There's already accepted terms for what he's describing, without trying to claim a difference between "open source" and "community driven". Free Software is so

There's already accepted terms for what he's describing, without trying to claim a difference between "open source" and "community driven". Free Software is software that you are free to run, modify, and redistribute. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html The "open source" releases of Android meet this definition (at least until it gets installed on hardware with a locked bootloader). The OSI's official Open Source Definition aside (which is mostly a bunch of legalese) open source is a development model where different parties contribute code as needed. (Eric Raymond's the Cathedral and the Bazaar is a decent introduction: http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/index.html http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral...) Android never followed an open source development style. Each version was constructed in secret, then released to the public in a complete state. I would honestly like to see Google switch to a true open source development style, or to see some party with enough influence fork Android and continue development in an open source manner.