9 ms·

I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party compa

I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party company OEM Acer from shipping Aliyun phones under the threat of pulling early access to betas etc. Being Open implies the chance to fork and fragmentation. Google might be doing good for Android, but it seems to be going further away from being "open". AOSP is open, Android, not so much.

swang 14y ago
> I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party company OEM Acer from shipping Aliyun phones under the threat of pulling early access to betas etc. What you're saying is misleading. Acer were the ones who broke the rules and Google enforced them, for good reason too. If you sign up and agree to be in an organization in order to gain early access to firmware, then you should abide by the rules of the organization. Otherwise, don't join. > Being Open implies the chance to fork and fragmentation Yup. If you don't want to play by Google's rules, do what Amazon did and make your own version. Or as a better example, do what Archos has been doing for near 3+ years. Google provides timely improvements that they eventually send back upstream, but they have no obligation to instantly provide these updates to AOSP to everyone.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  Of course Archos recently changed their tune and started releasing tablets with Google Play starting with the G9 generation...
- cooldeal 14y ago
  >What you're saying is misleading. Acer were the ones who broke the rules and Google enforced them, for good reason too. I find it interesting that you don't think it's misleading for an organization called the "Open Handset Alliance" to have rules stating they can't ship handsets using competing platforms that can run Android apps. Or that it's misleading to call Android open and then withhold key apps, the app store itself and early access which are neither free nor Free or open. So Aliyun/Alibaba is basically screwed because no major OEM can ship their devices regardless of how good their OS is. How is calling Android open not misleading? What other open project has such restrictions? Linux? Firefox? Apache? I don't think even MySQL has such restrictions.
  - swang 14y ago
    I don't really want to argue with you over the word, "open" since that seems like where this discussion is heading. Who cares about that point? Fine, OHA is a bad name. That still doesn't absolve Acer of joining and agreeing to abide by the consortium's rules. Android is open, Google apps are not. None of Google's apps are necessary to run Android.

swang 14y ago

> I don't think it's FUD to point out the inconsistency that comes with on one hand proclaiming Android to be open and with the other blocking a third party company OEM Acer from shipping Aliyun phones under the threat of pulling early access to betas etc. What you're saying is misleading. Acer were the ones who broke the rules and Google enforced them, for good reason too. If you sign up and agree to be in an organization in order to gain early access to firmware, then you should abide by the rules of the organization. Otherwise, don't join. > Being Open implies the chance to fork and fragmentation Yup. If you don't want to play by Google's rules, do what Amazon did and make your own version. Or as a better example, do what Archos has been doing for near 3+ years. Google provides timely improvements that they eventually send back upstream, but they have no obligation to instantly provide these updates to AOSP to everyone.

fpgeek 14y ago
Of course Archos recently changed their tune and started releasing tablets with Google Play starting with the G9 generation...
cooldeal 14y ago
>What you're saying is misleading. Acer were the ones who broke the rules and Google enforced them, for good reason too. I find it interesting that you don't think it's misleading for an organization called the "Open Handset Alliance" to have rules stating they can't ship handsets using competing platforms that can run Android apps. Or that it's misleading to call Android open and then withhold key apps, the app store itself and early access which are neither free nor Free or open. So Aliyun/Alibaba is basically screwed because no major OEM can ship their devices regardless of how good their OS is. How is calling Android open not misleading? What other open project has such restrictions? Linux? Firefox? Apache? I don't think even MySQL has such restrictions.
- swang 14y ago
  I don't really want to argue with you over the word, "open" since that seems like where this discussion is heading. Who cares about that point? Fine, OHA is a bad name. That still doesn't absolve Acer of joining and agreeing to abide by the consortium's rules. Android is open, Google apps are not. None of Google's apps are necessary to run Android.