 15th March?

Messenger will continue to work as you know it today. If you are signed in with Messenger on your desktop** you will see a banner notification to upgrade. When you click on the banner, an installer window will open with the request to upgrade. This will take you through our installer flow to install Skype and automatically uninstall Messenger.

So, what’s happening after 15th March?

Messenger users on desktops** will not be able to sign in and will only be able to upgrade to Skype. If you attempt to sign in, a notification will appear, and if you continue, you will be taken through our installer flow to install Skype and automatically uninstall Messenger at the same time.

Can I update to Skype on my mobile?

Yes! Skype is available on iPhone, Android and soon on Windows Phone 8. We encourage you to download the latest Skype app on your mobile and then uninstall Messenger. You will be able to sign in to Skype on your iPhone, Android and Windows Phone 8 mobile apps with your Microsoft Account over the next few weeks. If you use another phone with Messenger on it, it will continue to work for a while."

* To get group video chat, you’ll need a Skype Premium subscription.

 ** Newer versions of Messenger will be able to receive the optional upgrade notifications. Older versions will not receive the notifications and you will have to download Skype manually.

SSD vs HDD

These days most people are buying laptops for their computing needs and you have to make the decision between getting either a Solid State Drive (SSD) or Hard Disk Drive (HDD) as the storage component. So which is best to get, a SSD or HDD?  There’s no straight forward answer to this question, each buyer has different needs and you have to evaluate the decision based on those needs, your preferences, and of course budget.  Even though the price of SSDs has been falling and right now there is a tight supply of HDD drives due to Thailand floods, the price advantage is still strongly with HDDs.  But if performance and fast bootup is your top consideration, and money is secondary, then SSD is the way to go.  We’ll make a comparison of SSD and HDD storage and go over the good, the bad and the ugly of both.
What is a SSD?
We’ll make no assumptions here and keep this article on a level that anyone can understand.  You might be shopping for a computer and simply wondering what the heck SSD actually means?  To begin, SSD stands for Solid State Drive.  You’re probably familiar with USB memory sticks, SSD can be thought of as an oversized and more sophisticated version of the humble USB memory stick.  Like a memory stick, there are no moving parts to an SSD, information is stored in microchips.  Meanwhile, a hard drive uses a mechanical arm with a read/write head to move around and read information from the right location on a storage platter.  This difference is what makes SSD so much faster.  As an analogy, what’s quicker, having to walk across the room to retrieve a book to get information or simply magically having that book open in front of you when you need it?  That’s how an HDD compares to an SSD, it simply requires more physical labor (mechanical movement) to get information.
A typical SSD uses what is called NAND-based flash memory, this is a non-volatile type of memory.  What does non-volatile mean you ask?  The simple answer is that you can turn off the disk and it won’t “forget” what was stored on it.  This is of course an essential characteristic of any type of permanent memory.  During the early days of SSD rumors floated around saying stored data would wear off and be lost after only a few years.  Today this is not true, you can read and write to an SSD all day long and the data storage integrity will be maintained for well over 200 years.  In other words, the data storage life of an SSD can outlive you!
An SSD does not have a mechanical arm to read and write data, it instead relies on an embedded processor (or “brain”) called a controller to perform a bunch of operations related to reading and writing data.  The controller is a very important factor in determining the speed of the SSD, decisions it makes related to how to store, retrieve, cache and clean up data can determine the overall speed of the drive.  We won’t get into the nitty gritty of the details for the various tasks it performs such as error correction, read and write caching, encryption and garbage collection to name a few but suffice to say, good controller technology is often what separates an excellent from simply good SSD.  An example of a fast controller today is the SandForce SATA 3.0 (6 Gb/s) SSD controller that supports up to 500 MB per second read and write speeds.
Finally, you may be wondering what an SSD looks like and how easy it is to replace a hard drive with after market.  If you look at the images below you’ll see the top and underside of a typical sized 2.5” SSD, the technology is encased inside either a plastic or metal case and so it looks like nothing more than a battery might look like:

SSD Top Side

SSD Bottom Side

The form factor of the SSD is actually the same as a regular hard drive, it comes in a standard 1.8”, 2.5” or 3.5” size that can fit into the housing and connectors for the same sized hard drives.  The connector used for these standard sizes is SATA, there are smaller SSDs available that use what’s called mini-SATA (mSATA) and fit into the mini-PCI Express slot of a laptop.
What is an HDD?
Hard Disk Drives, or HDD in techno-parlance, have been around for donkeys years relative to the technology world.  HDDs were first introduced by IBM in 1956, yes folks this is nearly 60-year old technology, thank goodness vacuum tubes for TVs didn’t last so long!  An HDD uses magnetism to store data on a rotating platter.  A read/write head floats above the spinning platter reading and writing data.  The faster the platter spins, the faster an HDD can perform, typical laptop drives today spin at either 5400 RPM (Revolutions per Minute) or 7200RPM, some server based platters can spin at up to 15,000 RPM.
The major advantage of an HDD is that it is capable of storing lots of data cheaply.  These days 1 TeraByte (1,024 gigabytes) of storage is not unusual for a laptop hard drive, and the density continues to grow.  Cost per gigabyte is only around $0.10 / GB these days for an HDD, that’s amazing when you compare it to the near $1.75 / GB cost for an SSD.  If you want cheap storage and lots of it, using a standard hard drive is definitely the more appealing way to go.
HDDs predominantly use the SATA interface.  The most common size for laptop hard drives is the 2.5” form factor while a larger 3.5” form factor is used in desktop computers.  The larger size allows for more platters inside and thus more storage capacity.  Some desktop hard drives can store up to 4TB of data! HDDs look essentially the same from the outside as an SSD, below is an example of what an HDD looks like using the Seagate Barracuda 3TB hard drive:

HDD Top Side

HDD Bottom Side

SSD Vs HDD Comparison
Now it’s time to do some comparisons and determine which might be best for  your needs, an SSD or HDD?  The best way to compare items is a table with a side by side comparison of items in which a green box indicates an advantage:

Attribute	SSD (Solid State Drive)	HDD (Hard Disk Drive)
Power Draw / Battery Life	Less power draw, averages 2 – 3 watts, resulting in 30+ minute battery boost	More power draw, averages 6 – 7 watts and therefore uses more battery
Cost	Expensive, in excess of $1.50 per gigabyte	Only around $0.10 per gigabyte, very cheap
Capacity	Typically not larger than 256GB for notebook size drives	Typically 500GB – 1TB for notebook size drives
Bootup Time for Windows 7	Around 22 seconds average bootup time	Around 40 seconds average bootup time
Noise	There are no moving parts and as such no sound	Audible clicks and spinning can be heard
Vibration	No vibration as there are no moving parts	The spinning of the platters can sometimes result in vibration
Heat Produced	Lower power draw and no moving parts so little heat is produced	HDD doesn’t produce much heat, but it will have a measurable amount more heat than an SSD due to moving parts and higher power draw
Failure Rate	Mean time between failure rate of 2.0 million hours	Mean time between failure rate of 1.5 million hours
File Copy / Write Speed	Generally above 200 MB/s and up to 500 MB/s for cutting edge drives	The range can be anywhere from 50 – 120MB / s
Encryption	Full Disk Encryption (FDE) Supported on some models	Full Disk Encryption (FDE) Supported on some models
File Opening Speed	Up to 30% faster than HDD	Slower than SSD
Magnetism Affected?	An SSD is safe from any effects of magnetism	Magnets can erase data

If we tally up the checkmarks the SSD gets 9 and HDD gets 3.  Does that mean the that an SSD is three times better than an HDD?  Not at all, it depends on your needs, the comparison here is just to lay out what the pros and cons are for each.  Here are some rules to follow in deciding which drive is best for you:
If:

• You need lots of storage capacity, over 500GB
• Don’t want to spend much money
• Don’t care too much about how fast a computer boots up or opens programs then get a hard drive.

If:

• You are willing to pay for faster performance
• Don’t mind limited storage capacity or can work around that then get an SSD.

Today it still makes sense for a majority of typical buyers just to get a hard drive inside a new computer simply due to the much cheaper cost.   If you are an enthusiast for new technology and having top computing performance then of course SSD is the way to go.  Eventually SSD will replace HDD as the standard storage mechanism, certainly in laptops given the advantages they present for a mobile device.  We are already seeing this happen with SSD showing up as the default storage device in the new Ultrabook category.  There will always be a market for both HDD and SSD, and the perfect solution may actually be a hybrid blend of both storage solutions.  The advent of mSATA SSD devices and hybrid drives that include both SSD and HDD may be the best hope for reaching storage zen and giving you the best of both worlds, but that’s a topic for another day!
Curious about which SSD or hard drive to buy? Be sure yo check out our constantly updated leaderboard that has a breakdown of the best SSD in categories like value, mainstream and enthusiast.

Paste blank Status/Comments on Facebook

Paste blank Status on Facebook

In this Trick you will know how to publish single line or multiple line Blank Status on facebook wall . You can also use this method in facebook comments. So lets get started.

For single line Blank Status

• Copy below codes into your status

@[0:0: ]

• Note:- the text is like @[0:0:space]
• Don't write space where i have writen space rather press spacebar.

  For MultiLine Blank Status :

• Paste as shown below in your staus.

@[0:0: ]
@[0:0: ]
@[0:0: ]
@[0:0: ]
@[0:0: ]
@[0:0: ]

• Note there is space after 0:

  

Another method

• Paste below codes into facebook status

@[2:2: ]

What's the difference between an Intel Core i3, i5 and i7?

Intel Core i3, i5 and i7 CPUs have been around for over a year now, but some buyers still get stumped whenever they attempt to build their own systems and are forced to choose among the three. With the more recent Sandy Bridge architecture now on store shelves, we expect the latest wave of buyers to ask the same kind of questions.

Core i3, Core i5, Core i7

If you want a plain and simple answer, then generally speaking, Core i7s are better than Core i5s, which are in turn better than Core i3s. Nope, Core i7 does not have seven cores nor does Core i3 have three cores. The numbers are simply indicative of their relative processing powers.

Image credit: Intel.

Their relative levels of processing power are also signified by their Intel Processor Star Ratings, which are based on a collection of criteria involving their number of cores, clockspeed (in GHz), size of cache, as well as some new Intel technologies like Turbo Boost and Hyper-Threading.Core i3s are rated with three stars, i5s have four stars, and i7s have five. If you’re wondering why the ratings start with three, well they actually don’t. The entry-level Intel CPUs — Celeron and Pentium — get one and two stars respectively.

Note: Core processors can be grouped in terms of their target devices, i.e., those for laptops and those for desktops. Each has its own specific characteristics/specs. To avoid confusion, we’ll focus on the desktop variants. Note also that we’ll be focusing on the 2nd Generation (Sandy Bridge) Core CPUs.

Number of cores

The more cores there are, the more tasks (known as threads) can be served at the same time. The lowest number of cores can be found in Core i3 CPUs, i.e., which have only two cores. Currently, all Core i3s are dual-core processors.Currently all Core i5 processors, except for the i5-661, are quad cores in Australia. The Core i5-661 is only a dual-core processor with a clockspeed of 3.33 GHz. Remember that all Core i3s are also dual cores. Furthermore, the i3-560 is also 3.33GHz, yet a lot cheaper. Sounds like it might be a better buy than the i5. What gives? At this point, I’d like to grab the opportunity to illustrate how a number of factors affect the overall processing power of a CPU and determine whether it should be considered an i3, an i5, or an i7.Even if the i5-661 normally runs at the same clockspeed as Core i3-560, and even if they all have the same number of cores, the i5-661 benefits from a technology known as Turbo Boost.

Intel Turbo Boost

The Intel Turbo Boost Technology allows a processor to dynamically increase its clockspeed whenever the need arises. The maximum amount that Turbo Boost can raise clockspeed at any given time is dependent on the number of active cores, the estimated current consumption, the estimated power consumption, and the processor temperature.For the Core i5-661, its maximum allowable processor frequency is 3.6 GHz. Because none of the Core i3 CPUs have Turbo Boost, the i5-661 can outrun them when it needs to. Because all Core i5 processors are equipped with the latest version of this technology — Turbo Boost 2.0 — all of them can outrun any Core i3.

Cache size

Whenever the CPU finds that it keeps on using the same data over and over, it stores that data in its cache. Cache is just like RAM, only faster — because it’s built into the CPU itself. Both RAM and cache serve as holding areas for frequently used data. Without them, the CPU would have to keep on reading from the hard disk drive, which would take a lot more time.

Basically, RAM minimises interaction with the hard disk, while cache minimises interaction with the RAM. Obviously, with a larger cache, more data can be accessed quickly. All Core i3 processors have 3MB of cache. All Core i5s, except again for the 661 (only 4MB), have 6MB of cache. Finally, all Core i7 CPUs have 8MB of cache. This is clearly one reason why an i7 outperforms an i5 — and why an i5 outperforms an i3.

Hyper-Threading

Strictly speaking, only one thread can be served by one core at a time. So if a CPU is a dual core, then supposedly only two threads can be served simultaneously. However, Intel has introduced a technology called Hyper-Threading. This enables a single core to serve multiple threads.For instance, a Core i3, which is only a dual core, can actually serve two threads per core. In other words, a total of four threads can run simultaneously. Thus, even if Core i5 processors are quad cores, since they don’t support Hyper-Threading (again, except the i5-661) the number of threads they can serve at the same time is just about equal to those of their Core i3 counterparts.This is one of the many reasons why Core i7 processors are the creme de la creme. Not only are they quad cores, they also support Hyper-Threading. Thus, a total of eight threads can run on them at the same time. Combine that with 8MB of cache and Intel Turbo Boost Technology, which all of them have, and you’ll see what sets the Core i7 apart from its siblings.

The upshot is that if you do a lot of things at the same time on your PC, then it might be worth forking out a bit more for an i5 or i7. However, if you use your PC to check emails, do some banking, read the news, and download a bit of music, you might be equally served by the cheaper i3.At DCA Computers, we regularly hear across the sales counter, “I don’t mind paying for a computer that will last, which CPU should I buy?” The sales tech invariably responds “Well that depends on what you use your computer for.” If it’s the scenario described above, we pretty much tell our customers to save their money and buy an i3 or AMD dual core.

Another factor in this deliberation is that more and more programs are being released with multithread capability. That is they can use more than one CPU thread to execute a single command. So things happen more quickly. Some photo editors and video editing programs are multi-threaded, for example. However, the Internet browser you use to access Netbank or your email client is not, and is unlikely to be in the foreseeable future.

How to Download Facebook Photo Albums

FacePAD: Facebook Photo Album Downloader which allows you to download your friends’ Facebook Albums, Events Albums and Group Albums with the click of a button.You can follow as under:-

1. 
   

Facebook upgrade S-1 to describe its mobile faults

As we zero in on D-day, when Facebook is a stock for all to buy into and fiscally dissect, the biggest social network once again amends its S-1 filing for its IPO for the sixth time.

This latest update, filed Wednesday afternoon, to admit that the mobile focus for the company has drastically slowed the pace that the company adds new users and could end up hurting the company revenue in the long run.

Since the original Facebook IPO filing, it has been understood that the company has still been grappling with how to truly monetize its mobile ecosphere since the platform doesn't incorporate Sponsored ads at the same rate as the browser-based platform. Facebook has looked at the news feed to inject its paid advertisements rather than banner or side-bar ads but finding the right combination and testing it has not been as quick of a process as some may wish.

In the latest S-1 filing, the company state that it does "not currently directly generate any meaningful revenue from the use of Facebook mobile products, and our ability to do so successfully is unproven."The filing goes on to point out that "the recent trend of our daily active users (DAUs) increasing more rapidly than the increase in the number of ads delivered. If users increasingly access Facebook mobile products as a substitute for access through personal computers, and if we are unable to successfully implement monetization strategies for our mobile users . . .”

So while Facebook is willing to admit the faults it has in its mobile dvertisements, the company also is posting its expectations that once it finds the right  combination, it will again take off like a rocket. Facebook has started its roadshow for an expected May 18 debut on NASDAQ and is crossing all of its t's and dotting all of its i's in these last few days, as investors pick away at S-1 filings for more details that it wants. One of these areas has clearly been in the mobile realm where everyone has been looing to find new revenue and growth, both of which Facebook has fallen short of and needs to provide better explainations about in order to get all of the money-men on board.

WebRep

currentVote

noRating

noWeight

As Oracle and Google Both Claim Wins within the Java Case, What`s Next?

The jury within the Oracle versus. Google suit came back an incomplete verdict saying Google infringed on Oracle’s Java copyrights. However, as jurors deadlocked around the problem of fair use, the problem of API copyrightability becomes vital.

Since a jury finds for Oracle in the patent and copyright violation situation versus Google, what goes on next?

A California jury came back an incomplete verdict in support of Oracle May 7, discovering that Google did indeed violate the company’s copyrights associated with the Java programming language and effectively stole some APIs to be used within the Android operating-system. However, the findings were possibly great for each side, as verdict leaves several key questions un-answered.

While Oracle won around the copyright claim, the jury discovered that Google only infringed on nine lines of code. Fundamentally from the situation is whether or not APIs are copyrightable And Select Alsup must make that determination inside a decision that may be far-grabbing the program industry.

Numerous companies, including Microsoft, Motorola, Apple, Samsung and lots of other are involved in a continuing number of court cases concerning which of them own patents on a variety of technologies, especially technology associated with mobile phone software and hardware. A choice around the copyrightability of APIs could open the floodgates to more lawsuit.

The jury deadlocked on whether Google could prove fair utilisation of the copyrighted works Fair me is a copyright principle that states that copyrighted material might be freely used if certain things have established yourself or even the use meets certain criteria.

"When the jury had return and stated there is no violation here, that will took proper care of that," stated Bruce Wieder, the Dow Lohnes IP attorney and adjunct professor of law at Georgetown College, told the Houston Chronicle. "Now now you ask ,, how about the defense of fair use? And also the response to that's, we do not be aware of response to that."

The partial verdict states Google infringed the succession, structure and organization of 37 Java APIs by using individuals APIs in Android, based on the jury of 5 males and 7 women. The jury deliberated for any week before coming back the verdict today in U.S. District Court in Bay Area.

Using the mixed verdict, Google lawyers immediately asked for a mistrial saying there may 't be an incomplete verdict on question 1. U.S. District Judge William Alsup, who's managing the situation, stated he'd hear motions around the mistrial and also have that problem taken care of by Thursday, May 10.

“It is really a mixed and not so obvious decision,” stated Al Hilwa, an analyst with IDC. “Much is dependent on which the judge rules and just how the 2 parties react. It is more probably to trigger appeals along with other motions.”

John Rymer, an analyst with Forrester Research, told eWEEK: “I’m no legal scholar, however it appears to become the jury’s decision isn't good news for Oracle. It’s nearly a “worst case” decision: Oracle wins on principle, but does not pressure Google to considerably change its code and/or collect a large financial penalty. I’ve always believed that Oracle required a calculated risk that could reap big enough advantages of the Google suit to pay for that ill will the suit produced among some designers. The verdict from the jury within the copyright situation appears to provide Oracle paltry benefits in return for the developer ill will. This result helps you to cement the vista of Oracle because the large bad corporation attempting to win on the market by squelching innovation by designers. This look at Oracle helps you to drive designers from the organization and potentially from Java.”

Using the jury findings of May 7 alone, Oracle is searching at anything that legal damages, that could be for under $200,000 - far in the a lot more than $1 billion Oracle was searching for.

“I seemed to be struck through the jury’s lack of ability to determine whether Google’s utilization of Java constituted ‘fair use’” Rymer stated. “I question the number of juries could - the question and software precedents defy logic regular folks can understand.

To obtain a large payday out of this situation, Oracle needs to reveal that Google outright stole Java. And fair me is answer to that. The fair use doctrine needs to be shot lower to ensure that Oracle to exhibit that Google willfully infringed on its copyrights and patents. With willful violation, Oracle could be qualified for triple damages from Google. Alsup suggested he thought proof of willful violation by Google was strong earlier within the trial.

Inside a publish about fair use from May 6, Florian Mueller, a specialist on technology patents that has looked at the situation carefully, but who also required a situation like a consultant to Oracle, stated:

    “There's consensus among experts from the Oracle v. Android OsOrEspresso trial the jury has probably recognized infringements but hasn't yet arrived at unanimity on Google's ‘fair use’ defense. Google's counsel was in opposition to an incomplete verdict, although it seems he would now accept one. But he didn't want the judge to request the jury foreman if the election around the remaining question was ‘close.’ Google can most likely figure the evidence for willful violation and against ‘fair use’ has me overwhelmed, but [former Sun Microsystems Boss] Jonathan Schwartz' testimony may have had just a reasonable effect that the minority of jurors does not want to accept to a finding that might be certainly going to lead to Google being found liable.”

Schwartz claimed that Sun’s Java APIs weren't considered proprietary and Google lawyers pointed to some Schwartz blog publish lauding Google for developing Android. However, Scott McNealy, the Boss of Sun just before Schwartz, claimed that Sun did indeed consider its APIs proprietary.

"One concern inside the Java community would be that the 'Java-like' language on Android essentially fragments the Java market, as well as designers to know the variations and nuances between creating a Java application and developing one for Android,” stated Scott Retailers, Boss and founding father of Azul Systems, which supplies solutions that optimize Java for that enterprise.  “We believe in one, unified Java language and runtime and something which runs across all platforms, so in connection with this designers would simply want to see the actual Java be supported on Android.”Meanwhile, both sides released claims concerning the verdict. Oracle stated: “"Oracle, the nine million Java designers, and also the entire Java community thank the jury for his or her verdict within this phase from the situation. The overwhelming evidence shown that Google understood it needed permission which its unauthorized fork of Java in Android shattered Java's central write once run anywhere principle. Every major commercial enterprise -- except Google -- includes a license for Java and keeps compatibility to operate across all computing platforms."

Because of its part, Google stated: "We appreciate the jury's efforts, and realize that fair use and violation are two sides of the identical gold coin. The core problem is whether or not the APIs listed here are copyrightable, and that is for that court to determine. We be prepared to prevail about this problem and Oracle's other claims."

The moment the jury finished entering its partial verdict around the copyright problem, Alsup moved straight to the 2nd phase from the trial to pay attention to patents. Phase three from the trial will cope with damages.The situation, that was heard in federal court in California, fascinated we've got the technology community for many days as Oracle Boss Ray Ellison clashed with Google Boss Ray Page by what company, if any, is the owner of the privileges to Java-among the world’s most broadly used programming languages. The trial also featured a parade of former Sun Microsystems professionals and detailed account of the development of APIs combined with the most popular Android mobile OS.

"It’s vital that you notice that you will find really two separate issues at hands here-the very first is the problem of programming APIs and if they'd like to be copyrighted,” Azul’s Retailers stated. “The second area of the lawsuit is Oracle’s declare that Android infringes on patents held by Sun/Oracle. Around the second area of the lawsuit and Oracle’s patent violation claims, it appears likely because of the insightful patents Sun/Oracle holds in this region that Android infringes on some, and ultimately comes lower to the number of dollars and business credits have to be exchanged to solve the dispute. We're hopeful the end result from the lawsuit may benefit the Java community by preserve just one, unified Java."

However, regardless of the finest of hopes and desires, it's obvious that the jury could be unpredictable as evidenced through the May 7 verdict.