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.'"
and here I was looking forward to this phone for the reason I would be able to add whatever apps I wanted. Google please do not become apple.
-Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
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
I, for one, welcome a way to stop a potential robot uprising. But, I think robot's sufficiently intelligent to rebel, will also have figured out how to disable the switch.
If they delete an app you paid for, will they reimburse you?
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
If someone really wants to produce a fully open, Four Freedoms-safe, Stallman-friendly cellphone, they'll have to set up a fully open, Four Freedoms-safe, Stallman-friendly network to run it on. Which probably means someone kindly donating a few squillion for the infrastructure.
The internet got close to that by starting off below the radar. The comms companies will not let that happen again.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
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.
If you produce a custom build, how will you sign the custom firmware image so that your phone runs it?
Or are you going to produce your own hardware to run it on as well?
Perhaps I'm confused, but I thought I read that even though the OS was open, the handset would only run firmware images that had been digitally signed by the handset maker. The OS is open so the handset makers can play with it - not the users.
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.
If HTC (or any hardware manufacturer) let you install completely bespoke firmware images on your phone, then they'd have no control over what code you ran on the phone. You could accidentally or intentionally create firmware images which crashed or disrupted the phone networks they were connected to. The network operators would then be very quick to block all Android phones and the handset makers wouldn't be able to sell them anymore - Androids name would turn to mud. I'm pretty sure the firmware images have to be signed by the hardware manufacturer or all hell would break loose.
Security rule #1: don't trust the client.
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
There's a reason the baseband firmware and the application firmware (Android) tend to run on seperate CPUs with seperate RAM and flash storage. These then connect to the system via a serial or USB link.
There's no real good reason to not let users update their own user space firmware with whatever they want other than the simple reasons of DRM and user-control.
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