3 ms·
meh, Google is "more open" than others e.g. Apple and even when they're forced to weird a stick, they do it reluctantly. Instead, like the US government, Googl
by asah 4y ago
meh, Google is "more open" than others e.g. Apple and even when they're forced to weird a stick, they do it reluctantly.
Instead, like the US government, Google have developed mastery of "soft power" making it statistically-rare that they conduct Putin-like tactics. They know that heavyhanded tactics force heavyhanded responses and are actually a sign of weakness, not strength.
To be fair, if their business model came under _material_ pressure to be locked down, I'm not convinced they'd stay open.
As an example, look at Chrome vs adblockers - they could've shut them down years ago, but only acted when adblockers ate materially into the business and they were forced, again recognizing that they'll lose some users to Firefox and Brave.
- _emacsomancer_ 4y agoI've seen arguments that Google's incentives simply align better with an open web than do those of many other big tech players, e. g. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1421141091080818688.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1421141091080818688.html
- saagarjha 4y agoN.B. The author of that thread is a longtime Chrome contributor.
- scarface74 4y agoHow is Google “more open”? Surely you don’t mean because of Android? https://www.engadget.com/2018-07-18-eu-commission-google-record-fine.html https://www.engadget.com/2018-07-18-eu-commission-google-rec... https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on...
- fomine3 4y agoStill far better than Apple for open
- scarface74 4y agoHow so? You can not profitable sell an Android phone without the closed sourced Google Play Services in any country outside of China any more than you can sell a phone running Darwin.
- fomine3 4y agoAs you said, they can sell without Google for China and technically it's possible on other market (see Amazon Fire, Meta Quest) and widely used for embeddeds, thanks to open core OS. AppleOS device is by 3rd party strictly impossible.
- scarface74 4y agoYes if you have the resources of a company worth over 1 trillion dollars you too can take advantage of the crumbs bestowed on you by Google to make a successful platform in the West…
- fomine3 4y agoYou can see other non big tech examples like DJI controller, and don't miss embeddeds like credit card terminal. Anyway no 3rd party can make AppleOS device, period.
- jvolkman 4y agoMy tv runs Android. My exercise bike runs Android. My DJI drone's controller runs Android.
- scarface74 4y agoYour TV probably runs Android with Google’s proprietary stack on top..
- netheril96 4y agoMy TV doesn’t (I’m in China).
- bruce511 4y agoI think you are using "open" in one sense (open source) whereas the original meaning may have been in the sense of "more open use". Obviously yes, Google is more open source than say apple, but clearly less than say red hat. That's not to say Google is "completely open source" but objectively it's "more" than some. In terms of usability though Google is pretty open. You can install any software on your android phone, whereas apple controls everything you do on ios. You can access pretty much all Google services via an api, Facebook and twitter much less so. In general, Google is more open in that sense. In the sense of open source, Google is more open than some, but generally would not be considered an "open source company". Other than android there's not much offering there.