4 ms·

Why would Google pay for something Ford is entirely responsible for? Ford is rolling a customized version of Android Automotive, as all car OEMs are. Do you bla

by kernal 4y ago

Why would Google pay for something Ford is entirely responsible for? Ford is rolling a customized version of Android Automotive, as all car OEMs are. Do you blame Google for Samsung not updating their phones?

hedora 4y ago
Of course I blame Google for Samsung not providing upgrades to a Google-branded OS. Do you blame Dell when Microsoft screws up the start menu?
- kernal 4y ago
  I must have mussed the part where Dell compiled the Windows OS source code and created their own OS. Additionally, do you blame Debian when Ubuntu isn't updated? According to your flawed logic, you do.
  - WorldMaker 4y ago
    > I must have mussed the part where Dell compiled the Windows OS source code and created their own OS. We don't know yet how much Ford plans to/is working to customize Android Automotive, just that they said they are customizing it. It may be pretty likely that they only plan to customize it about as far as Dell or Samsung do as the two above examples: change some logos, some default wallpaper, auto-install some different apps. None of those require recompiling Windows or Android from source (respectively) today, and there's reasonable assumptions that Google would intend Android Automotive to be similarly customizable by car vendors in ways that cellphone vendors customize Android today, so the analogy to Samsung may be very directly comparable. > Additionally, do you blame Debian when Ubuntu isn't updated? I have in the past. At one point when I was regularly using Ubuntu there were several apps that I couldn't easily install because the chain of blame was directly: the right library version for a dependency is not in Ubuntu's distribution; it's not in Ubuntu's distribution because it's not yet in Debian Unstable because it was causing problems in Debian Canary though that may have been because of other things Debian was trying to integrate around it. In such a case, that's definitely Debian's fault that Ubuntu wasn't updated in the way that I wanted it to be at that time. That's not flawed logic at all. Since then Ubuntu has done a lot more to isolate itself from Debian integration issues and the PPAs and Snap communities have done even more to expand what's possible without needing a full distro upgrade, but that doesn't mean there haven't been times when it was directly useful to point a finger at Debian rather than Ubuntu for an update problem.

by kernal 4y ago

hedora 4y ago

Of course I blame Google for Samsung not providing upgrades to a Google-branded OS. Do you blame Dell when Microsoft screws up the start menu?

kernal 4y ago
I must have mussed the part where Dell compiled the Windows OS source code and created their own OS. Additionally, do you blame Debian when Ubuntu isn't updated? According to your flawed logic, you do.
- WorldMaker 4y ago
  > I must have mussed the part where Dell compiled the Windows OS source code and created their own OS. We don't know yet how much Ford plans to/is working to customize Android Automotive, just that they said they are customizing it. It may be pretty likely that they only plan to customize it about as far as Dell or Samsung do as the two above examples: change some logos, some default wallpaper, auto-install some different apps. None of those require recompiling Windows or Android from source (respectively) today, and there's reasonable assumptions that Google would intend Android Automotive to be similarly customizable by car vendors in ways that cellphone vendors customize Android today, so the analogy to Samsung may be very directly comparable. > Additionally, do you blame Debian when Ubuntu isn't updated? I have in the past. At one point when I was regularly using Ubuntu there were several apps that I couldn't easily install because the chain of blame was directly: the right library version for a dependency is not in Ubuntu's distribution; it's not in Ubuntu's distribution because it's not yet in Debian Unstable because it was causing problems in Debian Canary though that may have been because of other things Debian was trying to integrate around it. In such a case, that's definitely Debian's fault that Ubuntu wasn't updated in the way that I wanted it to be at that time. That's not flawed logic at all. Since then Ubuntu has done a lot more to isolate itself from Debian integration issues and the PPAs and Snap communities have done even more to expand what's possible without needing a full distro upgrade, but that doesn't mean there haven't been times when it was directly useful to point a finger at Debian rather than Ubuntu for an update problem.