Rooted Devices Blocked From Android Movie Market

tekgoblin writes "Google has released the Android Movie Market to Android tablets with Honeycomb 3.1 and in a few weeks for users with Froyo and Gingerbread. However Google has stipulated that the Android Movie Market will only be available to Android devices which are not rooted. So if you have a rooted Android device, don't expect to download anything from the Android Movie Market any time soon (or at least until a workaround is found)."

Comments

Android

[Anonymous Coward]

Android has kinda been a fiasco. Security problems, malware, hardware fragmentation, software piracy and now this blocking of rooted devices. Wasn't Android supposed to be open? I guess not. It doesn't hurt Google's bottom line tho, they still get the advertising revenue and even got the geeks to do the marketing for them.

Re:Android

[MightyMartian]

Android has kinda been a fiasco. Security problems, malware, hardware fragmentation, software piracy and now this blocking of rooted devices. Wasn't Android supposed to be open?/blockquote

No kidding. It's almost as bad as the iPhone.

Re:Android

[nurb432]

The device IS open. The store is not. Their store, their rules ( actually its most likely the MPAA's rules ). I don't see a problem with it really. No one is forcing you to use their stores.

Now when they start trying to prevent you from rooting, or limiting where you can connect to, THEN we have an issue. Until then, its just a choice.

Re:Android

[exomondo]

Wasn't Android supposed to be open?

The issue isn't with the OS, it's with the store which has to deal with the movie studios supplying the store.

Re:Android

[tripleevenfall]

I know this will get modded down, but I think AC has a point.

People will say "It is open - I can see the source". But shouldn't it mean something, in practice?

If we only have a platform that is open on the theoretical level - if users have to root a phone (something most people will never do) for it to be open, if making your phone open entails giving up other features, if manufacturers are actively hostile to people doing this and attempt to install countermeasures to rooting and sideloading...is this really "open"?

Or do we have a situation not unlike the iPhone and jailbreaking - a walled garden?

Re:Android

[exomondo]

If we only have a platform that is open on the theoretical level - if users have to root a phone (something most people will never do) for it to be open, if making your phone open entails giving up other features, if manufacturers are actively hostile to people doing this and attempt to install countermeasures to rooting and sideloading...is this really "open"?

So what you're saying is that Linux isn't really "open"?

Re:Android

[Ostracus]

The only thing it means is that the word "open" has lost it's meaning.

Re:Android

[symbolset]

It's part of the marketing campaign to spin away the openness of all these products. It's a failed strategy that highlights just how toxic the closed products are: you don't get to choose whether you want open or closed.

It's DRM that's not open and isn't ever going to be. If you want DRM'd services like movies badly enough to give up the openness, that's your choice. For music we don't have to put up with that crud any more. As far as I can tell the people who pay for DRM'd services like Netflix and this Android Movie Market validate the DRM business model and defer the day when the video vendors give up on DRM - perhaps forever.

But having a model that lets people choose? That seems fair even if I don't like how people choose. A reasonable person can't find fault with that.

Re:Android

[shutdown -p now]

They are? Last I checked, you're free to use any third-party video store with Android. For that matter, you could run one of the half dozen BitTorrent clients directly on the phone/tablet in question and get your media that way, if you're so inclined - they're not blocked from the Market (and even if they were, you can always install an .apk).

The way this is different from Apple is that there any third-party video store app would have to do transactions through Apple, and pay the 30% cut.

Re:Android

[hellwig]

What? They aren't blacklisting websites or even blocking third-party apps. They are simply blocking rooted phones from their movie store. Are you going to start complaining that WP7 and iOS phones can't connect to their store either?

Google is not saying what you can and cannot do with your phone. Google is saying what you can and cannot do with their movie marketplace, there's a BIG difference there. How dare Google dictate what people can and can't do with Google's movie store? You ever heard of the old "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?" Google is saying if you use a rooted phone, you don't get access to their marketplace. Google and/or the studios are a little worried that people with rooted phones might find a way to steal movies. If you don't agree with the paranoia, you shop elsewhere. It's similar to how some stores don't let kids in groups of more than 2 enter, or allow you to bring in a backpack or large bag, they don't want you shoplifting. Also similar to how certain businesses post signs about not allowing weapons (even though the constitution allows you to own those weapons). They aren't saying you can't own a gun, they're saying you can't take it into their store, THEIR property. Google doesn't want rooted phones in THEIR store, and that's their right. Trust me, keeping out a few teenagers (some of whom just might have been planning to steal stuff anyway) doesn't hurt a store's business, and the maybe 10% of rooted android devices out there won't be missed by Google either.

Re:Android

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you not see the humour in the fact that one you've "rooted" your "open" phone, you're now locked out of the store run by the maker of that "open" phone?

I don't care how it's different from apple. I'm just pointing out that Android fanboys are just as blind to the idiocy relating to their chosen platform as the Apple fanboys.

Re:Android

[WorBlux]

The problem with thier policy is that a rooted device can be programmed to say "I'm not rooted, honest!"

However they had to make this official policy in order to get the media conspiracy to licence their vids. I'm just waiting for the day someone breaks ranks and the most of DRM disappears overnight.

Re:Android

[ceoyoyo]

Wrong. The OS is open. The devices aren't. The network isn't. The store isn't. Kinda marginalizes the value of an open OS.

Re:Android

[mug funky]

lol, i thought RIM's PR dept was quiet lately, but really, posting on /.?

Re:Android

[SanityInAnarchy]

Do you not see the humour in the fact that one you've "rooted" your "open" phone, you're now locked out of the store run by the maker of that "open" phone?

I don't see the humor. I suppose I see the irony, but it doesn't in fact make the phone less open, any more than TiVo made Linux less open. The main difference is that it's not normal for Android phones to allow users to install their own OS without first finding an exploit of some sort, and that is a problem, but I don't see that being at all related to the video store -- the issue here is with the store, not the devices.

I'm just pointing out that Android fanboys are just as blind to the idiocy relating to their chosen platform as the Apple fanboys.

I suppose that's the definition of a fanboy, but I don't think you've shown that. Android as a whole is not idiotic, and neither is iOS. Aspects of them are idiotic, and I don't see anyone here "blind" to the problems with Android, though, curiously, there seem to be too many people who see the Apple App Store's closed nature as a good thing. Still, even among people who own iPhones, it seems like most people accept Apple's tyranny as something they can live with, not as something they'd prefer -- that is, they see it as a worthwhile exchange for a better experience overall.

And hey, AC, at least you've found a way to feel superior to fanboys of both.

Re:Android

[hairyfeet]

Just goes to show how, yet again....piracy wins! With piracy one doesn't have to give up control or freedom, you can have it in any damned format you want, and no worry about rootkits, backdoors or other acts of sabotage...err...I mean 'protecting of IP".

Time and time again, from game companies putting out their wares with nasty malware DRM, music companies putting ring 0 drivers that leave huge gaping security holes, and now this, time and time again the corps make sure piracy is ALWAYS better. Why you'd think they have stock in PTB or something!

Oh and mark my words Android WILL end up as locked down as iPhone, just you watch. Now that it has started to get traction both Google and the carriers will want more control, and since they have been very careful not to touch ANYTHING GPL V3 with regards to Android the next move will be eFuses or code signing. They'll do it "for security" and probably announce it right after some piece of Android malware has hit, but the results will be the same. Just like TiVo you'll have the code but not be able to do a damned thing with it.

While I've never agreed with much when it comes to RMS I thought then as now he had it spot on, once the corps were shown by TiVo how to lock up GPL code then the days of GPL V2 were numbered for anybody that actually cared for the four freedoms. Funny how once the TiVo trick was known all these corps started using GPL V2 code huh? Especially how they've gone out of their way to make sure they aren't "tainted" with GPL V3 code anywhere near their devices. mark my words Google doesn't need the geeks anymore so the days of open Android are numbered. They will jump in bed with the *.A.As, the carriers, and of course making it so every search has to go through Google will just be a nice bonus. Don't forget how they said Android was "open" and then said it was open "for the carriers" not the end users. These are just the feelers, seeing how much backlash they are gonna get. mark my words, before Xmas you'll see the end of Android being open.

Re:Android

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Surely that rationale also applies to buying smartphones in general, no matter manufacturer or carrier control?

Re:Android

[icebraining]

They blacklisted their own site.

No, the site blacklisted the phones. It sounds the same but it isn't.

If that's not telling you what you can and cannot do, then I don't know what is. I bet a robber who holds you up at gunpoint and demands your money and you give it to them, then you voluntarily gave it to them. They didn't take it from you, you gave it away, right?

Except you have the right to keep both your money and not get shot, but you don't have any right to access their store.

Re:Android

[node 3]

So what you're saying is that Linux isn't really "open"?

No, that's not what he's saying. Linux, the kernel (which is the extent to which Android can really be called "Linux", and even that is custom), is very open. It's the stuff you heap atop it, and the hardware you run it on, that might not be so open. In the case of Android, the hardware and software are varying degrees of closed.

This is quite similar to TiVo.

Re:Android

[walshy007]

Now that it has started to get traction both Google and the carriers will want more control, and since they have been very careful not to touch ANYTHING GPL V3 with regards to Android the next move will be eFuses or code signing. They'll do it "for security" and probably announce it right after some piece of Android malware has hit, but the results will be the same. Just like TiVo you'll have the code but not be able to do a damned thing with it.

The carriers have always wanted control, this is not new. Googles entire point of making android was for there to be an open platform for which it could display ads. Being closed lessens the number of people interested, it's main product is eyes so whatever gives it the most eyes is what it will do, being open is a part of this. That said, the carriers have sway over the phone manufacturers, so it would not surprise me in the least if the carriers locked things down a bit more. But google really has no business case for locking it down, it goes against it's own interests.

They will jump in bed with the *.A.As, the carriers, and of course making it so every search has to go through Google will just be a nice bonus.

Even if google secretly wanted to limit it only to google search, it would never. The department of justice would come down on them so fast it would make their head spin. So with that out of the picture what incentive does google have to ally themselves with the *.A.As or carriers? Considering google is the very company trying to undermine those other interests monopolies on their respective things so that ads can be shared more freely.

Don't forget how they said Android was "open" and then said it was open "for the carriers" not the end users. These are just the feelers, seeing how much backlash they are gonna get. mark my words, before Xmas you'll see the end of Android being open.

Even if carriers start locking down phones that would not mean android itself would not be open. The individual devices may be locked down, but the platform will still be open. The more devices that are locked down the more incentive other carriers have to offer a phone that is not to seize that small portion that want it. Yes it is a small portion, but when considering the effort required to acquire it (none, just leave the thing open) someone will want to take it (corporate greed and all that).

The sky is not falling, thanks to google we do now have an open platform. Yes this platform is at risk from those that would try to subvert it in the chain, but overall getting everyone to adopt completely locked down devices after being used to the open droid will be a hard sell for some.

Re:Android

[kwenf]

Moped Jesus? Is that for sale?

Re:Android

[MightyYar]

Just goes to show how, yet again....piracy wins!

So true. They've just driven everyone with a rooted phone to seek alternate sources of entertainment. I don't know what all the options are, but one of the easiest, cheapest, and most popular is "for free from the internet".

Media companies are hilarious. I can download full-sized Blu-Ray rips from the protocol that shall remain nameless on the day of release, but they are protecting the crappy Android quality movie files from the most savvy users.

Re:Android

[zeroshade]

There's no walled garden. There's a door that has a requirement to enter, but I can just walk around and use a different door to get to the same area.

Limiting access in a single instance != walled garden. I can still use the regular Android market, or the amazon market, or install applications individually on my own, or any number of other ways of getting applications. Sorry, but there's no walled garden here...

Re:Android

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly! If it was possible to root an iPhone and then install what you wanted, that'd be one thing, but since Android is open and Apple is closed/teh gay, it's totally different.

Re:Android

[AK Marc]

Except you have the right to keep both your money and not get shot, but you don't have any right to access their store.

I'm not discussing rights, but what is right. When you can determine the difference, get back to us.

Re:Android

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless Pirates are attacked by Ninjas, Monkeys, or Robots!

Re:Android

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see that the movie studios would consider it a dealbreaker if their content could be consumed on devices capable of circumventing DRM. So Google could choose between abandoning Google Movies, or excluding a microscopic part of their userbase who have chosen to root their device.

Funny though, isn't it.
Those who run apps on their phones as root are leet, but those who run their windoze boxes as Administrator are schmucks,

Re:Android

[thsths]

I agree, security wise the whole android process is completely broken. Release fast release often only works if the releases actually get out into the field, and because of vendor customization and lock-in they don't. This situation was perfectly predictable, and it could have been avoided in a few different ways.

That being said, as an OS android is pretty amazing. Sure there are bugs, but I think it also has more capabilities and more potential than any of the competitors. WP7 has some interesting features, but it certainly does not have a decent browser, and that's probably the most important app on a smartphone.

Re:Android

[exomondo]

So what you're saying is that Linux isn't really "open"?

No, that's not what he's saying. Linux, the kernel (which is the extent to which Android can really be called "Linux", and even that is custom), is very open. It's the stuff you heap atop it, and the hardware you run it on, that might not be so open. In the case of Android, the hardware and software are varying degrees of closed.

This is quite similar to TiVo.

If Android is closed by virtue of the hardware and additional lockdown software then so is Linux on which that same kind of hardware and software is present, like in the case of TiVo. So it's not Android that is closed, it's some phone platforms, you can't equate say the Motorola DroidX to the Nexus One just as you can't say Linux is closed just because it's on a TiVo when you can install it on a PC and it's fully open.

Re:Android

[node 3]

If Android is closed by virtue of the hardware and additional lockdown software then so is Linux

Android is not Linux. The software that is locked down in Android is not "additional", it's Android itself.

Android is to Linux similar to what TiVo is to Linux. TiVo is closed, but the Linux kernel is not.

So it's not Android that is closed, it's some phone platforms

No, Android is closed. Or simply just "not open". Show me where the source code for 3.0 is. Show me where you can build an official Android handset without meeting Google's rules. There *is* an open version of Android, but no one uses it. It's almost like a TiVo distribution without the TV listings or season pass features, etc.

you can't equate say the Motorola DroidX to the Nexus One just as you can't say Linux is closed just because it's on a TiVo when you can install it on a PC and it's fully open.

No, because this isn't a comparison between a generic Linux OS and a customized, specialized, closed one. They both run a customized, specialized, closed (or "not open") Linux-based OS.

Re:Android

[exomondo]

Android is not Linux.

Thanks captain obvious, i never made any claim to the sort and if you're capable of reading my post that would be obvious to you.

The software that is locked down in Android is not "additional", it's Android itself.

No it isn't, compare Android 2.3 on a Nexus to on a Droid, there are additional lockdowns on the Droid the make it necessary to root it, these are not present in the very same version of Android 2.3 on the Nexus.

Android is to Linux similar to what TiVo is to Linux. TiVo is closed, but the Linux kernel is not.

No, because I can grab a copy of Android 2.3 sources with no problem.

No, Android is closed. Or simply just "not open". Show me where the source code for 3.0 is.

Just because you can have a version that is not open doesn't make it entirely closed. The OSX kernel has many BSD components, it doesn't make BSD closed, the source for 2.3, the latest version of Android available for mobile phones is up for you, i'm sure you can find it.

Show me where you can build an official Android handset without meeting Google's rules.

It doesn't need to be 'official', that has absolutely ZERO to do with openness.

There *is* an open version of Android, but no one uses it.

Oh so now Android's closed, except for when it's open. The only closed version of Android is 3.0, the tablet version, not even designed for the VAST majority of Android devices.

It's almost like a TiVo distribution without the TV listings or season pass features, etc.

No it isn't, that's an idiotic comparison that makes no sense.

you can't equate say the Motorola DroidX to the Nexus One just as you can't say Linux is closed just because it's on a TiVo when you can install it on a PC and it's fully open.

No, because this isn't a comparison between a generic Linux OS and a customized, specialized, closed one. They both run a customized, specialized, closed (or "not open") Linux-based OS.

Build a version of Android from sources and you can install it onto a Nexus, try and put it on a DroidX and you'll be hit with additional non-Android lockdowns that prevent it.

Re:Android

[node 3]

Android Open Source Project is not the same Android you get on a phone. It's similar to Chrome vs Chromium. If you want the "full" Android experience, there are non-open source limitations. Google's claims of being open are smoke and mirrors. They are, at best, "open-ish".

Version 3.0 isn't even open-ish. The part you can get the source for is the kernel, which is a heavily modified, but obviously still GPLd, Linux Kernel. You seem to think I'm talking about carrier or handset maker extensions. I'm not. I'm talking about Android itself, as officially designed by Google.

Just because you can have a version that is not open doesn't make it entirely closed. The OSX kernel has many BSD components, it doesn't make BSD closed, the source for 2.3, the latest version of Android available for mobile phones is up for you, i'm sure you can find it.

You are making no sense. First off, no one is saying it's "completely closed". Second, you are looking at it ass-backwards. The Mac OS X kernel is open source, but that doesn't make Mac OS X open. The Android kernel is open source, but that doesn't make Android open. The proof of this is 3.0. You can't just hand-wave it away. Android 3.0's closed nature have absolutely zero impact on whether Linux is open, just like TiVo has no impact. Linux is completely open, Android is sometimes open, but never completely.

Re:Android

[exomondo]

Android Open Source Project is not the same Android you get on a phone.

It doesn't matter, you can get the source of Android 2.3, the same that you get on a Nexus phone, the full platform and software stack.

You seem to think I'm talking about carrier or handset maker extensions. I'm not.

Then why did you interject in this discussion if you don't know what we are discussing? Clearly - as you can see from the poster i originally replied to - that is *exactly* what we are talking about, the additions of the manufacturer and how those affect the openness of the underlying software.

Android 3.0's closed nature have absolutely zero impact on whether Linux is open

I never said it did - in fact you are the one that brought up Android 3.0 - i simply suggested the logic that lead him to the claim that Android isn't open - the additional lockdown hardware/software on some Android devices - would lead you to the conclusion that Linux isn't open - like the additional lockdown hardware/software on a TiVo. Obviously that is true in neither case and the additional lockdown hardware/software has no impact on the openness of the underlying software. We were talking solely about manufacturer-added lockdowns before you butted in.

Re:Android

[hairyfeet]

You want to know what is sad? I have gotten to the point that when I buy a game I take its nice shiny box and put it in the closet and just run the "Razr1911" version. Why? Because their shitty ass ring 0 DRM garbage makes a modern X64 OS run like ass, so yet again its the pirate version for the win!

If for any reason I need to install new hardware, or move my game folder to that new drive I just bought without wanting to do a full reinstall, the pirate version "just works" whereas the DRM version is crap. Starting with Bioshock II (which makes you run GFWL, which I've spent more time fighting that POS software service than I have the bad guys in the games) I've simply bought the game and left it in the package. The Razr1911 version doesn't need GFWL, it has a pre hacked version already included that "just works" hassle free. And that doesn't count the fact that so many of the games I buy simply won't run OOTB because the DRM ignore the drive (because I have two burners and no players) and calls me a pirate for daring to have burners in my machine! WTF? who doesn't have burners in their machine today? Hell they are cheaper than the players!

For a good example of how this DRM bites you in the ass I invite you to watch this video (warning language NSFW, but you watch it you'll understand why he is POed) and share it with everybody you know. People don't realize that for many of us piracy isn't about "getting free stuff" it is about being able to use what we paid for because if the DRM don't work there is nothing you can do, as most places won't accept opened returns. As the guy in TFL I posted says "It IS bullshit!" and I have to agree. Nowhere else are you allowed to sell products that are broken by design and fail so often to do as intended.

(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Palmsie]

Which will be in about a week.

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Anonymous Coward]

72 hours.

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Anonymous Coward]

conventional media: HACKERS FIND WAY TO ILLEGALLY DOWNLOAD VIDEOS DESPITE GOOGLE's PROTECTION.

Great, really looking forward to this Catch-22 for power-users.

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Anonymous Coward]

It'll take a week for people to realize they could just torrent the movie instead of paying money for a 24 hour version?

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[tripleevenfall]

"Hello." -Carl Sagan

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Anonymous Coward]

There's always BitTorrent and Gnutella.
Done, and done!
Do I get a trophy? ;)

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[w0mprat]

Was this modded funny because it was a week not 24 hours?

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Palmsie]

Because someone found it funny, just a guess.

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[w0mprat]

Was this modded funny because it said a week? LOL

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, I'll turn in my geek card. What does this comment mean? Google, it does nothing.

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Anonymous Coward]

He's referencing the parent's signature and hoping for a +5. Surely Carl Sagan said hello once before.

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[davester666]

Just suck on this, Amazon (as some people had to root their phone to load the Amazon app store app)!

Re:(Or at least until a workaround is found)

[Forty Two Tenfold]

He said that to alliens.

Rats!

[Anonymous Coward]

And I was totally planning on abandoning Netflix and BitTorrent in favor of yet another half-baked movie service!

3.99 are you out of your mind?

[cultiv8]

I didn't even know there was a such thing as a "Android Movie Market", an honestly don't care, I don't plan to pay $3.99 to "rent" a movie to my phone. I'll be happy once Netflix comes to Droid.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[mariasama16]

Go to http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1076150, there's2 different modified versions of the Netflix.apk which people have reported success with. Root not required.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anonymous Coward]

Netflix is already available for my nexus one straight from the market

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[PPH]

For $3.99, it had better run on my 50" 1080p plasma TV.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anonymous Coward]

Congratulations? The OP clearly stated "Droid" in his post. Netflix is having issues getting on every phone due to implementing DRM support required by the movie industry. I suspect that these modified apk's leave the movies somehow open as a result, which will not make the movie industry happy.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Drathos]

Before you go with the hacked versions, give the original apk a shot. Works on my Droid running CM7. Got it from xda-dev before the hacked versions were posted (it's also posted in the thread with the hacked versions).

I did have it sort of lock up once (kept playing, but wouldn't react to any input and couldn't exit it), but that was the only issue and it's worked fine since.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anonymous Coward]

Already did, https://market.android.com/details?id=com.netflix.mediaclient

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Killerchronic]

I can honestly wait till i get home before i feel the need to rent a film on any device. I'm kinda one that needs a fullsize tv not a 4inch screen to watch and enjoy something, especially if its going to be costing me to rent it.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anonymous Coward]

works on 5 android devices right now, including the 2 year old Nexus One

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[xlsior]

Netflix is already on the droid, although they only support half a dozen different phones. Works like a charm on my HTC Incredible, though.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[jareth-0205]

For $3.99, it had better run on my 50" 1080p plasma TV.

Well, given quite a lot of the higher end phones come with HDMI now, there's a pretty good chance.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anonymous Coward]

For $3.99, it had better run on my 50" 1080p plasma TV.

You can connect a mini-HDMI to HDMI cable from many phones/tablets to your setup so it will run there.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[oakgrove]

Here's a video of some guy showing off his OG Droid. If you look carefully, the first app he fires up is netflix.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anonymous Coward]

First thing, it's Honeycomb, so it's not a phone, it's a tablet.

Second thing, this:
http://theoatmeal.com/blog/apps

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Archangel Michael]

My phone (DX) has HDMI out, but only runs at 720. Just because it is HDMI doesn't mean 1080p. Other phones may run at 1080i, however I would suspect that most do not.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[jareth-0205]

Well that's a limitation of the phone that you decided to buy, not the service...

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Anthony Mouse]

No actual users care anything about whether the movie industry is happy.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[ActionDesignStudios]

Wow, thanks for the tip -- I was waiting to install it as I didn't really have time lately to hack and play around with it but it installed and works great on my CDMA HTC Desire!

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Adm.Wiggin]

It's on the market, too:
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.netflix.mediaclient

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Drathos]

Unfortunately, it does not allow you to install on "incompatible" devices, which the Droid is one of, from the web market. Eventually, Netflix may open the app up for more devices, but until then you have to go to alternate sources to get it. And when they open up more devices, I doubt the Droid will be one of them since it is a very old device (was end-of-lifed almost a year ago and most people who got it will be up for upgrades soon) with much tighter hardware constraints (only 256MB of RAM being the big one).

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[Adm.Wiggin]

Ah, I just assumed that since they're letting me install it on my ancient G1 (both from the web interface and from the market on the phone directly) that it was openly available. Wonder why it's allowed for the G1 but not the Droid? I am running Gingerbread, but that definitely isn't the only issue here, especially since it force closes as soon as I run the actual app.

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[FredFredrickson]

I've got a moto droid with cyanogenmod 6 (the latest 6 stable release, i forget which) and the modified netflix apk works wonders. Don't hold your breath for them to release for droid 1, i don't think anybody loves us anymore :(

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[FredFredrickson]

I hate that artificial limit. Netflix works like a dream on the droid! Why not let it out with minimum requirements and let us decide whether or not to use it!

Re:3.99 are you out of your mind?

[jwhitener]

The official Netflix app is in the android market right now.

I did have an issue with my HTC Incredible though. When Netflix installed, it upgrade flash. For some reason, the phone then started reporting low space, despite having plenty of phone and SD card space. After searching, other people said that uninstalling Netflix and then reinstalling (which would not upgrade Flash since it would already be at the correct version) fixed the issue. I tried that, and so far, everything is working fine.

Re:Crap.

[RobbieCrash]

Google's Android Market != Android

Google dictating the terms of the Android Market being limited does not mean that Android is closed any more than Amazon requiring you to have an Amazon account to use their market does.

Obviously required by the studios

[Edmund Blackadder]

For all the idiots that are going to complain about Google reneging on their openness promises this was obviously required by the content owners. There is no way the studios will allow any of their precious precious movies to run on a device without them being absolutely certain that they know where the data goes from the network connection to the screen and they can ensure nobody copies it.

Believe me, I know. I run Linux and there is no way to get any of the legal paid for movie services on my computer. iTunes does not work, Netflix does not work, the Amazon thing does not work. (I can only get free services like Hulu).

So it is not Google's fault, Google has no choice about it. In fact they are to be commended on convincing the studios to release their movies on Android at all, because I am sure Android's open source scares the hell out of the studios.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

You can rent movies/use Netflix on a jailbroken iPhone. How is it the studios that are requiring this?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[king neckbeard]

I really wish Big Content would get some kind of a clue. Stopping a legit method does not stop other methods from working

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[symbolset]

Once again the studios are #winning by making it harder to give them money than to just download the movie you want in an open format. [/sarcasm]

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Much like the DRM in iTunes was Apple's fault, but DRM on an Android device is to be commended.

It's hilarious watching the Android fanboi's falling over themselves to defend this. Their ability to spin their own reality would make an Apple fanboi proud...

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[rrossman2]

You're an idiot.. you can rent movies/use Netflix on a rooted or non-rooted Android. Just like you can use Netflix on a non-jail broken iPhone.

The issue is the studios and the license for the Movie Market. Just like Netflix doesn't *always* have the same movies.. they get added and removed as the license agreements with the studios change/expire, etc.

Just read this article here for a freakin idea of how the studios control the show:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/23/netflix-loses-dexter-californication_n_839577.html

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Correction:

Amazon's video streaming DOES work in Linux. It's flash-based. I've used it. Netflix does not work because it requires silverlight (and moonlight doesn't work).

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, yes it is entirely their fault.

They said "Android will be open", if that means they have to say "Sorry we cannot give you streaming movies but we did say it was open and the movie industry have said that means we cannot do it." then so be it.

The current situation is that "Android is open*"

* for a given value of "open", terms and conditions apply, may not be able to use all features if you really are open.

Had they said that from the beginning "We will be mostly open

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Kjella]

Personally I don't understand what they think would be different. Look at TPB today. What would TPB look like if they dropped DRM? Oh, exactly the same because it's all there anyway. It's like they're all dreaming that some day they'll find a DRM that works and manage to secure every link. Or that "casual pirates" haven't heard of the Internet. You'd have to be blind, deaf and dumb not to have found it. Sigh...

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Android is very open. That doesn't mean that all apps for it will also be open. If you don't understand that then you have no basis for judgment.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[theurge14]

So basically all the Android users who made fun of iOS users for ages are up in arms because Android continues to follow down the iOS path.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[betterunixthanunix]

For all the idiots that are going to complain about Google reneging on their openness promises this was obviously required by the content owners

How does that change the fact that Google is reneging on their promises?

We criticized Google for filtering search results in China, so why should we not be critical in this case?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Fnord666]

There is no way the studios will allow any of their precious precious movies to run on a device without them being absolutely certain that they know where the data goes from the network connection to the screen and they can ensure nobody copies it.

You know, high tech devices like DVD players for example.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

The Amazon video on demand service works fine on Linux. I'm running Arch Linux and have used it to watch movies off Amazon for a while now.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[wvmarle]

The obvious other choice Google has is to NOT provide such service. That should be a realistic alternative.

Or will really everyone suddenly buy an iPhone at twice the price of an Android phone just to watch movies? So not having a movie market, would that really dent their competitiveness? That market is probably US-only anyway.

Or will Android users simply resort to piracy to get their movies on their phones instead? In which case the movie companies lose out more than when there would be an unrestricted streaming option.

This all keeping in mind that DRM in music is all but dead already (all it really did was give iTunes absolute power over the record companies). Makes me wonder more and more why they keep trying with movies, books, games...

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[WorBlux]

DRM isn't about stopping piracy, (theres always the analog hole) it's about taking away fair use and turning the world into one where pay per view is universal.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Svartalf]

Considering that they've done the Cloud Music storage deal without licenses, I don't buy that line of reasoning.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[headLITE]

Movie DVD encryption was broken twelve years ago but that doesn't mean they didn't try.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[friedman101]

Believe me, I know. I run Linux and there is no way to get any of the legal paid for movie services on my computer. iTunes does not work, Netflix does not work, the Amazon thing does not work. (I can only get free services like Hulu).

I also run Linux and Amazon's video and mp3 services work just fine for me. The former requires flash which works well enough on linux, the latter even has a native linux binary

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess Linux isn't open then because there exist proprietary closed Nvidia drivers for it.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[syousef]

For all the idiots that are going to complain about Google reneging on their openness promises this was obviously required by the content owners.

Google then should not have made a promise it could not reasonably be expected to keep. No one forced them to. How does this make people who complain idiots exactly?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[devent]

"So it is not Google's fault, Google has no choice about it."

Yeah right, Google could just say NO. But than Google would lose a few million bucks, but why do I care? They had a choice and they choose to just accept the terms of the movie studios. So why shouldn't I be pissed at Google and the movie studios?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Back in the day I believed that DRM was there there to stop the "casual" copying. Now that I saw that my 14 years old little brother had installed a bittorent client on his laptop on his own (and had plenty of series such as Simpsons downloaded), I guess DRM won't even stop that anymore as people become more aware of the unlimited sharing possibilities that Internet provides.

Well, perhaps it looks nice on the figures when Big Companies pour billions of dollars to DRM.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Edmund Blackadder]

Sorry I may have been mistaken. I may have just had problems with flash when i tried.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[thegarbz]

So tell me again where they promised to make their movie platform open? Or are we still just extrapolating Android to mean all of Google?

Android is still open as was promised. Try yourself:

mkdir mydroid
cd mydroid
repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git
repo sync

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

So it is not Google's fault, Google has no choice about it.

Google has a choice not to boost an industry it doesn't agree with. Unless it does agree with the movie industry.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Paradise Pete]

So it is not Google's fault, Google has no choice about it.

It doesn't really matter whose fault it is, does it? There's been a certain expectation about Android phones and unfortunately that expectation is becoming less and less attainable.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[cyclomedia]

Blinkbox in the UK is flash-streaming, works fine on OpenSUSE. Though probably not for long now that I've mentioned it and the MAFIAA radar picks up my comment. Sorry.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[icebraining]

Cloud Music, unless I'm mistaken, doesn't have its own library of music that you buy/rent, it only lets you store what's already yours.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[gl4ss]

"So tell me again where they promised to make their movie platform open?"

hmm. how about the first press gathering they kept to announce the whole thing? that's the first time they spinned about being totally open and customiziable(though as soon as info about dalvik came to light, couple of days after, it was quite obvious it wasn't going to be like they said and instead that it was essentially savaje inspired system hacked together quickly).
basically what they forgot to mention that it's open to device manufacturers which is a really, really, limited club. and to even them it's open only to a point. knowing a workaround from looking at the sources doesn't matter if you're unable to deploy the solution because of politics(of being google approved).

but this is a drm thing with the movies. how they're trying to differentiate rooted and non-rooted androids.. well, that's a problem for google right now. what they have now done has been this: promised to have working drm to content providers. HAHA. one thing about android apps is that they can never be even reasonably secure(from reverse engineering).

and right now, what I'd like, would be honeycomb android-x86(for development purposes), but I suppose it's a bit hard to come up with it while google is sitting on the source.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Hint: Google could just say no. So could you.

Android is as open as before. Jailbroken Android phones get no movies from the movie store, just as before (when there wasn't a movie store. If Google said no, there would also be no movies from the movie store, just like if you say no to the movie store, you'll get no movies from it - jailbroken phone or not.

When all of the solutions give the exact same result, why is it a problem that Google didn't pick that specific solution?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[msauve]

You don't know the difference between an OS platform, and an application which runs on it.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

You likely have some other problem. I use Ubuntu LTS 32-bit and 64-bit, and Amazon Instant video works fine on both of them.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Junta]

Funny, people can play this content on their personal computers. I too am dissatisfied with Linux support, but anyone claiming they don't support Linux it's due to DRM is full of it. So long as they let a Windows PC (which gives the users administrative access) play back the content, the argument is moot.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[peppepz]

Google : Sony = Rooted Android : Linux on PS3

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

basically what they forgot to mention that it's open to device manufacturers which is a really, really, limited club.

Yeah and of course all the people capable of typing the commands I posted above. Really. Try it! You could I don't know make a whole new version of Android and port it to whatever phone you want. But no Android isn't that open, is it?

Learn the difference between a platform and an application. Only one of the two was promised to be open, and as someone who is currently running CyanogenMod on my Galaxy S which I bought from a carrier like any other, I really don't know what you're whinging about.

and right now, what I'd like, would be honeycomb android-x86(for development purposes), but I suppose it's a bit hard to come up with it while google is sitting on the source.

Google have announced their release schedule. Don't like it, fork it and make your own. It is opensource after all. I too feel like every character that Linus Torvalds types should be separately checked into the repo so that we can see him code live, but imagine the bugs. The release date for the source is set. You can wait just like the rest of us.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Dwonis]

Seriously, the only reason I use Android is so that I don't have to put up with the crap that iOS users put up with. If I wanted iOS, I'd get a bloody iPad.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[lucian1900]

Indeed. They had the chance to give me a way to pay them. Unless paid content is higher quality and more convenient than free content, people obviously won't bother.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Kynde]

For all the idiots that are going to complain about Google reneging on their openness promises this was obviously required by the content owners.

That's a load of crap.

Google could've said no. Just as they should've said no when it was china doing the asking.

"You want to sell movies in Android? Then sell to those who rooted the devices, too, because it has jack to do with piracy. You fight your piracy wars on your own turf and where it has considerably less collateral damage to legit user experience."

Having a spine when it counts is what not being evil is all about. Being not evil only when it's parallel to profit, is not being not evil.

I really need and use the features that rooting the device provides. Without it, I'd be a lot less inclined to even buy Androids. Denying that in the name of DRM is just ridiculous. And Google should've said so.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[RogerWilco]

Meh, in the Netherlands none of those work, not on Windows, Mac, or iOs either. "This content is not available in your country"

Well, if nobody is selling it to me, then I have only two options left, either not watch it, or "find it". If I'm lucky there might be a Region 2 DVD release at some point. I really don't understand these guys.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[idontgno]

Well, by default, what gets stored into cloud is the music you buy from Amazon Music. So, yeah, it does have a library of music you buy (Amazon Music), and you do store stuff you buy from them into it.Other than that, I don't know much about that Cloud Storage doohickey. I don't use it. I prefer to keep my media "purchases" (mostly "Free tune of the day" non-purchases) in my own mass storage, thankyouverymuch.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[icebraining]

That's Amazon's, not Google's. I don't think you can buy music through Google, can you?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been running Amazon Instant Video on Ubuntu 11.04 with no problems since it was in beta. Every week Amazon charges me $1.89 for the latest episode of Doctor Who and I fire it up on my Linux desktop. (And yes, the full-screen flash plays fine.)

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Great, I'd like to do that with Honeycomb. Got a link for me ?

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[idontgno]

I lost that context. That's a useful distinction.

However, in practice, it's also a distinction that's easy to lose. My Google-powered Amazon-shopping Overlord distracted me.

No, as far as I can tell, there's no Android music market. Yet. (How mad would Amazon be if their market got edged out by an Android-brand market run by Google?)

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Lemmy Caution]

An Android fan doesn't need to defend this: it has almost nothing to do with Android as an actual OS. A Google fan might have more 'splainin' to do, but that would hardly be the first time that Google fell short of the image that is often created of it, or made compromises to get deals done.

An Apple fan can talk little solace in any of this. Apple's ecosystem remains far more controlled and un-open.

Me? I'm sad that there are fans at all. People treat brands and corporations as if they were churchs and sports teams, combined. It's pathetic: part of the process by which humanity has become re-infantilized, dependent, trapped in permanent childhood.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[Anonymous Coward]

The link is the same. There is a release date too. Sit your arse down and wait for it like the rest of us.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[pjr.cc]

Wow, i could not have expressed it better myself.

TBH, it wont bother me one iota that i cant rent movies on an android phone, that google bowed to its is exceedingly disappointing.

Re:Obviously required by the studios

[amplex]

I was gunna say, I've been using playon to watch netflix on my g tablet which is running vegantab (2.3) rooted.. it sure does work..

Wont take long to circumvent I'm sure.

[Kenja]

Just look at how they got NetFlix running on a rooted Nook Color. I'm sure there will be a work around. Not that I'm going to care one way or another since I dont see the point in buying DRM heavy single platform movies.

Re:Wont take long to circumvent I'm sure.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, NetFlix supports the fucking Nook but still not Linux? Fucking shit-balls. Hell, there's ANDROID and no Linux support. Talk about irony.

Since you have root...

[boondaburrah]

There's probably a way to only allow the app to see certain things, blinding it to whatever would give away rooted-ness.

In any case, Netflix works on rooted devices, so it's not like there's missing functionality. In theory, Amazon Instant Video should work as well (with flash player) Other than that, I'd need a bigger SD card to fit movies transferred from my computer.

Also, I personally still can't see why I want to watch movies on a 4-inch screen. (or a screen I have to hold, for that matter (tablets))

Re:Since you have root...

[drinkypoo]

Also, I personally still can't see why I want to watch movies on a 4-inch screen. (or a screen I have to hold, for that matter (tablets))

it's for travel. If we could simply get some kind of legal acknowledgement that all format-shifting is legal then your tivo or whatever would transcode your favorite shows and load them onto your devices for you so you could watch 'em on the train to work or what have you.

Obviously this is useful for only a subset of the population... but it's significant

Re:Since you have root...

[demonlapin]

Watching movies on a 4-inch screen is pretty awful, though SD television is fine. On a 10-inch screen like the iPad, though, Netflix looks good. I'd rather watch it in my living room, of course, but when you're traveling, you take what you can get. Thankfully, my laptop has an HDMI port...

Re:Since you have root...

[bemymonkey]

Also, I personally still can't see why I want to watch movies on a 4-inch screen. (or a screen I have to hold, for that matter (tablets))

Travel, crapper, public transport, park, beach (or just outside in general)... there are lots of situations where being able to watch movies on a 3-12" screen is useful/fun, but in order to experience them, you need to GO OUTSIDE. ;)

Re:Since you have root...

[boondaburrah]

Ah, but I do go outside. Out there, I don't need any screens.

Re:Since you have root...

[Ol Olsoc]

some hints:

Crapper? - don't use your phone. Maybe get some of that yummy fecal goodness on the phone. Maybe someone might think you're there to take piccy's to entertain yourself at home later or put online. Bad bad idea. Leave the phone alone for a few minutes. You'll survive.

Park, beach or just outside in general? - try just enjoying being outside. If you absolutely have to watch a movie in the park, that is seriously pathetic. You might meet some nice people, maybe make some friends if you put the damn thing away for a moment.

Let the accusations begin

[parallel_prankster]

Before we go all crazy on Google, we have to understand that Google has a business to run and any movie marketplace site like this will have to come up with notices like these to even get started. I don't think the fault is completely with Google on this one. It is the movie making production companies that want to enforce these kinda things to avoid piracy.

Re:Let the accusations begin

[Anonymous Coward]

just because it's a business doesn't mean the consumer should just shut up. part of capitalism is the business listening to what customers want.. that can't happen if the customers are epxected to stfu. it is not an entitlement to make your expectations known.

Re:Let the accusations begin

[magamiako1]

If (customers_who_want_movies > customers_who_want_rooted_phones) then
phone.lock();
movies.play();
end

Re:Let the accusations begin

[Anonymous Coward]

It is the movie making production companies that want to enforce these kinda things to avoid piracy.

Which goes to show that movie company executives are utterly retarded. They make it artificially hard to legitimately buy content and expect this behaviour to discourage piracy? They are idiots (the fact they try to enforce region restrictions and localised markets is also a pretty good indicator).

Would anybody skilled enough to jailbreak a device be stupid enough to use this service in the first place? The MAFIAAs treat us like shit. They are source of corruption and degredation of service and consumer rights. You'd be just as dumb as them to pay them anything.

Re:Let the accusations begin

[Junta]

I don't care *who* 'wants' it, Google is going along with it (and has been going along with it from even before movie studios were involved). The whole reality that one has to root/jailbreak your phone means the vendor is not being completely open.

Though less 'open', WebOS at least gives end users more sanctioned control over their device. You enter a well-documented code to enable the option to provide root shell and sideload applications. Too bad they have not seen success in the market, *but* I would encourage people seeking a device that gives them control to consider it a haven from iOS, Android, BalckBerry, and WP7 devices. I personally will only buy a phone that needs such BS as 'jailbreaking' when I simply have no option left. I don't care how 'easy' it is *unless* the manufacturer comes right out and officially says "here you go, we have no intent on restricting you in the future, have fun" (see http://developer.palm.com/blog/2011/05/10-reasons-for-geeks-to-love-hp-webos/ number 2). I don't want to be stuck in a fight with the company I gave money to for the duration of my ownership of it.

OpenMoko also is open *and* gives ultimate control, but unfortunately is a pretty impractical platform for a lot of the stuff people want to do with their handheld devices.

Re:Let the accusations begin

[ChunderDownunder]

I'd definitely look at webos if I they were for sale in my country.

A question for n900 owners would be whether they expect Nokia to actually distribute a successor. If not, whether they're planning to port Meego to rooted Androids (instead of, say, cyanogenmod.)

Root Knowledge

[SirCowMan]

How do they know it is rooted? That would be the bigger concern to me.

Re:Root Knowledge

[fidget42]

That's east, they ask the OS to do something that only a rooted phone can do, like running a process that requires root privileges.

Re:Root Knowledge

[betterunixthanunix]

Why would the OS respond to such a request?

Re:Root Knowledge

[mjwx]

Why would the OS respond to such a request?

Because it is asked.

My understanding of Root on Android (BTW, I've rooted every Android phone I've had) is that user intervention is required when a program asks for root privileges (I.E. you have to tap "accept").

Not knowing how Google intends to detect rooted phones, I'd say logically, the easiest workaround is to tap "deny" when asked for super user access.

In the case of third party DRM requirements, Google tends to do the minimum amount possible to get it working, then not worry about people that get around it.

Not that this matters to me, I live in Oz and regional restrictions will ensure that I wont get this service until 2034 and a US$2.99 movie will cost A$3450.00.

Re:Root Knowledge

[blackraven14250]

Google can probably tell without doing that. I can only imagine that they'd just see if Superuser or any of the other root programs were installed on the phone they'd know. They could probably also look for the changes to the phone's config.

Re:Root Knowledge

[Anonymous Coward]

So, to stream movies, the 'trick' is to say 'no' to the popup asking for root privileges for the streaming app.

Re:Root Knowledge

[.tekrox]

>I live in Oz and regional restrictions will ensure that I wont get this service until 2034 and a US$2.99 movie will cost A$3450.00.
I think you forgot to factor in the data charges.

I supposed by 2034 Vodafone might have a usable network at the least.

Services that work with GNU/Linux? Just one! Amazo

[Anonymous Coward]

It is sad that there is only one major movie service that really works with GNU/Linux. Maybe two. Amazon primarily. Hulu second. Now you also have allot of television sites and similar that work. But most are just a rehash of movies and TV shows. Comparatively the big three or four are not doing enough to support GNU/Linux.

great move there...

[CTU]

Remove an option for people with rooted phones to legally download movies. No wonder piracy is so common, at least they can get the content they want without jumping through hoops, well in this case it is just unlikeable restrictions. Still, That would be funny if it weren’t so sad.

It's OK

[JanneM]

I don't have a rooted device, but I'm not going to access the Movie Market anyway (let me guess it's not available where I live; I haven't bothered to find out).

I see a movie about two or three times a year. When I do, we go to a movie house - big screen, plush seats, expectant crowd - and make an evening of it. Movie, then dinner somewhere, perhaps a beer or two someplace. Part of a full nights entertainment.

Watching a movie - made for big-screen immersion - by myself on a small screen, with distractions all around - no thanks, I'll rather do without.

Re:It's OK

[amiga3D]

Exactly. I can't watch more than a few minutes of video on a tiny little screen like that. It's not fun. It's not entertaining. I've got a 47" HDTV to watch video entertainment on. They can keep their mobile video crap.

Re:It's OK

[Nikker]

I have to second that. Once you have a decent setup with a nice screen it's hard to watch something longer than a couple minutes on a 4" screen. Having a tv with built in wifi would be a good start but being able to manage the functions via remote. Make mobile rentals just like renting a movie, your phone is in the same area as the tv and it plays what ever you have access to, NetFlix, Hulu,etc. It would be like bringing relatively large collections on your mobile and being able to watch them on any screen you are close to. What would be really sweet would be if manufacturers would just add a short-range radio that can handle 1080p and switch through inputs like we do with video1,2,etc. You could literally sit down at any equipped monitor and run a desktop off it maybe in a dual screen setup. /rant

Re:It's OK

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently you don't travel. I watch movies and TV shows on my Android all the time because it helps pass the time. If I buy a movie it gets ripped and I never use the disc again. I use torrents to watch TV, especially shows that don't air in the US. They can't call me a lost sale because I don't have any money to begin with and if I did I wouldn't be giving it to the MAFIAA

Re:It's OK

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like those people who download a crappy cam rip, and then complain that it was a shitty movie.
Meanwhile I, having seen it in a large THX cinema, with snacks and friends, thought it was great.

I looove such people. Because no matter how much you tell them they're stupid... you don't feel bad. ;)

Re:It's OK

[JanneM]

I travel quite a lot. Books - paper or on-screen - are fine during travel. TV shows, made as they are for small screens, work fine too. But not movies. I save those for when I can go see them on a big screen together with other people.

Re:It's OK

[Anonymous Coward]

they dont care about you. you arent their target market

Re:It's OK

[gl4ss]

you would do it to _escape_ distractions, like some screaming kid in an airplane.

Re:It's OK

[jareth-0205]

Presumably this would be an ideal use for that HDMI-out that's on most high-end phones these days...

Re:It's OK

[jareth-0205]

I'd agree, for that price it's not much use to me just on the phone screen apart from convenience... except, tablets have perfectly well-specced screens for film viewing, and most phones and tablets now come with HDMI-out. I could easily see myself buying a video on my phone and then plugging it into my tv to watch.

Re:It's OK

[thomst]

I don't have a rooted device, but I'm not going to access the Movie Market anyway (let me guess it's not available where I live; I haven't bothered to find out).

I see a movie about two or three times a year. When I do, we go to a movie house - big screen, plush seats, expectant crowd - and make an evening of it. Movie, then dinner somewhere, perhaps a beer or two someplace. Part of a full nights entertainment.

I see a movie about 4-5 times a week ... and I _never_ go to a "movie house" to watch them. Instead, I do so in my living room, on my modest, big-screen TV with the sound running through my stereo.

See, even if I could afford to go to a "movie house", I wouldn't do so, because, at least here in the U.S., people seem to have entirely lost the social skills necessary to allow me to actually _enjoy_ watching a movie with a crowd of strangers. Somehow, it has become acceptable for selfish idiots to yammer to their seatmates all the way through a movie, shout advice to the characters on the screen, and receive and _make_ cell phone calls from their seats - and the theater management does _nothing_ to stop this oafish behavior. As a result, what once was a genuine pleasure has been completely ruined for me, because my fellow customers' selfishness very effectively prevents me from enjoying the immersion that used to be the key attraction of going out to the movies.

Fuck that noise. Theater owners have enough muscle to force directors to cut their movies' running times to under two hours, but somehow they lack the nuts to eject disruptive customers? I call bullshit on that, and I protest that hypocrisy by NEVER going to see a movie in a theater. Does that mean I miss seeing first-run movies? Well, yeah ... but that's a trade off I'm willing to make. After all, there are lots and lots and LOTS of non-first-run movies I have yet to watch - and plenty of classics I'm delighted to watch again.

So, "Watching a movie - made for big-screen immersion - in a crowd, in a theater, with yammering idiots distracting me all around - no thank, I'd rather watch it on a small(er) screen, with my wife.

FTFY

Re:It's OK

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll change your self-centered view of the world when you have kids.

Re:It's OK

[nicolastheadept]

HTC have a thing to plug into your TV and stream video from Desire HD to it (and other DLNA devices), only up to 720p though http://www.htcaccessorystore.com/uk/p_htc_item.aspx?i=208287

Re:It's OK

[Ol Olsoc]

Or the annoying idiot who runs into you while he's watching a movie on his phone.

Superuser.apk

[Kral_Blbec]

I'm curious how they plan on detecting if it is rooted or not. The easiest rooting method for my phone (if your using stock roms) or any custom rom you install on your own, uses the Superuser app to request root access anytime an app wants it. If they just try to run a root command, its going to pop up asking to allow or not and all you have to do is disallow. Blammo. Your phone looks like its unrooted.

Re:Superuser.apk

[rrossman2]

Couldn't they just search for the most common locations of the superuser app, or watch to see if a superuser app pid comes up? I mean it wouldn't be that hard to find out if the phone has been rooted

Re:Superuser.apk

[hedwards]

I'm wondering if they're going to be making a distinction between rooting and unlocking. My Nexus One was unlocked using just the stock tools that Google provided through HTC for that specific purpose. There's no reason why I can't just re-lock the phone and none but Google and myself is the wiser.

It seems to me that given that I didn't need to download any cracks that it shouldn't count against me. Owners of handsets that needed to be rooted in order to be unlocked may be in a different situation. Although they too ought to be allowed to access the marketplace.

But, at this point, I'd like to see some sort of citation from the blogger that's making these claims. I can't help but notice that the blurb about the author says something about an iPhone review site. Not that that means there's something nefarious about it, but it does lead one to wonder whether the information is credible given the only citation is to another blog that doesn't itself reference anything to back the allegation up. Sounds like it could just be a case of FUD or a misunderstanding.

Re:Superuser.apk

[complete loony]

if (new File("/bin/su").exists()) ...

Re:Superuser.apk

[jonescb]

A rooted phone has the file /system/xbin/su

Why would you watch a movie on your phone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, are movies and tv shows that important that you can't walk out of the house without watching a movie? Last thing I want to worry about when driving at night is if the dude driving next to me is on the phone, texting, emailing, and now watching a freaking movie.

Re:Why would you watch a movie on your phone?

[compro01]

Some of the world rides a bus, train, or flies on an airplane and wants to have a TV show or movie to watch while doing so.

Re:Why would you watch a movie on your phone?

[mattr]

My HTC Evo has HDMI output. Not that I would use it, but I could see impulse buying a movie while walking home and popping on the tube, if the resolution is good enough.

Which is not to say that

[jra]

Google's Android crew isn't *privately* rooting for you to find a way to do it anyway.

Just shut up about it already, so you don't get them in dutch with the studios, alright?

Little overlap

[Bifurcati]

I would expect that the people who know how to root their phone are also unlikely to pay $3.99 to rent a movie - I can't imagine there's a lot of overlap or heartache here amongst the users.

On the other hand, these are also the most tech savvy users who might actually be swayed by a convenient and cheap (and legal) movie downloading system. Certainly I used to buy music from a certain Russian site because the cost was worth the convenience of high quality music on demand.

Re:Little overlap

[Reed Solomon]

That's actually a bit insulting. You're essentially saying people who root their phones because they don't like to be told by the corrupt phone companies what to do that they are criminals? movie pirates?

A lot of people pay for netflix out of convenience. It is a reasonably priced service. Why would someone who roots their phone not want it?

Re:Little overlap

[Anonymous Coward]

As we learned from the humble indie bundle the folks rooting their phones would indeed be unlikely to pay $3.99 to rent a movie. If the same trends hold, they'd likely pay closer to $15.

Re:Little overlap

[Bifurcati]

Apologies if I offended; you're right, perhaps that wasn't a fair comparison. I still think there would be a correlation - maybe not as strong, though?
More to the point, in Australia we can rent physical DVDs from $2.95 (new release) overnight. On Tuesdays, all DVDs are $1. If one of the intentions of these sort of stores is to make inroads against piracy, you'd have to be working at beating these price points, even with the convenience of home based downloads.

Re:Little overlap

[Anonymous Coward]

Except if Netflix's business model were $4 per movie, they would be a lot less popular. In any respect, I think he is right to a degree, anyone who knows how to root their phone (and many who don't), will know that there are many options out there, some free, some expensive, some legal and some illegal. Given the options, I don't think they will go with Android marketplace beyond getting the Netflix app.

Re:Little overlap

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering there are redboxes everywhere... $1 overnight dvds $1.50 overnight bds with constant discounts, seems silly to be confined to pay $4 for something similar. I do subscribe to netflix because it is cheap and easy, and use redbox for newer movies I may want to watch. Cheap and easy, most of these rentals seem too locked down and expensive... thus expensive and not-so-easy.

Re:Little overlap

[dmuir]

Almost. You also have to factor in time and money spent going to the rental shop. Petrol isn't cheap! That said, I still think paying $6 on iTunes for a new release is a wee bit steep.

Re:Little overlap

[demonlapin]

People who root their phones are likely to have the technical know-how to be able to pirate movies safely and effectively, even if they don't actually do it, so your comparison was apt. In the US, if you can wait for movies to make it to Redbox (vending machine for DVDs, basically, with a 30-day delay between initial release for purchase and availability at the Redbox), they're $1/day, so $4 movies aren't likely to be big sellers.

Re:Little overlap

[gravis777]

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard. I rooted my phone because it was still at 2.1, my phone company never pushed out the promised update (only shipped it on the same model if you bought a new phone), and it had so much stock crap in it, the phone was unusable. I rooted my phone to run CM7, not to get pirated software. I still buy apps from the Android Marketplace and from Amazon.

Just because you CAN run pirated apps on a rooted phone doesn't mean that that is the only reason people root their phones.

Re:Little overlap

[Anonymous Coward]

See my second comment below; I suspect that there's a correlation between people who root their phones and know how to (and, indeed, do) download torrents, but maybe I overstated it here.

I would expect the case to be far less severe with apps given that they are reasonably priced and distributed well; without any numbers I expect far fewer people pirate apps than music or movies.

(And not to be narky, but that was "the stupidest thing [you] ever heard?" Really? My comment, right there? If so, I'm proud to have stooped to a new level.)

Re:Little overlap

[Anonymous Coward]

You're assuming that they would pirate content, rather then just not watch movies on their phone.

Re:Little overlap

[Kynde]

I would expect that the people who know how to root their phone are also unlikely to pay $3.99 to rent a movie - I can't imagine there's a lot of overlap or heartache here amongst the users.

Why would even say that, because that's exactly the kind of crap they put out.

Rooting an Android device has precious little to do with movie piracy. Except now, that they making it so, having the audacity to ask me to unroot to access a movie market.

This has precious little effect on those who pirate. The only ones this has any effect again is those that would be customers. And those are being denied of root access to their phone. Some may unroot, others will download them elsewhere.

This is just as assbackwards as copy protection. Make life more difficult for paying customers and have no relevance what so ever to those who download illegal copies.

Re:Little overlap

[Anonymous Coward]

I would expect that the people who know how to root their phone are also unlikely to pay $3.99 to rent a movie - I can't imagine there's a lot of overlap or heartache here amongst the users.

Why? What are you assuming about people that root that makes you believe that? Whatever it, it's unlikely to be true. I happen to pay for my content, and I've rooted my devices to have better control over how I can use it. Netflix on the Nook Color is a thing of beauty.

Re:Little overlap

[Archangel Michael]

No, he's saying that people with a rooted phone won't care about the restrictions placed on a marketplace by Google at the request of Big Entertainment (BE) conglomerates. They will get their movies anyways, just not pay for them.

What the BE guys don't realize is that they aren't stopping anyone, and in fact, may be encouraging the very behavior they are trying to punish. Rooted phones aren't the source of pirated media. DVD, and Bluray discs are. The only thing DRM does is break things for normal users. Pirates Don't have DRM issues, they've long since bypassed DRM.

Re:Services that work with GNU/Linux? Just one! Am

[Anonymous Coward]

Comparatively the big three or four are not doing enough to support GNU/Linux.

why should they?

catch-22

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't run Gingerbread (or Froyo or Honeycomb) unless I root my device, so it's an intersection of moot points.

If you run a rooted phone

[Laebshade]

You are unlikely to care about Android Movie Market. So what's the problem?

I certainly don't care.

Re:If you run a rooted phone

[rockman_x_2002]

This was what I said over on Gizmodo when the story broke there.

In all honesty, if you have a rooted phone, you already know how to stream your own movies from your PC to your phone, or have some other method of getting movies ripped from optical media and into a format that works quite well on your phone (which is either just as good or better than the convenience of downloading through the Android Movie Market in the first place).

Re:If you run a rooted phone

[Anonymous Coward]

The choice between rooted phone (freedom) and DRMed phone is trivial.

Re:If you run a rooted phone

[Anonymous Coward]

It is still relevant. The MAFIAAs try to use piracy as an excuse to lobby/bribe for laws that restrict our rights every chance they get. Things like this show that a huge chunk of piracy is a direct result of their anti-consumer business practices. The more they pull this stuff, the more arguments we get to show they are full of shit.

Re:If you run a rooted phone

[lucian1900]

The point is, many people would pay for DRM-free, fairly priced downloads. I sure would. As long as they don't offer that, I won't buy from them.

Re:Services that work with GNU/Linux? Just one! Am

[rrossman2]

Netflix.. seeing how it runs on a lot of Bluray players, TV's, phones, etc that use Linux at the core....

hmmm

[Charliemopps]

I wonder if there's somewhere else to download and watch the movie? Some place that doesn't care how I've configured my OS or my hardware. If there were such a place, one would think the content owners almost want me to go there to get their movie by making it impossible to get the movie directly from them. Ah... if only there were such a place...

A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[aussersterne]

Android is the marketing triumph of the mobile phone age. It demonstrates very clearly that there is tremendous value in the "open" brand. And that's what it is here, make no mistake. Android devices in practice are as open as Ferrari laptops are made by Ferrari.

Let's look at how open they are:

- Carrier locked, walled garden, locked-down out of the box = Little choice, little freedom
- Must root to be able to use important features
- When you root, you are locked out of other important features
- Fewer apps than iOS = Less choice = less freedom
- Less polished user interface, more fragmentation = less flexibility, smaller userbase, less choice = less freedom

iPhone jailbreak == Android root
After jailbreak == You can use all iTunes, Apple App Store, AND alternate sources
Vastly more apps == Vastly more choice, freedom
Less fragmentation, more polish == More ease of use, larger community, more choice, more freedom

In all practical terms, the iOS ecosystem is less restrictive. Somehow, however, the only thing that matters is the branding—the ideological and theoretical terms of the equation. Here somehow Google has managed to brand Android as "open" (despite the above) and this makes all the difference.

As a result, activist geeks and savvy tech users FLOCK to Android and push it to their families and friends, assuring all that this is important because Android is OPEN, while iOS is CLOSED.

They then immediately go about rooting the Android phone as the first order of business and then explain (rationalize) about how not all apps are compatible, rooted phones won't have access to things like movies, may create problems with carriers, etc., but all of this is justified by their OPENNESS... Unlike those poor iOS users that must "jailbreak" their phones.

It's 1984 style doublespeak. In one case, rooting = "open" = good. In another case, rooting = "jailbraking" = evil. It's the same damned act, with the same damned consequences, only in the case of the jailbreak, you end up with more functionality and more choice in the end.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[__aaqvdr516]

I find the best choice is: none of the above.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[exomondo]

- Must root to be able to use important features

like what?

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[gordo3000]

that isn't true. a major difference between jailbreaking and rooting is whether or not the vendor continues to provide you updates. A jailbroken iphone cannot be updated for security or for new features in the OS without possibly losing everything gained from jailbreaking. With jailbreaks, you end up with less functionality in some aspects and more in others and the things you lose can be very consequential.

On the other hand, a rooted android phone does not (generally) run that risk. There is now 1 example of a store you cannot access for now with a rooted android device.

as to your points about polish, your opinion is your opinion but don't turn an argument into a chance to market a device.

as to app count, if this research is reasonable,
http://asia.cnet.com/crave/study-android-to-overtake-ios-app-count-in-july-62208428.htm

then android will have more apps soon (July). And if the graph is reasonably accurate, the pace of android submissions continues to accelerate.

and as we all have read, android marketshare is outstripping iOS by a large clip. Hell, when I got my phone 2 years ago the best choice was an iPhone but even I'm excited to switch from what I've seen. I think the last great benefit to apple is being on AT&T so you can check things online while on the phone, which can be really useful. But I haven't looked to see if other networks support that yet and it isn't an iPhone exclusive.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Rosyna]

With jailbreaks, you end up with less functionality in some aspects and more in others and the things you lose can be very consequential.

On the other hand, a rooted android phone does not (generally) run that risk

Yeah, if you never get updates for your device in the first place, rooting won't make upgrading worse

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Nemyst]

Wow, talk about fanboyism right?

-Carrier lock. Apple has a much harder hand on walled gardens, what with not even allowing "competing" apps very often, and we all know how belowed AT&T is. Plus, Nexus One/S anyone? My S had no branding whatsoever, no carrier lock, I have built-in tethering and wifi tethering, I can choose any app that I could possibly like without any restriction.
-Android is at approximately 360,000 apps (Androlib), while iOS is at roughly 390,000 (148Apps). If you think an 8% difference is enough to make Android the most evil thing ever, just go have fun with Jobs then. I like how 8% is "vast", though, especially considering this is just from the official Android Market.
-Less polished user interface? Matter of taste I guess. I find the Android interface very attractive, and fragmentation is a term invented by deniers. It was called "flexibility" before that. Flexibility to choose how your OS looks and feels, flexibility to pick your applications, launcher, theme, flexibility to do things that the developers might not initially have thought about, flexibility to make your device your device. The fact you can easily develop apps for Android without having to jump through hoops is a bonus, as somebody who knows how to code but has no interest in publishing apps.
-I don't exactly know why you're trying to make Apple look like the underdog here, because they clearly are not. Furthermore, I've never, ever seen anybody considering both rooting good and jailbreaking bad. Either they see both as acceptable/good, or they see both as bad. You're just cherry-picking negative reactions to jailbreaking and positive reactions to rooting to make your case, which is fallacious.

So I'll let you have fun with your conspiracy theories and go back to customizing my Nexus S. Ah, the possibilities!

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[eqisow]

Open means source code. You know, the thing that allows all those great 3rd party firmwares like Cyanogenmod?

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[eqisow]

On T-Mobile (another GSM carrier, admittedly), I've always been able to talk and browse. I didn't even realize other people couldn't do it or that it was a big deal 'til I saw it touted as a feature on some commercial.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Dhalka226]

Carrier locked, walled garden, locked-down out of the box = Little choice, little freedom

Ah, sort of, but not quite. Android is open. Much like a BSD license, when one puts essentially no restrictions on something, one of the things that may happen is that people seek to close it up. You could argue that Google could have gone out of their way to prevent it, but you can hardly blame them for it happening. Ultimately this is just another version of the BSD vs. GPL debate. Whose freedom do you protect?

Further, there are phones and carriers that have these open versions of Android installed, meaning you DO have a choice. Vote with your wallet.

- When you root, you are locked out of other important features

A movie store? Which at this point merely SAYS you're "locked out" of it? Do you not think that somebody will devise a way to have a rooted Android phone go "yeah man, I'm completely locked down! Movie please?" Assuming such is even necessary as we speak.

- Fewer apps than iOS = Less choice = less freedom

Fewer apps = less choice = less freedom eh?

Well, shit. I hope linux users read your post so that they can understand how their operating system has less freedom than Windows. Poor deluded souls!

- Less polished user interface, more fragmentation = less flexibility, smaller userbase, less choice = less freedom

Oh I get it. You're an Apple fanboi.

I didn't particularly agree with anything you had to say, but at least up until now they've been facts (albeit ones spun to your liking). Now you're annointing your opinion as fact. Not only that, you've wandered so far into the realm of ridiculous that I hope you have a fucking rope tied to your waist to find your way back. How good a UI is has to do with user freedom? Give me a break.

Fragmentation? It's an issue -- for developers. Even if we're going to let you have a pass on this one without spinning it in the opposite direction, you've already included it. It means less apps. Maybe.

All of these being simple flaws in your own argument, without making a counter-argument at all and taking most of your points without contention. Obviously it is quite easy to contend pretty much every single one of them if somebody who actually cares about the Android vs. iPhone pissing contest were so inclined.

In short: Your post is nothing but your opinions, presented as facts. In your terms, it is a fiasco in every way.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[ceoyoyo]

Updating the OS. Particularly to a custom version.

That IS the banner feature of "open" Android, isn't it?

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[ceoyoyo]

Nonsense. You're confusing an unlocked iPhone with a jailbroken one. Updated versions of iOS on a given device are often jailbroken as they come out, or very shortly afterward. You don't lose any features at all when you jailbreak.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[MimeticLie]

- Fewer apps than iOS = Less choice = less freedom

Then Windows is logically the most free OS, right?

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[MimeticLie]

It's an issue with current Verizon phones, I believe the explanation was that they use the same radio for voice/data. I think the new LTE phones are going to be able to do both simultaneously.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[SanityInAnarchy]

Let's look at how open they are:

Yes, let's.

- Carrier locked, walled garden, locked-down out of the box = Little choice, little freedom

This is a problem. However, if the existence of these is enough to make Android "not open", then neither is Linux, BSD, or, well, anything. There are TVs which run Linux, and they sure as hell don't let you install anything you want on them. Those TVs are not open, therefore Linux isn't? Is that what you're saying?

- Must root to be able to use important features

Which?

- When you root, you are locked out of other important features

Again, which? The only one we know of so far is a single video store, far from the only video store. If that's "important" to you, I feel sorry for how empty your life must be.

- Fewer apps than iOS = Less choice = less freedom

Even if this were true, and it's not clear it is, the apps which we do have are barely restricted even in the official market, and you don't have to buy them from the official market. In fact, unless the carrier locks the device, there's nothing stopping you from installing software from other sources, and you don't need root to do so.

See if this helps: Let's suppose that all iOS had was fart apps, while Android has both fart apps and actually useful apps. Would iOS then have "more freedom" because it had 10 billion fart apps, while Android only had a few hundred useful apps that were actually unique and useful?

And I haven't even addressed the massive amount of additional freedom developers get. I mean, let's start with, I don't need to buy a Mac to develop with. I can choose my own tools to a large degree, but even if I go with the official SDK, I can keep right on using my Linux laptop, or even a desktop that isn't an overpriced workstation. If I can make a programming language compile to Android, I can use it -- there has never even been the threat of limiting it to one or two languages as Apple tried to do.

- Less polished user interface,

WTF does a user interface have to do with freedom?

more fragmentation = less flexibility,

Problem: The PC is already "fragmented", and Linux itself even moreso. What "flexibility" have they lost? And what "flexibility" is missing from Android, for that matter?

smaller userbase,

First, dead wrong -- Android actually has a much larger userbase. I don't know where you get that from.

Second, WTF does this have to do with freedom? Again, from this, I'd have to conclude that Linux and OS X are both less free than Windows.

less choice = less freedom

But you haven't shown less choice.

iPhone jailbreak == Android root

I can buy a Nexus S which is literally designed to be rooted. Where can I buy an iPhone that Apple hasn't tried their damndest to prevent me from rooting, let alone given me the tools to do it right in the official SDK?

After jailbreak == You can use all iTunes, Apple App Store, AND alternate sources

After rooting, the only thing I can't use is one video store. I suppose that puts a jailbreak ahead if I were to grant your premise that it's equivalent to rooting my Android phone -- except I don't need to root it to use alternate sources, and alternate sources pretty much make this video store irrelevant.

Vastly more apps == Vastly more choice, freedom

Even if there were numerically more apps, you haven't shown that this is "choice" in any meaningful sense.

Less fragmentation, more polish == More ease of use...

That is the only one I can give you, since:

larger community,

Factually wrong.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[arashi no garou]

I had to root my Moto Cliq to be able to run anything higher than 2.1. Given that the unofficial alpha-quality 2.2 ROM for my phone is faster and more stable than the Motorola official 2.1, I'd say the platform itself is pretty darned open. Especially compared to, say, iOS where jailbreaking has the opposite effect (locking you in to the last official OS release until a new exploit is found).

That said, another poster had a great point about the fact that once you jailbreak iOS you still have full access to all official portals along with the dark side. Now, apparently, that is not the case with Android.

Then we have the N900. It is a very open phone in every sense of the word (the OS is closer to "true Linux" than Android, the hardware is well documented and OSS friendly, etc.) but T-Mobile, Nokia and Intel have all but disavowed knowledge of its existence these days. It is a true hacker's phone in the sense that once you buy it, you're on your own for support. And as it fades into obscurity (hell, it was always obscure) with it goes any chance of a truly open mobile platform. And before you say "what about MeeGo?", it is so far from being a viable phone platform that it may as well not exist in that sphere.

Sadly, the world is stuck on the top three: Android, iOS and Blackberry, and the latter is beginning to fade from the consumer marketplace. Two years ago when someone whipped out their smartphone in public it was usually a Blackberry and slightly less often an iPhone; these days it's primarily an Android device with the occasional iPhone. Yet another duopoly...

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[smash]

If EITHER of the devices does what you want (i.e., in my case - make phone calls, check email, browse intarwebs and store contacts) then what is wrong with either choice?

To me, the phone is a tool just like a hammer or a screwdriver. I don't care whether or not the castings/tools are available for me to easily make my own screwdrivers or hammers, so long as the ones I can purchase do the job that I purchased them for with a minimum of fuss. My iPhone does that. I'm quite sure an android phone would do that, also.

99.9% of other end users don't care either.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[smash]

To what end? If the phone you purchased does what it says it can do on the box, then why is rooting it to run custom firmware an "important feature". Sure, it might be a desirable feature for a limited subset of users, but if it works as described/marketed, then I don't see how running custom unsupported firmware is an "important feature" other than for curiosity's sake.

Has any android handset been sold / had official marketing to say that "yes, you can run custom firmware"? If not, then don't be surprised if custom firmware is not supported.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[mrchaotica]

Ultimately this is just another version of the BSD vs. GPL debate. Whose freedom do you protect?

Indeed it is... the problem is that Android is supposed to be on the GPL side of that debate!!!

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Anonymous Coward]

A movie store? Which at this point merely SAYS you're "locked out" of it? Do you not think that somebody will devise a way to have a rooted Android phone go "yeah man, I'm completely locked down! Movie please?" Assuming such is even necessary as we speak.

That's funny, my first reaction was "Sure, whatever you like. Then I'll just buy the DVD when it's at the supermarket for € 6 in a few years". To each their own, I guess..

If nobody can be bothered to buy such DRM-infested crap, and nobody bothers to write scary piracy programs to interact with it anyway, then the movie companies will eventually stop producing it.

Translate:
"A store that sells sandwiches with shit on them? Haha, I bet some clever nutritionist-pirate will devise a way to hygienically remove most of the shit, and then we'll all buy them and eat them without the shit, take that evil sandwich industry!"

A different type of reaction would be: "A store that sells sandwiches with shit on them? I don't like my sandwiches with shit. I'll wait until they either stop putting the shit on top or I won't bother even trying to buy from them." Your call...

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[icebraining]

Again, which? The only one we know of so far is a single video store, far from the only video store. If that's "important" to you, I feel sorry for how empty your life must be.

This automatically gets a -1 douche from me.

We're not talking about children hunger in Africa, we're talking about damn smartphones. In this specific context, a video store is an important feature, especially considering the hundreds of thousands of people who already installed the Netflix app on their Android phones.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Stone2065]

One quick question... when was the last time Google bricked anyone's phone for doing something Google didn't like? Just a question...

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Stone2065]

I'm on my second Android based phone, and yes, I COULD root it, but as this poster said, I don't NEED to. With the software available on the Android market alone, I can make it do whatever I get an itch to MAKE it do. When/if I start having problems with it I can't fix by whatever means, I MIGHT look into rooting it.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[nabsltd]

I think the new LTE phones are going to be able to do both simultaneously.

Yes, the Verizon "4G" LTE phones can do voice and data simultaneously. It's still a pain in the butt if you don't have a bluetooth headset, but it does work.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Dog-Cow]

No. The GP is correct. Any given jailbreak for iOS only works for that revision of iOS, as Apple typically fixes whatever hole was used. Thus, until a new method is discovered, a jailbroken iDevice cannot be upgraded without losing the jailbreak.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[Dog-Cow]

Why?

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[zeroshade]

Carrier locked, walled garden, locked down out of the box = little choice, little freedom

You're only carrier locked due to carrier technology like EVERY other phone in the US. The GSM android phones with sim cards are just as unlocked as any other GSM phone with a sim card. Etc. There's no walled garden, you can install applications by side loading or from different markets or the google market. It's not locked down, it does everything it says it can and much much more.

Must root to be able to use important features

Like what? Rooting adds features like overclocking/underclocking, upgrading to the newest version of the OS beyond what the manufacturer will support. None of these are "important" to anyone except a power user who wants to tinker and mess with his phone, a small subset of users.

When you root, you are locked out of other important features

The only thing you're locked out of will be this Movie Market. That's it.

Fewer apps than iOS = Less choice = less freedom

One could argue that there's more diversity in apps than iOS which = more choice and more freedom. This is a false argument that doesn't have any merit for or against android. I almost want to say you sound like a fanboy

Less polished user interface, more fragmentation = less flexibility, smaller userbase, less choice = less freedom

Ok, you're definitely a fanboy. There's fragmentation in the iOS camp too (can you run the latest and greatest version of iOS on the iPhone 3? How about the iPhone 2?). Smaller userbase? Eh, that's debatable depending on where you get your numbers from. In the US there are more android phones than iPhones. Claiming that Android is less flexible than iOS is just ignorance to what you can do with one versus the other. I prefer the Android interface to the iPhones anytime. I like being able to customize my interface beyond a wall paper and ordering my apps. I like my widgets :)

how not all apps are compatible

Which is due to features available based on the hardware or the version of the OS. Rooting makes MORE apps available, not less, just as jailbreaking does the same for iPhone. However, unlike the iPhone, it's not necessary to root your Droid to get out of the closed garden.

won't have access to things like movies

No, won't have access to a movie rental service that is new. I fail to see the problem

May create problems with carriers

You can always revert to stock. And if you're worried about your carrier more than you want the added features of rooting than don't do it. You aren't the type of user that would benefit from rooting much then.

Unlike those poor iOS users that must "jailbreak" their phones

Nothing wrong with jailbreaking, but I don't have to root my android phone to install applications that aren't from the market. An iPhone has to be jailbroken to do that. Etc.

it's the same damned act, with the same damned consequences, only in the case of the jailbreak, you end up with more funcitonality and more choice in the end.

I don't think anyone advocating rooting looks at jailbreaking as evil or bad. They look at the reasons for jailbreaking are things that you have in Android without having to root. You end up with more functionality with a rooted Android phone than you do with a jailbroken iPhone. For example, a rooted android phone can always upgrade to the latest version of the OS. A jailbroken iPhone is stuck until someone finds an exploit to the newest version. The difference here is the availability of the source for the community to create a rom.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[SanityInAnarchy]

We're not talking about children hunger in Africa, we're talking about damn smartphones.

I didn't mention children in Africa, you did. So let's talk about some damn smartphones.

In this specific context, a video store is an important feature, especially considering the hundreds of thousands of people who already installed the Netflix app on their Android phones.

...and you just made my point for me. If there's already a Netflix app for Android which can run on rooted phones, again, I'd find it truly depressing if an "important" feature to you is this one specific video store, when there is at least one other significant video store for Android already, and nothing stopping anyone from setting up another.

I'll admit it's not a feature I personally am likely to be impressed by, as I can't see wanting to watch video on a screen that small, but that's not the point. Even granting that video is important, even granting that an Android-specific video store is important, I still don't see why that particular video store is an issue.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[mrchaotica]

By virtue of the fact that Google picked Linux (GPL), not BSD, to base Android on.

Re:A fiasco in every way but one important one.

[exomondo]

Updating the OS. Particularly to a custom version.

That IS the banner feature of "open" Android, isn't it?

Pretty sure you don't have to do that with the Nexus.

Well that makes it easy

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, so I can pirate then.

Making ethical dilemmas easy since 2011. Is there anything Google can't do?

Why

[rossdee]

Why would you want to watch a movie on a small phone sized screen? (Shouldn't you be keeping an eye on the road?)

I can understand watching 'live' events (like news, weather and sport)on a mobile device, you can't be home at the time its happening. But a movie can wait until you are sitting down in comfort in front of a big (er) screen)

Re:Why

[demonlapin]

You're trapped in the airport for three hours on a layover. There's a power plug in front of you. Wifi is free. If all you have is a phone, watching a movie seems like a pretty good idea.

Re:Why

[bahstid]

People might want to watch a movie on a train commute... where I live an hour each way is not particularly unusual. Also have you considered what could be done with a phone that has HDMI out?

Re:Why

[nkh]

Android is now available on tablets, incredible isn't it?

Rooted!

[LongearedBat]

So if your device is rooted, then your movie viewing is rooted. ;)

Re:Crap.

[rockman_x_2002]

This, plus I gather the MPAA has a part in twisting Google's arm to put certain stipulations in place to cover them. It just doesn't sound like the kind of thing Google would worry about themselves unless there were someone else involved in the deal. All speculation, of course. But food for thought.

Unrooting

[Anonymous Coward]

There's always a way to remove the root access. Turn it off and enjoy the show.

Its own path thanks

[SuperKendall]

I can still play rented movies on a jailbroken iPhone.

Apple does nothing that detects jailbroken phones. They don't care.

Plainly Google does.

That is different...

Re:Its own path thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

No that's " Thinking Different"

Re:Its own path thanks

[TrekkieGod]

They tried.

. Jailbreakers released a fix.

Re:Its own path thanks

[SuperKendall]

Good point, I stand corrected. I find it really odd they did not do that with videos first.

Re:Its own path thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has allegedly built a jailbreak checker into iOS version 4.

Err ... how can they tell? Insecurity?

[redelm]

Apart from the DRMesqueness, I would like to know how an app (suid root or not) could tell if the box had been rooted? AFAIK, when a [tiny]box is rooted, the root entry in /etc/passwd (or maybe /etc/shadow) is changed. That's it.

Sure, an app can read /etc/passwd (or suidr /etc/shadow) but how will it know what should be there? Is unrooted some fixed PW ??? This would be worth quite some cycles on a clustercracker.

An idiot would be wrong, not correct

[SuperKendall]

You're an idiot.. you can rent movies/use Netflix on a rooted or non-rooted Android

The whole point of the main article was that in fact you will not be able to play rented movies on a rooted Android device.

Just read the freaking article summary for a clue of your very own.

I'll help you out:

"However Google has stipulated that the Android Movie Market will only be available to Android devices which are not rooted."

Re:An idiot would be wrong, not correct

[Swarley]

Android Movie Market =! Netflix. Netflix works on rooted and unrooted android and iphone devices. Therefore saying it runs on rooted iphones is a meaningless argument. Android Movie Market is also not Netflix, so discussing netflix at all is pretty much irrelevant to a discussion about the movie market. Calling someone an idiot for making a doubly irrelevant argument sounds like a fair assessment to me.

Workaround?

[mclearn]

If you've rooted your phone, then what guarantee does ANY question posed to the phone have of being legit?

Q: "Are you a rooted phone?"

A: "Ummm, why no, I'm not. Yessir. Not a rooted phone at all."

Re:Workaround?

[hedwards]

You mean, what guarantee in general do you have posing that question to a phone? And I'd wager about the same if your server queries browsers about their useragent.

Re:Workaround?

[Anonymous Coward]

Totally agree with that. It's like Market Enabler. We just have control on rooted phones to reply anything that we want. So, basically, it's like Google saying to the movie studios: "ok, ok, we'll block rooted phones if this makes you happy. no problem... whatever."

Re:Workaround?

[wvmarle]

Of course, it's just that you may have to tailor the answer to the asker. Most apps you want to know the phone is rooted - that's the purpose of rooting the phone after all.

Still the workaround seems simple indeed: figure out the root detection method, and provide the correct answer to the app. Oh and simple does not necessarily mean easy :)

Re:Workaround?

[phantomfive]

My guess is they will do it exactly like Microsoft has done with their communications over USB for Zune and WP7, that is they encrypt the communication channel. And it is quite annoying....so far there is still no way to get administrator access on a WP7.

Re:Workaround?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know for existing hardware, but for new one that's rather easy. The solution is very near the one used by tivo.

Re:Workaround?

[kloot]

Trusted Computing to the rescue :)

The start of the "trusted computing" era

[chipwich]

And so the era of mandatory "trusted computing" begins, kicked off, ironically, by Google.

If you wish to consume licensed IP content on a device in your possession, then the content owners will determine what computing functions are allowed on such device. And the device remote kill-switch will make you think-twice about content misuse.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[chipwich]

btw, Trusted Computing is almost as much of an oxymoron as Digital Rights Management.

This Orwellian doublespeak makes my brain hurt. They only sound like features because marketing won't call it "Limited Application Execution" and "Digital Restrictions Management". Has anyone seen my tinfoil hat?

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[Anonymous Coward]

>> kicked off, ironically, by Google.

You just described what every videogame console has already been doing.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is where one must ultimately make the decision, "Do I really want that content?"

The problem with the direction that the media is heading is it makes the underlying assumption that people need their content. Where in actuality, it is a want.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[chipwich]

You just described what every videogame console has already been doing.

But unlike Android, consoles aren't sold on a platform of openness. If non-rooted Andoid gains adoption because of this, then Google will have done more to neuter Linux than Microsoft ever could.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[wvmarle]

A google search for DRM:

The first result is the "digital rights management" page of Wikipedia, where in the introduction the proper term "digital restrictions management" appears already, in bold.

The second hit is WP's disambiguation page.

And the third link points to the "digital restrictions management" page from defectivebydesign.org.

So not all is lost :)

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[Gaygirlie]

And so the era of mandatory "trusted computing" begins, kicked off, ironically, by Google.

If you wish to consume licensed IP content on a device in your possession, then the content owners will determine what computing functions are allowed on such device. And the device remote kill-switch will make you think-twice about content misuse.

This is nothing new; it's been done for AGES, on various different platforms and most notably on consoles. Google certainly isn't the first on the playground, and neither are they the worst contender there.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[westlake]

And so the era of mandatory "trusted computing" begins, kicked off, ironically, by Google.
If you wish to consume licensed IP content on a device in your possession, then the content owners will determine what computing functions are allowed on such device.

Look around you.

Google didn't start this. Google is playing catch-up.

There isn't an HDTV set, home theater receiver, video game console, set-top box, smartphone or tablet on the market that doesn't offer its own suite of Internet apps.

Thirty percent of prime timedownload traffic in the states is a Netflix stream. If you do not support the licensed Internet radio and television services, you do not have a marketable product.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[Anonymous Coward]

What? Wrong. Android has been closed since Day 1 with Google's own proprietary apps. Almost every single CyanogenMod install is infringing copyright law. Google has only claimed that Android is based on an open platform: AOSP. Similarly to how they claim Chrome is based on open source: Chromium and Webkit.

Besides that you show a fundamental misunderstanding of what 'software platform' means. It doesn't ever include user apps.

Re:The start of the "trusted computing" era

[Archangel Michael]

And in the end, it isn't going to stop pirates from pirating to bypass DRM that doesn't work. It only pisses people off, just most people don't realize why they are pissed off, and if you tell them to pirate the movie and get better experience they look at you like you're a criminal. Until you explain to them, one of the main reasons people pirate, is because to bypass being pissed off.

Geeks offer solutions to problems others create. It is our nature.

What openness promise?

[alinuxguruofyore]

Google has only been as open as necessary.

Re:Err ... how can they tell? Insecurity?

[Tr3vin]

I think it is looking to see if the device is unlocked, not if it is rooted. Unlocking allows for customizations, such as different kernels or root enabled images. If I remember correctly, the unlock flag is stored in the NAND memory, and is checked during the boot sequence. The Xoom can currently toggle that field, so that you can easily unlock and re-lock the device. The catch is each time you do that, the device reset to factory settings. There is also a verification that happens when you re-lock the device to make sure that everything is signed.

Why would I download a movie from a phone?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I want to download a movie, I'll get it from Netflix on my FiOS connection.

A week to realize that!?!?!?!?

[syousef]

It'll take a week for people to realize they could just torrent the movie instead of paying money for a 24 hour version?

Geez, a whole week to realize that? Is it restricted for sale to those with a low IQ?? Or just slashdot users? :P~~~

I made that distinction, did you?

[SuperKendall]

Calling someone an idiot for making a doubly irrelevant argument sounds like a fair assessment to me.

It was not doubly irrelevant, it was half irrelevant - the original poster mentioned BOTH renting and Netflix playing.

So possibly you could call him half an idiot but his main point had traction because he explicitly mentioned rentals.

Not much of a loss

[ya really]

I'm sure android users will find a workaround as already mentioned. However, it's not that useful when netflix is already on android en masse. Although the netflix app was already pulled from the market (and only "made" for a handful of phones), it has been integrated into nearly every android phone able to run gingerbread roms as root. If you're an android user and want it, go over to the xda developer forums and find your phone and take a look. I added it to my phone the other day and it works perfectly.

What about video output?

[willoughby]

The LG G2X (and probably several other phones) has an HDMI connector allowing video output. I wonder if this will be disabled. I could find out myself but I returned mine due to the problem with the screen.

As I said above, "open" is a state,

[aussersterne]

not an intention. A door is not "open" when it is shut simply because you intend for it to be open. Shut is shut.

Android's source is open.
Android as a platform is nowhere near it.

Techies care a great deal about the former.
Everybody else only cares about the latter.

But techies have done a good job of convincing everyone else that open source code for Android OS == open platform in the marketplace, in practice.

And the debates rage here on Slashdot as if there was some question about whether Android, in reality, in the marketplace, as a series of devices and carriers, is open. It isn't. It simply isn't.

But of course you can have the source.

Here you go, Grandma!
What's this?
It's the source code to Android! Can you feel the freedom pulsing through your veins?
Um, can I just watch a movie?
No, sorry, can't do that. Just read the source. SOOOO OPEN!

Re:As I said above, "open" is a state,

[spirit of reason]

Looks like some mods got confused and thought Troll meant Disagree.

Agreed with the spirit of your open source vs open platform issue. Though, I'm not sure support for user modification is necessarily part of the definition of open platform. I think Google fulfilled the requirements by allowing anyone to create a new Android device without licensing (provided you don't consider the Android Market part of the platform). Guess we'll need some other term.

An open source operating system doesn't do much good (for a power user/developer type) if the bootloader and root file system are locked. There are some devices that leave the bootloader open, but they're exceptions to the rule. And needing to exploit an unpatched security vulnerability to get root is unacceptable.

Re:As I said above, "open" is a state,

[Anonymous Coward]

Techies care a great deal about the former.
Everybody else only cares about the latter.

Techies might have rooted it.
Everybody else won't have.
So it isn't relevant to this discussion.

And if you are so anti-techie, this forum probably isn't the community for you.

Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[Shihar]

Wait... so I have a rooted device. Forget all of the added functionality you can get by rooting, I would root for no other reason than that CyanogenMod skull fucks HTC Sense and is always up to date. Is Google basically saying that if I root and ROM my phone the only way I can get movies is to, um, pirate them? Good policy. I am sure that nothing is going to drop piracy rates faster than by making it so that your most savvy users have no choice but to pirate if they want movies. What asshole thought that that was a good idea? What brilliant idea is next? Maybe we should only hand out condoms to people who are celibate.

This wont stop me from rooting. It sure is fucking stupid though.

Maybe if they keep going down this path and are annoying enough I'll just say fuck it and get an iPhone. If I am going to be stuck with a locked down piece of shit, I might as well have on that isn't filled with bloatware and NASCAR apps. Android is awesome, but some times I feel that between the carriers, the manufactures, and now apparently Google, they are desperately trying to fix that.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[Shihar]

Most savvy... and demonstrably the most untrustworthy. I mean, you've already shown you could care less about violating your carrier contract, and your device EULA, and probably Google's Android agreement to boot.

Rooting a phone probably does violate some EULA or another (not Google's BTW). If there actually existed an alternative, I would pretty happily jump on it. Sadly, here in the States you have basically three cell network left and they have colluded to make it so that you can't simply buy a phone that works on their networks. With the pending doom of T-Mobile, we don't even have non-two year contracts any more.

The manufacturers are almost as bad as a the cell networks. They have amassed a pile of patents, cross licenses those patents, and created a cartel. There should be a thousand and one Silicon Valley cellphone maker startups designing phones in the Valley and then mass producing them in China. They don't exist because patent law has made it physically impossible. It is utterly impossible to make a cell phone these days without violating literally hundreds of patents. Hell, every time someone makes a phone they knowingly violate patents. The only thing that keeps the system somewhat in check is that the other guy is doing the same thing, and if he sues you, you can sue him back. For an example, just look at Apple and Samsung currently suing the piss out of each other. If you don't have a few billion for lawyers, you can't even consider stepping into that fucked up industry.

If there was any sort of real competition left to be had you could make an argument with doing it the "right" way (as if a EULA isn't legal flaming piece of shit). As it stands, if you want a cell phone you need jump a mountain of meaningless 30 page EULAs. I am sure that my fucking alarm clock these days has a EULA that declares that I agree surrender my rights to my first born child by plugging it into a wall.

And you *had* a choice, rationalizations aside. You had a choice as to which phone to buy. You had a choice of carriers. But every sentence you wrote demonstrates that you believe you're entitled to whatever it is you want, however you want it, and no matter what it takes to get it. Face it. If it wasn't this, it would have been the rental price. Or the selection. Or the quality. Or the rental period. Or whatever.

That is very much untrue. Point me to the carrier that doesn't have stuffed into their contract an agreement not to mod your device and I'll pretty happily switch carriers. There is however literally no choice. You get to pick between, shit, shittier, and shittiest (that would be Sprint, Verizon, and AT&T, respectively). I in fact have picked the one with the most liberal policies (Sprint), coverage and cost be damned.

Your declaration that anyone who doesn't want the fucking NASCAR app on their phone must be a pirate it also pretty fucking stupid. That is my Steam profile. Unless I have been hacking Steam, it looks like I bought 139 video games. I'll apparently throw $60 at any video game that looks shinny. It is a pretty safe bet that I'll pay a couple of bucks to watch a movie too.
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197969828904

There are a lot of very good reasons to root your phone, almost none of which are nefarious. Unless you are on AT&T's shit network, all Android phones allow side loading which allows for piracy without violating any 59 page EULAs or rooting. The biggest and best reasons to root your phone is so that you actually have an up to date version of Android. Being able to customize the shit out of your interface is also very nice. On older phones, rooting is almost mandatory because the carriers and manufactures love to fill your phone full of uninstallable crapware and skin it with their shitty memory hog proprietary interfaces. If uninstalling the fucking NASCAR app violates my EULA, then Sp

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[icebraining]

He felt entitled to do what he wanted to his own phone? The nerve!

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[sosume]

I mean, you've already shown you could care less about violating your carrier contract, and your device EULA, and probably Google's Android agreement to boot.

Why? I bought my phone in the store, not from my carrier. Samsung does not prevent me from using a custom ROM. There is nothing in my contract barring me from using any phone I want. You are spreading FUD.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[grrrgrrr]

All your reasons for rooting your android phone are also reasons why normal users are better of buying an iphone if you ask me.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[Shihar]

All your reasons for rooting your android phone are also reasons why normal users are better of buying an iphone if you ask me.

Then you pretty clearly don't understand what rooting is doing or what Android lets you do in general. My phone is tricked out with entirely custom interfaces. Everything from the lock screen, to the home screens, to keyboard, is set up for me and me alone. The phone itself is also physically moded in that it has a new back plate that lets me ram a 3500 mAh batter up its arse. Hell, just the basic level of normal non-rooted Android blows iOS out of the water in terms of customizability and control. A phone that isn't rooted can swap out its launcher, change keyboards, and replace nearly every little piece of the OS with something different. It also has widgets. I mean come on... a phone in this day and age that doesn't let you have widgets? That seems a little goofy. In fact, wasn't it not until iOS 4 that they let you change your background picture to a non-Apple approved one? Yeah... I'll pass.

iPhones are great if you find technology scary, disorienting, or just don't want to think about it at all. I would get my mom an iPhone. She more or less can't break it and never has to worry about it. It is like a big feature phone that can do the Internet. If you have even a touch of the technophile about you and even a fraction of the desire to customize your phone to be more useful to you, Android is the way to go. Granted, that could change. They could lock down Android as tightly as an iPhone so that I can't have wonderful things like Swype, but until that day, I'll stick with Android. A phone that my mother can use and understand (and really, she is a great woman, just not my gold standard for technology) is an order of magnitude too dumbed down, controlled, and nerfed to be of any interest to me.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[zeroshade]

Wait, without jailbreaking you can customize the interface on your iPhone? Oh wait...no you can't. All you can do is change a wallpaper. You can overclock and underclock the CPU on an iPhone without jailbreaking? Nope. You can replace existing functionality with different functionality that you might like better for default phone functions? Nope. You can uninstall default apps that Apple put on the phone to begin with? Nope.

Hmm...how is a normal user who wants to root their android phone better off buying an iPhone? They would just have to jailbreak the iPhone and even then they wouldn't be able to do all the same things.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[grrrgrrr]

You mis the point completely. No you would not need to customize the interface because the interface is very good and not fucked up by some phone manufacturer that does not know software at all but wants to stand out.. The Iphone has a better battery live than most android phones so no need to under-clock. It works very well without customising and android does not if have to believe Shihar

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[grrrgrrr]

"Then you pretty clearly don't understand what rooting is doing or what Android lets you do in general." I think it is more the case of your reading ability that fails than my understanding of of what rooting means. I qualified "normal users".

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[zeroshade]

No you would not need to customize the interface because the interface is very good and not fucked up by some phone manufacturer that does not know software at all but wants to stand out

Uhm, that's a matter of opinion. Personally I believe the stock Android interface is much better than the iPhone interface. And maybe every so often I just want to change up the way my phone looks or works? Or maybe add some widgets that give me useful information. You can't do that on the iPhone and lots of Android users love being able to do this.

The Iphone has a better battery live than most android phones so no need to under-clock

Dude, if you're going to defend your phone at least spell it correctly. Little 'i', big 'p'. iPhone. Come on. Also, life, not live. Anyways, the battery life of an iPhone varies but even the iPhone under heavy use doesn't have as much battery life as an Android phone with SetCPU and a low voltage kernel using profiles to underclock the CPU. Not only that, you forgot the ability to overclock and get more performance out of the hardware, particularly on the older phones. I could be wrong, but you can't do that on the iPhone.

It works very well without customising and android does not if have to believe Shihar

Android works very well without customizing also, the fact that you can customize it also is what makes it great. As for the second half of that sentence, wtf is Shihar, and why should I believe it?

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[shmlco]

Pretty much everything you said is either a rationalization or justification as to why you believe you have no choice but to root the phone, and violate your EULA and carrier agreement in the process. As such, my original point still stands: If you believe that X set of circumstances is unfair, or that you're entitled to "cheat" under Y set of circumstances, then I, as Google, have no reason to believe that you won't rationalize your way into cheating under other circumstances as well.

Though as others have mentioned, this is probably a restriction insisted upon by the studios. From their perspective, who knows what sort of capture software might exist on an unsafe device.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[FredFredrickson]

Agreed, as somebody who rooted to upgrad to cyanogenmod on his moto droid 1 solely because google crippled their build*, I was one of those people who already willingly pay a few bucks here and there for movies on my roku with amazon VOD. They've lost a good revenue stream here.

*when android went to 2.2 (or maybe it was 2.1, I don't remember), they disabled the notification LED on the droid while the screen was on. This was a pointless move with no setting to over-ride it. With as many fullscreen apps that I have (like when it's docked), I like to see notifications that are in the background using the color LED. Far be it from me to want to be notified by my phone when there's communication!

But the final straw was taking silent mode off the volume rocker. Either Vibrate was ON or Vibrate was off, 5 menus deep in the settings, but the rocker wouldn't do both: (loud -- med -- soft -- vibrate only -- silent). Waste of time. Thank god for cyanogenmod.

Re:Condoms to People Who Are Celibate

[Shihar]

Pretty much everything you said is either a rationalization or justification as to why you believe you have no choice but to root the phone, and violate your EULA and carrier agreement in the process. As such, my original point still stands: If you believe that X set of circumstances is unfair, or that you're entitled to "cheat" under Y set of circumstances, then I, as Google, have no reason to believe that you won't rationalize your way into cheating under other circumstances as well.

Um yeah... they were justifications. I would like to think that most of my actions have justification. I could follow a paranoid EULA (BTW, how many of those have you actually read before slamming "I agree!"), or I could just merrily use the device that I bought in a way that pleases me. If I was doing damage or stealing, or anything of that nature, maybe you could make an argument that mindlessly following one of the 50 EULAs you slam "I agree!" on in a day are worth pondering for a moment. Seeing as how I have done no damage in modifying the software on a piece of hardware that I own, I pretty merrily justify ignoring the commands of the pop ups. Hell, if anything I consume less of the network if for no other reason than that I can actually turn off the crapware they infest the phone with. Justification? Sure, but most worthwhile humans should be pretty happy break stupid rules. Maybe I am just more of a rebel than you. I also occasionally jay walk if no cars are coming, I drive 72 mph in 65 mph zones when traffic conditions permit it, and I have strolled in a public park after sunset. Oh dear god, the humanity of it all! I also once killed a man just for looking at me funny, but that was totally justified because, as I said, he looked at me funny.

I also broke the EULA when I replaced the backing on my phone to shove a bigger battery into it. OMFG! DEVICE MODIFICATION!!!11!!! He can't be trusted!

Though as others have mentioned, this is probably a restriction insisted upon by the studios. From their perspective, who knows what sort of capture software might exist on an unsafe device.

It is an idiot decision. You literally can't name a movie that they are going to sell that you can't already pirate. It isn't going to stop, slow down, or in any way impede piracy. It might drive some people too piracy. It will certainly prevent me from giving them money. As my Steam account with a few thousand dollars of video games shows (all of which I could have pirated instead), that is a pretty dumb decision. They don't slow piracy down for a fraction of a second, encourage it infact, and prevent people who would on a normal day give them money from giving them money. It is a dumb decision no matter how hard you try and rationalize and justify it. It fails in its goal of reducing piracy, likely increases it, hurts profits, and pisses off consumers.

Regardless of how stupid I think the decision is, I won't actually lose much sleep on it. I'll just use that money to download a few more games on my ROOTED!!!!11!!! computer from Steam, or just use the Netflix app which doesn't care if you have root or not.

Re:Crap.

[oiron]

And it's not the Android Market itself - it's the movie market...

I have no intention of watching a movie on my QVGA screen, so I'm sticking with Cyanogenmod.

Not the solution.

[crhylove]

Until we remove all the corporate oligarchies, they will continue to act directly against the interest of the populace. This is just one more example. Anonymous FTW!

Re:Not the solution.

[msauve]

You're right. If you remove the movie studio oligarchies, then there won't be any major motion pictures; to pay for, or to pirate. Problem solved!

Re:Not the solution.

[Anthony Mouse]

Naturally this follows from the indisputable fact that no one other than a major studio can produce a major motion picture.

Just make youtube work

[Anonymous Coward]

Given that the bulk of newer android phones still can't use youtube (whether they are rooted or not) and haven't been able to for over I year I could care less if their movie service doesn't work if you are rooted they have more basic functionality issues to deal with which from what I can tell they are just ignoring!!

Fine, we all continue to file share then

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're a technical user, you will want to have your phone rooted so you can actually use it as the computer in the pocket it's promised to be. You just aligned the interest of hackers with the interests of "pirates". That worked great for Sony....... Smart, real smart. Plus, in no way is in the culture of openness. Is it me or are Google seeming a little bit more evil every day?

Re:Services that work with GNU/Linux? Just one! Am

[icebraining]

Because there are people willing to pay them if they did.

HDMI output

[protactin]

Newer Android devices, especially tablets, have HDMI output.

There. Now you can copy movies with your non-rooted device.

Re:HDMI output

[smash]

Except HDMI has HDCP built in.

hdcp is broken.

[leuk_he]

except hdcp keys were leaked

Anyway, maybe is more simpler to use a version of the app that does not tell it is on a rooted device.

Re:Rather than going point by point

[Zider]

For the other 99% of humanity, "my community of platform users" (those who can help me with questions, with whom I can share experiences and mutually dialogically engage in troubleshooting) includes only the other people with the same handset and the same carrier. A much smaller community. There are just a handful of versions of the iPhone and they are all AT&T.

I hope you realize "humanity" is more than just americans, and "the world" is bigger than the USA. We don't even have AT&T over here, so you're way wrong there.

Maemo looks pretty good now

[kurt555gs]

I think I will build a shrine for my Nokia N900. I doubt we will ever see a truly open platform from a major manufacturer or allowed be a vile and evil carrier again.

Maemo would have been better for tablets than Android.

How does Market know that the phone is rooted?

[xxqs]

What is the indication that a phone is rooted? How would Market application know that in the first place?

A workaround already exists

[Anonymous Coward]

It is called a torrent.

I OWN IT!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's my damn phone and my damn tablet! I'll run any OS and give myself superuser access on any damn device I want! Just like my pc! Don't try to KONTROL me!

Re:There seems to be a lot of confusion in this st

[rogerdugans]

What you are referring to is "usability" NOT being "open."

Rather a huge difference.
Even if I did not disagree with your points about usability...

Open refers to Open Source which means that the operating system has source code available so that users can look at the code themselves and modify it if they so choose.

Usability, or Ease of Use refers to how easy it is to DO SOMETHING with the software. Email, web, video whatever you want.

By saying that Android is open Google does NOT imply that you can do anything with Android other than look at the source code.

However the ability and FREEDOM to look at the source code gives US (users) the ability to either modify the os ourselves or use code modified by others IF WE CHOOSE.

IOS is not open.
WIndows is not open.
Linux and Android ARE open.

Does this mean that they are better for all and sundry? No, of course not.
But they are better for many, and personally I have yet to find a better os for a smartphone: I can do more at lower cost, more reliably than with any other phone.

And I can do so without resorting to spreading FUD or false statements, pal. ;)

Re:Services that work with GNU/Linux? Just one! Am

[Anonymous Coward]

How many TV services work with Australia?

hint: none.

Re:But the Google fanboys

[zeroshade]

The reasons to root are things that a normal user wouldn't want/need to do. Whereas the need to jailbreak an iPhone does give things a normal user would want to do, like being able to download an application and install it without using the Apple App Store.

when Android devices have by and large been much the same: closed until you open it.

Please give an example how Android devices are closed until you open it? Unless you're on AT&T where they removed the ability to side-load applications (which is why i never recommend buying an Android phone from AT&T) then every Android phone can install applications from more than just the Google App Store, they can use the amazon app store, side-load applications, or a bunch of others if they want. They can install new interfaces like LauncherPro, replace the default functionality with a new text messaging app, or completely different actual browser (not just Opera Mini which is not really a browser so much as it downloads and renders on an outside server and then forwards the results rather than browsing directly on the phone), etc.

The only reasons to root are to overclock/underclock your phone, remove stock apps placed by the manufacturer (not all manufacturer's do this), completely install an entire new interface over the entire phone, and update beyond what your carrier is willing to suppport.

For example, is that iPhone 2 running iOS4? Don't think so. Is that iPhone 3 running the latest version of iOS? Nope. Yet my original Droid is running gingerbread right now because I rooted it. The average user has no need to do this.

Talk about what benefits the source of Android offers that isn't available to iOS users by virtue of its closed source.

Choice! Android users have the choice of TONS of different phones from a multitude of carriers. As a result of Android's open source nature, soon Blackberrys will be able to run Android applications. (You really think they would have done that if it wasn't free and open source and available?) As a result of Android's open source nature there's an entire community that builds Roms from source which turn out to be faster and more efficient and better than many of the default roms that manufacturers put on their own phones. And I'm not talking about rooting with that. You just can't do that with iPhone because it's closed source. The benefits for a power user are huge due to the community and Roms and tweaking and hacking. The benefits for the average user is that when the manufacturer stops supporting a phone, they can update it and breathe new life into an old phone due to people making Roms and tweaking the code to function on older phones.

Open means Open Source

[rogerdugans]

That means that the source code for Android is available.

It does NOT mean that all the applications must be open source, it does not mean that every app must be able to access everything in the world.
It does not mean that the web browser on the phone can access a proprietary file format that is not compatible.

It means that the source code for the operating system itself is available and can be modified.

The FACT that Android is Open Source does give us, the users and potential users, a great deal of additional possibilities WITH THE OPERATING SYSTEM.

It does not mean that phone manufacturers or carriers have a requirement to allow us to run a custom version of Android- some make it quite difficult in fact.
It does not mean that software developers are required to open source their applications (although some do.)

It does not even mean that Google is required to open source all of THEIR applications.

Being open source does not guarantee the os is easier to use, more stable or more resistant to malware.
Being Open Source does NOT mean that it is trivial to modify the OS so that a user can remotely drive their car with their cellphone!

But there ARE a tremendous number of advantages that being open source DOES provide: since the source is open, once a device can be updated (rooting and exploits usually required- carriers and manufacturers fault, not Google) it can often be updated and extended to be able to do more and work better than it did originally. Usually this is because the custom versions of Android are based on Google's Android, not the carrier/manufacturer versions.

Yes, I use Android on phones and a tablet and I am very happy with them.
Many people are likely to be happier with iPhones and other smartphones, and I am happy they have them.
But the fact remains that at an OPERATING SYSTEM LEVEL, Android is open and Iphone is not.
On a Market level, iPhone is severely restricted and Android far less so.

There are those who claim that jailbreaking and rooting are the same- completely incorrect. Very different indeed.
Jailbreaking an iPhone is more akin to installing the Amazon Market for Android than it is to rooting.

Re:Open means Open Source

[FlyingGuy]

I don't have mod points at the moment, but if I did I would mod you up.

I am still surprised that people just don't get this, at all or they are living in some fantasy land in which everything is free and they are allowed to do whatever they want with whatever software they decide they like.

I use an iPhone for three things, Primarily to make phone calls, secondly to keep track of my calender, thirdly to listen to music.

I personally don't care for all the split personalities of Android on the various handsets and carriers.

Google put out an OS that works that the source is available for and that is their model, more power to them.

Apple put out an OS for their tablet and phones that the source is not available for and it does what the vast majority of people want it to do, more power to them.

People always want to turn this into a binary choice and its certainly is not that in the least. Many people will only let their Blackberry go when you pry it from their cold fingers and the same goes with an iPhone or a Droid Phone.

I see the number of people who bitch about the whole damn thing as about 1/1000 of 1 percent of the users and frankly those people don't amount to anything in the greater scheme of things.

Snooki

[tepples]

I've got a 47" HDTV to watch video entertainment on.

Which someone else in the house is using at the moment to watch MTV's Jersey Shore.

Re:Rather than going point by point

[SanityInAnarchy]

Freedom is the ability to do real things that you might like to do without being constrained.

Like, say, view a pornographic app on your phone.

But never mind that -- you've already chosen a very odd view of freedom. If you're given the freedom to do a thing, and you didn't want to anyway, that doesn't count as freedom? Really?

Only for techies does this set of real things include "hacking on the source."

And yet, if this was actually irrelevant, we wouldn't have Linux to begin with. At the moment, Apple still pretty absurdly limits what can and cannot go in their app store, so even if most end-users would never develop an app, they are still affected by not being able to find apps which would fall afoul of these restrictions. Giving developers freedom does translate to end-user freedom.

Also, if you're really going to go here, jailbreaking a phone also falls into this set of real things.

Only for techies is it irrelevant if an app has "slight" compatibility problems with a handset...

You're again speaking in abstract terms without citing any actual apps with actual compatibility problems, and you're ignoring the part where this is generally accepted as the state of affairs in desktop computing -- how many apps have slight compatibility problems with the latest version of an OS?

Sit ten users in front of a Windows box, and the same ten users in front of a Linux box for the following hour.
Then ask them: during which hour did you feel more free in your user of these computers?

These users have had how much time to be trained in Windows over the years, and you give them an hour to try out a new OS? I'd be very curious to repeat that experiment with users who had no experience with iOS, sitting them down in front of a computer and an iPad.

As a typical geek you will, of course, tell them that they are all wrong,

If someone claims to be free while I have them tied up, there are a few possibilities: Either they like being tied up (possible), or they don't realize that they are tied up. The reality of being restricted really isn't dependent on their opinion, however.

Now, I wouldn't tell them that they are wrong to prefer Windows, but I think if you don't ask the leading question about freedom, you might find they prefer it for being "easier to use," or, if they have a bit more insight, because it's closer to what they're familiar with.

Because they don't want to hack on the source.

Did I ever once claim they did? What's more, do you really think availability of source, or actual open-ness, doesn't affect end-users at all?

Consider Firefox. While most users couldn't identify this as the reason, open source and open-ness is why it was able to get the market share it has and why so many users prefer it, even if they're only just technical enough to install an add-on. Being open source meant Microsoft couldn't simply buy the Mozilla Foundation and kill Firefox. It also meant that, while most users don't care about hacking on the source, the one user who cared to hack on the source and add, say, popup blocking, or tabbed browsing, or an extension API, or write an extension like, say, Adblock, had a profound impact on how useful the browser is, and how much freedom there is, for every other user to try it.

Then there's the part where having an open standard drove the Web to places it really couldn't have gone if we were stuck in the "Works best with IE6" era. Without that, and without Firefox to challenge IE -- even if no users actually used Firefox -- the iPhone wouldn't exist in any recognizable form, because Webkit, if it existed at all, would be irrelevant. By contrast, today users have the freedom to use any browser they want, on devices which might not have had a browser at all if IE6 still ruled, and to expect most of the Web to jus

Google working for Big Content?

[RivenAleem]

Has Google actually released a statement regarding this? My thought is that the only "crime" Google are doing is disallowing you from getting access Anonymously to the movie. Google makes money on knowing what you are doing/watching. A rooted device would lead to the ability of getting the movies without them knowing who you are. I suspect (I'm not super tech savvy) that the non-rooted device is tied into your user profile/billing system, so it can be traced that Mr Joe Bloggs watched Movie Y. Now they can use this data to work out what kind of advertising they can target at you.

Anyone who buys into some Google service, expecting that they won't be monitored for advertising purposes really needs to cash in their geek card. Rooted device not only goes against Big Content, but also defeats the purpose of it being a Google product.

No loss here

[TuringCheck]

I got a torrent client on my Android, that should do it.

Re:No loss here

[thePuck77]

ding! ding! ding! We have a winner!

Re:Rooting

[miltonw]

Hang on. You bought your phone, but you don't control it. The phone is "yours", but someone else determines what you are allowed or not allowed to do with it, when you can upgrade, and how you can change it. You trust your carrier to do "what's best for you" but your carrier doesn't trust you. That's your phone.

My phone is different. I don't trust my carrier to "do what's best for me" -- because they don't and they won't. I know they will only do what it best for them. So, unlike you, I own my phone. I determine what runs on it, when it gets upgraded and, especially, what doesn'tT run on it.

"Untrustworthy"? Um, no. Just because your carrier doesn't trust you doesn't mean you are untrustworthy.

I trust my carrier to provide the specific service they've contracted with me to provide. I don't trust them enough to let them into my phone any more than I'd let my ISP have control of my PC or let the electric company dictate what appliances I can run in my home.

Re:Crap.

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Google's Android Market != Android

Google dictating the terms of the Android Market being limited does not mean that Android is closed any more than Amazon requiring you to have an Amazon account to use their market does.

What do you think it says about Google's plans for the future of the Android platform that they are excluding rooted devices from using some of their own services ? Google the grand protector of openness, unless of course it's inconvenient.

Also kinda different

[Sycraft-fu]

A Jailbroken iPhone is on par with a regular Android phone. You Jailbreak to be able to run apps not from the market and to be able to install some kinds of apps Apple doesn't permit like things that change the input device or the like. Well that is Android in its default state. You can install from non-market sources (or add another market like Amazon), apps have a much wider latitude in what they do, and so on.

Rooting an Android phone is to get yourself total and compete control, the ability to install different ROMs, the ability to mess with the kernel, etc. It is a much higher level of device access.

Re:Crap.

[RobbieCrash]

I don't think it means anything for the Android platform. I think it sucks that I won't be able to access Movies while running my phone how I want. But, even if I didn't have a rooted phone, I couldn't access movies because I live outside the US. The reason I can't access it outside of the US is the same reason that rooted phones can't access it inside: Content providers and licensing.

If you want to get pissed about locking down content, then look at every piece of licensed content, and how much of it is available outside of your borders. Get pissed off about the fact that international licensing is such a shit show, that I can't even buy mp3s from Amazon's mp3 store, half of the iTunes catalogue isn't available to me, virtually none of the online radio providers work here.

Google wants to provide content to people that people want, because they can make money off of it. But, to avoid lengthy court battles, and providers refusing to profide content, they have to play by the content providers rules. It sucks, I wish that weren't the case. But to try to blame Google, Apple or Amazon for their content having ridiculous restrictions of whatever form, is moronic.

Re:Crap.

[CharlyFoxtrot]

I agree with nearly everything you say, my problem with Google is this: they make a big show about "openness" but giving away the OS is the easy part. People buying into this crap will end up with their "open" phone in a desert without content and a few crappy open source apps because Google, as most corporations refuse to support openness where it's hard and it counts. And I don't buy the argument that they have to play along with content providers. Apple, though far from perfect, at least plays hardball with these assholes forcing the price of music downloads down, getting rid of DRM on iTunes music, kicking NBC out of the iTunes store because they wanted to raise prices on videos. Google could buy these companies several times over but they haven't shown any backbone in a good while now. They talk the talk without walking the walk.

Re:Crap.

[RobbieCrash]

Fair enough. But, Apple was only able to force the majors to remove DRM and was only able to tell NBC to get stuffed after becoming the only game in town. Google cannot do that at this point. They simply don't have the market share.

Plus, Google did just piss off the majors in a HUGE way with Google Music. Apple is still trying to nail down deals, while Google is already offering me 20,000 free cloud based storage songs.

Now, I'm not completely apologetic for Google, I think that this is really shitty that they bowed so hard on the licensing deals that I'm not allowed to use the service. I fully agree that they should do more to ensure that consumers are presented with more solutions and options. But, I don't think that they're in as secure of a position to start issuing the ultimatums that Apple can. When they've "proved themselves" to the majors, they'll be able to force them to allow things like rooted users accessing the 'protected content'. With enough consumer pressure, I'm sure it will happen, just as it did to iTunes.

If it doesn't, I'll be first in line to decry the shitty stance that they're taking on the issue. But as long as I'm able to access Android source and recompile it as I see fit, I'm not going to call questionable licensing decisions in side products, I'm not going to start flagging Android as closed.

It's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

A whole lot to ensure you manufactured me would like to understand additional about this. Your blog is my stepping stone, my friend. Thanks for that heads up on this subject matter.
wigs for women Cheap Body Jewelry

More Difficult to Buy = Bad Strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

Making things more difficult to buy is just bad strategy. It's not like the content isn't available for free without these types of restrictions.

You'd figure that the MPAA would understand by now that making their product more difficult to use or obtain while illicit 'competing' product doesn't have these restrictions or inconvenience associated with it just discourages honest people from buying.

Why are people disillusioned?

[pjr.cc]

Alot of people out there dont get why people here see this as a bad thing, and fine, if you dont then more power to you. You can sit there and say "well, this is required by the studios" or whatever you like.

However, the reason people like me are getting up-in-arms about such a move is because of what google USED to represent. In short, it was one of the few companies around that was large enough to stand up and fight a fight we want to see fought. Its not about what the MPAA and studios want, its about whats sensible. This is not. Typically google have fought that fight, to the point where they DO put significant dollars on the line in order to win what is plausibly (though subjective it may be) a just and/or fair outcome.

This has stopped happening. The reality is, google could have probably gotten that content simply based on android market share, and maybe in the future they'll revisit that fight. Who knows. But lately (big IMHO here) google seemed to have changed tactics quite a bit in regards to being a company that "does no evil". They're sitting on that border line, at least in the minds of people like me they are - my opinion (alone) matters very little and so im easily dismissed. Again, the whole "do no evil" is a subjective argument and what it means to me, you and everyone else may be completely different. But at least TRY and understand why people will be disappointed about this.

The best part of all this is, I wouldn't rent a movie anyway (there are better options). google have a GREAT ability to never provide services in my country, which in itself doesnt bother me in reality. But for me the "do no evil" argument of google's is wearing quite thin rather quickly.

My ultimate point being that calling people idiots for believing in a fight that you may not is rather silly and ultimately the fight was to your benefit.

On a more personal note - someone using the name of Edmund Blackadder to post such a comment is disturbing, blackadder was one of my more favored tv shows.