6 ms·

I stand that it is: http://source.android.com/ http://source.android.com/ Some people like to state that gmail, maps, the play store and other proprietary Goog

by deelowe 14y ago

I stand that it is: http://source.android.com/ http://source.android.com/ Some people like to state that gmail, maps, the play store and other proprietary Google bits are not open source and that is true, but those are not android. Those are separate apps. Some like to claim that since Google gives vendors early access to the source, this somehow makes it not open. For those releases, at that specific date in time, maybe so. But, the source is released and generally pretty soon after phones start shipping (honeycomb was a different story and Google's statements on the matter have been proven to be true with the new combined tablet and phone releases). Look, if android wasn't open source, projets like this would be a lot less successful: http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ http://www.cyanogenmod.com/

flatline3 14y ago
The point at which Apple's culture significantly shifted away from open source was the point at which they hid all their source code until after the OS was released. This completely breaks the OSS community and contribution model. Back in 2002, it was possible to contribute code to the current in-development version of Mac OS X. Now it's not, and iOS-specific OS code isn't provided at all.
- deelowe 14y ago
  Ok? What's this have to do with android? An anecdote is just that. We can't compare past Apple behavior to that of Google. They are very different companies in many ways.
  - flatline3 14y ago
    It means that: A) closed development breaks the OSS community model -- that's not anecdote, just fact. B) We have a past example of the slippery slope of closed development.
cooldeal 14y ago
Sigh, this whole Android is open or not argument is degenerating into the kind of arguments over 'Copyright infringement vs. Stealing'. Here's one good solution, call the open Android as Androidium(on the lines of Chrome vs. Chromium). Very good article on the openness of Android and to implement the above proposal. http://marketingland.com/what-is-the-one-true-android-and-how-open-is-it-21664 http://marketingland.com/what-is-the-one-true-android-and-ho... >Some like to claim that since Google gives vendors early access to the source, this somehow makes it not open. For those releases, at that specific date in time, maybe so. But, the source is released and generally pretty soon after phones start shipping (honeycomb was a different story and Google's statements on the matter have been proven to be true with the new combined tablet and phone releases). The problem came to fore when Acer got threatened with being cut off early access etc. when they wanted to launch other phones with Alibaba OS (Aliyun) on them. It's sort of a Android fork, but that's legal, but still Acer had to fold under the pressure or force getting cut off from their mobile business. Early access is much more important to OEMs than you make it seem to be and being able to fork is the core tenet of open source. >Look, if android wasn't open source, projets like this would be a lot less successful: http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ You know what, barely anyone would use CM if they couldn't get access to the Play Store and Google Apps like Map. So they download it illegally from other sources. CM used to provide them but got a warning from Google. So right now they wink-wink-nudge-nudge towards the Play Store.
- Tichy 14y ago
  Cyanogen Mods
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    Excuse me?
    - Tichy 14y ago
      They are possible because Android is open source. Edit: overlooked that you already mentioned them. The argument "nobody uses them without Play and Maps" is invalid, though.
kgarten 14y ago
Depends on what you call Android... If you talk about the "Android open-source software stack" ..yes that's "open" (I would still not see it as open source as for me it's the community that matters). If you talk about the Android smart phone os ... no that's not open-source.
kgarten 14y ago
For me "open-source" stands for community driven with open repository. It's a way to develop (not a source dump after a while of closed source development). Also I argue that Android as a smart phone OS is NOT open-source, as you desperately need binary code for basic OS functionality.

by deelowe 14y ago

flatline3 14y ago

The point at which Apple's culture significantly shifted away from open source was the point at which they hid all their source code until after the OS was released. This completely breaks the OSS community and contribution model. Back in 2002, it was possible to contribute code to the current in-development version of Mac OS X. Now it's not, and iOS-specific OS code isn't provided at all.

deelowe 14y ago
Ok? What's this have to do with android? An anecdote is just that. We can't compare past Apple behavior to that of Google. They are very different companies in many ways.
- flatline3 14y ago
  It means that: A) closed development breaks the OSS community model -- that's not anecdote, just fact. B) We have a past example of the slippery slope of closed development.

cooldeal 14y ago

Sigh, this whole Android is open or not argument is degenerating into the kind of arguments over 'Copyright infringement vs. Stealing'. Here's one good solution, call the open Android as Androidium(on the lines of Chrome vs. Chromium). Very good article on the openness of Android and to implement the above proposal. http://marketingland.com/what-is-the-one-true-android-and-how-open-is-it-21664 http://marketingland.com/what-is-the-one-true-android-and-ho... >Some like to claim that since Google gives vendors early access to the source, this somehow makes it not open. For those releases, at that specific date in time, maybe so. But, the source is released and generally pretty soon after phones start shipping (honeycomb was a different story and Google's statements on the matter have been proven to be true with the new combined tablet and phone releases). The problem came to fore when Acer got threatened with being cut off early access etc. when they wanted to launch other phones with Alibaba OS (Aliyun) on them. It's sort of a Android fork, but that's legal, but still Acer had to fold under the pressure or force getting cut off from their mobile business. Early access is much more important to OEMs than you make it seem to be and being able to fork is the core tenet of open source. >Look, if android wasn't open source, projets like this would be a lot less successful: http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ http://www.cyanogenmod.com/ You know what, barely anyone would use CM if they couldn't get access to the Play Store and Google Apps like Map. So they download it illegally from other sources. CM used to provide them but got a warning from Google. So right now they wink-wink-nudge-nudge towards the Play Store.

Tichy 14y ago
Cyanogen Mods
- cooldeal 14y ago
  Excuse me?
  - Tichy 14y ago
    They are possible because Android is open source. Edit: overlooked that you already mentioned them. The argument "nobody uses them without Play and Maps" is invalid, though.

kgarten 14y ago

Depends on what you call Android... If you talk about the "Android open-source software stack" ..yes that's "open" (I would still not see it as open source as for me it's the community that matters). If you talk about the Android smart phone os ... no that's not open-source.

kgarten 14y ago

For me "open-source" stands for community driven with open repository. It's a way to develop (not a source dump after a while of closed source development). Also I argue that Android as a smart phone OS is NOT open-source, as you desperately need binary code for basic OS functionality.