Slashdot Mirror
Android Also Comes With a Kill-Switch
Aviran writes "The search giant is retaining the right to delete applications from Android handsets on a whim.
Unlike Apple, the company has made no attempt to hide its intentions, and includes the details in the Android Market terms and conditions, as spotted by Computer World: 'Google may discover a product that violates the developer distribution agreement... in such an instance, Google retains the right to remotely remove those applications from your device at its sole discretion.'"
Yawn, yet another inflammatory Slashdot article.
The search giant is retaining the right to delete applications from Android handsets on a whim
Good use of 'whim', makes it seem utterly random rather than based on a particular criteria.
Yes, they can remove apps you buy at the App Store from your phone. Unlike Apple and the iPhone however, you can get applications from other places that aren't subject to the kill-switch.
"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
Reading from some of their early documents, it appears when they said Open, they meant for hardware makers.
They compared it to QTopia (when closed), Symbian, ect.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
It's at the "sole discretion" of Google. There's no provision for binding arbitration or litigation. So "whim" is correct.
If you want openness, get OpenMoko.
Google is doing everything in the Java environment precisely to put you in a sandbox they (and the cell networks) can control.
This is my problem with Android, you may as well go with Windows Mobile. They are just about as open. If you are concerned with freedom then you should get an OpenMoko FreeRunner. You can run whatever software you like on it in whatever language you want. There are plenty of other problem with OpenMoko, but software freedom is not one of them.
No, this is something written into the Android OS by Google. It's a part of their app store. Any Android phone will have this as a part of it, unless Google changes Android in order to remove it (which they most likely won't). But that being said, I don't think it's a terrible feature, and I'm sure that in the near future, there will be plenty of ways to install software onto Android without going through the app store, and thereby take Google out of that part of the loop.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
Whether or not HTC 'lets' you is irrelevant- you can.
In fact, I'm doing it right now. My phone has a linux build available for it, and I'm running a tailored build of Windows Mobile that's entirely different from the one HTC sent me with the phone.
"It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
Yes! I talked with a Google Employee on the Android IRC Channel. You can still install applications yourself just like you do with the Android SDK Device Emulator. This is simply to prevent evil-doers from using the Marketplace as a mass-distribution network. Google still does not have an application approval system or take a cut from the developers.
These media outlets needs to stop blindly copy-and-pasting each other and learn a little bit about Android. Google could probably also get off it's ass and do a little marketing and customer awareness work.
"What's the use of a good quotation if you can't change it?" - Doctor Who
How? With what tools?
You can buy a GSM modem for a couple of bucks and control it via your computer.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
I know RTFA is out of fashion here... can't blame people if TFA isn't even the TFA but a F Blog Post -on- TFA, but all the same...
``In addition, Google says that if it does remotely remove an application, it will try to get users their money back, a question that iPhone users have wondered about in the case of an iPhone application recall. Google said that it will make "reasonable efforts to recover the purchase price of the product ... from the original developer on your behalf." If Google fails to get the full amount back, it will divide what it gets among affected users.`` - http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9117279&source=rss_news , AKA: TRealFA
How? With what tools?
It's not like you can't acquire the baseband firmware and RF chipsets and make your own device.
My blog
*If* Google were to abuse this like Apple have done then yeah, it'll be bad. Until then it's just common sense.
When exactly did Apple abuse this again?
I'll admit to being biased, but...
And your proof of this assertion is...what, exactly?
As counter, I offer links to the Git repository and the kernel and other GPL/LGPL bits. That's already more than any other major platform has done, and they aren't through yet.
What? You want it to pop up with a bash prompt?
And your proof of this assertion is...what, exactly?
The decision on whether a device is firmware-flashable is made by the device manufacturer. The T-Mobile G1, the first Android device, is being made by HTC, which has a history of making firmware-flashable devices.
And your proof of this assertion is...what, exactly?
Popularity of Java in mobile device development, of course, would have nothing to do with it, since that wouldn't fit your conspiracy theory. Neither would security (no direct memory access), for that matter.
And your proof of this assertion is...what, exactly?
I mean, seriously. If you have problems with their developer agreement, cite passages and specific issues.
Carriers will, undoubtedly, be the "customers" of many Android devices. At the same time, I've received emails from manufacturers whose devices will not be sold through carriers. If your carrier allows standards-compliant devices (e.g., GSM), you should have your choice, albeit not on day one, as Android devices make it through various manufacturing and development processes.
The Busy Coder's Guide to Android Development
You obviously have never met a hacker/phreaker, have you.
But for a (somewhat) well known way of running custom packages, how about openmoko? I somehow doubt their phones will be nuking cell networks anytime soon.
---- Liquid was a patriot ----
This situation reminds me of the pre-Carterfone phone system, in which the phone company (there was only one, which is a reminiscence for another day) prohibited attachment of "foreign" devices. If they didn't make it, you couldn't attach it. They'd even 'ping' your wiring to make sure you didn't have any unauthorized extras on the line. It took the Carterfone decision to get rid of that prohibition, leading to today's ability to attach anything we want, so long as it doesn't harm the system. I hope that we'll eventually get something like that for these new phones so that we're not subject to somebody else's ideas of what we're allowed to run on our own hardware.
Thanks. The parent's argument reminded me of the days before AT&T was broken up. You were allowed only one type of phone (provided by them) in your home. Their argument against 3rd party phones was that any old phone would crash the network. We later learned that was BS after AT&T was broken up.
(Also google HTC and cooked ROMs. You CAN put a home brew rom on your phone - I've been running a cooked ROM on my VZW phone for a year now because VZW never activated the GPS feature HTC built into the phone.)