3 ms·
This article makes it sound like Embracing is a bad thing, because necessarily Extend, and Extinguish will follow. But it doesn't really work that way with Open
by guardian5x 7y ago
This article makes it sound like Embracing is a bad thing, because necessarily Extend, and Extinguish will follow. But it doesn't really work that way with Open Source.
- pixl97 7y agoEh, kinda does by extending the standard in a non open way. Then blocking.
- dleslie 7y agoGoogle proved the model for embracing, extending and controlling open source by way of Android and the shift to Google Play Services. Start open and let the walled garden grow within.
- gowld 7y agoHow does a not-open-source product control open-source? Anyone can try to build an open source alternative to GPS on whatever hardware they can obtain, using Android Open Source Project (AOSP). Without Google open source, they've have to replicate it's functionality from scratch. If AOSP never existed, Android would still be Android (GPL allows proprietary Android) and would still be as popular as it is. iOS was never open source, and did fine.
- dleslie 7y agoYes, anyone can make an open source alternative; the point is that the popular system will remain closed and controlled. Free alternatives don't become a threat when you control their implementation target.
- WorldMaker 7y agoWhen was the last time a Google-free AOSP fork had a successful handset on the market? We've seen almost nothing but failures: Amazon Phone, Cyanogen, … The market seems to have spoken that Android isn't Android without "Google Play Services" secret sauce, and that's entirely proprietary walled garden.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]