5 ms·

Yeah and SailFish OS isn't full open source. The only thing that is not open source on android is the Google Play services. Android is can be fully functional w

Yeah and SailFish OS isn't full open source. The only thing that is not open source on android is the Google Play services. Android is can be fully functional without the Play Services. With SailFish the UI is closed source. How's the OS without a UI?

ocdtrekkie 10y ago
Android isn't fully functional without the apps you want it to run. And all the apps you want to run require Play Services. With a walled garden like that you have no way around that requirement where it's implemented. A UI layer you can conceivably replace. App stores have incredible controlling power. But even worse is the Play Services platform: It means even if you get the APK on an AOSP device, it won't run because it's not built to run on Android, the open source project, it's built to run of Google Android, the closed source product. The realization people need to realize is that Google effectively forked their own OS, and the original has basically no support.
- rtkwe 10y ago
  It's tricky because there's not really a great alternative to creating the Play Services divide because those services are pretty integral to how a lot of apps function and they rely a lot on outside data and servers so you either have a separate bit of the OS handle it or you have base AOSP have weird dependencies on Google servers for data. Also I think a lot of the movement of things into Play Services instead of the base OS is because manufacturers were so horrible about actually updating their devices so Google moved it out of the OS into a portion they could actually control so they could actually roll out updates in a timely manner.
  - petra 10y ago
    Maybe. But they could have open-sourced the Play Services.
    - rtkwe 10y ago
      What parts of Play Services are actually useful without the Google hosted services?
  - codedokode 10y ago
    Play Services are mostly necessary for commercial apps (to show advertisement, so spy on user, to collect payments). Many applications in F-Droid do not require them. And using Play Services doesn't require to have an account with Google or to have a network connection. As Google Play Services are distributed for free, anyone can download them and set up so that they cannot connect to Google but still allow to run apps dependent on them.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    I don't buy into these excuses. If Google really cared about OEM updates, it would make it as part of the requirements to license the Play Store.
    - rtkwe 10y ago
      I'm not so certain that's exactly how it'd go. OEMs faced with being forced to provide updates at an unknown pace might just decide to try to roll their own version of Play Services and the underlying data that those hook into, which given the quality of their normal bundleware isn't too promising.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        And face the issue that key apps wouldn't run on their devices, thus making people not care about them. As it already happened to a few that tried such attempts. Amazon is probably the only one that can manage to push known app vendors to also publish on their store.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    First of all, Google is responsible for poor updating of devices. Don't blame anyone else for the fact that their OS is hard to update, and Google doesn't require even basic security fixes as a requirement of getting the Play Store. (If you're unaware of what the MADA is: Google actually gets to approve or veto every device and software update released for devices running Android, effectively, and uses it to make demands about installed apps and branding.) Second, the OS, designed for openness, would have open protocols for apps to build on that could be backed by anyone's servers. For instance, you can add multiple location providers to Android, there's no excuse for telling developers to build a dependency specifically on "Google Location Services". An open platform would have the location provider in the open source OS, and then apps would pull from whatever location services happened to be on the device in question, whether that be Google's servers, Samsung's servers, or someone else's. The reality is that Play Services was designed for one purpose, and one purpose only: To create a proprietary fork of the Android application platform that would only run on devices Google controls via their secretive contracts with manufacturers.
    - realusername 10y ago
      I honestly don't know why this is downvoted, I pretty much agree with everything here. The current situation is pretty much a result of politics and policies, not technical issues which can't be solved.
- phillc73 10y ago
  > Android isn't fully functional without the apps you want it to run. And all the apps you want to run require Play Services. My phone feels pretty functional without Play Services and runs all the apps I want to run. Everything installed via F-Droid. * Messenger/Chat - Telegram/Mattermost * Browser - IceCat * Mail - K9 * Twitter - Twidere * Podcasts - AntennaPod * Music - Apollo * File Manager - Ghost Commander * GitLab - LabCoat * SSH - ConnectBot * Contacts Sync - DAVdroid * Maps - OSMAnd Not sure what else I need to make my phone fully functional.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    Oh, but wait, I need Skype to conduct business. (You wouldn't think a Microsoft app requires Google services, but it can't run without it.) The problem is, people will often need one or two apps which open source can't adequately replicate. And they're all on proprietary Android only.
  - jszymborski 10y ago
    F-Droid is too much of a liability. http://blog.checkpoint.com/2016/11/30/1-million-google-accounts-breached-gooligan/ http://blog.checkpoint.com/2016/11/30/1-million-google-accou...
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      If anything, F-Droid is far more trustworthy than the Play Store, as F-Droid essentially is a single-source publisher. If F-Droid can't build the APK from source, it won't ship it. So it's guaranteed that you can look at the actual source code of any app you install via F-Droid. The Play Store, on the other hand, is taking a risk.
    - detaro 10y ago
      What does the link have to do with F-Droid?
skykooler 10y ago
The Sailfish UI can be replaced with the Glacier UI from Nemo Mobile, I believe.

ocdtrekkie 10y ago

Android isn't fully functional without the apps you want it to run. And all the apps you want to run require Play Services. With a walled garden like that you have no way around that requirement where it's implemented. A UI layer you can conceivably replace. App stores have incredible controlling power. But even worse is the Play Services platform: It means even if you get the APK on an AOSP device, it won't run because it's not built to run on Android, the open source project, it's built to run of Google Android, the closed source product. The realization people need to realize is that Google effectively forked their own OS, and the original has basically no support.

rtkwe 10y ago
It's tricky because there's not really a great alternative to creating the Play Services divide because those services are pretty integral to how a lot of apps function and they rely a lot on outside data and servers so you either have a separate bit of the OS handle it or you have base AOSP have weird dependencies on Google servers for data. Also I think a lot of the movement of things into Play Services instead of the base OS is because manufacturers were so horrible about actually updating their devices so Google moved it out of the OS into a portion they could actually control so they could actually roll out updates in a timely manner.
- petra 10y ago
  Maybe. But they could have open-sourced the Play Services.
  - rtkwe 10y ago
    What parts of Play Services are actually useful without the Google hosted services?
- codedokode 10y ago
  Play Services are mostly necessary for commercial apps (to show advertisement, so spy on user, to collect payments). Many applications in F-Droid do not require them. And using Play Services doesn't require to have an account with Google or to have a network connection. As Google Play Services are distributed for free, anyone can download them and set up so that they cannot connect to Google but still allow to run apps dependent on them.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  I don't buy into these excuses. If Google really cared about OEM updates, it would make it as part of the requirements to license the Play Store.
  - rtkwe 10y ago
    I'm not so certain that's exactly how it'd go. OEMs faced with being forced to provide updates at an unknown pace might just decide to try to roll their own version of Play Services and the underlying data that those hook into, which given the quality of their normal bundleware isn't too promising.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      And face the issue that key apps wouldn't run on their devices, thus making people not care about them. As it already happened to a few that tried such attempts. Amazon is probably the only one that can manage to push known app vendors to also publish on their store.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  First of all, Google is responsible for poor updating of devices. Don't blame anyone else for the fact that their OS is hard to update, and Google doesn't require even basic security fixes as a requirement of getting the Play Store. (If you're unaware of what the MADA is: Google actually gets to approve or veto every device and software update released for devices running Android, effectively, and uses it to make demands about installed apps and branding.) Second, the OS, designed for openness, would have open protocols for apps to build on that could be backed by anyone's servers. For instance, you can add multiple location providers to Android, there's no excuse for telling developers to build a dependency specifically on "Google Location Services". An open platform would have the location provider in the open source OS, and then apps would pull from whatever location services happened to be on the device in question, whether that be Google's servers, Samsung's servers, or someone else's. The reality is that Play Services was designed for one purpose, and one purpose only: To create a proprietary fork of the Android application platform that would only run on devices Google controls via their secretive contracts with manufacturers.
  - realusername 10y ago
    I honestly don't know why this is downvoted, I pretty much agree with everything here. The current situation is pretty much a result of politics and policies, not technical issues which can't be solved.
phillc73 10y ago
> Android isn't fully functional without the apps you want it to run. And all the apps you want to run require Play Services. My phone feels pretty functional without Play Services and runs all the apps I want to run. Everything installed via F-Droid. * Messenger/Chat - Telegram/Mattermost * Browser - IceCat * Mail - K9 * Twitter - Twidere * Podcasts - AntennaPod * Music - Apollo * File Manager - Ghost Commander * GitLab - LabCoat * SSH - ConnectBot * Contacts Sync - DAVdroid * Maps - OSMAnd Not sure what else I need to make my phone fully functional.
- ocdtrekkie 10y ago
  Oh, but wait, I need Skype to conduct business. (You wouldn't think a Microsoft app requires Google services, but it can't run without it.) The problem is, people will often need one or two apps which open source can't adequately replicate. And they're all on proprietary Android only.
- jszymborski 10y ago
  F-Droid is too much of a liability. http://blog.checkpoint.com/2016/11/30/1-million-google-accounts-breached-gooligan/ http://blog.checkpoint.com/2016/11/30/1-million-google-accou...
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    If anything, F-Droid is far more trustworthy than the Play Store, as F-Droid essentially is a single-source publisher. If F-Droid can't build the APK from source, it won't ship it. So it's guaranteed that you can look at the actual source code of any app you install via F-Droid. The Play Store, on the other hand, is taking a risk.
  - detaro 10y ago
    What does the link have to do with F-Droid?

skykooler 10y ago

The Sailfish UI can be replaced with the Glacier UI from Nemo Mobile, I believe.