4 ms·

Android (AOSP) these days is not a functionally complete mobile OS with Google pushing lots of functionality into their closed apps. Mobile really needs a compl

by pcx 13y ago

Android (AOSP) these days is not a functionally complete mobile OS with Google pushing lots of functionality into their closed apps. Mobile really needs a complete OS which devs can use as an off-the-shelf product, and mod according to their needs. FirefoxOS and Ubuntu Mobile are probably the only real contenders now. Both have their pros and cons, but I sincerely hope that either of them (if not both) would succeed. One very important thing Google added to the ecosystem was drivers. Android using Linux essentially made nearly all mobile hardware work on Linux, even though some drivers are closed. I remember the days when getting a projector to work with Linux was a pain, and I am not even 25! EDIT: My comment on AOSP is in this context: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/neither-microsoft-nokia-nor-anyone-else-should-fork-android-its-unforkable/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/neithe... http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-... I do accept that Google has added great value to the ecosystem with AOSP. It's just that AOSP is pretty much unusable for people without the resources of Amazon, Nokia, Mozilla, etc. I want something like Debian/Ubuntu. It's pretty much possible for a single person to build a customized OS for computers. We need that for mobile.

swetland 13y ago
Dianne's response to the recent "AOSP is unusable" silliness is pretty solid: http://www.hnwatcher.com/r/734444/Google-s-Dianne-Hackborn-comments-on-Ars-s-Android-open-sourceness-FUD-piece http://www.hnwatcher.com/r/734444/Google-s-Dianne-Hackborn-c... Regarding drivers, we expended a lot of effort to push things as open as we could. We never shipped any binary kernel drivers for any lead devices, something which most OEMs and silicon vendors seem to have stuck with. We insisted on linux-on-the-metal instead of solutions where it would be virtualized under a closed hypervisor that had the "real" drivers and other such insanity. GPU drivers have been the biggest uphill battle -- getting all the vendors to agree to GPLv2 kernel components to handle resource management and ensure that userspace is not directly poking the hardware, alongside their "secret sauce" in userspace was better than nothing and better than closed binary kernel components, but not ideal. It seems like we're finally seeing some motion in this area. Watching Nokia, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and others take AOSP from its git repositories and build full products on top of it is, I think, among the best evidence that there's an awfully useful base platform there. If people were to augment that with open source alternatives to various Google (or other) cloud services, that would be cool. And of course folks can take AOSP as a base and extend or modify it however they like in a fully open way -- follow the model of cyanogenmod that's been tracking AOSP and adding their own enhancements, goodies, or platform support on top of it, for example...
- pjmlp 13y ago
  Except other than a minority, no users will care if they don't get access to Google services.
- Spearchucker 13y ago
  Your points are noted, and I agree with you. But I'm not convinced by Dianne's post. Big red flag is what on earth you need cloud for to provide a location service? And mail? An MTU is a client app by definition. Open implies supporting popular protocols - that hardly creates a dependency on Gmail. The biggest issue of all though is how most apps are virtually unusable without an internet connection. That, in the real world, happens a hell of a lot more often than people like Dianne care to realise. I call bullshit. Her post is as biased as the posts she's responding to.
  - ZeroGravitas 13y ago
    The reason you need tho cloud for location service is because you can save user time and battery by doing a lookup based on nearby wifi points, a database of which is stored in the cloud. Relevantly, Mozilla are trying to build an open one of these. https://blog.mozilla.org/services/2013/10/28/introducing-the-mozilla-location-service/ https://blog.mozilla.org/services/2013/10/28/introducing-the... Though privacy issues make it complicated for people to just download the data, rather than make a call to the cloud. Those who object to the whole idea of this will probably just have to accept slower lookups. I'm not sure what you're saying with your other points, I would have thought a GMail app would be expected to have a dependency on GMail. The Email app (which Ars claimed was abandoned, yet just got a overhaul) is there for communicating over popular protocols to non-Google services.
    - Spearchucker 13y ago
      I use a normal (non-Gmail dependent) MTU for my Gmail. What user need does the Gmail-dependent MTU from Google fulfill that warrants that dependency? As far as I can tell, my non-Google MTU adds more functionality to GMail than GMail has. As for AGPS - great. But we already know that location services function quite well without it. Did you know that you can do AGPS and drastically reduce time to fix just by initializing a GPS receiver using your last known location? AGPS with a location obtained from a WiFi SSID (via a call to the cloud) is only faster when your last known location is drastically different to your current location (another state, or country). I won't believe that Google is incapable of designing a location API that's extensible. There's a non-technical reason, and that reason is in conflict with the openness Google likes to play up.
tombrossman 13y ago
I have to disagree with the statement that AOSP is not functionally complete. I'm using it on a Nexus handset with F-Droid and I'm really pleased at how easy it was to switch over. I was rooting my phone anyway and this started as an experiment. I had the ROM and the separately packaged Google Apps package (Google Play Services, etc...) and thought I'd try skipping the extra Google stuff to see how it worked. Haven't looked back since. Some of the replacement apps are functionally superior to the Google versions, though I concede these are not as user-friendly for non-technical users. Nothing against Google really, I have a GMail account as a secondary email and I like the default Google search on the Firefox browser. I just don't need any more than that and so reject the added complexity of flashing all the Google stuff on top of AOSP.
- bad_user 13y ago
  I did the same thing with an older Galaxy S that I have lying around. I installed CyanogenMod on it without Google's services. Have been installing apps from F-Droid. I use Apollo, VLC, K-9 Mail, OsmAnd and Firefox. At some point I also installed some apps from Amazon's App Store, but I then realized that I don't really need any of that crap. People saying that AOSP is not usable don't know what they are talking about. That said, I'm also planning to get a phone with Firefox OS and I think it has a bright future, just because it is based on web standards. I really like the approach taken by Firefox OS and Chrome OS.
  - pcx 13y ago
    > People saying that AOSP is not usable don't know what they are talking about. The Linux kernel is usable. Why don't you just start from scratch with the kernel? When I say AOSP is not usable for normal folks, I mean it's not comparable to the existing solutions we have for computers.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
noinsight 13y ago
That mobile OS is Mer (-> and Jolla with Sailfish OS). It's probably the only real contender at the moment.

by pcx 13y ago

swetland 13y ago

Dianne's response to the recent "AOSP is unusable" silliness is pretty solid: http://www.hnwatcher.com/r/734444/Google-s-Dianne-Hackborn-comments-on-Ars-s-Android-open-sourceness-FUD-piece http://www.hnwatcher.com/r/734444/Google-s-Dianne-Hackborn-c... Regarding drivers, we expended a lot of effort to push things as open as we could. We never shipped any binary kernel drivers for any lead devices, something which most OEMs and silicon vendors seem to have stuck with. We insisted on linux-on-the-metal instead of solutions where it would be virtualized under a closed hypervisor that had the "real" drivers and other such insanity. GPU drivers have been the biggest uphill battle -- getting all the vendors to agree to GPLv2 kernel components to handle resource management and ensure that userspace is not directly poking the hardware, alongside their "secret sauce" in userspace was better than nothing and better than closed binary kernel components, but not ideal. It seems like we're finally seeing some motion in this area. Watching Nokia, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and others take AOSP from its git repositories and build full products on top of it is, I think, among the best evidence that there's an awfully useful base platform there. If people were to augment that with open source alternatives to various Google (or other) cloud services, that would be cool. And of course folks can take AOSP as a base and extend or modify it however they like in a fully open way -- follow the model of cyanogenmod that's been tracking AOSP and adding their own enhancements, goodies, or platform support on top of it, for example...

pjmlp 13y ago
Except other than a minority, no users will care if they don't get access to Google services.
Spearchucker 13y ago
Your points are noted, and I agree with you. But I'm not convinced by Dianne's post. Big red flag is what on earth you need cloud for to provide a location service? And mail? An MTU is a client app by definition. Open implies supporting popular protocols - that hardly creates a dependency on Gmail. The biggest issue of all though is how most apps are virtually unusable without an internet connection. That, in the real world, happens a hell of a lot more often than people like Dianne care to realise. I call bullshit. Her post is as biased as the posts she's responding to.
- ZeroGravitas 13y ago
  The reason you need tho cloud for location service is because you can save user time and battery by doing a lookup based on nearby wifi points, a database of which is stored in the cloud. Relevantly, Mozilla are trying to build an open one of these. https://blog.mozilla.org/services/2013/10/28/introducing-the-mozilla-location-service/ https://blog.mozilla.org/services/2013/10/28/introducing-the... Though privacy issues make it complicated for people to just download the data, rather than make a call to the cloud. Those who object to the whole idea of this will probably just have to accept slower lookups. I'm not sure what you're saying with your other points, I would have thought a GMail app would be expected to have a dependency on GMail. The Email app (which Ars claimed was abandoned, yet just got a overhaul) is there for communicating over popular protocols to non-Google services.
  - Spearchucker 13y ago
    I use a normal (non-Gmail dependent) MTU for my Gmail. What user need does the Gmail-dependent MTU from Google fulfill that warrants that dependency? As far as I can tell, my non-Google MTU adds more functionality to GMail than GMail has. As for AGPS - great. But we already know that location services function quite well without it. Did you know that you can do AGPS and drastically reduce time to fix just by initializing a GPS receiver using your last known location? AGPS with a location obtained from a WiFi SSID (via a call to the cloud) is only faster when your last known location is drastically different to your current location (another state, or country). I won't believe that Google is incapable of designing a location API that's extensible. There's a non-technical reason, and that reason is in conflict with the openness Google likes to play up.

tombrossman 13y ago

I have to disagree with the statement that AOSP is not functionally complete. I'm using it on a Nexus handset with F-Droid and I'm really pleased at how easy it was to switch over. I was rooting my phone anyway and this started as an experiment. I had the ROM and the separately packaged Google Apps package (Google Play Services, etc...) and thought I'd try skipping the extra Google stuff to see how it worked. Haven't looked back since. Some of the replacement apps are functionally superior to the Google versions, though I concede these are not as user-friendly for non-technical users. Nothing against Google really, I have a GMail account as a secondary email and I like the default Google search on the Firefox browser. I just don't need any more than that and so reject the added complexity of flashing all the Google stuff on top of AOSP.

bad_user 13y ago
I did the same thing with an older Galaxy S that I have lying around. I installed CyanogenMod on it without Google's services. Have been installing apps from F-Droid. I use Apollo, VLC, K-9 Mail, OsmAnd and Firefox. At some point I also installed some apps from Amazon's App Store, but I then realized that I don't really need any of that crap. People saying that AOSP is not usable don't know what they are talking about. That said, I'm also planning to get a phone with Firefox OS and I think it has a bright future, just because it is based on web standards. I really like the approach taken by Firefox OS and Chrome OS.
- pcx 13y ago
  > People saying that AOSP is not usable don't know what they are talking about. The Linux kernel is usable. Why don't you just start from scratch with the kernel? When I say AOSP is not usable for normal folks, I mean it's not comparable to the existing solutions we have for computers.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]

noinsight 13y ago

That mobile OS is Mer (-> and Jolla with Sailfish OS). It's probably the only real contender at the moment.