Did they have to get bank loan to front these costs? Very unlikely, right? I respect my lawyer, and wish all the success, yet not that it is much needed.

I wonder myself, how magically come, that this product and original maker, also Java, all ended in Oracle's belly. Therefore everything now comes from them, no even need to search for other Java engine. Though many must be still using this solution, particular corporation is in transition to their own product, from what I know, made out of chunks from SAP.

This does not mean at all, app will run out of the box on Firefox. It was quite an effort to develop and debug on particular platform to the decent usability, and that will not be as easy to dismiss, as it is to coin a phrase.

This makes for worries. My client, hotel chain, is using core Property Management System, which is made of IE + Java app, now provided by Oracle. Since Windows and IE have been staple of business use, there can be many more cases, when app logic has been put on them with even more of longevity expected.

I have only experience to never be single person served by the lawyer, and can't think why this could be overall reasonable. There are only that much of certain dates with the events in the ongoing process and allowances, waits in between, when other proceedings are more likely to be handled, than not. As to charging whole lotta more, that's exactly an observable issue, not an excuse.

I can't even imagine how such a thing can be launched by default, with opt-out possible, only if one is able to care.
When you are acquiring devices, buying them out, you suppose they are absolutely for your, fully controllable use.
This is about to be broken in a quite strange manner.

Just as said, given degree of a decision does not seem fair, and was very much predetermined by the lawyer.
To own benefit, many could notice.

Aren't you assuming it was the single case, carried by lawyer for that long time? Quarter a million is still a fortune, especially when you did not work some harder to "get her clients' lives back for them" in more just proportions of compensation. It's abuse.

Acceptable, or worse. Not much of a decision. Lawyer being compensated more, than parties in lawsuit, is not speaking for very just arrangement, but for abuse.

This contradicts reports they did, and have received tool to recover their assets, albeit this was slow process.
https://it.slashdot.org/story/...

Google:
You’re protected at every turn. Avoid bad apps.
Google Play Protect helps you download apps without worrying if they’ll hurt your phone or steal data. We carefully scan apps every day, and if we detect a bad one, we’ll let you know and tell you what to do next. And we study how it works. Because everything we learn improves the way we screen apps. So you stay safer.

Microsoft:
In Microsoft Store, you can find many of your favorite apps, discover new ones, and manage them all in one location. Most importantly, Microsoft verifies that apps in the store are safe and adhere to privacy, content, and security standards. By downloading apps from Microsoft Store, you can be certain that your apps are free of viruses and malware.

Why are they bothering to make these statements so early on? Because this is proper, perhaps?

Probably not elsewhere in Europe neither, as the same "Private video" pops here.
If you can't serve Europe, what's worth the effort to open to the world? Empty promise.

When did that happen? I find quite contrary: https://developer.apple.com/ap...

It's you, who doesn't get it - it is uniform and solid by design.

It is not Linux. Not Android. It is commercial product, experience from start till end offered by Apple, the design company.
Ensured by their capability to control known malware, as per declaration.

Sure. Yet let me guess if this discussion is about App Store, you didn't buy. Why at all you expect to define its design then?
You don't have to answer, as so far this was missing meaningful focus, thus why pointlessly whine.