4 ms·

This isn't about Apple, as has been pointed out repeatedly. There are a lot of criticisms about iOS which are valid, however I don't recall them ever claiming t

by Cadsby 16y ago

This isn't about Apple, as has been pointed out repeatedly. There are a lot of criticisms about iOS which are valid, however I don't recall them ever claiming their platform was even remotely open. If "Open" is now a convoluted word, we have Google to thank for that, because that's what happens when you launch an entire marketing campaign around a single term.

recoiledsnake 16y ago
>..you launch an entire marketing campaign around a single term. They did? Maybe I was the only one who missed it. Links? Android is definitely way more "Open" than iOS, by almost any metric, even with the latest changes. Care to dispute that? And it's not helping that Apple is going to even more closed via forced cut of subscriptions.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- rbarooah 16y ago
  Claiming it's 'more' open just begs a Godwin conclusion.
  - recoiledsnake 16y ago
    Why? Aren't there discernible differences in the openness of Android and iOS regarding the hardware, app stores and subscriptions?
    - rbarooah 16y ago
      I'm guessing you don't understand the Godwin reference.
- m0nastic 16y ago
  You can watch this video for starters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89xc_1Vv69k http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89xc_1Vv69k (Google IO 2010 Android Keynote) One selected quote: 1.) "So if you believe in openness, if you believe in choice, if you believe in innovation from everyone†, then welcome to Android." † Everyone, depending on where the innovation is, being Google employees, and select partners who are given access to the Android source before public release.
  - recoiledsnake 16y ago
    That seems pretty true compared to the alternate platform which results in things like this http://blog.robrhyne.com/post/659211315/almost-on-the-app-store http://blog.robrhyne.com/post/659211315/almost-on-the-app-st... and this http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9207641/Apple_rejects_Sony_e_reader_app_Is_Kindle_next_ http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9207641/Apple_rejects... And it seems like nothing has changed with the latest changes to Android. Care to elaborate? Edit: And how is a IO keynote 'an entire marketing campaign' ?
    - m0nastic 16y ago
      Apple has been upfront from the get-go that their platform isn't open (they say that people who want to do things openly on iOS are free to make web apps; which I guess is nice, but sort of a brush-off). I don't like the position Apple has taken. I agree that it's their prerogative to do so, and they argue that their position leads to a better product. I've used several Android phones, and now an iPhone 4, and I think that they're right...and I hate that. I don't want them to be right, I want them to be proven wrong. I think Android has absolutely worked to position themselves as a friend to "open" (with bullshit nebulously defined definitions of what "open" means). The entire content of that keynote is a gushing plea to friends of the open source movement (that you have an alternative to iOS). And I think that Google's position of "open" since the launch of Android has been shitty (so yeah, I guess nothing has changed with the latest changes to Android), except that this yet another bullet point on the side against open. Development on Android has always occurred in the dark, without feedback or input from the community at large. When a release is "ready", it's open-sourced, and then people are free to take the parts of Android which are included in that open release and do what they want with them. This is of course, long after Google's partners have had access to the source, so that they can prepare their phones for release. I'd like for "open" to mean an open playground, where everyone is equal (and technology can compete on merits). Not where "everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others". But like Apple, Google is free to do this (I don't think they're in violation of any licenses with the way they release their code). But I think it sucks, and I think it's crazy that I have to long for an actual "open" alternative to the supposedly "open" alternative to iOS.

by Cadsby 16y ago

recoiledsnake 16y ago

>..you launch an entire marketing campaign around a single term. They did? Maybe I was the only one who missed it. Links? Android is definitely way more "Open" than iOS, by almost any metric, even with the latest changes. Care to dispute that? And it's not helping that Apple is going to even more closed via forced cut of subscriptions.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
rbarooah 16y ago
Claiming it's 'more' open just begs a Godwin conclusion.
- recoiledsnake 16y ago
  Why? Aren't there discernible differences in the openness of Android and iOS regarding the hardware, app stores and subscriptions?
  - rbarooah 16y ago
    I'm guessing you don't understand the Godwin reference.
m0nastic 16y ago
You can watch this video for starters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89xc_1Vv69k http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89xc_1Vv69k (Google IO 2010 Android Keynote) One selected quote: 1.) "So if you believe in openness, if you believe in choice, if you believe in innovation from everyone†, then welcome to Android." † Everyone, depending on where the innovation is, being Google employees, and select partners who are given access to the Android source before public release.
- recoiledsnake 16y ago
  That seems pretty true compared to the alternate platform which results in things like this http://blog.robrhyne.com/post/659211315/almost-on-the-app-store http://blog.robrhyne.com/post/659211315/almost-on-the-app-st... and this http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9207641/Apple_rejects_Sony_e_reader_app_Is_Kindle_next_ http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9207641/Apple_rejects... And it seems like nothing has changed with the latest changes to Android. Care to elaborate? Edit: And how is a IO keynote 'an entire marketing campaign' ?
  - m0nastic 16y ago
    Apple has been upfront from the get-go that their platform isn't open (they say that people who want to do things openly on iOS are free to make web apps; which I guess is nice, but sort of a brush-off). I don't like the position Apple has taken. I agree that it's their prerogative to do so, and they argue that their position leads to a better product. I've used several Android phones, and now an iPhone 4, and I think that they're right...and I hate that. I don't want them to be right, I want them to be proven wrong. I think Android has absolutely worked to position themselves as a friend to "open" (with bullshit nebulously defined definitions of what "open" means). The entire content of that keynote is a gushing plea to friends of the open source movement (that you have an alternative to iOS). And I think that Google's position of "open" since the launch of Android has been shitty (so yeah, I guess nothing has changed with the latest changes to Android), except that this yet another bullet point on the side against open. Development on Android has always occurred in the dark, without feedback or input from the community at large. When a release is "ready", it's open-sourced, and then people are free to take the parts of Android which are included in that open release and do what they want with them. This is of course, long after Google's partners have had access to the source, so that they can prepare their phones for release. I'd like for "open" to mean an open playground, where everyone is equal (and technology can compete on merits). Not where "everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others". But like Apple, Google is free to do this (I don't think they're in violation of any licenses with the way they release their code). But I think it sucks, and I think it's crazy that I have to long for an actual "open" alternative to the supposedly "open" alternative to iOS.