4 ms·

Android is "open" to end-users, but not completely "open" to vendors I think you have this backwards. With the exception of Honeycomb, vendors have a lot of fl

by kylec 16y ago

Android is "open" to end-users, but not completely "open" to vendors I think you have this backwards. With the exception of Honeycomb, vendors have a lot of flexibility to do what they want with Android, including skinning it and running it on custom hardware. And if they decide to forego the Google apps, they don't have to get approval to ship a device with Android on it. Conversely, users of Android-based products don't have the ability to update or modify the OS (beyond what the vendor allows) without 'rooting' the device, a process that most non-technical people are unable to perform.

tptacek 16y ago
If they can't get the next revision of the OS on the same terms as their competitors, it's not open for them. I think you're glossing over the practical realities of shipping products that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to launch. If you want to assert that it's not open for end-users either, I won't argue, but I'm not sold on that.
- kylec 16y ago
  I'll agree that Google is taking steps to make Android less open for vendors, but it's still more open for vendors than it is for end users (largely because of vendors putting restrictions on the devices they sell).
bad_user 16y ago
And yet, there are devices sold that don't have to be rooted, which you can't say about iOS.
- kylec 16y ago
  True, but iOS isn't involved here. What's involved is that Google has repeatedly promoted Android as an 'open' platform, but now has decided that actually being open is no longer in their interest.
  - bad_user 16y ago
    I don't think there's any platform that can be used as a distribution medium and that doesn't come with strings attached. Even stuff licensed under GPL comes with strings attached. And there are inherent disadvantages to being open, which Google is trying to mitigate here, and they have been doing this ever since Android launched (people have short memories or simply bad attitudes -- Android's source code wasn't released from the start). If anything Google's behavior is actually consistent.
    - rbarooah 16y ago
      Google's behavior is consistent with their past behavior, but not consistent with what their words. That's pretty much the definition of hypocrisy.
      - bad_user 16y ago
        Bullshit -- define "open". Also, when referring to "their words" some references are required ;)
        rbarooah 16y ago
        Here: "We wanted to make sure that there was no central point of failure, so that no industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other. That's why we created Android, and made its source code open." (from: http://source.android.com/ http://source.android.com/) Are you seriously going to pretend that Google is not now restricting or controlling the innovations of any other industry players?
        recoiledsnake 16y ago
        >Are you seriously going to pretend that Google is not now restricting or controlling the innovations of any other industry players? Huh? How is delaying the source code release of an incremental update such a big deal? Innovate all you want on top of 2.3(which is barely a few months old), make it tablet friendly or whatever and port it to whatever hardware you build. Haven't you heard of the concept of forking?
bmorrison 16y ago
"With the exception of Honeycomb..." Which fallacy is that, again? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelming_exception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelming_exception
- mikebike 16y ago
  "With notably rare exceptions..." http://crookedtimber.org/2011/03/30/with-notably-rare-exceptions/ http://crookedtimber.org/2011/03/30/with-notably-rare-except...

by kylec 16y ago

tptacek 16y ago

If they can't get the next revision of the OS on the same terms as their competitors, it's not open for them. I think you're glossing over the practical realities of shipping products that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to launch. If you want to assert that it's not open for end-users either, I won't argue, but I'm not sold on that.

kylec 16y ago
I'll agree that Google is taking steps to make Android less open for vendors, but it's still more open for vendors than it is for end users (largely because of vendors putting restrictions on the devices they sell).

bad_user 16y ago

And yet, there are devices sold that don't have to be rooted, which you can't say about iOS.

kylec 16y ago
True, but iOS isn't involved here. What's involved is that Google has repeatedly promoted Android as an 'open' platform, but now has decided that actually being open is no longer in their interest.
- bad_user 16y ago
  I don't think there's any platform that can be used as a distribution medium and that doesn't come with strings attached. Even stuff licensed under GPL comes with strings attached. And there are inherent disadvantages to being open, which Google is trying to mitigate here, and they have been doing this ever since Android launched (people have short memories or simply bad attitudes -- Android's source code wasn't released from the start). If anything Google's behavior is actually consistent.
  - rbarooah 16y ago
    Google's behavior is consistent with their past behavior, but not consistent with what their words. That's pretty much the definition of hypocrisy.
    - bad_user 16y ago
      Bullshit -- define "open". Also, when referring to "their words" some references are required ;)
      - rbarooah 16y ago
        Here: "We wanted to make sure that there was no central point of failure, so that no industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other. That's why we created Android, and made its source code open." (from: http://source.android.com/ http://source.android.com/) Are you seriously going to pretend that Google is not now restricting or controlling the innovations of any other industry players?
        recoiledsnake 16y ago
        >Are you seriously going to pretend that Google is not now restricting or controlling the innovations of any other industry players? Huh? How is delaying the source code release of an incremental update such a big deal? Innovate all you want on top of 2.3(which is barely a few months old), make it tablet friendly or whatever and port it to whatever hardware you build. Haven't you heard of the concept of forking?

bmorrison 16y ago

"With the exception of Honeycomb..." Which fallacy is that, again? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelming_exception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overwhelming_exception

mikebike 16y ago
"With notably rare exceptions..." http://crookedtimber.org/2011/03/30/with-notably-rare-exceptions/ http://crookedtimber.org/2011/03/30/with-notably-rare-except...