3 ms·

>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 availa

>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.