4 ms·

> I've been tracking their GitHub and what is happening is that while yes, the source is open, they won't let you add anything they don't like. Well, thats bas

by pawadu 10y ago

> I've been tracking their GitHub and what is happening is that while yes, the source is open, they won't let you add anything they don't like. Well, thats basically how Android works. And with the upcoming policy changes (in CDD and GCM) things will get even worse.

sjilo 10y ago
Could you tell me about those changes?
- pawadu 10y ago
  I am under NDA so I cant give you specifics but the general theme of the changes are: less power to manufacturers, more to carriers.
  - zeveb 10y ago
    > less power to manufacturers, more to carriers. What about the owners of the phones? I pay money — good money, quite a bit of it — for my phone. I own it. It should do exactly what I want, not what Google, Apple, Samsung, Sprint, Verizon or T-Mobile want.
    - pawadu 10y ago
      Well, this change will limit what Samsung is allowed to customize, maybe thats a good thing? But everyone else with get more powers.
geofft 10y ago
There's a difference with Android, though: with Android, you can modify the source and use it on your own devices (which might be not be super easy, but it's doable). With AMP, you can modify the source and ... ... run your own search engine??? Android is software in the traditional sense. AMP is a protocol, even though it's phrased as software. The principles of free software apply to software, and protect your freedom when applied to software. They don't work right when applied to protocols.
towo 10y ago
It's pretty much how open source works everywhere - you have to convince the maintainer to adopt your code. If they don't, you've got the options of either being sad or forking it and trying to get people to use your subjectively better version. It's open source, not anarchist source.
- nrjdhsbsid 10y ago
  In the case of AMP the only source that works with google is the official one. As soon as you fork it's not "AMP" compatible anymore. You see the other half of AMP is completely proprietary and runs on Google's servers. It doesn't matter that you can edit AMP because the server (Google's end) will refuse to run your edited version.
  - towo 10y ago
    Yes, which is what I implied: open source software is fine and good if it's used in a decentralized fashion. But if it's just a provider open sourcing the implementation of their communication protocol/operating system running on their devices, it's good for the community that they can look into it and learn; but just as well, it doesn't imply that any of the changes you're able to make actually do anything.
- pawadu 10y ago
  But have anyone been able to convince the Android team of anything? They are not even listening to the Linux team with their thousands of highly qualified developers and are essentially running their own fork of the kernel where everything has to be done The Google Way (TM).

by pawadu 10y ago

sjilo 10y ago

Could you tell me about those changes?

pawadu 10y ago
I am under NDA so I cant give you specifics but the general theme of the changes are: less power to manufacturers, more to carriers.
- zeveb 10y ago
  > less power to manufacturers, more to carriers. What about the owners of the phones? I pay money — good money, quite a bit of it — for my phone. I own it. It should do exactly what I want, not what Google, Apple, Samsung, Sprint, Verizon or T-Mobile want.
  - pawadu 10y ago
    Well, this change will limit what Samsung is allowed to customize, maybe thats a good thing? But everyone else with get more powers.

geofft 10y ago

There's a difference with Android, though: with Android, you can modify the source and use it on your own devices (which might be not be super easy, but it's doable). With AMP, you can modify the source and ... ... run your own search engine??? Android is software in the traditional sense. AMP is a protocol, even though it's phrased as software. The principles of free software apply to software, and protect your freedom when applied to software. They don't work right when applied to protocols.

towo 10y ago

It's pretty much how open source works everywhere - you have to convince the maintainer to adopt your code. If they don't, you've got the options of either being sad or forking it and trying to get people to use your subjectively better version. It's open source, not anarchist source.

nrjdhsbsid 10y ago
In the case of AMP the only source that works with google is the official one. As soon as you fork it's not "AMP" compatible anymore. You see the other half of AMP is completely proprietary and runs on Google's servers. It doesn't matter that you can edit AMP because the server (Google's end) will refuse to run your edited version.
- towo 10y ago
  Yes, which is what I implied: open source software is fine and good if it's used in a decentralized fashion. But if it's just a provider open sourcing the implementation of their communication protocol/operating system running on their devices, it's good for the community that they can look into it and learn; but just as well, it doesn't imply that any of the changes you're able to make actually do anything.
pawadu 10y ago
But have anyone been able to convince the Android team of anything? They are not even listening to the Linux team with their thousands of highly qualified developers and are essentially running their own fork of the kernel where everything has to be done The Google Way (TM).