The whole subthread focusing on the Android VM is completely irrelevant. The entire argument at this point has to do with the inclusion of the Java APIs. Not even Oracle or the appeals court are harping on Google's custom VM.

The VM is used as an excuse by Google supporters why they should get excused to help drive Sun into the floor.

Java still exists today thanks Oracle, not Google.

Android does not have a Java VM, and it does not run Java bytecode. Dalvik bytecode is more compact, and more CPU efficient, and the more recent ART runtime is even more efficient and performant. But it isn't a JVM.

Just like all the vendors selling commercial JDKs for the embedded market.

They also offer customized versions fine tuned for their deployment scenarios, doing Java bytecode to either native (AOT) or their own proprietary bytecode format when generating the firmware image.

Or for example, IBM Java running on IBM i mainframe, where Java bytecodes used to be translated into the TIMI bytecodes, just like any other IBM i application.

The Dalvik and ART runtimes differ in that the do not run Java bytecodes. Every commercial embedded jvm, open source jvm, and me jvm I have seen all run Java bytecodes and you can use any toolchain that makes .jar files with these vms. Unless the translation you mention can happen at runtime, it isn't a jvm.

It happens at deployment time, as mentioned.

Firmware does not change during runtime.

In 2008, none were as good as Dalvik for the use case.

That's the story Google likes to sell.

Nokia and Sony-Ericsson flagship phones were quite good.

No they weren't, I developed for them.

Me too, alumni from that little company located in Espoo.

I hope that little company does not come under pressure to make Android phones.

It is hard to compete against a free beer OS originally developed with tech unlawfully taken from other companies.

So one either swims or joins the graveyard of companies that tried to fight it.

> It is hard to compete against a free beer OS

I'd argue that it's next to impossible. OSes are a commodity now. Even Microsoft is coming around to that idea.

> tech unlawfully taken from other companies.

All of the previous caselaw said that this was fine.

I was third party. Maybe your close association is blinding you.