Slashdot Mirror
Why the Kill Switch Makes Sense For Android
Technologizer writes "It came out this week that Google's Android phone OS, like the iPhone, has a kill switch that lets Android Market applications be disabled remotely. But it's a mistake to lump Google's implementation and Apple's together — the Google version is a smart, pro-consumer move that avoids all the things that make Apple's version a bad idea."
It may sound remote, but you may want to try RTFA:ing. I know it's not going to happen, though, so I'll summarize why it's OK for Google. :)
The thing is that Android allows for installing programs from -- hear and be astonished! -- other sources than Google itself, unlike Apple. Without any extra or undue inconvenience.
And, Android's kill switch is only for the programs that come through Google's own app store. So, you can probably pretty much bet that it's only going to be used to regulate malware, or Google's app store won't last long. Or if Google does misuse it, you'll just have to download the program in question directly from its developer.
Posterity, my posterior.
And, Android's kill switch is only for the programs that come through Google's own app store. So, you can probably pretty much bet that it's only going to be used to regulate malware, or Google's app store won't last long.
Mod parent up! All the overreaction to this "news" is because people are ignoring (or ignorant of) the fact the "kill switch" is in the terms of service for the Android Market. The consumer isn't agreeing to let Google delete any app, just any app from the Android Market. If Google abuses this, people will just go to a different web store such as Handango for their android apps.
And, Android's kill switch is only for the programs that come through Google's own app store.
[Citation Needed]
FTFA: Furthermore, keep in mind that this kill switch will only affect apps distributed through the Market, not those installed from the Web.
Which cites : http://www.appscout.com/2008/10/android_contactssync_syncs_con.php
(As far as I can tell, Google's power to revoke apps off your phone only applies to stuff in the App Market. The much-vaunted "kill switch" comes from the Android Market terms of service, so if the developer is outside the Android Market, it probably doesn't apply.)
Which links to nothing relevant and provides no support for his statement.
Until we hear from Google, this is all just conjecture from blogs.
And based on TFA's tone, this post comes to mind
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Android (Market)'s Kill Switch is completely different from iPhone's Kill Switch.
anyone who actually bothered to read the info and public statements by Google can see that this kill feature is meant to enforce Android Market's distribution agreements, therefore it doesn't affect apps installed from other sites. secondly, all of the info points to this feature being used to protect consumers, not to exploit them. if somehow a malware app gets distributed by Android Market, Google is making it their duty to remove any potentially damaging applications from all android devices that have purchased the application from Google's website. not only that, but they want to refund any money android users have paid for said malware.
despite the huge lead that the iPhone has right now, i think Google's open, pro-consumer, pro-homebrew policies are major selling points over the locked down iPhone, which is further tarnished by Apple's increasingly anti-consumer attitude. the fact that Google seems to support 3rd-party/homebrew development for the Android platform just makes Android that much more enticing to developers of all stripes. no need to worry about an app being rejected by Android Market because it competes with an existing app, and no need to distribute your app through google in the first place.
these are really two diametrically opposed business philosophies. no NDAs, no need for users to jailbreak the phone, and a much more developer/consumer-friendly attitude in general. one Kill Switch is used by Apple to shut down potential competitors; the other is used by Google to be responsible by removing any malware they may have inadvertently sold to customers (and refund those charges). one platform is completely locked down under Apple's iron grip, while Android is completely open and allows application installs from 3rd party websites free of conditions.
irrational fanboyism aside, i'd have to say that Android wins hands down.
Because the infamous "kill switch" statement is part of the Android Market Business and Program Policies (see Product Removals). If you don't use Android Market, you're not subject to the kill switch.
And you can get your Android apps elsewhere without jailbreaking, unlike the iPhone.
I read the article, and the trail of html links going to ONE other author who "thought that it only applies to Google Appstore aps, not other channels." There's no certainty there, not even a concurring opinion from a lawyer or statement affirming from Google.
If you really believe that the carriers via Google don't have the final say about what apps get on the phone appstore or not, you're really stupid. The carriers will ALWAYS demand that power from the handset makers, and they have the final say about what apps are allowed on the phone. Period. If they don't get that control, they're not going to allow the phones on their network, silly "open 700 mhz" rule or no. They'll find some way around the rule, drag their feet, go to court, pay some congress-critters, do whatever while the shut down as many apps as they want.
I've been developing for handsets for a while, and been watching the market for even longer. There is NO way you are going to have a mass-market handset that doesn't have the carrier ability to shut off any apps they want.
You might get around it on a few developer phones that have the security turned off and an app signature that's unique to some little project. When I say "mass market," I mean like 6 million phones, all identical and all with the possibility of running your app without some type of code signature being applied. This is NOT like 1983 and the PC revolution, where people get to pick the applications they want on their equipment. The business folks have already figured out how they're going to control app delivery for maximum profit and control. Don't expect any revolutions here. Expect slow progress only when absolutely pushed, and even then, as little as needed to relieve the pressure.
Remember that the carriers have years and billions invested in their networks. They're all still trying to digest their last acquisitions and get all the hardware to play nice together. They're all desperately looking for any 1% margin that they can squeeze from the customer before they switch to the competitor. They're desperately trying NOT to become "pipes" like the land carriers have become for the Internet, so they're not just going to roll over and let the customer decide what cool new app gets installed.
I fully expect that Google will fold the minute that T-Mobile finds something they don't like. Of course, I'd really like to see it happen (handset maker stand against carrier), but we all know it's not going to happen. You're just deluding yourself if you think otherwise.
Ah. So you think Microsoft should include it in Windows update?
So what exactly do you think this is?
Remember... The iPhone OS is open source too. the source doesn't help if you can't install modified versions on the device without hacking.
I agree with your point in that many people are holding a double standard.
That being said, the IPhone OS is based on open source code (BSD) but is not itself open source as you said. As for Android it suffers from a case of Tivoization in that it dos not easily allow core modification. So Android though technically open source, it is not truly free.
let me make this clear: i don't have anything against jailbreak. i'm a ardent supporter of homebrew on the PSP.
the iPhone and PSP are both absolutely amazing pieces of hardware. they are truly marvels of modern engineering. and while the PSP's beautifully designed XMB interface perfectly complements the device's slick and sexy exterior, it is still lacking in many respects. now, the iPhone's touchscreen interface is even more impressive than the PSP's in terms of stylish aesthetics and supreme usability. but the iPhone too has its drawbacks in its software.
it saddens me that these two marvels of portable engineering are held back from their true potential by simple software problems which have their roots in not so simple corporate policies and anti-consumer attitudes held by Apple and Sony. here are the major complaints:
Sony PSP
iPhone
Android
Neither Sony nor Apple support homebrew/CFW/jailbreak. as a result, if you want the freedom to use your own device as you see fit, you need to void your warranty, and Apple/Sony have shown that they will actively try to combat such practices. i can't speak for Apple, but i know that Sony's anti-consumer attitudes have resulting in their releasing useless update after useless update without ever fixing the problems with the official PSP firmware that drive consumers to homebrew/CFW.
Google encourages developers to write applications for Android and do not try to control the distribution of 3rd-party apps. they support 3rd-party software rather than wasting resources to impede their development. the Android Developer Challenges issued by Google offers $10 million in prize money.
Well, you know jack shit about ad-hoc distribution
Given the context of the thread, I'd say that it's you who knows jack shit* about ad-hoc distribution.
1) You're limited to distribute your app to only 100 phones.
2) (more importantly) You're still tied to Apple - and they can still cut off ad-hoc as a distribution method. They've already done this to the developer of podcaster.
In short, Ad-hoc distribution is an even less realistic method option for app installation for consumers than jailbreaking.
* in fact, I'd say that you've got a few years of hard study, before you're even able to aspire to knowing jack shit (about anything).
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
intentionally locked out of the PSN/Playstation Store unless you buy a PS3.
Of course you DO know that the Playstation store has been accessible from the PC for, like, forever now and you could buy games off it and transfer it to the PSP? And you DO also know that with FW 5.00 you can access the Playstation Store directly from the PSP and download games directly to it?
cya
Raziel-chan
Dunno about you, but when I require service from a manufacturer my gadgets usually are beyond any state that would allow to repair them myself. It's highly likely that it's impossible to un-jailbreak an iPhone in this state, thus, no warranty for me. :(
Can you easily unjailbreak an iPhone with e.g. a broken touch screen? Without any touch functionality? Or without display?
Yes, yes, and yes.