3 ms·

I agree with you as a fellow hacker. But I don't think this can be called a solution for end-users, who would just like things to work out of the box. And as an

by hrjet 13y ago

I agree with you as a fellow hacker. But I don't think this can be called a solution for end-users, who would just like things to work out of the box. And as an app developer, one needs to consider the problems of the end-user. That is where fully packaged open-source projects could make a difference. However, without a strong backer, it is only going to lead more fragmentation.

bad_user 13y ago
I was addressing your comment, that Android is not open-source anymore, with which I disagree. Your argument above is in the same line as people claiming that end-users do not benefit from open-source. In some sense it is correct, as end-users do not have the technical know-how to assemble their own operating system, to make changes to source-code, etc... But practically speaking, end-users don't have to do it by themselves just like they don't have to fix their cars by themselves (e.g. I helped friends install Cyanogenmod on their phones, which is a PITA to deal with, but once done, it's done). The power of open-source is in the ability to fork it. Not all people or companies can do it, but if there's demand for it (e.g. Google's stewardship goes awry), then a successful fork will happen. Building an operating system from scratch is hard. Having stock Android available as a base for new operating systems is an incredible gift. In the meantime, yes, forks of Android are only for hackers wanting to play around. But if this leads to the rise of alternative marketplaces, like F-droid, then this will benefit everybody. Not sure if you notice it, but the biggest problem that Android has in terms of openness and lock-in is Google Play. Fortunately Android allows installing software from third-party sources, but unfortunately there aren't many alternative marketplaces out there.

3 ms·

I agree with you as a fellow hacker. But I don't think this can be called a solution for end-users, who would just like things to work out of the box. And as an

by hrjet 13y ago

bad_user 13y ago
I was addressing your comment, that Android is not open-source anymore, with which I disagree. Your argument above is in the same line as people claiming that end-users do not benefit from open-source. In some sense it is correct, as end-users do not have the technical know-how to assemble their own operating system, to make changes to source-code, etc... But practically speaking, end-users don't have to do it by themselves just like they don't have to fix their cars by themselves (e.g. I helped friends install Cyanogenmod on their phones, which is a PITA to deal with, but once done, it's done). The power of open-source is in the ability to fork it. Not all people or companies can do it, but if there's demand for it (e.g. Google's stewardship goes awry), then a successful fork will happen. Building an operating system from scratch is hard. Having stock Android available as a base for new operating systems is an incredible gift. In the meantime, yes, forks of Android are only for hackers wanting to play around. But if this leads to the rise of alternative marketplaces, like F-droid, then this will benefit everybody. Not sure if you notice it, but the biggest problem that Android has in terms of openness and lock-in is Google Play. Fortunately Android allows installing software from third-party sources, but unfortunately there aren't many alternative marketplaces out there.