Android Source Code Gone For Good?

First time accepted submitter vyrus128 writes "Many people were upset at the revelation, reported here in May, that the Honeycomb version of Android would not be open sourced. But Google promised that the next version, Ice Cream Sandwich, would have full source available. Now that ICS is out, though, the source is nowhere in sight. In the thread, Android's Jean-Baptiste Queru offers the following, as to the question of whether source will ever be made available: 'At the moment I don't have anything to say on that subject.'"

Comments

Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

seriously.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[ozmanjusri]

Exactly.

Google has said all along: "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices."

What's with all the Android-baiting on Slashdot lately? Did Microsoft buy some more advertising?

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Doc Ruby]

I welcome that kind of pressure to keep Google honest. Something has to push back against the many pressures to keep Google dishonest, and to keep Android source unavailable. Pressure from the large geek community is good.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[TrancePhreak]

Possibly Apple? Who did all of Steve Jobs' stock go to?

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's with all the Android-baiting on Slashdot lately? Did Microsoft buy some more advertising?

Why is it anti-Android sentiments are assumed to be the product of Microsoft? They make more money from Android than they do from WP7 so if anything the anti-Android stuff is likely to come from someone like Apple.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[bragr]

Well, California is a community property state, so his wife. Since she isn't inheriting it (she already co-owned it), she doesn't have to pay estate taxes (I think).

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Ihmhi]

A lot of things (like politics, for instance) would be better if we called people on their bullshit - constantly - rather than let them get away with it.

Thankfully we finally have people leveraging the power of the Internet and aggregating data with things like Politifact and the Obameter, so the populous can be more informed if they want to be more informed. Sadly, a lot of them still don't seem to care.

I do feel a fair bit of hope that there are a lot of younger people who try to be more connected to the world, though. They read the news (and not just Fox's "UHMERICUH FUCK YEAH" shows), they protest, they petition... maybe idealism is something that only the young are good at.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[jone_stone]

Sorry but it's not just a word. It has power that can't be willed away. If you use it like that you're asking for trouble, regardless of your intention. I find it offensive (as would most other residents of the United States, I'd guess), particularly when used the way you just used it. You can't make that reality go away by saying "get over it, people".

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Zontar The Mindless]

You ever look at all of their mixed, contradictory promises of future events that never unfold and think, "wow, what a bunch of fucking niggers, guess I better buy an iPad or some other competitor that's not Google"? (and for the love of God, get over the word, it is a word like other words, your hypersensitivity does not make it special, it really doesn't have much to do with skin color but with content of character, just for once stop knee-jerking and realize it)

It has everything to do with skin colour. It means "black", your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.

So no, we're not hypersensitive. Rather, you're a foul-mouthed git who thinks he's Humpty-Dumpty.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[djl4570]

It's more likely that the stock and other assets are in a family trust and Powell is a trustee. Yahoo Finance doesn't list Jobs or Powell as a major holder nor are either listed in the insider transaction history.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[ozmanjusri]

Why is it anti-Android sentiments are assumed to be the product of Microsoft?

You notice nobody at Slashdot is discussing the OS itself?

Despite other commentators recognizing that a new release of the most popular smartphone OS in the world is a big event, and that the new version is a significant improvement, all the discussion here is about what Microsoft has said about it, or more lame versions of the long-running trolling over source code.

Meanwhile, this is what the real world is saying:

"Android ICS offers a massive array of improvements over its predecessors bringing the best of both Gingerbread and Honeycomb while providing a raft of new innovations."

http://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-computing/android-4-0-ice-cream-sandwich-everything-you-need-to-know-954464

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[beelsebob]

Yeh, instead it's much better to carry on bashing on about how android is open, and how all other phone OSes are closed, and this makes android superior. We should just ignore the fact that andriod isn't open at all.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[CodeReign]

Still far better discussion than reddit.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[mwvdlee]

(and for the love of God, get over the word, it is a word like other words, your hypersensitivity does not make it special, it really doesn't have much to do with skin color but with content of character, just for once stop knee-jerking and realize it)

"Nigger" comes from the Spanish "Negre", which literally means "black". So it has ONLY to do with color.
You using that word and then explaining why your use of that word isn't meant to discriminate means you perfectly well understand that current society will interpret it as discriminatory.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Mister Liberty]

I welcome that kind of pressure to keep Slashdot honest. Pressure from the large geek community is good.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[crankyspice]

Well, California is a community property state, so his wife. Since she isn't inheriting it (she already co-owned it), she doesn't have to pay estate taxes (I think).

Only to the extent Jobs acquired those shares during the marriage. Anything acquired before, in a community property state, is separate property (with the community having an interest in any increase in value that can be attributed to work done during the existence of the community)... And assuming there's no trust, etc., in existence.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[icebraining]

As a counter point. In Estonian language the word neeger means a polite version of african origin or a person with black skin color etc. It has absolutely no context here because there never was any involvement in slave labor etc and the population of black coloured people here is rather slim (order of 100 or less in the whole country), mostly due to the climate. However if you take the other words one can use i.e. must mees (black person) etc, those have an undertone of rudeness to them.

Same in Portuguese, which was the language where the words supposedly came from (since "we" were the first Europeans to buy African slaves).

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[icebraining]

Actually, the phone version of Android, 2.X, is still Open Source. Only the tablet version (3.X) and ICS, which isn't available in any product are closed.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Kjella]

You don't get it, if you are male and I tell you "Stop being such a fucking cunt" then it's an insult to you that you're acting like a woman and an implied insult that women are cunts. Those meanings aren't separate, they're the basis of the whole insult. Here's a derogatory term for a whole group and you're just as bad as them. Any way you use it amounts to "You're as bad as being a black person and being a black person is very bad." Naturally black people would object to that even if they're not the direct target of the statement.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[MrHanky]

1) No one does that. 2) It is open. CyanogenMod makes Gingerbread available to an awful lot of devices with source and everything. It's the latest code currently available on Android phones, in actual fact.

I hope that when you grow up, you become more honest. Otherwise, you'll be unsuitable for politics.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[ttong]

Yes. Every time I go there I lose a couple of IQ points. Oh shii~

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[somersault]

I'd never taken cunt to mean woman, despite the obvious physiological link. To me a cunt is just a person who acts like a cunt. Which is similar to a dick or an asshole.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[spire3661]

Words evolve over time into different shaded meanings. You do realize that dictionaries dont define a word, USAGE does. A dictionary is the CURRENT usages for words, subject to change.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[TheRaven64]

And this is the view that keeps the word's power. Contrast with gay. The homosexual community embraced the various slurs that people used against them. It's now hard to find a word to describe a homosexual that is intrinsically insulting - only the attitude of the speaker matters, as it should be. In contrast, people get hyper-defensive about people saying 'nigger', giving it a taboo status.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[mwvdlee]

Yes, and in USAGE this word is a derogatory term.
As I stated before, saying you use a certain word with a different meaning than recognized by current society does not make it so.
The meaning of words is determined by the masses (those you want to understand what you're saying), not the individual.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[delinear]

There's a difference between keeping up pressure on companies to do the right thing (good) and blatant overreactions that harm the company's image without justification (bad). Claiming that the fact that the source isn't available the second the OS is released, despite assurances from the company that it would be open source and nothing official to the contrary, somehow means the end of all open source from said company forever is just insanity level overreaction. Let's give them a chance to do the right thing before we all don the Guy Fawkes masks and march on Google HQ.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just what I was thinking - it says more about GP that he associates women only with their sexual function. I'm a guy but I'm not insulting guys when I say someone's being a penis.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[wzzzzrd]

+1 flamebait. salute. it's the truth, but anyway ;)

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

So they finally fixed the CPU may be pegged issues and Dalvik VM SIGSEGV issues?

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

And this is the view that keeps the word's power. Contrast with gay. The homosexual community embraced the various slurs that people used against them. It's now hard to find a word to describe a homosexual that is intrinsically insulting

Faggot? Poof? Fairy?

Not that I disagree with you. They are words, and they only have power as long as the people at the other end of the insult give them power. That said, I think people understandably find it pretty hard to get over something that has been used in the past to humiliate them.

And 'gay' was a term created by the homosexual community. Back in the day the word used to mean happy. Within the homosexual community they used it to apply to themselves as a subterfuge way of requesting homosexual roommates without the community at large figuring it out. "Looking for a gay roommate" would be placed in classified ads and people at large would assume the dude is just looking for someone who is not a downer. Then the word was turned into an insult, but I don't think homosexuals ever abandoned it, they just resented the new use of the word in the meaning of 'lame'.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Denogh]

Do not feed the trolls!

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[JDG1980]

But CyanogenMod needs Honeycomb or ICS to provide a good experience on tablets. Now it appears that may never happen.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Andy Dodd]

Android source releases in the past have NEVER been provided on announcement day.

As you've pointed out, it usually happens after a device with the new version is released, and don't expect it on device launch day either - usually it takes a couple of weeks, but it's rarely withheld longer than that (Honeycomb being the exception, an exception which Google explicitly stated was an explanation and why it was an exception.)

Complicating the issue is the fact that the AOSP repos have traditionally been hosted on kernel.org - which is STILL at least partially hosed. As the kernel.org saga goes forwards, more and more people that were hoping for it to return quickly have migrated - see Linus moving to github, and as of 2-3 weeks ago, the AOSP tress finally got mirrored over to github, but I'm not sure if that was an official move. (It was impossible to sync a full Cyanogenmod tree from scratch for at least a month due to the fact that the components of Android CM doesn't modify get synced directly from the original repos.)

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[ozmanjusri]

Now it appears that may never happen.

Says who?

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, and with regard to that word, it's one that a large number of black people use to refer to themselves (and other black people).

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[bonch]

I love how Google fans think ANYTHING even remotely critical of something Google does is "baiting." Even funnier that you suggest Microsoft is involved somehow.

Google has repeatedly gone back on its word about Android's openness, and that is news. Whether or not you like the news shouldn't matter.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[bonch]

What the hell?

What ICS having improvements over its predecessors have to do with the fact that its source code isn't available? One of the big selling points of Android was supposed to be its openness, and that was often trumpeted on Slashdot.

Now that Google has gone back on that, suddenly, it's not a news story, and because the "real world" (TechRadar?) isn't talking about the lack of source code availability, that means it's not a story?

Plenty of other tech media outlets have covered this issue, particularly Ars Technica. Just because you're a big Google fan and don't want to see any criticism of them or their products doesn't mean that it shouldn't be discussed. That is, unless you think it's okay for Google to exploit the positive feelings associated with the term "open" only to go back on that.

As for being most popular smartphone OS in the world, you may want to try counting tablets and music players in your figures to see what is actually the most popular mobile OS in the world. Hint--its an OS as closed source as Android currently is.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[RenderSeven]

Sure, keep the pressure up, cant hurt much. But with Apple going lawsuit-happy and their ultimate target is clearly Android, Google has to be thinking that sharing anything has a bigger downside risk, both in terms of potential liability and in exposing planned features. Google had to reconsider their stance because the landscape has become hostile in the last 12 months, and the blame falls squarely on Apple (and Microsoft and Oracle and their DOJ lackeys) for aggressively trying to kill off a competitor for being successful. If I were Google I'd be adopting a siege mentality too.

I dont really care about them releasing source. As a consumer I'm a lot more interested in having a viable alternative to iPad in the marketplace, and as a developer Im a lot more interested in having better tablet support in Ubuntu. Lack of Android source code hasnt hindered me in any way from developing Android apps, while lack of drivers and decent libraries for Ubuntu tablets *has*.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[EvilBudMan]

I've noticed that. They just don't want you to root your phone anymore and get rid of all of the carriers crapware. I can see with an unlimited plan charging for tethering but for a plan limited to 2 gig you gotta pay extra for that. Data is data. Does anyone think this is not dishonest?

I would say that this is happening because Google is coming under pressure from the carriers for this sort of thing. Android 4.0 will probably be hard to root.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[EvilBudMan]

I think you are right. CyanogenMod just isn't fast enough and maybe you don't have enough screen for the keyboard to work properly on these older Froyo devices.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[scot4875]

I'm really not that worried about this possibility, simply because Google would be fools to not release the code and they know it. They've benefited greatly from contributions to projects like Cyanogen, and the collective will of the Internet tends to come up with a lot of good ideas for them to integrate back into the official distribution.

I suppose it's possible that they *could* just decide "oh, we'll let them keep playing with Gingerbread and just steal any good ideas we see," but I think they know that's short-sighted and will cost them a lot more than good will.

--Jeremy

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[scot4875]

Thanks for being an example of an Apple fanboy bashing Google. Double-bonus for still having that not-even-wrong sig about Google's openness.

--Jeremy

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[jo_ham]

1) No one does that. [bash on about how Android is open and other phone OSes are closed, thus making Android superior]

AHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

Oh wait, you were serious, let me laugh even harder.

What website are you reading?!

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[scot4875]

Repeatedly? They said they wouldn't release Honeycomb's source because it was shit. What other instance do you have about them 'going back on their word' about Android's openness? And on top of that, even if they *did* close the source forever, how is that any different than your beloved Apple?

You're going to be eating a lot of crow when ICS hits source code repositories. Somehow I doubt you'll ever offer up a mea culpa over it and instead find something else to bitch about.

--Jeremy

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[scumdamn]

Not really. There's a whole subreddit about Android full of helpful people. Slashdot has become a backwater of curmudgeons and the number and quality of comments is really disappointing. I have such great memories of Slashdot but after a bit of a hiatus I realized why I don't visit as often.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't available in any product?
Galaxy Nexus?
Yes, you cannot buy one today, but it is a real product. Coming next month I believe.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/20/behind-the-glass-a-detailed-tour-inside-the-samsung-galaxy-nexu/

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[metamatic]

As for being most popular smartphone OS in the world, you may want to try counting tablets and music players in your figures to see what is actually the most popular mobile OS in the world. Hint--its an OS as closed source as Android currently is.

You need to move the goalposts a bit slower than that, or it's painfully obvious.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Larryish]

I think "faggot" is probably the most insulting word I know to describe pillow-biters and ass-bandits.

People say "faggot" used to mean "a bundle of sticks", but I don't think that applies because bundles of stick don't suck each other off.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Anonymous Coward]

to burn homosexuals, they'd use a bundle of sticks. thus, faggot became a perjorative for homosexual. learn to read or something.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[Zontar The Mindless]

Call me deprived, but I did not have the good fortune to grow up in Glorious Free Progressive Estonia. Instead, I grew up in a place where one commonly saw signs reading, "Coloured Only" and "White Only", and where the word "nigger" carried (and continues to carry to this day) the connotation of "second-class" (at best), or even "property".

The signs are long gone (thank goodness), but you just try going to the US and calling the first black person you see "nigger". I guarantee a most interesting result. (Protip: Make sure your health insurance is up date first. You might need it.)

There's your "context", moron.

Re:Well then why bring it up?

[bragr]

Well he got married in 1991 and he had no Apple stock from the time he got fired to the time of Apple's acquisition of/merger with NeXT in 1997. And he probably has all his Apple and Disney stock in a holding company like how Bill Gate has Cascade Investments LLC.

Umm....

[zixxt]

http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1

Re:Umm....

[Aikar]

damn you beat me to it cause I had to login :(

Re:Umm....

[Culture20]

http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1

Is Gingerbread the same as Ice Cream Sandwich? Where the hell have version numbers gone?

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

"- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices"

So this whole "news" post on Slashdot is a joke. Surprise, surprise.

Re:Umm....

[tywjohn]

They do have version numbers. Just like Windows XP, Vista and 7 all have version numbers.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ice Cream Sandwich is considered 4.0, Honeycomb was 3.0 and Gingerbread was 2.3

Re:Umm....

[Kotoku]

damn you beat me to it cause I had to login :(

Well he saved you from making an error. The AOSP repository had some downtime and that announcement just says that the gingerbread source is available again. The ICS source is Android 4.0

Re:Umm....

[the linux geek]

Of course - because 2.3 and 4.0 are equivalent.

Re:Umm....

[Moryath]

Version 5 will be named Cookie Crisp then?

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1

Is Gingerbread the same as Ice Cream Sandwich? Where the hell have version numbers gone?

RTFL.

We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

Re:Umm....

[timothyb89]

Gingerbread is version 2.3. Ice Cream Sandwich is version 4.0. Most devices won't ever see the 3.0 updates and instead will just jump to 4.0.

This whole article is a non-issue - Google has said several times that the source would be released along with the new Galaxy Nexus. From http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a :

We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

They had some decent reasons for not releasing the Honeycomb source. Perhaps their reasons weren't good enough to make up for not releasing it at all, but their promises to release the 4.0 source have kept devs happy for a few months now. I see 4.0 as the update to 3.x that cleans up the source properly, and has the added benefit of no longer dividing between phones and tablets. Devs can finally get back to writing one app that works on everything.

Re:Umm....

[sapphire wyvern]

They're letter codes with a dessert theme. The first letter of the name is in alphabetical order.

C = Cupcake = 1.something
D = Donut = 2.0
E = Eclair = 2.1
F = FroYo = 2.2
G = Gingerbread = 2.3
H = Honeycomb = 3.0
I = Ice Cream Sandwich = 4.0

I'm not sure what the B version was called. The next version will presumably start with J. Jelly maybe?

Re:Umm....

[Anthony Mouse]

To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Not much on pattern recognition, are you?

The next version will be called Jelly Roll. It will be followed by Krispy Kreme, then Licorice Latte, then Merry Marshmallow. This stuff was announced months ago by Google. Do try to keep up.

Re:Umm....

[Thantik]

A = Alpha
B = Beta

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't usually get the code into AOSP immediately after the first phone comes out (they release the GPL-required bits only). This isn't new, everyone was expecting it.

Re:Umm....

[Julz]

Jello Cake? Or maybe Jam 'n Scones (spreading onto media appliances :P)

And I vote for "Smore" when we get to v14 :) oh and I don't suppose we'd have "Twinkie" for v15?

Re:Umm....

[Flipao]

Really? Because last I checked the source code of ever major version not named honeycomb had been released.

If they ever decide to stop releasing the source, self entitled trolls like you still have no right to complain: They've released more OS source code than Apple and Microsoft combined ever will.

As far as Honeycomb goes it has been explained to death that it was a quick fix to get Android on tablets, ICS is essentially Honeycomb with phone support, they've gone on record to say the source will be released, and it'll likely be out in a month or two, so take it easy.

Re:Umm....

[ScrewMaster]

A = Alpha B = Beta

Apple Turnover

Banana Bread.

Re:Umm....

[Jane Q. Public]

They're still not line or version numbers. Names are great, but when they're changed at the drop of a hat, they don't add anything, they get confusing.

Still waiting for Ubuntu's Obstreperous Ostrich.

Intel is the company that has taken it to ridiculous extremes. They have so many variants of their CPUs, with such bizarre and inconsistent designations, I (who used to be a computer tech) no longer even bother to keep track of most of them. I just look it up.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

They've released more OS source code than Apple and Microsoft combined ever will.

Haha another ignorant fandroid. Your statement about Apple might be true only if we ignore Darwin, cups, llvm/clang, bonjour, webkit, macruby, etc. Oh and if we ignore their contributions to things like Apache, GCC and various other GNU utilities, Samba, etc. Basically your talking from your ass.

Re:Umm....

[hairyfeet]

I have a question....what good will it be to get the source? The way I understand it, correct me if I'm mistaken, is that Android is using GPL 2 correct? And that there is no requirement to share driver source or anything BUT the kernel. Now considering these devices are as proprietary as the desktops used to be in the 80s how EXACTLY is one gonna find the source useful? Without the drivers these things are bricks, correct?

So I just don't get it, claiming Android is "open" without any requirements for drivers seems to me to be about as useful as claiming Apple is open because you can download Darwin. Without all the other bits one can't really do much with it, can they?

Re:Umm....

[Hardhead_7]

A and B were Alpha and Beta. Also, Donut was 1.6. There was no 2.0 official release, they went straight to 2.1 (Eclair).

Also, minor version bumps sometimes have no name. Honeycomb isn't just 3.0, it's more like 3.x (3.0, 3.1, and 3.2 are all "Honeycomb"). Now, that may just be Honeycomb, which is an oddball anyway since it doesn't run on phones and isn't open source. But it may also be that going forward, only major version numbers will have desert names. So Jellybean or whatever it ends up being called may be 5.0, with any incremental 4.x versions still being considered ICS. We'll see.

Re:Umm....

[cheekyjohnson]

If they ever decide to stop releasing the source, self entitled trolls like you still have no right to complain: They've released more OS source code than Apple and Microsoft combined ever will.

No one can criticize them because, in your opinion, some of the others are worst (and Google has done some good). Obviously all criticism will be completely invalid.

If things could be worse, the current situation is obviously good.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a specific difference to (well, not Apples, but other) open source projects where one can follow development and argue decisions when they are being made, rather than one year after the fact.
Someone thinks they are the smartest and don't really believe in the open source model.

Re:Umm....

[bmo]

Onanistic Orangutan

--
BMO

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm fucking gettin' hungry...

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

The drivers are blobs but the interfaces tend to remain fairly stable. Sometimes some interface tweaking is required. As a rule of thumb, no changes (or minimal) changes are required to the binary driver blobs. For the most part, things just work once you get the source compiling. And even better, the compilation instructions typically explain how to pull the drivers off of the device in question before you begin compiling; so as to be included in the new build.

Re:Umm....

[WilyCoder]

Because all of those things are 'OS source code', right?

Re:Umm....

[Anthony Mouse]

what good will it be to get the source?

See obvious answer here.

Having the source to the drivers would be preferable as then they could be improved as well, but nothing other than being a purist stops you from using the binary blobs as-is and improving the code that is open source.

Re:Umm....

[tlhIngan]

have a question....what good will it be to get the source?

Well, a ton of devices use AOSP - Kindle Fire, Nook, many tablets and phones, so those will get 4.0 when it comes out.

The other reason is if you have the True Android Phone. Or several now - the Nexus One, Nexus S, Galaxy Nexus phones, which are completely open and trivial to enable installing your own OS. Which is the whole point of Android.

The other phones? They're merely Android compatibles. Most have roots and other stuff that let you get them closer to the true Android phones.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I have this useless piece of junk from sharp called "netwalker". Once I managed to get android running on it, it turned to a rather nifty device. So there's that.

Re:Umm....

[scdeimos]

Maybe you missed this bullet point:

- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’ branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

Re:Umm....

[Commontwist]

I vote for Snickerdoodle!

Re:Umm....

[Kjella]

If they ever decide to stop releasing the source, self entitled trolls like you still have no right to complain: They've released more OS source code than Apple and Microsoft combined ever will.

Of course Microsoft or Apple never pretended their OS was open source either. And if Google wants to come right out and say we're moving to a closed source platform too, that's their right. But the whole "we might drop some source sometimes for some versions at some time" is neither here nor there. "Buy Android, it's open source" (2.x) "Forget Android and get an iPhone/iPad, same closed source shit" (3.x) "Oooh, it's open source again" (4.x) "Damn, they didn't release source again" (5.x).

I mean Google has pretty much set the precedent that they don't mind shipping products with no code. What's to say they won't do that again? Assuming the 4.0 code is coming out as promised, and I'm not holding my breath for that. Last time I heard them promise that it was for 3.1...

Re:Umm....

[brian.swetland]

There are remarkably few binary blobs in Android lead devices (some OEMs add more proprietary goop to their own phones though).

http://source.android.com/source/building-devices.html

Nexus S, for example, requires these pieces above and beyond the available open source userspace and kernel code:
- opengl userspace libraries (ImaginationTech)
- radio interface library (Samsung) -- glue between the Android Telephony stack and the Radio
- firmware for bt/wifi chip (Broadcom)
- GPS userspace library (Broadcom)
- NFC firmware / loader library (NXP)
- auto-calibration library for orientation sensor (AKM)

The closed pieces are available here, under a license that allows you to use them in your own builds, and even to redistribute (non-commercially) entire flashable OS images including them.

We continue to work to reduce the number of closed binaries needed on the lead Android devices. We have *never* shipped a lead device that includes any non-gpl/bsd kernel code.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

They are in alphabetical order.... G, H, I.... :)

Re:Umm....

[AndrewNeo]

There was no 2.0 official release? What the heck did my original Droid come with then? It was API level 5, and was quickly replaced with 2.0.1 (API level 6). 2.0 came out in November 2009, 2.1 didn't come out till January 2010. 2.0 doesn't have a dessert name as far as I can tell, though.

Re:Umm....

[murr]

Oh hallelujah, our problems are solved. We have banana bread.

Re:Umm....

[GigaplexNZ]

Darwin is.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Gingerbread is 2.3, Honeycomb is 3.x and Ice Cream Sandwich is 4.0.

So still no source for Ice Cream Sandwich.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Half of your list (at least) is open source stuff apple *uses*, not wrote themselves. Of course they're going to release those parts.. now any more source code (desktop etc?)... nope.

Re:Umm....

[oook_in]

From that post:

We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices./

Re:Umm....

[ttong]

Almost...

Re:Umm....

[BasilBrush]

Apple Turnover
Banana Bread.

"Turnover" being another name for rip-off.

Re:Umm....

[somersault]

Strange, I didn't get that from his comment.. he mentions Win7 once.

As someone who's been using Linux as their primary OS for both work and personal use for the last 2 or 3 years, and has hated MS ever since Window s3.1, I think it's safe to say that I'm not a shill. Still, I just ordered a new PC, and guess what, I left Windows 7 on there, because Windows 7 finally has the ability to run sanely without admin privileges, and having a 6 core processor makes me a little less frustrated at the idea that I'll have to run AV to be safe. I'm going to use Windows 7 as my base OS for VMs and gaming, and do everything else in Linux VMs (probably Mint or Crunchbang, but I want to try out Turnkey too). If it turns out that all the games I like run well in WINE, then I'll switch to Linux as the base OS.. but simply having a machine with Windows 7 on it is not a "Microsoft talking point"..

Re:Umm....

[cynyr]

the open licensed code is out for 3.x. It's just not useful and to be fair, 3.x has no place on a phone, it wouldn't work well on the small screens. 4.x will work on all screen sizes, from 3" to 70" (of course that really means like 480x240 to 1080p). anyways, I'm fairly sure there is a precedent of not having source out for a new version until there is an official google branded product shipping with it. This makes some sense, or just about everyone would already be running CM8.0-RC1 by now.

Re:Umm....

[GameboyRMH]

I still think that should have been the name of the latest release. Really reflects the Ubuntu interface design philosophy these days as well.

Re:Umm....

[Desler]

Umm, no. The first part of the list are all Apple OSS projects that they own, develop and release the source code to. The second half with Apache are all projects that they've made numerous source contributions to for years now. So, yes, while those projects are ones they "use" they have also been years long contributors to them. So, sorry, fandroid but you're still wrong. Apple is has contributed millions and millions of lines of OSS and was doing so for years before Google ever started making its token gestures.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you get the source and stick it up your ass, fat bitch?

Re:Umm....

[oakgrove]

We continue to work to reduce the number of closed binaries needed on the lead Android devices. We have *never* shipped a lead device that includes any non-gpl/bsd kernel code.

Thank you! Great work and I can't wait to get my hands on the Galaxy Nexus!

Re:Umm....

[m.ducharme]

Hoo boy, I can see that being a problem down the road, as the community implements kludgey fixes in the kernel source to work around deficiencies in the binary blobs. We've seen how well that works with linux and video cards. In some ways, mixed open/blob code is worse than either completely open or completely closed solutions.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Jstupid jnaming jconvention. This industry is too cutesy for its own good. It's pathetic really.

Re:Umm....

[somersault]

Well we had a little discussion the other week about hardware and games that didn't really involve OS at all that I remember. He even pointed me to the Linux section of Good Old Games - he didn't seem anti-Linux to me.

I do tend to call people out on witless fanboi-ism/shilling, but Hairyfeet just struck me as someone who's enthusiastic about tech in general, rather than one of the guys with a 2500000 level ID that's clearly just been created to slag off Google while boosting MS and Facebook (ie TechLA and the others).

There are actually some people out there who, strange as it may seem to you, have differing opinions, and reasons for those opinions. My best friend likes his iPhone, but for some reason is talking about getting a Windows Phone for his next phone. He simply liked the interface when he tried it. He's all about aesthetics, whereas I care more about features and the ethics of the companies involved, aesthetics being nice but not a priority. So while I find it hard to believe that anyone who says they like MS products isn't a shill.. some of them aren't.

Re:Umm....

[tesdalld]

They would not be named Krispy Kreme or Jello or any of those names, those names are trademarks.

Re:Umm....

[HappyPsycho]

peanut butter Jelly time!!!!

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

So, er, you didn't look at his posting history...

Does this help?

Re:Umm....

[somersault]

Well, he's a bit misinformed on the differences between the internals of OSX and your standard Linux distro (which conceptually are almost identical), but I think he's getting more annoyed at your average Linux evangelist's attitudes than the technicalities.

There have been some installs of Ubuntu where I'm sure I never had to touch the command line to do any usery stuff, so I know it's not true that the CLI is always necessary in Linux. I do think he's wrong there. However I got sick of Ubuntu, and with Mint (the second most popular Linux distro) I've had to resort to get things working the way I like.

I don't have a problem with the CLI myself, being a geek and CompSci graduate, etc, and I do disagree with him that it's "out of style". It's never really been "in style" for end users, but it is incredibly convenient for power users and adminstrators to be able to script and pipe everything about.

Linux is not a drop in replacement for Windows any more than OSX is, simply because there are some games and professional apps that you just can't run. He's being a bit of a troll in the way he gets so worked up and overgeneralises, but his overall message is that Linux either needs to change/babify to be suitable for everyday users. I think that's one option. The other option is that we stop caring about trying to go mainstream. I think that is also a sensible option. I'd love if Linux were mainstream on the desktop, because then I wouldn't need Windows for gaming - it's the only reason I've ever used Windows at home. But I also realised I don't care that much whether other people use Linux or not any more than I would want everyone else to use the same brand of car as me or something.

Yes he's being a douchebag in the way he phrases things, but so are the guys on the other end of the scale. I hate fanboism in general. That's why I always go devil's advocate on everything. I'm sure sometimes I come across as a fanboi myself. I can be very opinionated. I definitely was more fanboi-ish and religious about things in the past - but I at least try to see things from other people's point of view, apart from the guys who are very obviously shilling (who sometimes make valid points, but it's often among half-truths or completely misinformed viewpoints).

Re:Umm....

[bonch]

"once it's available on devices."

In other words, after Google's privileged partners have fully taken advantage of their early access to the OS. Why isn't it open source right now?

Re:Umm....

[UnanimousCoward]

What comes after Zucchini bread? Aceymac apple pie?

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut the fuck up you stupid fat piece of shit loser. Go back to fucking them little old ladies out of their social security checks with your system optimizer services bullshit you sorry excuse for human excrement.

Re:Umm....

[oakgrove]

Thanking somebody and complimenting them on their work is flamebait now? O_o

Re:Umm....

[StikyPad]

Don't forget the Transformer Prime, Optimus Prime, LexisNexis, and the upcoming Jellyroll running on Alexis Texas with full TRIM support.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

cock smoker die

Re:Umm....

[technomom]

Wow. Have you actually done any research on the subject? Cyanogen is amazingly popular, useful, and solid. So solid, in fact, that Samsung sent its phones to the creators of Cyanogen for test. Then, they hired the Cyanogen founder who continues to build and invest in the project. If anything, it has made for a better product.

Re:Umm....

[technomom]

It makes little sense to do so until they've stablized it for release. This has always been the case with Android. The AOSP always follows after the Nexus announce. I know all the Android haters want to see a conspiracy here but this has been AOSP standard operating procedure all along.

Re:Umm....

[brian.swetland]

The closed bits on Galaxy Nexus are pretty similar to Nexus S (though the orientation sensor no longer requires a closed library -- one is provided that "adds extra value" but the system works fine without it).

Re:Umm....

[GrumpySteen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnover

Must be some local slang usage. Rip-off appears to be one of the few things it doesn't mean to the general public.

Re:Umm....

[somersault]

Actually I was being honest about not needing the CLI in Ubuntu. I realised one day that I hadn't needed to do any weird configuration at all for a couple of Ubuntu installs. I still chose to use apt-get over synaptic (the GUI equivalent) a lot of the time, and likewise I like to use Remote Desktop and VNC from the command line, but there are GUIs for those who want them. Apache I did make a couple of symlinks for on the CLI, but there is probably a GUI tool for making symlinks (they're a bit like Shortcuts, but not quite the same) for those who want it, and anybody who uses Apache will very likely be someone who is comfortable with a CLI anyway of course. So I do think it's possible if your drivers are working perfectly. Since I moved to Mint of course, I've resorted to the CLI to sort out WiFi issues before. So Ubuntu is the only distro I'd recommend to noobs, and then I'd only recommend devices that come with Ubuntu, like certain Dells, as they're guaranteed to be supported in the driver dept!

As someone who has been a Windows admin for 10 years now, yes I have met a few who use Start->Run, one of whom is me. For example I don't know an easier way to start regedit without creating a shortcut to it in the Start Menu (which you don't want to do for most users!). Likewise if you're just doing one-liners like regsvr32 or whatever then it makes sense. Usually I type cmd in there for a command line if I'm not on my own Windows machines (which will have it in the Start Menu or on the desktop).

You're broadly correct in your GUI vs CLI comparison. Often a GUI is convenient. I've actually considered writing some GUIs for Linux myself just to make life easier for those who aren't aware of the locations of common config files, or those who know them but just want a convenient location for quickly configuring anything they want. Even if it just links to a bunch of text files like the Windows "sysedit" command (was still around in XP, not sure if it is on 7).

Yep. Linux has plenty of potential for end users on the desktop if it keeps improving, but it's definitely not ideal for everybody yet. In terms of my own Linux experience, this pretty much covers it though. I didn't like having to screw around just to configure my monitor resolution and get 3D in the past. I've not had to do that since I tried Ubuntu in 2008. Things are definitely heading in the right direction.

Re:Umm....

[Anonymous Coward]

And all you do is accuse people of being shills and fling insults when their opinion doesn't exactly line up with your own. You want people to stop using Microsoft products, but who do you really think you are going to convince with that childish attitude of yours?

At least Windows users don't spend significant portions of their day in bitter rage over what software other people choose to use.

Re:Umm....

[rhook]

For those too lazy to read the link.

"- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices. "

Posted yesterday.

Re:Umm....

[BasilBrush]

Yes, it's British slang. If somewhere has been "turned-over", it means it's been robbed. The etymology is obvious I think.

Re:Umm....

[another_twilight]

Add me to the list of those who use Start->Run. Regedit, iexplore, calc, winver, ntbackup, cmd, mstsc, eventvwr ... either they don't have convenient links, or it's quicker to type than play 'where's the icon on _this_ machine'.

GUI might reward exploration but you are dead wrong when you think that what most people do is _not_ repetition. People learn a pattern of movements and clicks. Change the icon's location and they are lost. They don't 'explore' to find it again. Those who are happy to poke about a GUI are also happy enough to play with a CLI if they get shown one. Of course it's going to be a bot confronting if all they have seen is a GUI, but that doesn't make it inherently more challenging than working out how to get the 'classic' control panel so you can find the link you remember from the last version of Windows.

You have a serious case of subjectivity and preconception. You hear what you want to hear - like your Linux admin's claim about new tasks.

You know Windows. I get it. You've met some obnoxious FOSS advocates. Me too. But you are ranting. You often rant. You are rude and obnoxious ... Hey, wait - all the things you claim to have experienced you, in fact, exhibit. You justify your behavior by what amounts to straw men. No one you are responding to made the claims you are attacking. Seriously mate, you come across as though some Linux user killed your dog when you were a kid.

Re:Umm....

[hairyfeet]

Must not be on a laptop then, as I have found exactly ONE distro that worked OOTB on wireless and sadly Ubuntu wasn't it. Xandros Linux worked OOTB on all four laptops I threw at it, but since it was $89 an install and Windows 7 HP is like $35 when you buy the 3 pack it ended up being pointless.

And I don't know how many times I can say this, you seem to be a nice guy so I'm gonna assume its not on purpose. You yourself admit you're an admin, yes?that's fine, hell I use CLI for IPConf, but you know what? NOT TALKING ABOUT GEEKS here, because Linux has ZERO growth factor for geeks, the geeks that want it already have it, those that don't? Happy where they are.

I'm talking about the people i work for 6 days a week, your mailman, your landlady, the checkout girl at the grocery store. Now be honest somersault , do you think any of those folks have EVER used start>>>run for anything? Hell most late model XP Dells didn't even come with start>run in XP Home and NOBODY noticed. Did you? I didn't until I needed to IPConf and had to remember to go use the GUI because the start didn't have it. It does show though how little that's used by home users when many PCs don't even have it and nobody notices.

And I still stand by my statement that for home users there is NO CLI in windows, it doesn't exist. they don't use it, they don't need it, you could strip it out tomorrow and nobody would notice. Now compare that to Ubuntu, go to their forum and ask for a NON CLI solution to ANY problem, see what you get. you'll get insulted, you'll get cursed, you'll get treated like shit by elitist fucks.

Here is my other little test that shows, at least for retail, Linux isn't ready. Take ANY distro, your choice friend, download the ISO from 5 years ago (that would be Ubuntu 6 if you use Ubuntu i do believe), get everything working, NOW upgrade it to current, see how much is broke. I had exactly ONE, count 'em one, PC survive two upgrades, NONE survived upgrading to current with 100% hardware working, not one. Hell don't take MY word for it, how do you explain Dell have to run their own repos even though we are talking a teeny tiny subset of hardware? Its because everybody cranks out new code without bothering with even basic QA friend, that's why. Expecting a minimum of 7 years frankly ought to SOP, hell even Vista is getting 5+ and nobody bought it.

In the end I think the problem with Linux is threefold, 1.-the elitist assholes that think CLI gives them gonad powerz and all that don't want to learn Bash commands must be idiots. yeah I don't see them loading their kernels with punch cards, do you? And why aren't their apps in ASM, after all ALL languages since ASM has been to make things easier, get PEEKing and POKEing!

2.-Can't see the forest for the BS. As I said there is this great new thing that could put Linux in front of millions without even them knowing! Its fast, simple, easy, gives them MORE battery life or in the case of desktops lets them surf or enjoy media with SSD speed, yet the community ignores it. And for what? Every other attempt has failed miserably, Linux is flatline, same numbers this year as last, the only real gains are coming from dictatorships that want to do a China and put "Red Flag watch your ass" Linux on everything. with Expressgate/Splashtop you could actually do what the community has wanted for years, put Linux in the hands of millions, but because it is easy? See reason 1 as to why it won't get traction.

3.-the final nail in the coffin, one I can't see an easy way to fix, the "busted shitter" problem. everybody wants to be the guy who makes the cool discovery, everybody wants to be the star, how many want to fix busted shitters? try NONE. this is why Apple and MSFT have to pay out millions to coders, because bug fixing and serious documentation and QA? Its all slow, long, boring as watching flies fuck and thankless work. MSFT and Apple PAY to get that work done

Re:Umm....

[RocketRabbit]

This is just the source to the GPL portions of Android. It's not "the source code to Android."

Re:Umm....

[somersault]

It's on my netbook, never had any WiFi problems with Ubuntu. When I switched to Mint, I started having problems like I said, but Ubuntu was fine. It really depends on your hardware. Windows 7 seems to have pretty decent driver support, but Ubuntu was miles ahead of XP. I started using Ubuntu before Windows 7 was available and so it was really refreshing to have everything just work on a fresh install without doing the traditional scouring the internet or driver CD for the files I needed, which I'd been doing on Windows since 1998.

Yes, I agreed with you about users, but you asked specifically "seriously have you EVER met even a fucking admin that uses start>>.run for shit in Windows?" and I was answering. I use Run (Windows key + R, it's nice and quick) regularly for opening network shares. You can type paths into explorer address bars too, but I don't often have an explorer Window open, and pressing Windows R then the path you want is faster than opening explorer, clicking to the address bar and typing the path you want. In Windows 7 you can just press the Windows key instead of Windows-R, since the new search box doubles up as a "Run" menu" anyway. You can type command names or network paths right in there. Very useful if you're on someone else's machine and you don't have shortcuts set up, or you are accessing some uncommon file path from your own machine (ie to open up the C:\ drive on someone else's computer, you can use \\computername\c$ ). These are not reasons for users to need the quick Run functionality, but they are good reasons for admins to use it.

I rarely see a Home edition of Windows, so I can't comment there. Usually I run Professional editions, even at home. I think my new machine is going to be Home Premium or something, but it hasn't been assembled yet..

I don't think your problem is with Linux so much as with Gnome/KDE and the attitude of the developers. The Linux kernel itself is very stable and well maintained (there are a lot of paid developers that work on it), but yeah there are plenty of poorly managed open source projects (just as there is a lot of shit commercial software out there, believe me). There's too much infighting and cock-waving when it comes to window managers. Personally if I was going to work on OSS projects I'd start off by just doing bug fixes for a while. That's the recommended way to get into Kernel development actually, you join the "kernel janitors" group and start off fixing bugs and cleaning up code. Eventually once you're familiar and competent with the code, you can work on new features and improvements. Personally I value stability over features, but if we're talking about attracting more users, that's clearly not the way forward - just look at the history of any software.

Re:Umm....

[hairyfeet]

Well comparing ANYTHING to XP would be like comparing the latest Windows to Ubuntu first edition. Hell if it wasn't for military contracts MSFT would have done taken it behind the barn and put a bullet in it. You can't even buy OEM XP anymore, I haven't seen a retail copy in 3 years.

And sorry about start>>>run, I should have been more specific, the numbnuts misquoting me swears to God that we ALL use start>>>run constantly to launch programs. I don't know about you but on machines where I'm not admining? I MAYBE use it once a month, if that, and only to quick call regedit. Which FYI despite the hate registry is YEARS ahead of a bunch of .txt files splattered like a shotgun blast all over the OS. I can shoot a .reg to a client and say 'clicky clicky and reboot" and fix a good 80% of common everyday nigglers. There just isn't anything THAT easy when it comes to Linux, if the user can't run CLI (which a sane person does NOT give normal users admin if they can help it) or can't get the syntax? they're boned. i have seen Linux machines crippled simply because a word was mistyped in the wrong .conf file, a PC shouldn't be THAT easily broken.

Well if you work on anyone but corporate prepare to be in Home, as I'm predicting home Premium WILL be the new XP Pro. With XP there was enough differences to warrant using pro at home, with 7? Frankly there isn't a single feature that can't be done better using third party and a good 95%+ of the features they kept for pro frankly aren't used even by SMBs, strictly huge corps. So I'm seeing small offices all over the place running Home premium simply because its so much cheaper, hell you can get the 3 pack for something like $39 a license.

And there is ONE thing I really really REALLY have a problem with the kernel, and that is a stable hardware ABI. Linus in his arrogance simply won't allow one and its stupid, it could end all the "update foo broke my drivers" mess tomorrow and the ONLY reasons not to have one are arrogance and religious dogma. Again when ALL your competitors, windows, OSX, BSD, even OS/2, ALL have stable ABIs you should ask "Are they doing something right that we're doing wrong?" because for Torvalds to think he is smarter than the kernel teams of a half a dozen OSes put together? just shows how arrogant he truly is. Every argument against ends up boiling down to "ZOMG somebody might make a non free driver ZOMG!" which of course ignores the fact that binary blobs ARE HERE ALREADY and that a stable ABI isn't gonna suddenly change a corporations entire policy towards GPL one way or another.

Ultimately what Linux needs, and I get serious hate for saying this, is a Steve Jobs. Right now its too fractured, too many off doing their own thing, no real direction. it needs a dictator to come in there and say "You WILL get on the fucking ball NOW!" and lead the troops. many say it can't be done because of the nature of FOSS, I think it can. look at Google and how many have jumped on android. Give people a way to make money off what they do? You'd be surprised how many hoops they'll be willing to jump. But I agree that as it is there is simply too much cock waving and bullshit. The clock is ticking, XP is EOL in less than 2 years. The distro that cuts through the bullshit and gives the masses a "clicky clicky" easy peasy solution that runs on the hundreds of millions of machines? Could take some real share. but instead we see the DEs ripping off the worst bling bling of OSX and Windows, getting slower all the time, no real focus, its just a mess. And as someone that makes a living selling machines I can't afford to wait another 5 years while they get their shit together, if they ever do.

Sue!

[Culture20]

It's your God-given right as an American. Sue for the source! Where's RMS?

Re:Sue!

[Kotoku]

All elements that under the GPL require source code distribution are already available for download.

Re:Sue!

[tomhudson]

Where's RMS?

Too busy being crazy.

Everyone knows he doesn't care about Ice Cream Sandwich - he prefers his own brand of Foot Cheese ( @ 1min54sec )

Re:Sue!

[Shooter28]

Why is this listed under your rights online? Google wrote the code, it's up to them what they want to do with it.

Re:Sue!

[t2t10]

Legally, of course, they can do what they want and get away with it. But one reason users and companies adopted Android was because Google promised to keep it open source and royalty free.

Re:Sue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it means that the program's users have the four essential freedoms:

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

The Free Software Definition

Re:Sue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well that's cool because ICS isn't available yet (binary or source). It will launch with the galaxy nexus. Which also happens to be when the source will be made available.

We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a This article is a complete non-story.

Re:Sue!

[poetmatt]

Say what? They said they'd make the entire source available, GPL source is already available.

It's also your right to feebly troll the article, and you could have done so much better.

Re:Sue!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's you're right to feed the trolls....congrats you're doing it well and have mastered your craft. Oh crap is this referring to me or you...now I'm stuck in a self-referencing loop...thanks alot poetmatt.

Re:Sue!

[muon-catalyzed]

> Where's RMS?

Such a brazen GPL betrayal... RMS should sacrifice himself on a stake of Androids in the Googleplex backyard!

Re:Sue!

[Maritz]

It's you're right to feed the trolls....congrats you're doing it well and have mastered your craft.

2/3 ain't bad.

Re:Sue!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's your God-given right as an American. Sue for the source! Where's RMS?

It's an Apache license, not GPL. They don't have to offer source. Things that make you go DOH!

Re:Sue!

[technomom]

....which they have clearly stated they intend to do. So what is the problem?

Re:Sue!

[t2t10]

Intent isn't sufficient. They need to release frequently and completely if they don't want to lose the trust of the community. They may not have a problem yet, but they soon will if they don't act soon.

Re:Sue!

[Lisias]

The thrust of the community didn't protected them from the bad media they got on all that half-baked cheap Android devices.

I don't like this as anyone else, but I can't close my eyes from the fact that they're trying to survive a battle where the adversaries are gaining ground by carefully choosing the devices in which they are being presented to the public (by controlling who have access to the source).

Re:Sue!

[t2t10]

You're assuming that the cheap Android devices hurt them. I think that's an erroneous assumption. While cheap Android devices may cause the Apple press to ridicule Android, I think they are a net benefit. The biggest problem with cheap Android devices isn't the cheap hardware, it's lack of access to Google's Market. Instead of clamming up and making things harder for users, Google should open up more.

Apple has such a fringe market that it just isn't worth even competing with them; and Android isn't going to lure away die-hard iPhone users anyway because they by iPhone because of the brand name, not the functionality.

Bad title.

[Mark19960]

Only Ice Cream Sandwich is up in the air, not all Android source code.
The title implies that it was all taken down, which is simply not true.

Re:Bad title.

[jrumney]

More precisely, everything after 2.3 is up in the air. When 3.0 was released, we were promised source code for 3.1. Then 3.1 was released, and it was - "no, we've changed our numbering scheme so 3.1 is actually a minor update to 3.0, and what we previously called 3.1 will actually be 4.0". Now 4.0 is out, and Google are being very evasive about the question of source code. My guess is that the partners have become more powerful, and convinced Google that they should have a competitive advantage over the clone manufacturers in China. We might see the Honeycomb source soon, but I wouldn't expect ICS source at least until Jelly Roll is in the hands of Samsung, HTC, Motorola and Sony Ericcson.

Re:Bad title.

[compro01]

Now 4.0 is out.

4.0 is out? Where? The first phone running 4.0 (the Galaxy Nexus) doesn't come out til next month.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

If by "being very evasive", you mean posting the following tidbit here:

We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

But that doesn't sound evasive at all. It sounds like the exact thing they've been saying since the 3.1 ruckus (which was bad, and was their fault, unquestionably). Wait at least till the first ICS device (Galaxy Nexus, I think) is shipped -- if you don't feel like giving them a reasonable couple weeks after that, well ok, but nobody paying any attention at all could possibly expect they'd have released the source by now, since they always said it would be when the phone-ready version (previously 3.1, now 4.0) was out.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Other way around. All the awful customizations, fragmentation and side deals with Bing, etc. is Google's headache, so they play favorites with manufacturers that agree to Google's rules.

Re:Bad title.

[shellbeach]

4.0 is out? Where? The first phone running 4.0 (the Galaxy Nexus) doesn't come out til next month.

You can run ICS quite happily in the android emulator from the SDK right now. So, yeah, it's out.

The source isn't out yet, but Google's been very specific that it will be released in the next few weeks ("We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices") just as Gingerbread was.

This post is a joke -- it focuses on the comments on an engineer who has nothing to do with the ICS code release, and says as much. However, some people seem so convinced that Google's gone full-evil that they're jumping on every "no comment".

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

Of course they do. When they find one, it goes on the front page.

Re:Bad title.

[mattcasters]

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

You must be new here!

Re:Bad title.

[Daniel Phillips]

My guess is that the partners have become more powerful, and convinced Google that they should have a competitive advantage over the clone manufacturers in China.

Or Google's trustworthiness and responsibility to the community is declining.

Re:Bad title.

[Xest]

Actually no, it's just the usual Apple fanboy trolls trying to stir FUD up about Android as always.

Like all the FUD about fragmentation, which they've suddenly gone silent about since iOS itself has become fragmented whilst not being designed from the outset to cope with it as well as Android was.

On that note, where's the iOS and Windows Phone source code? Oh wait, nevermind.

The genius of Apple marketing is that their fanboys are so addicted to their brand that they don't even have to do much, the fanboy troll army does most of their job for them nowadays.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is logical. What was utterly stupid was to release the source in the first place. Now the assholes have to justify the change.

Re:Bad title.

[muon-catalyzed]

> up in the air

is that a new codeword for closed-source?

Re:Bad title.

[shellbeach]

*laughs* ... I first started reading /. in 1999 (sadly didn't sign up for an account until mid-2002 ... oh, the missed opportunity for low ID number)

This story is pretty bad even by /.'s lowly standards, though.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

No they don't, but they don't check for fan boys comments either!!

Re:Bad title.

[delinear]

Google (aside from the Nexus, which is more of a showcase device) isn't a phone manufacturer. Why would they care what clone manufacturers in China are doing? If anything, keeping the source open should encourage more of these clone manufacturers to adopt Android, which in turn will increase their market share (and the number of people shopping in the Android market).

Re:Bad title.

[delinear]

And to clarify, I meant phone vendor - I know they don't "manufacture" the phones per se.

Re:Bad title.

[CaptainJeff]

Technically, the ICS SDK is out, which is more of a pre-release of the OS for developers so we can get apps ready for it. Until an actual device appears running ICS, I don't think I would say it is "out."

And yes ... Google will release it.

And yes ... this article is horribly misinformed.

Re:Bad title.

[Andy Dodd]

Technically the master mirrors were all taken down temporarily - not by Google but by the asshat that compromised kernel.org

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

Yes, and they post every single one they find.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Like all the FUD about fragmentation, which they've suddenly gone silent about since iOS itself has become fragmented whilst not being designed from the outset to cope with it as well as Android was.

I'm not in love with iOS, but give me a break. Try using Android across different OSes, phone manufacturers, and service providers. 'Fragmented' is a nice way to put it.

Re:Bad title.

[Xest]

The point is this, Android apps work pretty well across all those devices, the fragmentation trolling implied the difficulty of developing across a fragmented device base was a major barrier which it clearly isn't.

The reason I point out it's now more of an issue for iOS because they didn't plan for it is illustrated nicely by the common example of iOS' method of dealing with the large iPad screen vs. the iPhone screen such that it only uses a small percentage of the screen space and leaves the rest black, or horribly pixelates the app by just doubling the size of the pixels. That needn't have ever been the case if they'd planned for the fact that their screen resolution etc. wasn't always going to remain static - progress being inevitable is a bit of a no brainer, yet Apple missed this and tried to spin it as them avoiding the fragmentation issue by only having a single standardised spec. That wasn't going to work for ever, Android's planning for it from the outset in the design of it's APIs paid off such that it is much more supportive of development of a single app that plays nicely across many specs. iOS is only struggling more and more with this as they release more fragmented devices, whilst Android seems to be getting more and more polished as time goes on despite having an order of magnitude more variants.

It's not that Android doesn't have fragmentation, it's simply that it's far superior at handling it, because it always knew it'd have to.

Re:Bad title.

[Jonner]

Only Ice Cream Sandwich is up in the air, not all Android source code.
The title implies that it was all taken down, which is simply not true.

Even if Google longer offered download links for Apache-licensed Android components, it wouldn't matter that much, since many people have copies and the license can't be revoked. What does matter is whether Google has decided to make future releases proprietary only. That would be a low blow even worse than Apple's participation in FLOSS projects and be clear signal that they're headed directly into evil territory.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Google has officially started its Walled Garden with Android after all!

Re:Bad title.

[kidgenius]

Actually, those guys using just the open source aren't going to count as customers because the devices won't ship with the google apps, including market. That's why when you install Cyanogenmod, you need to go get the google apps package from somewhere else to provide the extra functionality. Only devices that license through google get the market, gmail, etc.

Re:Bad title.

[jo_ham]

Is your user name a Dark City reference?

Re:Bad title.

[Bert64]

They will be once the purchase of motorola mobility goes through...

Re:Bad title.

[shellbeach]

Sure is :)

Such an underrated movie ...

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Call me silly, but if /. editors had to look up every fact, nothing would ever be posted here.

Re:Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, they did change their number scheme. When they first mentioned 3.1 before they released Honeycomb they said 3.1 would be the release where they combine the phone and tablet branches of the OS, that didn't happen with the actual 3.1 release but rather has happened with 4.0 (Ice cream sandwich), I say give Google a month after they release the Galaxy Nexus before claiming they are going to keep it closed. Why a month after? That would be because IIRC they haven't been too quick releasing the source for previous versions, but I'm not going to check the actual time between the releases and the source availability.

Personally I'm not going to buy an Android device until they start releasing the source again, so I do hope the release it.

Impatient, much?

[mariasama16]

Wait, so the fact that the OS was announced 24 hours ago, its not been released on any phone/device/etc yet and people are STILL whining that the source is not released?! I want their time machine!

Re:Impatient, much?

[the linux geek]

How about 3.0, which was released almost a year ago?

Re:Impatient, much?

[NoobixCube]

Mod parent up.

Re:Impatient, much?

[Flipao]

4.0 is 3.0 with support for small devices, the source for Honeycomb was withheld to stop developers from attempting to shoehorn it into phones and make fragmentation worse than it already is. The first Honeycomb devices started to come out during February/March, which is hardly "almost a year".

Re:Impatient, much?

[phantomfive]

We've been waiting nearly a year for this. The big question people, including me, are worried about is not when, but iF.

Re:Impatient, much?

[amRadioHed]

Right, or in the words of Matias Duarte "On Honeycomb we cheated, we cut the corner of all that smaller device support. That’s the sole reason we haven’t open sourced it."

Re:Impatient, much?

[Zebedeu]

I don't know where the Slashdot summary pulled the (strangely unlinked) quote from JBQ, but in his most recent post in Google+. he confirmed the source is coming: https://plus.google.com/112218872649456413744/posts/HB5qQHeNKBQ

JBQ is the guy who almost resigned in protest over the Cyanogenmod debacle (when Google demanded that they don't bundle the Google apps with their rom), and he's the guy in charge of releasing the code to the Android open source project.
So when he says the source is coming, I'm inclined to believe him.

Re:Impatient, much?

[Anonymous Coward]

But they made it clear they didn't want to release the source for 3.0 (as in, not ever) because there were a lot of gigantic ugly hacks in it. They said they'll release the source for 4.0 soon.

Re:Impatient, much?

[delinear]

Ditto - this is all based on Honeycomb, but the reason for that not being opened up was explained (they were afraid manufacturers would run with it on mobiles even though it wasn't optimised for mobiles, giving the public a false bad impression of the OS). If Google wanted to move to closed source, it's already done the hard work breaking that news with Honeycomb, they'd just stick with that line. What they wouldn't do is announce ICS is going to be open, get everyone excited, then pull the rug a second time - that would drag their public image with many people through the dirt. For that reason, and the comments from JBQ, I find it massively unlikely they're planning to keep ICS closed, but conspiracy theorists will be conspiracy theorists.

Re:Impatient, much?

[Tacvek]

The quote came from the second link. He could not speak openly about that until Dan Morrill announced that the AOSP back up and running.

Dan made that announcement later in the day, at which point JBQ made the G+ comment that you linked to.

Too Early, comes with official update push

[Kotoku]

This is a dumb news story. History has shown that the source release hits the AOSP shortly after the update is pushed to phones (presumably to protect against any major flaws before it is rolled out to devs).

SDK has been released, SDK Roms should be out soon and by December ICS source should be under heavy development for CM 8 and other roms if history is any indicator.

Google reported on the live stream last night plans to put the ICS source up, something they said they had no plans to do with Honeycomb.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Thantik]

CyanogenMod 9. They're skipping 8 because 8 was supposed to be for Honeycomb.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Now I know I'm a true nerd. I almost got goose bumps.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

CyanogenMod 9. They're skipping 8 because 8 was supposed to be for Honeycomb.

Well, I hope the Cyanogenmod project continues. Steve Kondik is now working for Samsung: what that will do to his priorities (and to what is actually allowed to do on CMx) is hard to say. I hope it goes on: that one project has advanced the state-of-the-Android-art considerably. For the past couple of years, I won't even consider a device that I can't root and put my CM on.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I hope the Cyanogenmod project continues. Steve Kondik is now working for Samsung: what that will do to his priorities (and to what is actually allowed to do on CMx) is hard to say. I hope it goes on: that one project has advanced the state-of-the-Android-art considerably. For the past couple of years, I won't even consider a device that I can't root and put my CM on.

Cyanogenmod is just a temporary solution for a bigger problem, that the carriers/manufacturers lock down and hack away at their Android builds until it barely resembles the stock Android experience. Hence all the fragmentation, limitation of what users should be able to do with their devices, and it creates so many inconsistencies across brands/carriers. Cyanogenmod is just a response to that problem.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing personal against you, but comments like this are so ignorant.

Steve Kondik is just one man in the team that produces Cyanogenmod. Cyanogenmod was never his primary day job. He continues to work on Cyanogenmod even under Samsung employ. Even if he had to remove himself completely from Cyanogenmod, the rest of the team is there.

Seriously, go look at the maintainers list. There's a ton of names there.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[shellbeach]

Well, I hope the Cyanogenmod project continues.

They've quite publicly stated that they are ... and the CM7 code review has been as busy as ever.

Steve Kondik is now working for Samsung: what that will do to his priorities (and to what is actually allowed to do on CMx) is hard to say.

He's still approving CM7 code, so I'd say he's managing OK ...

I hope it goes on: that one project has advanced the state-of-the-Android-art considerably. For the past couple of years, I won't even consider a device that I can't root and put my CM on.

Funnily enough, it's even possible that Google might agree with you -- that story claims that they choose a set of CM developers to work on the Galaxy Nexus and ICS.

I also suspect that -- given Samsung famously gave the CM7 devs a Galaxy SII each in exchange for getting CM7 running on the SII -- that Samsung has no wish to see CM7 die either. Or at least, they certainly don't mind seeing it running on their phones. Reading between the lines, I think that Google realises just what a great thing they've got going with the CM team, and are encouraging them to keep on keeping-on; after all, CM has fixed heaps of bugs in the Android code base.

It's certainly a very different strategy to Apple's response to jailbreaking (you may recall that they tried, unsuccessfully, to declare it illegal through DRM circumvention).

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[AndrewNeo]

It's pretty much a fact Google sees the value in it, because their (perfectly valid and legal) initial decision to tell Cyanogenmod to stop bundling Google's apps (Maps, Market, etc.) soon turned into a "you know what, just download the bundle from us and it'll be fine"

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Sun]

I know a few people who work for Samsung doing open source projects (EFL and such). They are devoting, pretty much, all of their paid time to that open source project.

If Steve Kondik was hired by Samsung in order to work on CM, expect more output from him, not less.

Shachar

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Samsung has actually been providing resources to further the development of CM. My understanding is that they want him to continue developing it.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Cyanogen himself has confirmed it will continue. It's much bigger than just Cyanogen now with all of Team Douche working on it.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Google reported on the live stream last night plans to put the ICS source up, something they said they had no plans to do with Honeycomb.

While it might not be as tidied up (tagged, marked as a separate branch; generally stuff to make it easier to jump straight to that point) as other versions, the Honeycomb source should be present, since they work on it in git, and git maintains a complete history of changes. That is to say, the ICS code drop could more accurately be described as an updating of the git repository to bring it in-line with the state of the internal one at the point of ICS' completion, and so that update would also bring in the history in-between, which includes Honeycomb.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if Kondik is only peripherally involved with CM9, there are several highly skilled devs working on it now. He hasn't been the developer for a long time now.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

Well, I hope the Cyanogenmod project continues. Steve Kondik is now working for Samsung: what that will do to his priorities (and to what is actually allowed to do on CMx) is hard to say. I hope it goes on: that one project has advanced the state-of-the-Android-art considerably. For the past couple of years, I won't even consider a device that I can't root and put my CM on.

Cyanogenmod is just a temporary solution for a bigger problem, that the carriers/manufacturers lock down and hack away at their Android builds until it barely resembles the stock Android experience. Hence all the fragmentation, limitation of what users should be able to do with their devices, and it creates so many inconsistencies across brands/carriers. Cyanogenmod is just a response to that problem.

Actually, it was one man's hobby. The fact that it actually solved a problem is icing on the cake ... and given that the Cyanogenmod group made some useful improvements to the code base didn't hurt either. I agree with you about carrier fragmentation, but that's not what really makes CM worth using.

Put it this way: the stock Android experience is, well ... okay at best. Tolerable. Google could have done better, frankly. Personally, I run Cyanogenmod because I enjoy the stability and performance, both of which are considerably improved over the stock firmware. My G2's performance was adequate with the T-Mobile provided firmware (pretty much stock except for a couple of stupid apps) but I had to overclock it to get the performance I knew it was capable of. It also spontaneously rebooted itself on occasion, even after reflashing it a couple of times. With Cyanogenmod, I can actually underclock the thing and it's still smooth as silk. I've also had ZERO compatibility issues with it, which is remarkable considering that it's a third-party product. Some apps just wouldn't work right with the stock ROM.

As Steve Kondik himself said once, the CM group moved pretty far away from the original modding community, given that many of the folks who work on it aren't hobbyists, but are serious lead developers like himself.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

It's certainly a very different strategy to Apple's response to jailbreaking (you may recall that they tried, unsuccessfully, to declare it illegal through DRM circumvention).

What I'm waiting to see is how Motorola handles rooting after the Google takeover. Their stated position prior to that was they they were going to do everything in their power to keep their firmware locked down ... encrypted bootloaders and all that. Obviously, you don't want a bunch of open-source hotshots coming up with a vastly more efficient version of Android so that people will be able to keep their older phones useful for longer: best to keep control of the firmware load so you can effectively obsolesce the devices at will.

It's also interesting that HTC released a bootloader SDK. That's pretty damned awesome, when you get right down to it.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

It's pretty much a fact Google sees the value in it, because their (perfectly valid and legal) initial decision to tell Cyanogenmod to stop bundling Google's apps (Maps, Market, etc.) soon turned into a "you know what, just download the bundle from us and it'll be fine"

Well, at that point he'd already made a few friends among their senior development people. I understand they weren't too happy with how it went down.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[shellbeach]

Obviously, you don't want a bunch of open-source hotshots coming up with a vastly more efficient version of Android so that people will be able to keep their older phones useful for longer: best to keep control of the firmware load so you can effectively obsolesce the devices at will.

... except that both HTC and Samsung seem very happy for customers to root their phones, and no other manufacturer that I know of has gone down Motorola's "extreme" bootloader locking path. Given the awareness of Android fragmentation in the community, it's not a great look for a manufacturer to be locking phones out of upgrades, anyway. Sure, it might work for the first phone a customer buys, but they're unlikely to remain loyal to the brand if the brand shuts them out and treats them like crap.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[AndrewNeo]

I'm sure the engineers would like to open source Maps and whatnot too. It's management/sales/lawyers that stop that kind of stuff from happening.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

Obviously, you don't want a bunch of open-source hotshots coming up with a vastly more efficient version of Android so that people will be able to keep their older phones useful for longer: best to keep control of the firmware load so you can effectively obsolesce the devices at will.

... except that both HTC and Samsung seem very happy for customers to root their phones, and no other manufacturer that I know of has gone down Motorola's "extreme" bootloader locking path. Given the awareness of Android fragmentation in the community, it's not a great look for a manufacturer to be locking phones out of upgrades, anyway. Sure, it might work for the first phone a customer buys, but they're unlikely to remain loyal to the brand if the brand shuts them out and treats them like crap.

Yes, which is why I expect Google to reverse Motorola's ridiculousness. However, there's a difference between not working too hard to prevent rooting (which, I agree, was how Samsung and HTC treated the phones in the past in spite of carrier pressure to lock them down further) versus openly embracing the use of alternate operating systems. That's why I see HTC's bootloader SDK as a huge step in the right direction towards true openness and user choice. Ultimately, I would hope that rooting (and the use of third-party ROMs) can become as easy and safe as sticking your favorite Linux CD into your PC. Right now it's still something that's far too likely to generate a brick for the ordinary user, but there's no good technical reason that it has to stay that way.

I foresee a time when you power on your phone for the first time, and it gives you a list of the most popular ROMs and lets you download and install the OS of your choice automatically. Now that would be cool.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

I'm sure the engineers would like to open source Maps and whatnot too. It's management/sales/lawyers that stop that kind of stuff from happening.

Not without reason, to be honest. Carriers still offer Google-branded phones (I have one, the T-Mobile G2) and they want to make sure that so-called "Google Experience" devices have some added draw. There may also be some things in there that they'd rather not give their competition a leg up with.

Re:Too Early, comes with official update push

[ScrewMaster]

Nothing personal against you, but comments like this are so ignorant.

Steve Kondik is just one man in the team that produces Cyanogenmod. Cyanogenmod was never his primary day job. He continues to work on Cyanogenmod even under Samsung employ. Even if he had to remove himself completely from Cyanogenmod, the rest of the team is there.

Seriously, go look at the maintainers list. There's a ton of names there.

True ... but the reality is that it was Steve Kondik who led that team to produce the results that it got. I disagree with you that such a team will automatically continue to produce the same results when the original leader leaves. It's his priorities, his vision, that can hold the group together and drive the end result.

It's certainly possible that Steve is no longer necessary for the project ... but that's hardly guaranteed. I don't know much about their team dynamics and how they set the project goals to know either way.

Legal battle inside the walls

[Fnordulicious]

There is probably a battle between lawyers and engineers going on within the walls about whether to release the sources or not. Give the engineers some time before you start bashing them, and instead give them more reasons to use as ammunition against the lawyers.

Re:Legal battle inside the walls

[Daniel Phillips]

There is probably a battle between lawyers and engineers going on within the walls...

Good and evil.

Re:Legal battle inside the walls

[Anonymous Coward]

has anyone considered that they might not be revealing the source because they don't want to give others ammunition to make applications for injunctions

alternatively, or in addition to, has anyone considered that they might have some patentable code and they've been advised not to publish it until they have a patent?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

Re:Legal battle inside the walls

[delinear]

Given that Google said already the code will be released when the first device that uses it is released (which is some weeks away), even that's not necessary right now - right now I'd say just give them until the point where they've already promised the code before the wild speculation begins.

Calm yourselves.

[Alunral]

Chill out, guys, it's been exactly a day since this all released. They said it will be released, give them time. If we don't have it within a month, THEN worry. ...How long does it usually take them to release the source code?

Re:Calm yourselves.

[Kotoku]

Takes about two weeks after either the initial phone release or the update push if I recall correctly from the Nexus S and gingerbread pushes.

Barking up the wrong tree

[Anonymous Coward]

So on one mailing list, one Google engineer who does not have authority on the policy of releasing full source said "no comment", then the sky is falling?

Incorrect

[rainwater]

> "Now that ICS is out" Wow. What has happened to Slashdot? ICS is not out. The first device, the Galaxy Nexus, doesn't get released until next month. And Google did announce ASOP would be released once it is released to the first ICS devices. Basically, everything posted was incorrect. Nice try though

Re:Incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

>Wow. What has happened to Slashdot? ICS is not out.

Well, "Android Ice Cream Sandwich SDK Released" happened, so yes, ICS is out. Historically /. has been a hangout for developers. We know that if the SDK is out, it's... out.

Re:Incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

We know that if the SDK is out, it's... out.

Umm...wrong, the SDK is out, not the operating system. Since when is an SDK the same thing as an operating system? Oh wait, that's right. It isn't the same thing at all.

Re:Incorrect

[teh kurisu]

The SDK contains the emulator, which in turn contains the operating system. Whether or not this constitutes a 'release' is a matter for debate (I would argue that it doesn't), but the OS is definitely out there for public consumption.

Re:Incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

ICS is not a device. ICS is "out" -- feel free to test that in an emulator. This is also why Google released the GPL pieces already, they never do that until they have to.

Re:Incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

Feel free to make a phone call using the emulator.

Re:Incorrect

[CCurzon]

If you have to put "out" in quotes, it's not out.

Re:Incorrect

[rainwater]

The SDK is not an OS. The SDK is released ahead a time so that developers can update their apps. Everything about this article is wrong as Jean-Baptiste Queru has already announced the source is coming as soon as the device is released and the OS is out.

Re:Incorrect

[delinear]

Yes, and it's pretty common for the SDK to be released ahead of the product, so that developers can ensure applications that worked on the previous version still work, or develop pathces where required. There's nothing unusual whatsoever in seeing an SDK released before the official product - even developers are used to this model.

Re:Incorrect

[Anonymous Coward]

The SDK's released, and you can run ICS in the phone emulator there. ICS is "released", it's just not available on any devices yet.

Eclair (2.0)?

[Anonymous Coward]

It took a solid week after Eclair started rolling out to phones before they released the source for Eclair.

Hold ya horses

ICS Source to be released after Nexus

[DanLake]

http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/10/19/android-engineer-ice-cream-sandwich-aosp-source-code-will-be-released-but-not-before-galaxy-nexus-goes-on-sale/

Re:ICS Source to be released after Nexus

[Kotoku]

As expected. It would kill a bit of the excitement if a few hundred thousand phones were running ICS via custom ROMs before the Galaxy Nexus even hit the stores.

Re:ICS Source to be released after Nexus

[Anonymous Coward]

For different meanings of "run" ... it typically takes at least 1-2 weeks to create a working AOSP-based ROM for the !Nexus devices.

Re:ICS Source to be released after Nexus

[ScrewMaster]

For different meanings of "run" ... it typically takes at least 1-2 weeks to create a working AOSP-based ROM for the !Nexus devices.

Ha ... that might go faster now that Samsung has Cyanogen on board. Or he may be told to leave it alone. I dunno.

Re:ICS Source to be released after Nexus

[bonch]

Interesting. So Android's "openness" takes a backseat to the whims of marketers.

RTFL

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course - because 2.3 and 4.0 are equivalent.

"We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices."

*headdesk*.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a complete non-story; which would be obvious if you actually read the rest of the thread you're
quoting from. If you did, you'd see that the only meaning of the statement is this:
answers to those sorts of questions are supposed to come from PR people and high-up people, not
regular employees.

Re:*headdesk*.

[scdeimos]

For once an AC post I can agree with. There's also this post talking about moving the AOSP from kernel.org due to load issues to Google's own servers, and includes this on ICS:

- To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’ branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

Mod submission -1 flamebait

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just stupid:

Google's stated position is that Ice Cream Sandwich source will be available at an unspecified future date.

A Google employee declines to make a statement about the eventual availability, likely because he's not supposed to suggest even approximate dates, and without that there's literally nothing to add to the existing statement.

Some blistering idiot (we'll be charitable and assume he's sincere) thinks this somehow calls the eventual release of Ice Cream Sandwich source into more question than before, and (perhaps afraid people will see it for the non-news it is?) slaps on an inflammatory title suggesting all previously open-sourced Android code is disappearing.

And Samzenpus, true to form, sees it, likes it, and puts it up unaltered (since he couldn't figure out how to make it.any shittier).

Why do I even come here anymore?!

Re:Mod submission -1 flamebait

[ScrewMaster]

Why do I even come here anymore?!

I ask myself that same question rather frequently. And then I come here again. And I write things.

Less often since I've been using G+ though.

bullshit.. it's coming, just not before the device

[marcushnk]

Dan Morrill
  Oct 20, 4:29 am
Hi!
As you know, like many other projects the Android Open-Source Project was
affected by the recent kernel.org downtime. So, we’re pleased to let you
know that the Gingerbread source code is now available again, and AOSP git
servers are back online.
Even before the kernel.org downtime, it was clear that AOSP was sometimes
taxing kernel.org’s git infrastructure. When we did the Gingerbread source
release, for example, load due to AOSP made part of kernel.org unusable for
several days. This isn’t fair to kernel.org’s staff or the community, so for
some time we’ve been preparing our own git hosting on Google servers.
We were finishing up just as kernel.org experienced their downtime, so the
Gingerbread source is now available on Google’s servers. Accordingly, the
git URLs have changed.
Here are the instructions to access the new git servers:
      - You need to get the latest version of the repo tool:
      curl https://dl-ssl.google.com/dl/googlesource/git-repo/repo > ~/bin/repo
      - You need to initialize a new repository:
      repo init -u https://android.googlesource.com/platform/manifest -b
      android-2.3.7_r1
      - The full instructions are at
      http://source.android.com/source/downloading.html
There are a few limitations to be aware of:
      - Our priority has been getting the main source code mirrors back online,
      so for the moment gitweb source browsing and Gerrit Code Review are still
      unavailable.
      - We are now working on bringing AOSP’s Gerrit Code Review site back up,
      and hope to be able to say something here soon.
      - It might be a little while longer before gitweb comes back,
      unfortunately, since Gerrit Code Review is the next priority.
      - To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.
      - As these new servers are, well, new, there may be hiccups if we
      encounter unexpected issues. However we’re keeping a close eye on them and
      will respond to any issues as quickly as possible.
Finally, we’d like to send a huge “thank-you” to the kernel.org community
and Oregon State University Open-Source Lab staff. They’ve done an
incredible job hosting the AOSP source code mirror and Gerrit Code Review
for nearly 3 years. Without them, it’s safe to say that AOSP would not be
where we are today.
Thanks, and happy coding!
- Dan

FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[CritterNYC]

This is FUD based on nothing. Google has said for quite some time that Gingerbread was available, that Honeycomb would be closed and only suited for tablets and that Ice Cream Sandwich would have the source available once it was released. Google was true to their word and everything for 2.x is available and 3.x is closed. The post linked to in the main article is the sources they are required to release (GPL) now that the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK is available. It should be noted that Ice Cream Sandwich itself as an OS has not been released and is not available on any shipping product. They've already said "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices." It's not available on devices yet.

to all pedestrians walking through:

[Anonymous Coward]

move along, nothing to see here (God, been awhile since I last saw that good old phrase here)

Re:to all pedestrians walking through:

[JohnRoss1968]

"move along, nothing to see here (God, been awhile since I last saw that good old phrase here)"
You must have been gone for awhile. Welcome back

Not real open source

[Anonymous Coward]

A real open source project releases the source code while it's under development, not after the product is released, if they feel like even doing that.

You can argue specifics all you want, but I'm an open source developer and in my opinion, "open" means open development, not just allowing other people to see the code.

Google has every right to do whatever they want, but they shouldn't be calling it open unless it really is open.

Re:Not real open source

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right. There are lots of open source projects where you can see the code but ownership and all rights are still reserved. That's "open source", isn't it? Still a walled garden, though. How about "Free Open Source Software", where you can see, modify, use, and extend software as you see fit? That's truly "open source" with all the goodness and none of the drawbacks.

If Google calls or called Android open source, then they lied. I don't think you need a PhD to figure it out.

"Open Source" - yah, right...

[Anonymous Coward]

After Google initially advertising Android as open source and getting thousands of open source developers invest many man years of their spare time into Android development, why is Google silently removing the terms "open source" from some of the sites and refuses to release the Honeycomb source? This is absolutely unacceptable. By now, everyone should have recognized that Android is clearly not open source even if parts of it are. It's time to wake up and get ready for Tizen/MeeGo development!

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[ubernostrum]

No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses, which justifies a default position of "I'll see it when I believe it" for Google making promises to release code. Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?

This post is garbage.

[Anonymous Coward]

They said yesterday they would release the ICS code when they release the phones. For god sakes it hasn't been released moron.

No shit

[Rebelgecko]

Why should they release the source for an OS that isn't even out in the wild yet? They've already said that the source will be released once the Galaxy Nexus is in stores (probably so that the Nexus is actually the first phone running 4.0. I'm there will be plenty of custom ROMs for other phones/tablets within days of the ICS source being released)

Re:No shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should they release the source for an OS that isn't even out in the wild yet? They've already said that the source will be released once the Galaxy Nexus is in stores (probably so that the Nexus is actually the first phone running 4.0. I'm there will be plenty of custom ROMs for other phones/tablets within days of the ICS source being released)

If we accepted this definition of open source, Solaris 11 is "open source", and Solaris 10 was waaaaaaaaay more "open source". So tell me, is Android open source, or does the Linux community just have an axe to grind?

Re:No shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should they release the source for an OS that isn't even out in the wild yet?

So bugs get fixed before they get deployed?

Re:No shit

[Rebelgecko]

Sure, it would be nice for them to release the source code sooner rather than later, but it's a big leap from wanting more frequent/faster releases to saying that the AOSP is dead like the article title is implying.

Re:No shit

[Anonymous Coward]

So Google only releases the source after their buddies get first dibs on it for their products? If they release it at all that is. How exactly is this "open" if some get preferential treatment by Google? How is it "open" if the source is no where to be found? And finally, how is it "open" if a single corporation controls the entire project? Android is a closed source OS fully controlled by Google, except the parts they are obligated, by law, to make open.

Re:No shit

[whoop]

NEWS FLASH: Not only is the ICS source code "nowhere in sight," like the summary says, but also, no source code for any version of Android after Gingerbread is released either!! Where's the J, K, L, M, etc source code?? Huh Google? You said you support open source, so where is it?? Typical Google fanboys will defend them, but I see the troof!

Re:No shit

[delinear]

The code is in the SDK for testing purposes. In fact it's probably a strategy to ensure quality that they are holding off on the full release, so that app developers have time to test and update their products where necessary before a new OS is released (because you know the second it is, modders and third party phone vendors will all be rushing to be amongst the first to bring ICS to devices - with no testing period you'll have a lot of disgruntled customers).

Re:No shit

[brion]

Every desktop Linux distro I know of releases source along with beta packages throughout the entire development process. I still think it's a shame that Android instead develops in secret, sharing development sources only with exclusive partners.

Re:No shit

[Jonner]

Why should they release the source for an OS that isn't even out in the wild yet? They've already said that the source will be released once the Galaxy Nexus is in stores (probably so that the Nexus is actually the first phone running 4.0. I'm there will be plenty of custom ROMs for other phones/tablets within days of the ICS source being released)

They should release the source because that's the right way to participate in a FLOSS project though they are not legally required to do so. Google clearly understand the value of other peoples' Free software to them, but not of participating in projects for the good of the entire community.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a HINT: Check the LICENSE on Android. They don't HAVE a legal requirement for jack on the platform itself. Only the Linux kernel and things like it- which everyone seems to be complying on. Android itself is under the Apache License , which has no requirements for redistribution of the source on publication like the LGPL and GPL happen to have.

It's damned FUD you and others are spreading here. Give it a rest, will you?

The Sky Is Falling?

[Frosty Piss]

So, essentially, this "story" is nothing more than I-Hate-Google-The-Sky-Is-Falling conspiracy speculation nonsense.

Is Slashdot pandering for page-views?

Re:The Sky Is Falling?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is Slashdot pandering for page-views?

Does a bear shit on the pope?

(Probably not but let's run with it as a headline)

Re:The Sky Is Falling?

[Aighearach]

Does a bear shit on the pope?

Only if it is Kurt "The Pope"

Please forward all bear poo to kurt@thepope.org

Re:The Sky Is Falling?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope it looks like paranoid android fanbois are looking for mod points.

Re:The Sky Is Falling?

[EvilBudMan]

Sure why not.

Re:The Sky Is Falling?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Is Slashdot pandering for page-views?

You must be new here.

Every time the Microsoft/Apple/Oracle alliance astroturfers here insist that the ICS source won't be released I ask them, "and if it is, how will that change your world view?," or similar, and they never respond.

One of them finally got a submission through to the front page, it seems.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Moridineas]

Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?

I haven't followed Google's behavior with the Android source code that closely, but what legal requirement are you talking about? I thought Android was Apache licensed?

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[agent_vee]

What legal requirement? Google doesn't have to release any of the Android source code because they chose the Apache license. The parts of Android under GPL like the kernel have been released. Also Google has a better track record of releasing source code than most companies so I think they have earned a bit of slack in this situation.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses, which justifies a default position of "I'll see it when I believe it" for Google making promises to release code.

Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?

Every bit that is bound by the gpl has had the source code released. They own the rest of the copyright or the code is under a permissive license. There's no unfulfilled legal obligation there.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Apache licensed source is closed, GPL things like the Linux kernel are available. Android is more open than it has to be in cases other than Honeycomb.

Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[Flipao]

Fear mongering headlines followed by outright lies in the summaries, and people eat it up...

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[Archangel Michael]

Works for Politicians as well.

Oh, and the Republicans want to eat your babies.

And Democrats want to rape your sons and daughters.

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[Anonymous Coward]

As a news feed with fear mongering headlines followed by outright lies, I am deeply offended by being grouped with Fox News.

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[Daniel Phillips]

Fear mongering headlines followed by outright lies in the summaries, and people eat it up...

Google has brought this on themselves by being less than forthcoming.

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[thefatchuckster]

bullshit, refraining from commenting on something is not the same as denying it.

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[dzfoo]

But it is the same as being "less than forthcoming."

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[Gaygirlie]

Fear mongering headlines followed by outright lies in the summaries, and people eat it up...

You're new to Slashdot, aren't you? This is the way it's been for years and years now.

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[delinear]

They've said the source will be released once the first phone hits the market. That's forthcoming enough. Sure, they could give an exact date if they wanted to be more forthcoming, but unless they're guaranteed to hit it, it's just opening themselves up to exactly this type of criticism if they slip (even if they slip for reasons beyond their control). They've been plenty forthcoming enough to answer the unfounded fears expressed in TFA, that's all that really matters.

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[samwichse]

Interesting you say that, because almost every single rated post seems to be saying that the summary is wrong. I'd hardly call that "eating it up."

In fact, this response seems to me the exact opposite of Fox News... a response by those loyal watchers would be to accept the wrong summary, and continue to apply it to every new situation no matter how much evidence there was that the summary was wrong.

Sam

Re:Slashdot is turning into Fox News

[onekopaka]

Well put, sir.

My Ice Cream Melted

[Anonymous Coward]

Alas, like the shiny new penny you had as a child, it eventually becomes dull and loses appeal. So where is Ubuntu Mobile? Who is going to step up and be the savior? The bigger question is whether open source has started to die as a movement in favor of the draw of shiny cool new tablets and smartphones. Rue these words oh ye who remain faithful. This shall be the downfall of open source if not checked.
elcar on hcet

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses, which justifies a default position of "I'll see it when I believe it" for Google making promises to release code.

Citation needed. Situations that exist only in your head don't count :)

Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?

The GPLed parts were released. The Apache licensed parts have no such requirement. Please read the licence before spreading lies.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Except Google hasn't failed to obey any open-source licences yet. They have released the source for all the parts of Honeycomb that required it. Additionally, those licences only require source releases to accompany binary releases.

Re:Gingerbread is still a GPL violation

[Kenja]

So sue if you're so sure. But articles such as this are pure FUD, there is nothing to indicate that they wont release the source code to ICS.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Seven people so far have posted, correcting you on this issue. I would hope it educates you; I fear that it won't. It'll be interesting to see if you make this claim again in some future discussion.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[ScrewMaster]

This is FUD based on nothing. Google has said for quite some time that Gingerbread was available, that Honeycomb would be closed and only suited for tablets and that Ice Cream Sandwich would have the source available once it was released. Google was true to their word and everything for 2.x is available and 3.x is closed. The post linked to in the main article is the sources they are required to release (GPL) now that the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK is available. It should be noted that Ice Cream Sandwich itself as an OS has not been released and is not available on any shipping product. They've already said "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices." It's not available on devices yet.

So why are we all still here?

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[onefriedrice]

Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?

I haven't followed Google's behavior with the Android source code that closely, but what legal requirement are you talking about? I thought Android was Apache licensed?

Regardless of Android's license, there is no legal requirement for Google to release any code except portions to which they do not hold the copyright and are licensed (to Google) under viral conditions (i.e. GPL). Google's own code (as long as it is not classified as a derivative of someone else's work under the GPL), even if it was released under the GPL (or any open source license) in the past, does not have to be provided freely because Google is the copyright holder and therefore is not subject to the license as if they were a licensee.

As far as I'm aware, Google is adhering to any licensing terms that they are subject to. They also open source some of their own code, as well. Non-story.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anubis IV]

I was about to suggest that you were incorrect and that /. reported on Google saying that 3.1 would merge the two, but in re-reading the linked article from back then, it appears that you're correct. They always said that ICS would merge the two together. Oh well, guess I shot down myself on that point. Yay for facts prevailing, regardless of my memory.

As for the source code commentary, I think it's ethically dissonant (read: hypocritical) for a company claiming that their OS is "open" to close the source for an extended period of time, even if they do later open it back up. I have no problems with closed source, but I do have problems with companies claiming one thing and delivering another (or nothing, in this case). I especially have issues with it since Andy Rubin, when Android was criticized in a public earnings call by Steve Jobs for its claims regarding openness, responded by Tweeting:

the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make”

And then only 4 months later he failed to deliver on his own idea of open for anyone wanting to use Honeycomb. At the very least, that's a disappointment. I don't see how anyone can see it otherwise. That they kept their word and are releasing the source for ICS is good, of course, but it's good in the same sort of way that your employer keeping their promise to pay you this month after skipping last month is a good thing. But it is good, and I'm glad to see that they're doing it.

Whether or not what they did is legal is a matter best left to lawyers, and I have no opinion on that subject.

Re:Gingerbread is still a GPL violation

[Anonymous Coward]

You meant Honeycomb, I think, not Gingerbread. Also, the GPL parts of Honeycomb were released (including the kernel and so on), it was the Apache Licensed parts they kept closed.
 
Not taking a position one way or another on if it was good or bad, just clarifying.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses ...

Someone go tell the Boost project maintainers -- tens of thousands of closed-source C++ programs must hereafter remain open because of using Boost, an open source library collection. E-mail the lawyers at Adobe, too; one of those 'open-source infringing' products is Photoshop; and Adobe co-develops Boost.GIL.

Typical FOSS idiot who thinks the (L)GPL is center stage of the open source movement.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. 100%

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[kangsterizer]

Excuse me, but Google also said that Android was truly open,and even made fun of Apple about that in public.

Then 3 month later they released HoneyComb and we've never seen the source, and we'll never see it in fact.

The fact is that Google will or will not release Android source (the non-GPL parts) whenever they feel like it, if they feel like it, and will stop releasing whenever they feel like it, if they feel like it. And that their "word" is not worth very much either.

They will most likely release ICS source code because it would be rather bad for their marketing if they did not. But they'll probably try to close it again, whenever they decide the competition is too high (tablets were a whole "new" market back then and they probably had fear that WebOS/BB/etc could get Android's share here. Now it's pretty clear that its Android/iOS and all the rest is dead.)

That's the opposite of what he said

[EboMike]

Quoting JBQ's post from today: "yes, that means ICS will be coming to AOSP".

https://plus.google.com/112218872649456413744/posts/HB5qQHeNKBQ

Re:+5 Funny.

[TapeCutter]

Is Slashdot pandering for page-views?

Does a bear shit on the pope?

(Probably not but let's run with it as a headline)

Where's my mod points when I want 'em.

Re:discount jersey

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever I see a spammer like you, I think, "good -- now I can add that company to the list of companies with which I will never do business under any circumstances." you spared me the displeasure of having to first do business with them to find out what they're like and what my dollars were supporting. thank you.

Disgusting!!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's theft in broad daylight!!!

If EVERYONE boycots ICS for even a short period, Google will have to react and place the source at the disposition of everyone, the way it should be.

Real World

[Anonymous Coward]

So, the poster child for Open Source has figured out that you can't make any money under that philosophy. Welcome to the "real world" Googlers!

Groklaw may give the clues

[G3ckoG33k]

Here is the latest article http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20111019223707715

"The trial date in Oracle v. Google, previously set for October 31, has been vacated. No new date has been set. "

So, my guess is that Google awaits the outcome for this trial.

Re:Groklaw may give the clues

[erroneus]

Yes, now I don't have to say it. Google would be ill-advised to add more fuel to the fire of the Oracle v. Google case. And it does not matter whether there is or isn't infringing code -- copyright or patent. The additional time wasted in litigation is additional money and potential risk.

Anyone complaining about Google not releasing source code when the whole of the Android platform is being threatened either isn't seeing the larger picture or isn't interested in Android's future.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[ToasterMonkey]

Google has said for quite some time that Gingerbread was available, that Honeycomb would be closed and only suited for tablets and that Ice Cream Sandwich would have the source available once it was released. Google was true to their word and everything for 2.x is available and 3.x is closed. The post linked to in the main article is the sources they are required to release (GPL) now that the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK is available. It should be noted that Ice Cream Sandwich itself as an OS has not been released and is not available on any shipping product. They've already said "We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once itâ(TM)s available on devices." It's not available on devices yet.

Not disputing the FUD.

But... Android is "open source" on the same terms Solaris is "open source" now? You have to laugh at this, the most lauded example of Linux and Open Source making it mainstream.

The garden

[codepunk]

hmmmm looks like we have another walled garden?

Re:The garden

[julesh]

No, because even if the source to the application framework isn't available, you can still (a) install your own applications on top of it without google's permission and (b) install your own kernel under it.

Re:The garden

[technomom]

No. We don't.

Andy Rubin already said it will be open source

[Anonymous Coward]

Andy Rubin on D8 mentions it will be open in a couple of weeks after Nexus ships

Source: http://video.allthingsd.com/video/asiad-andy-rubin-video-highlights/1FC7B32C-2DE3-4730-96D9-03F093167B8C (14 min 15 sec)

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Confusador]

...they released HoneyComb and we've never seen the source, and we'll never see it in fact.

I almost hate to defend them on this point, frustrated as I am about the fact that they haven't released Honeycomb (I understand why, but it sets a really bad precedent). Saying that we'll never see it is just wrong, though. They give full access to their version control, so when they open up ICS (and I have no reason yet to believe that they won't) you'll get to see every change made from Gingerbread to now.

Fork it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to take what IS available and fork the hell out of it.

Hey, where's the "disable advertising" checkbox?

[mikestew]

My karma's still excellent, where'd that checkbox go? Because crap articles like this make me want to check it. I mean, maybe they will, maybe they won't. But there seems to be little basis to say they won't from the oh-so-thin facts in TFS.

Google hiding stolen code

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess they know there is a lot of stolen code and don't want anybody to find it.

Already addressed

[MDMurphy]

I thought it odd I saw this thread on Slashdot after I'd read this article:

http://www.zdnetasia.com/android-4-0-to-be-open-source-in-coming-weeks-62302580.htm

"Rubin said Ice Cream Sandwich will be open source "in a couple of weeks" when Samsung's Galaxy Nexus ships and manufacturers will be free to push the update to their current range of devices. Going open source means manufacturers will be able to put Android 4.0 into their own devices and cut their own ROMs for existing products."

Don't Be Perceived As Evil

[canadiangoose]

The whole "Don't Be Evil" thing has never been about actions or behaviour. It has always been about impression. The full line should read: Don't be perceived as evil.

LOL

[Dark Lord of Ohio]

I knew it will happen :) Soon hard-core linux fans will ban android phones and declare them unclean and all android users as infidels, LOL.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

more like Derp Lord of Ohio, emirite?

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

but it's good in the same sort of way that your employer keeping their promise to pay you this month after skipping last month is a good thing.

What? No it's not, show some integrity and keep some perspective on the matter. Google in no way has any obligation to open source their code to you or anybody else, ever, for any reason. Period. Full stop.

However...
they do release the source code when it won't embarrass them (and Honeycomb would probably embarrass them), or, as in this case, once it has been released to manufacturers. There are legitimate business reason to do this, namely, Google does not want to crash the market for the new devices running the new operating system by releasing the operating system source code so people compile the source code for their device and then never upgrade to a new phone.

So, Google has said that they will open source the code once the first few devices running ICS are out on the market, and they will do so under their own prerogative to be nice to you and you and everybody else on Slashdot wants to draw and quarter them because you all think they owe you their source code.

If you want an open source operating system without considering the needs of your hardware vendors, go right ahead and switch on over to Maemo, no, er, Moblin, no, hmm, Meego, no, wait, Tizen, yeah, that one for the next few months, until the next thing comes along to keep from actually shipping something that works. The fact that hardware vendors chose Android over Meego should tell you something about market forces and business decisions that are required to grow a successful product. Don't like it? Then grow your hair out, kick off your shoes, and go develop Hurd.

Bad /. editors. No cookie for you!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

Apparently not, given the amount of articles I stories I have reading recently where the first few comments for each article all point out lacking information/source/validity or that it is just plain fud (4 so far today!).

I personally suspect /. editing has been handed over to a redesigned spam filter.

Re:Bad /. editors. No cookie for you!

[meloneg]

Don't /. editors check stories for troll submissions these days?

Apparently not, given the amount of articles I stories I have reading recently where the first few comments for each article all point out lacking information/source/validity or that it is just plain fud (4 so far today!).

I personally suspect /. editing has been handed over to a redesigned spam filter.

Wow! the incomprehensibility of that first sentence hurts. It really does.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[mattcasters]

The Honeycomb code was open to tablet manufacturers and ASUS actually released.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Google as a rule NEVER uses version numbers when talking about future versions. They don't even exist during internal development and are only assigned when it's time to put the new version on devices.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Confusador]

If you have more information about that, I'd like to see it. Everything I can find says they released the kernel, which is no more than they (all) were obligated to under the GPL.

Andy Rubin promised

[Anonymous Coward]

In the inerview yesterday (in the end) he mentioned that it will be open sourced a few weeks after it's shipped on devices.
ICS was previewed, but it's still not released.

Because of the "lawful interception" backdoors?

[Lazy Jones]

In any case, shame on you, Google. But it had to be expected, after all, you're evil now.

Source is coming, apparently

[Anonymous Coward]

http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1

" - To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices. "

-19th October 2011

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[TuringTest]

The fact is that Google will or will not release Android source (the non-GPL parts) whenever they feel like it, if they feel like it, and will stop releasing whenever they feel like it, if they feel like it.

You mean, like every other open-source project in the world? I've yet to see a Free Software license that warrants access to all possible future releases. The closest thing to that is the KDE Free Qt Foundation's promised right to relicense QT in case it ever gets closed, and that's only up until the last version already published under the free Q Public License.

So far Google has given a very good reason why they don't want the one-shot temporary Honeycomb source to be exposed to the world, that it was an experiment designed to be obsoleted.

And they already have promised a date when the Icecream source will be released. I myself will reserve my judgement on the quality of their word until that date.

Yawn

[Anonymous Coward]

Story is a troll.

The MS sockpuppets are earning their keep today.

THE REAL REASON

[gl4ss]

the real reason is this: to keep small, "unlicensed" tablet and phone manufacturers from making devices with anything more fresh than 2.3. in other words it's just plain favoritism towards manufacturers who license googles stuff and pay google. a lot of googlers don't really want to say this aloud and keep promising the next version will be different story.

I mean, it would be sweet to have honeycomb or ics versions of http://www.android-x86.org/. for development, it boots up in virtual box much faster than the arm emulating shit-emulators that ship with the sdk.

not convienced

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not convinced it's going to happen. It is not in Google or their partners best interests to release the source, as evidenced by Amazons move to fork and wave goodbye. I think there will nothing but excuses and delays.

It is not dishonest

[Snaller]

if they change their opinion hence forth.

After all the are in it to make money, not to give you an open source orgasm.

Besides its early days yet, and that guy could just be a typical American idiot who can't string two coherent sentences together.

Awful Speculation

[Laebshade]

Stop with the shitty speculation.

I saw Steve at the BigAndroidBBQ here in Austin, TX, earlier this month, and had a chance to speak with him in person, one on one. I also professionally work with one of the members of TeamDouche.

While Steve did say that they currently had no info on when/if they would release ICS , CM development is alive and well.

Re:Awful Speculation

[ScrewMaster]

Stop with the shitty speculation.

I saw Steve at the BigAndroidBBQ here in Austin, TX, earlier this month, and had a chance to speak with him in person, one on one. I also professionally work with one of the members of TeamDouche.

While Steve did say that they currently had no info on when/if they would release ICS , CM development is alive and well.

Well, a. that's good to hear and b. no reason to be testy.

Re:bullshit.. it's coming, just not before the dev

[nloop]

Am I missing your point? The source code for Gingerbread is, and has been, available. Sure.

The article is talking about Ice Cream Sandwich.

Stallman proved right again

[T.E.D.]

You know, every time I start to actually believe the people who try to paint Stallman as a paranoid extremist, somebody goes and proves him right like this.

Its GPL v3 for me from now on.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[fermion]

Some people bought into the Android mythos because everything about the software stack was going to be open. This meant that carriers would not be able to limit how the bandwidth was used, and end users could get all the p0rn apps they wanted without a walled garden preventing the entry.

The reality is much different, and now with the lack of real availability and transparency with the source code the differences between Android and other phones is smaller. The development has never been an open source model. Features are still defined by what benefits Google and the carriers.

It is a tautology that Google has no moral obligations to do anything. This is bussiness and saying google has a moral obligation to release code is like say those who owe mortgages have a moral obligation to pay. They don't. Contracts are not covenants. But we do expect people to make at least a small effort to do what they say they are going to do, and in this case Google made a big hullabaloo about Android being open source, and used in marketing copy among other things. So if this is FUD, it is FUD created and promulgated by Google.

Re:bullshit.. it's coming, just not before the dev

[LateArthurDent]

Am I missing your point? The source code for Gingerbread is, and has been, available. Sure.

The article is talking about Ice Cream Sandwich.

Yes, because you didn't read the full post. It wasn't even that long, but here's the relevant part: We plan to release the source for the recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Andy Dodd]

Note that Google has done nothing of the sort - anything that's GPL has been released in full compliance.

People seem to forget that the majority of Android userland is Apache-licensed.

Re:bullshit.. it's coming, just not before the dev

[nloop]

To be fair, that did require scrolling. I mean, come on. Reading?

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Andy Dodd]

I'm not sure if HC source is guaranteed when that happens, as it isn't their full internal source repo that's being made public.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if Google does this out of goodwill, especially considering that their reasoning for withholding the source will no longer be valid.

In fact, I think at one point I saw Google claim that not only would ICS source be released, but Honeycomb source would be released - but NOT until after ICS source went live.

Google has stated many times, over and over again, why HC sources were withheld.

FOX?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did FOX"news" buy /. when I wasn't looking?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

corporations don't actually exist, and therefore can't be moral agents

That is no longer true. Corporations are arguing for personhood, and SCOTUS and the feds legislators are giving corporations those rights. With rights come responsibility.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Anonymous Coward]

Do not think even for a single moment that you are (or even can be) *morally* obliged in any way to a corporation. Legally, perhaps, but never morally. Step on the throats of your corporate masters without a thought, just as they would step on yours.

Lies damm lies and Slashdot

[LWATCDR]

Let's start with the lie in the summary.
"Now that ICS is out, though, the source is nowhere in sight. "
ICS isn't out. It has been shown but it is not out.
And we have this statement " - To reiterate, these servers contain only the ‘gingerbread’ and ‘master’
      branches from the old AOSP servers. We plan to release the source for the
      recently-announced Ice Cream Sandwich soon, once it’s available on devices. "
Source: http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/msg/c73c14f9b0dcd15a?pli=1
In other words this is all click bait and the summary should be appended.
The source will be released when the phones are released aka when the program is distributed the source code will be released.

Wow now Slashdot is now Trolling.

Re:bullshit.. it's coming, just not before the dev

[Jonner]

Perhaps you missed the part where Google has released the few GPL components of ICS, most importantly Linux. What they have not released are the Apache-licensed components which have absolutely nothing to do with kernel.org.

Re:FUD Alert. FUD Alert

[Jonner]

No, this is precisely the same sort of criticism that gets leveled against any company which has a history of adopting open-source code without obeying open-source licenses, which justifies a default position of "I'll see it when I believe it" for Google making promises to release code.

Or do you happen to know someone who has a device running Honeycomb and was able to follow up on the legal requirement that the source be made available to them?

The issue is not whether Google is complying with the law or the letter of any license. They have been very careful to avoid any such mistake. The issue is whether they are using the all too common strategy of getting a lot people to use their project by releasing it as Free and Open Source Software and then reverse direction when they have enough people depending on them. That's a bait and switch strategy far worse than how the likes of Apple and Microsoft operate. At least with them, you know you're getting proprietary software from the beginning.

Good job again, with the question mark

[Sloppy]

Is Slashdot just trying to generate ad impressions at the cost of misinforming people?

An inconvenient truth? Google is for-profit

[unassimilatible]

"What's with all the Android-baiting on Slashdot lately?"

What is with the blind faith in Google? They are a for-profit corporation, so obviously they aren't going to be open. They spent two years' profit on Moto Mobility, so of course they are going to give them preferential treatment. From the Oracle lawsuit discovery:

"If we gave [Android] away, how do we ensure we get benefit from it? [We] create policies that allow us to drive the standard,"

Oh Noes!

[drb226]

At least *one* of us has to pretend like we believe this is a credible story.

Hope

[DaMattster]

I really hope all this is a troll because my entire reason for using Android is the very openness of the platform. If Google is no longer going to keep their platform open source, I no longer have a compelling reason to continue using Android.

You Made Your Bed With Google

[Anonymous Coward]

And now you just got fucked.

Stop building sandcastles on Google's beachfront while you can.

As I've said before Android is "Open Sauce"

[drevange]

Android is not "Open Source", should not even pretend to be, and people should not think of it that way. It is "Open Sauce". You can take it, put your favorite flavor on it, massage it as you will, but you cannot "add" or rather "contribute" anything to Android.

There is a total NIH (not invented here) attitude by the Android team and nothing from the outside will realistically be included. It does not operate like any other real Open Source community.

Google has their controllers and determiners, and only they get to do any of the actual determination.

So once again, it is "Open Sauce"

THE GPL

[Anonymous Coward]

HEY WHY THE FUCK ARE THEY ALLOWED TO VIOLATE THE GPL?

DESPITE THEM ROCKING BRINGING LINUX TO SO MANY MOBILE PHONES ETC, IS THIS WHY THEY ARE GETTING SPECIAL TREATMENT?

(anti-caps-filter-evader-anti-caps-filter-evader-anti-caps-filter-evader-anti-caps-filter-evader-anti-caps-filter-evader-i-like-yelling-dipshit asdf-asdf-asdf-asdf-asdf-asdf-)

Re:Gingerbread is still a GPL violation

[CritterNYC]

Right, and they RELEASED all the source code that was GPLed as well as all source that was directly linked to it. They did this for Honeycomb. They've ALREADY done this for Ice Cream Sandwich. And they've released the FULL source (GPL, Apache, BSD, etc bits) for Gingerbread, as they will for ICS once phones are released.