3 ms·

>If you sign a deal with Google, you also get the same treatment as other companies that signed a deal with Google. Do you have any evidence to support this st

>If you sign a deal with Google, you also get the same treatment as other companies that signed a deal with Google. Do you have any evidence to support this statement? Agreements of that nature are not normally made public, and the circumstances surrounding the google maps/GPS on android thing, means this is very likely not the case. >The restrictions that Google has on Android have very good rationale. Im so happy that google is choosing to restrict my freedom to use my devices for my own good, thank you google. >You have already demonstrated that you'll find a fault with a very big and generous gift of Android. I can easily imagine that after Google lifts the restrictions that bother you so much (even though the likelihood that you're personally affected by them is 0) Android is not a gift, its intent was never to charitably donate something to the community at large, its intent was to make google money. Their entire platform is based off of the open-source work of others, it did not spring forth from google fully formed, expecting reciprocation is not too much to ask.

andylei 15y ago
> Im so happy that google is choosing to restrict my freedom to use my devices Google is not 'restricting your freedom'. You can fork android and do whatever you want. > Android is not a gift, its intent was never to charitably donate something to the community at large, its intent was to make google money Intent is irrelevant. Pre Google: 0 commercially viable Linux based phones. Post Google: dozens. > Their entire platform is based off of the open-source work of others, it did not spring forth from google fully formed, expecting reciprocation is not too much to ask. They do reciprocate. The source for android is yours to hack.
- throwaway32 15y ago
  >Google is not 'restricting your freedom'. You can fork android and do whatever you want. that is a bit of a hobson's choice, sure (some of) the code is available (pre 3.0), but without a device that is open and able to run it, it may as well be closed. >Intent is irrelevant. Intent is everything, would you be right to suspect the motivations of a mining company conducting a review of environmental impacts, even if the results appear sound on the surface? >They do reciprocate. The source for android is yours to hack. Except for of course, gingerbread.
  - nl 15y ago
    that is a bit of a hobson's choice, sure (some of) the code is available (pre 3.0), but without a device that is open and able to run it, it may as well be closed. I'm not sure what you define as "a device that is open", but surely the many unlocked handsets apply? If not, then http://beagleboard.org/project/android/ http://beagleboard.org/project/android/ perhaps? If not, then maybe the Nokia 810: http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/Linux-For-Devices-Articles/Porting-Android-to-a-new-device/ http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/Linux-For-Devices-Article... Am I missing your point somehow?
  - andylei 15y ago
    > without a device that is open and able to run it, it may as well be closed google doesn't make devices > would you be right to suspect the motivations of a mining company conducting a review of environmental impacts how is this a good analogy? they write software. its open source. you don't have to trust them. > Except for of course, gingerbread. this statement is actually false.

andylei 15y ago

> Im so happy that google is choosing to restrict my freedom to use my devices Google is not 'restricting your freedom'. You can fork android and do whatever you want. > Android is not a gift, its intent was never to charitably donate something to the community at large, its intent was to make google money Intent is irrelevant. Pre Google: 0 commercially viable Linux based phones. Post Google: dozens. > Their entire platform is based off of the open-source work of others, it did not spring forth from google fully formed, expecting reciprocation is not too much to ask. They do reciprocate. The source for android is yours to hack.

throwaway32 15y ago
>Google is not 'restricting your freedom'. You can fork android and do whatever you want. that is a bit of a hobson's choice, sure (some of) the code is available (pre 3.0), but without a device that is open and able to run it, it may as well be closed. >Intent is irrelevant. Intent is everything, would you be right to suspect the motivations of a mining company conducting a review of environmental impacts, even if the results appear sound on the surface? >They do reciprocate. The source for android is yours to hack. Except for of course, gingerbread.
- nl 15y ago
  that is a bit of a hobson's choice, sure (some of) the code is available (pre 3.0), but without a device that is open and able to run it, it may as well be closed. I'm not sure what you define as "a device that is open", but surely the many unlocked handsets apply? If not, then http://beagleboard.org/project/android/ http://beagleboard.org/project/android/ perhaps? If not, then maybe the Nokia 810: http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/Linux-For-Devices-Articles/Porting-Android-to-a-new-device/ http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/Linux-For-Devices-Article... Am I missing your point somehow?
- andylei 15y ago
  > without a device that is open and able to run it, it may as well be closed google doesn't make devices > would you be right to suspect the motivations of a mining company conducting a review of environmental impacts how is this a good analogy? they write software. its open source. you don't have to trust them. > Except for of course, gingerbread. this statement is actually false.