Slashdot Mirror
Alibaba Says Google Threatened Acer With Banishment From Android
Spy Handler writes "In a Microsoft-esque move, Google threatened Acer with banishment from Android if it went ahead with its new cellphone project with Alibaba (China's version of Amazon), using an OS called Aliyun. Acer has remained silent on the issue, but Alibaba reports that they received notification from Google, stating 'if the new product launch with Aliyun went ahead, Google would terminate Android product cooperation and related technical authorization with Acer.' A possible reason for Google's upset is that the Aliyun OS, which is not Android, can run Android apps as well as its own."
They could still use Android all they wanted if they did this, Google just wasn't going to go out of their way to help them. Don't they have the right to pick and choose who they work with?
IANAL, but I think this represents restraint of trade. So not only is it (arguably) evil (TM) it likely also illegal.
Brett
I'm not usually so keen to call upon these - but a user with only two posts, with a seemingly Linux-friendly nick, not a subscriber apparently but still manages two posts within a minute of the story being released, another one of those recommending Bing of all things... Just doesn't seem quite genuine to me. Not that I disagree with this being dickish, if true.
Is there *any* proof of this whatsoever? Forgive me if I don't take Alibaba's word for it.
They're just following the company motto. What's the motta with that?
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
A literal flood of google apologists and shills.
Anyone want to suggest any other search engines?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=search+engines
The entire mobile phone ecosystem is evil, starting with the carriers.
Why did you make a new account just to post on this story?
Why not use one of your other ones, one with a posting history?
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
iPhone 5 sucks, amirite guise, heh?!
Don't get your panties in a knot, Google haters.
Willing to bet money that this OS is a fork of the android codebase (It's from china, runs google aps, really a no brainer). While a legitimate use of the open source software, you might understand why google would be sour on Acer's moves.
Google makes money on android by creating business partnerships with android device makers(and carriers) to provide Google premium services that run on the andriod platform (Play store, maps, ad services, etc) You can buy a non-google partnered android device, the andriod code is free and open source, but they generally suck. (You have to hack in the play store and whatnot)
Google is threatening to pull their agreement with Acer over this knockoff OS, which is just plain business sense. Why would they want to support Acer when Acer is trying to cut them out of a revenue stream? Acer could continue to make android devices, but they'd be considerably less desirable without the google services.
In a tabloid-esque move, /. posts a summary in which it treats an unilateral allegation as fact.
TFA at least makes it clear that Alibaba is making a unilateral claim and that neither Acer nor Google have commented on it. Furthermore, TFA makes it apparent that Alibaba is offering no letter, email, or voicemail as proof that Google told Acer to nix the deal.
Whereas the /. summary contains this line: "Acer has remained silent on the issue, but Alibaba reports that they received notification from Google, stating 'if the new product launch with Aliyun went ahead, Google would terminate Android product cooperation and related technical authorization with Acer.'" Which makes it sound as though Google made the threat to Alibaba directly, which isn't even what Alibaba is claiming.
Look, I'm not a big fan of Google. I think they very frequently ignore their own "don't be evil" advice. But I'm also not a fan very of sloppy editing and poor journalism. Come on /., put more effort in creating your summaries.
But don't worry. Google are still totally open.
IBM did the same thing with OS/2 and 16 bit MS programs. Windows won, OS/2 lost because everyone could still code for one and get both. Google dosnt really have anything to worry about if you watch history repeat itself.
They are just protecting themselves. That new OS can run Android apps, of course it would be cockblocked by Google. The same could be said if Linux supported windows applications right after installation.
This just establishes the fact that Google is not necessarily evil.
FTFY
Aliyun (alien?) is clearly written in code lifted from Android without Google's permission. While Android sources are available, that doesn't mean you can just take the source, change it as you see fit and sell it as your own. Pretty shoddy of Acer.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Really gives fragmentation a whole new meaning don't it?
actual evidence.
Not the I expect much from the troll known as Timothy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Sounds similar to RIM's new BlackBerry OS, that can run Android apps too, but not everything. Does Aliyun have the same restrictions?
How are you supposed to build a posting history if you can't post without a posting history though?
I'm not him by the way, he's a shill.
So, this smidgeon of news doesn't establish anything.
They have a considerable investment in maintaining and augmenting Android, and BTW they did give it away free to the world. So if those people that got it for free want Google to spend REAL dollars supporting them, Google gets to ask for something in return. Like "don't fork this, create your own mess of of a highly complex O/S development project and make it our developers problem to sift out all the complaints that are fork-specific from the ones that aren't."
Android isn't your Daddy's script file library. It's big, complicated and expensive to adapt to all the latest hardware, which it runs on. This makes development a significant effort. If you want to compare this to our "purist" OpenSource methods, ask an iPaq enthusiast how long it took to get a newly released iPaq fully functional using GPE. I was always on my second LithIon battery by the time it worked well enough to use.
I'm going to get all the facts before I judge them. And then I'm still not using Bing :p
Nearly all of the author's articles are pro Apple or anti Google/Android, save for a few about cameras.
Truth is, as most of the code on android is apache licenced or GPL (as the kernel) there is no need to ask google's permission to make anything with it. The only parts of the operating system that are under a non-permissive licence that can be considered a showstoper would be the "brand" apps, as gmail, youtube and the google play store.
Why the fuck did you make a new account?
How are you supposed to build a posting history if you can't post without a posting history though?
Do you really think this is the first time this person has posted here?
New account has only posted to this story.
Posted the very second one was able to post even though this account is not a subscriber.
Has a very linux sounding username, but is very obviously shilling for microsoft.
I don't accuse every fanbois of being a shill, just those who follow that M.O.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
I stopped posting for a few months because i was being stalked by APK anyway, then I forgot the password and I've changed email addresses since then.
Google Play works just great with Cyanogenmod, and google didn't "decide".
Couldn't they do that and remove any android name reference, and release the code to still comply with the license?
Oh, look:
1) Brand new user.
2) Posts within the same minute the story appears.
3) Post has more text in it than can be typed in one minute.
4) Is full of irrational Google hate.
Yep folks, the irrational Google hater is back. From the tone of the posts, I'm not even sure anymore that he is a paid shill (they tend to be a bit more even keeled and dispassionate), and instead think that someone has an obsession with Google and his panties in a wad over the fact that no one else agrees with his arguments.
Next, I expect a petulant crap flood of GNAA posts and other AC shenanigans.
These sounds are made by users.
No, they're made by a single, obsessive and whiny nutbag. Go away.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
There is only a single source for this. That source is a company that is looking for publicity for a product they are producing which they hope to have compete in a marketplace where the established players (Ios from Apple, Android from Googloe) have both a relatively polished product and position to control "mindshare". This makes me somewhat suspicious of the story.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Goes to show you what happens when you let a bunch of faggots run your phone company.
And no comments from anyone at Google and Acer...
It would seem a bit hypocritical to say "don't run against our ABI" after their line of defense was "ABIs are so generic" in the Java/Dalvik case.
It's the gentle splash of Google fanboi tears.
Errr, isn't that what Amazon did?
Actually yes they can as long as they don't remove copyrights from the source or misuse Google's trademarks. Why would they need Google's permission to use and sell Apache v2 code when the license carries no such restriction?
http://wiki.cyanogenmod.com/wiki/Latest_Version/Google_Apps
Google Apps contain the proprietary Google applications that come pre-installed with most android devices. Due to licensing restrictions, these apps cannot come pre-installed with CyanogenMod and must be installed separately. CyanogenMod does not require Google Apps to function properly, however, to take full advantage of the Android system, Google Apps are recommended.
--
For anyone not targeting modders that are willing to look this type of thing up, not being licensed to have the official Google apps bundled on what you sell to users is a serious drawback.
Whoosh? (I was hoping you're being sarcastic)
Of course you can "take the source, change it as you see fit and sell it as your own" (your own product, not the source files) as long as you meet the obligations of the license (which would boil down to GPL for most of it). There is no need to italicize the word "sell" either, because free software licenses don't require products based on the source code to be distributed for zero cost.
There is nothing that says you have to meet the obligation of the license right away either, because until you actually distribute your product, you're not even in violation. After such time the bare minimum (assuming GPL) would be to honour written requests to have the source code made available. Even that doesn't have to be for zero cost.
That's an evil move of Microsoft proportions, for Google to threaten Acer like that. It's just like what Microsoft did to IBM over OS/2.
"While Android sources are available, that doesn't mean you can just take the source, change it as you see fit and sell it as your own."
Is it GPL or not? If it is, then yes you can do just that
You all trust Alibaba, the guy who swindled from 40 thieves? What has become of us all ? "In Swindlers We Trust". PS: You can replace 'Alibaba', '40 thieves' and 'Swindlers' with whatever you want... Google... anything.
If it's true, whats the big deal? Acer is under no obligation to follow Google nor does Google have an obligation to help Acer if they direction doesn't help Google. It's perfectly acceptable for both companies to part ways. Now, not getting help from Google may make it very difficult for Acer since they are pretty much the authority to go to for help but it doesn't make it impossible as Acer obviously would have delve into the Android code and hopefully have decent programmers on their side.
possibly he's selling said panties on ebay for a profit.
insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
Looks like a complete cock-and-bull story.
C'mon Slashdot editors. Take two minutes and check this stuff out first.
Proverbs 21:19
Added to the list
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
the point is, we can't even substantiate any of this - and no matter what they do, it's not "banishment from android". Relevance was lost when this somehow made it to the front page. Proof that if the firehose isnt' watched vigilantly enough bullshit non-articles make it through.
This is nothing but a sore loser whining. Google has no power over android; Acer could continue to use android with or without Google's support. In fact, if this were at all true, then Acer would have Google over a barrel due to antitrust laws. Alibaba is just making up excuses because they don't want to accept that Acer decided not to use their second-rate OS.
They are not banning Acer from anything. You have completely misunderstood. They are terminating the privilaged cooperation they give Acer. Why should Google spend extra money an resources on assisting Asus, when the intention is that they use that assistence to build better Android products, not build competing products. This just puts Acer on the same footing as any other Joe Smo. It doesn't prevent them from doing anything they do now. Essentially Google recognized that Acer was leveraging Google's assistance, not to help build android products, but to help build competing android products. There is no lockout here.
You must live a pretty sheltered live in a closet to think that this is what "evil" is. You want to talk in concrete terms about vendor lock-in, greed, proprietary vs. open, then I'll listen. You start throwing around words like "evil" in this context then you just look like a drama queen.
Sure, assuming you are just a member of the public with no contractual or similar limitations on your behavior, you can do pretty much (within the various F/OSS licenses applicable to the code) whatever you want with Android Open Source Project (AOSP) code.
OTOH, its not at all unlikely that the deal Acer has that involves "technical authorization", trademark licensing, etc., for Android -- not merely AOSP -- code also involves agreements by Acer not do some things it otherwise could do -- either with AOSP code on its own, or (as would be more relevant in this case) in terms of using Android-compatible third-party code, whether or not it is AOSP derived -- in exchange for all the special privileges with regard to Android that they get.
So its not at all hard to see how their flirtation with Alibaba's Aliyun OS may have conflicted with obligations they undertook as an Android -- not AOSP -- licensee, and resulted in a Google threat regarding the Android license.
Even if the Google threat story Alibaba is selling is true in broad outline (which there is nothing, AFAICT, other than Alibaba's claim itself to support), it still sounds like it is quite likely that it was Acer being reminded that they have to chose whether they want to be in the same relationship as the general public with respect to Android, or if they would prefer to keep the special privileges they've enjoined with regard to Android and pay the price that goes with that.
This will be fun. If this involved Apple, people would rage, torches would be lit and pitchforks would be sharpened. Since it's Google, I expect all kinds of apologists and claims that they're just defending their IP and this is ok.
Yeah. This will be fun.
WHY then are Barnes and Noble and Amazon using the android kernel WITHOUT THE ANDROID BRANDING?
It's the FUNCTIONALITY that makes android appealing.
Amazon was not a member of the OHA nor had any contractual obligations to google.
While I'll not question the sincerity or truthfulness of the original post as others have beat me to that, I will question equating Alibaba to Amazon.
I consider Alibaba a slightly inferior peer to EBay which puts it way, way lower than Amazon in my book.
"The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
Apple isn't an Android licensee and doesn't have the special "technical authorizations" Acer has with regard to Android (as distinct from the public license offers attached to the Android Open Source Project, which isn't the same thing as officially-branded Android.)
So, if there is a conflict between what Amazon did (which is different, but in some ways parallel, to what is at issue with Acer) and the kind of Android licenses that companies like Acer have, it wouldn't matter, because Amazon doesn't have that kind of license, and so Google wouldn't threaten to pull it (since, you know, its hard to take something from someone that they never had in the first place.)
It is not, it is mostly Apache licensed.
You can still do with it as you like, assuming you are not under any contractual obligations to google.
Acer does not get android via the AOSP, they have a private deal with Google.
As much as we would like to believe there's some corporations who genuinely want what's best for innovation and technology, these mega companies will always do what they think is best for their stock. Google will only be "not evil" as long as it builds consumer confidence. The moment they can start crushing other start-ups without fear of losing customers is the moment their TM is a thing of history.
"With patience a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue will break a bone."
There's always dogpile... wait they use google too. Damnit, we're screwed. Google owns the whole effing internet. I guess I'll go play outside.
"With patience a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue will break a bone."
Right, and Google can prevent Acer from installing those "brand" apps, including the all-important Play Store, if Acer doesn't play nice.
Amazon has the clout to grab Android and then make a clean break from Google. I doubt that Acer does. An android device without Play Store is near-useless.
How are you supposed to build a posting history if you can't post without a posting history though?
Do you really think this is the first time this person has posted here?
New account has only posted to this story.
Posted the very second one was able to post even though this account is not a subscriber.
Has a very linux sounding username, but is very obviously shilling for microsoft.
I don't accuse every fanbois of being a shill, just those who follow that M.O.
I was kind of thinking Apple, since he bashed both MS and Google.
Google Play works GREAT on Barnes and Noble Nook flashed with Cyanogenmod
NOOK HAS NO ANDROID LICENSE
BB10/ Playbook OS are. Remember RIM is actually SELLING Android apps.
So I'm able to compare the Alibaba/Acer product with BlackBerry 10.
Wait, you seriously bother maintaining a list? Whoever is doing this discards the account after they get first post on an article, and creates a new one for next time. You're never gonna hear from #2729623 again.
It's not necessarily irrational, or hatred for that matter. Although either of those are possible, it's more likely profitable. Between Microsoft, Apple, and FaceBook, I'm fairly sure there's no shortage of money for shill factories to bash Google. FaceBook was caught before, and I can't imagine that would stop such an honourable company from trying again. The other two are at least as likely to do the same.
" A possible reason for Google's upset is that the Aliyun OS, which is not Android, can run Android apps as well as its own." From every person that has touched it or seen the code they all say it's a skinned android clone.
Yes you CAN legally do this, android is Open Source, so they can fork and create their own, but it is scumbaggy to do so.
Because Barnes and Noble and Amazon are trying to build their own ecosystem where they sit in the role Google has in the Android-branded ecosystem as the provider (and thus, profit-maker from) the default App/Book/etc. store.
Its the base functionality that makes Android appealing if, like B&N or Amazon, you are trying to compete with Google, Apple, etc., as a mobile App/Book/etc. store operator.
Its Google Apps -- and the support Google provides for them, and provides for you as a device manufacturer when you take a license that includes them -- that makes Android appealing if you are a device manufacturer that is more interested in making money selling hardware, and don't see selling digital content as your core competency.
Google provides Android code in a way that supports both -- the former through the Android Open Source Project, the latter through Android brand licensing. But you've got to choose whether you want to use Android via AOSP to compete with Google (which they allow, but aren't going to spend extra resources supporting you while you do) or via an Android license which actively promotes Google services (which they enthusiastically support, and will spend extra resources supporting you while you do.)
AOSP -- and the firms using it -- Google sees as good because they increase developer attractiveness of Android technology, because lots of people using non-Android AOSP devices are still going to use the web on those devices and earn Google revenue via advertising (on Google pages and elsewhere), and because Google, presumably, sees the possibility of making more money with a smaller share of a bigger Android-technology-based pie.
But Android licensees provide Google with bigger advantages and a more direct route to revenue, and get, naturally, more direct support.
If you stopped because of a stalker you haven not been on slashdot long. Most every active poster with a UID 6 digits has at least 30 stalkers.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I wish accusations of shillness would be accompanied by proof of why what they said is wrong. "He's wrong cos he's paid!" Doesn't work. Sorry.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
It's a little like people who advocate for a punctuation mark to denote sarcasm. If you can't detect sarcasm when you see it, you don't really deserve to enjoy it.
More Twoson than Cupertino
No one can be 'banished' from Android. You can take open source Android, modify it, set up your own app store, and make money off it without paying a cent to Google (as Barnes & Noble and Amazon have done, among others).
Google may have told Acer that they can't be part of the Google Android program, which involves licensing the Google Play Store and the Google closed source apps (Gmail, Maps, Chrome, Talk, Google+ etc.), and at the same time tie up with Alibaba on an Android clone OS that runs Android apps. They *may* have, it's pure speculation, though I really cannot see why they would. Even if they have, it's hardly evil. Google give away the damn OS, and Amazon are able to use it and make millions off it without paying Google anything. Call me when Microsoft or Apple do anything similar.
This just establishes the fact that Google is not necessarily evil.
FTFY
Aliyun (alien?) is clearly written in code lifted from Android without Google's permission. While Android sources are available, that doesn't mean you can just take the source, change it as you see fit and sell it as your own. Pretty shoddy of Acer.
What I don't understand is how Aliyun can even sell it. Not the mechanism by which they get money in exchange for some code, but how anyone would willingly pay these people for something they can get for free. What exactly is Aliyun adding to the Android base that isn't already there?
More Twoson than Cupertino
And if that private deal was terminated, would Acer be unable to obtain Android?
More Twoson than Cupertino
Acer would be unable to gain access to Android, they could however still obtain the AOSP code.
Which is not Android, merely based on it and they share the vast majority of code.
Acer would not at all however have access to what is commonly referred to as GAPPS, which includes but is not limited to Google Maps, Google Market, Google Talk and Google Voice.
Or Acer could just go to Amazon and ask to pre-install the latter's apps to replace those of Google.
GAPPS runs GREAT on Barnes and Noble Nook WITH NO ANDROID LICENSE
Hey stupid asshole, why are you spewing your untrue shit everywhere:
Android / AOSP Home Page:
http://source.android.com/
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
I'm not confused about anything, you fuck up.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Pretty much. This is why Cyanogenmod and AOKP cannot have Gapps baked into it.
He's a shill. I am not.
I agree 100% with the sentiments that he expressed. Read Google's ToS. Look at the fines for privacy invasion that Google has. Yes, fine apps. Yes, uses them to rape your privacy in ways you can't imagine.
Will Alibaba's Aliyun do this? Who knows. But to believe Google isn't getting as evil as its competition is to be incredibly naive.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
You sure they're shills and not just one or two trolls who really know how to get under slashdotters' skins?
Paying someone to try to improve MS' image on slashdot seems like a really boneheaded move... which would not be surprising coming from MS...
Alright, you've convinced me that they're probably professionals and not basement dwellers. Still, shouldn't we be cheering them on for taking money from MS and giving them back very little in return?
"seemingly Linux-friendly nick"
Not at all, since a genuine Linux geek wouldn't couple Debian and Ubuntu as a nick. Debian folks wouldn't advertise for Ubuntu, and Ubuntu users usually know little about Debian.
It sounds like barely thought-out bullshit from a shill.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
The problem is that without "special treatment", a vendor can't (legally) sell devices that can access the large selection of applications that are exclusive to Google Play Store. Chase Bank's check deposit application is among them.
When Microsoft tells vendors "you can't ship anything but Windows on your computers"...
It's considered BAD
But when google says EXACTLY THE SAME THING
Somehow it's OKAY
"google gives tech support to contract holders" SO DOES MICROSOFT!
That's like saying a pirate copy of Windows just works because Microsoft didn't "decide" you shouldn't get it.
It's illegal for CM to bundle Google Play. That's why they don't provide it and you have to get it from somewhere else as an extra step after installing a CM ROM. Those sites are technically violating Google's copyright by distributing the gapps files.
Interesting to see that you don't have a section for Google shills. Biased much?
Really? (Looks around.)
Nope. Nobody behind me.
(Tightens tin foil hat a bit.)
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
This is great.....everyone can finally see what kind of company Google is, keep buying Android phones people and support this stealing company. If this was Apple doing it the story would be posted all over, so far I have only seen it here on slashdot.
Truth is, as most of the code on android is apache licenced or GPL (as the kernel) there is no need to ask google's permission to make anything with it.
Except for two things, some OEMs get advanced access to the code base before it's released to the general public and some OEMs get special access to the core Android developers if they can't get something to work on their own.
This is probably one of the reasons the two other Chinese government-sponsored forks of Android are still stuck at Android 1.6 and Android 2.3. It actually takes time to vet a new release of Android for NSA backdoors and security holes, and introducing your own backdoors into it. And I'm willing to bet that Chinese consumers are as impatient when it comes to getting new releases as American consumers are, many probably will just root their devices, or pay someone to root their device, and just install their own ROMS.
Being Evil is suing a fruit market in Poland because it can be confused with your company that makes phones. Not being evil is reminding your partner that you just gave them exclusive rights to a Google only product and that deal might have rules about other partners. You dont know what the contract said or if the allegiations are true, but this is Slashdot and half of you cant read, comprehend what you read, or not go on a witch hunter when your doritos bag is empty instead of screaming up stairs to your mom.
Wow that's just... just...
Khajiit has no words for this.
That's an evil move of Microsoft proportions, for Google to threaten Acer like that. It's just like what Microsoft did to IBM over OS/2.
Are we sure this actually happened? It seems rather unlikely that Googlers could be that stupid. Clearly an official response from Google is called for, sooner rather than later, and regardless of whether the report is accurate.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
This will cost me karma... but what is up with the double standards. I have seen more questionable "news" articles about Apple where the cry about "proof" or "single source" aren't that loud. Talking about hypocrisy ! Or are most people that naive that when a company has a "don't do evil" tagline, that it certainly must be true ?
If I read the original Reuter article, it makes perfectly sense why they would do that and if I see some of reuters own experience with related events, somethings is stinking. Alibaba seems to be one of china biggest e-commerce site. If it can leverage its popularity to push its own operating system on the market, that is very bad for Google. The chinese market are a lot of people to track and create personalized advertisements for. And Acer is a relative small player that can pushed a lot easier then the big names like Samsung, etc. So while I want to wait the reaction of Google and Acer, it seems a plausible scenario.
And Google wants to have a piece of the Chinese cake and go as far as to "do (necessarily sic) evil" for it... . So please spare me "the Google is holier then the pope" attitude. It's an advertisement company with shareholders and business targets, it isn't a fricking humanitarian movement. On the end of the line it is the same as every other company, all about the money.
What I don't understand is how Aliyun can even sell it. Not the mechanism by which they get money in exchange for some code, but how anyone would willingly pay these people for something they can get for free. What exactly is Aliyun adding to the Android base that isn't already there?
You pay for: 1) incremental functionality and 2) somebody else takes care of packaging up that free thing into a useful form.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Oh right, you with your "Everybody who posts anything negative about Google is a shill" list.
Pot, meet kettle.
I haven't seen any clear Google shilling, If you point some out I'll add it.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Truth is, as most of the code on android is apache licenced or GPL (as the kernel) there is no need to ask google's permission to make anything with it.
Except for two things, some OEMs get advanced access to the code base before it's released to the general public and some OEMs get special access to the core Android developers if they can't get something to work on their own.
Exactly. Google can't "ban" anyone from using android source code, but they can deny access to their proprietary apps and also from being part of the Nexus product line, which obviously depends on early access to the sources and SDK. Also, it is somewhat clear that access to core android developers during a device development is a valuable asset to any manufacturer, as it is the closest to a community android gets due to the open source/closed development environment strategy used by Google.
It is already well established that China will and are stealing any IP they can.
This is simply another example.
And Google are saying a simple thing to Acer:
If you want to use our tech, for free, don't play these games with us.
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
Soon.
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
Unlike Android components that are part of AOSP, Google Play Store is not Apache licensed.
Or Acer could just go to Amazon and ask to pre-install the latter's apps
And everybody whose bank makes its check deposit application available only through Google Play Store should just switch banks, right?
Are you kidding me? You have some serious bias if you don't see it on here. Just look at yesterdays post about the iPhone 5 http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/09/12/1723204/apple-announces-iphone-5. Use a different browser with no cookies that would keep you logged in or store your preferences.
Now scroll down and count how many posts are visible that have anything positive to say about Apple. How many do you see? 2-3?
This place is filled with Google shills, they just gain karma and selectively mod posts to keep the standard mindset here anti-Apple.
Android is still apache licensed.
Google Play Store is not, and people who buy an Android phone with no access to Play Store-exclusive applications are going to be sorely disappointed.
At least in the case of CM, people do tend to flash gapps.
Acer, as a commercial company, can't very well induce its users to pirate the gapps. MGM v. Grokster.
Amazon offers another store
Which I have installed on my Archos 43. However, my bank's check deposit application isn't in Amazon Appstore; it's exclusive to Google Play Store.
My son's Kyros is a particularly cheap tablet you can't install Google Play on. It's made by Coby. It comes with it's own app store called "GetJar" and I also was able to put FDroid on it, with varying results for ability to run apps.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Well, no, they don't _have_ to. They may choose to. For example, there's this little shop that sells Android tablets with their own store. Or here's a third party appstore that OEMs may choose to license and integrate. Then there's Opera's appstore, GetJar...
Amazon Appstore and SlideME Marketplace don't help if banks decline to release their banking applications on those stores.
Searched through there (after expanding all posts), couldn't find any. Any posts in particular you want me to take a second look at?
Keep in mind that geeks who hate Apple stuff for legitimate reasons and may have mod points aren't shills. Shills are newish users who mostly post comments for or against a certain company or product.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
That's bonch for you.
Maybe, but then we have the ? to denote a question when it could be detected in the text surely(?). !sarcasm punctuation would be the same.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
I know very, very few people who actually use a smartphone app from their bank.
One reason that someone might use a bank's smartphone app is that he lives nowhere near any of the bank's ATMs. Unlike the bank's web site, the app allows the user to deposit a personal or payroll check by using the device's camera to take a picture of the front and back of a check. Or should everyone in such a situation send deposits through the mail?
You do realize "Anonymous Coward" can be anyone right? How can you prove there are 30 something unique persons dedicated to trashing your comments? Just curious...
Tomorrow is another day...
> Most every active poster with a UID 6 digits has at least 30 stalkers.
Eh? Maybe a big list of foes .. but stalkers? Geeks don't have better things to do ??
I was leaning towards well thought-out bullshit, exactly what I would expect from Mr. Balmer.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Look at the volume of responses from angry /.ers frothing at the mouth at these kinds of comments, if you wanted to troll /. that certainly seems to be the best way to do it because there's no shortage of people who would love to believe you're serious (your list and all the angry cries of 'shill' are proof of that).
For some reason there are some people who just can't leave these troll comments alone, just let it be moderated down so we don't have to see it instead of contributing to its visibility. Stop feeding the trolls, it's that simple.
If i register an account and put up an anti-google post can i get on that list?
Yeah, I'm on a large number of "freak" lists. But no stalkers that I know of. There should be an acheivement for getting 10 friends, one for 10 foes, and one for 10 freak. And the biggest achievement on the site should be all three. At once. Sometimes I wish there was a way to see who had me on their lists to see where I sit with them.
Learn to love Alaska
Not at all, since a genuine Linux geek wouldn't couple Debian and Ubuntu as a nick. Debian folks wouldn't advertise for Ubuntu, and Ubuntu users usually know little about Debian.
Yeah, because Linux people are all exactly the same.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
maybe part of the agreement between Google and those who have an "agreement" means that they benefit from pre-release builds and direct line technical support. Has nothing to do with them using the released/posted source but has everything to do with helping their time to market with the latest. If you have to start with the final release version, you'll be behind all your competitors who have already been working with pre-release code.
Right, because shills can't just keep an account alive and keep shilling. I have a pretty good idea who's payroll you're on.
Cue the cliche cartoonish villain to the would be angsty hero: "You and I are a lot alike, you know!"
Only one way to find out!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
but is very obviously shilling for microsoft.
Then why did he bash Microsoft? You retards will ignore anything if it means you can still believe microsoft is paying people to post that sort of shit...like it's totally not just trolling, who would troll slashdot? "Microsoft Shill" posts are the most successful trolls on slashdot (even the really poor ones) because you're never short of a bunch of retards who think you're serious and get furious about it...LOL :P
It's supported from the Chinese gov't so I would assume, people that don't want Google to have their info (such as gov't officials, Chinese military) would have an interest. Foreign powers don't want to use Apple, MS, Google proprietary stuff cause it might leak info to US gov't. Just speculating here.
They could be both: shills trying to get us so angry that we get in Balmer's face, yelling at the top of our lungs, then we suddenly snap from one heated emotion to another. I've seen it a million times on TV.
You'd never guess.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Aliyun is a concatenation on Ali and yun; the former is self-explanatory, and the latter means cloud in Chinese.
I make hardware RNGs, which give 2.5849625 bits of entropy per use in theory (actual performance dependent on usage).
""
I think you're being trolled. Probably by a guy on your list. Keep up the good work :)
Clever signature text goes here.
"No, it's not true. That's impossible!"
You're falling into the trap. You can't argue with a shill, or with an OCD fanboy. They will move goalposts, cherry pick their data, flat-out lie, feign ignorance and just change topic if you finally cornered them on one subject. It's a complete waste of time to argue with them.
It's not that shills or OCD fanboys are wrong. They could very well be right on some points. The problem is that they're incapable of having an honest discussion that could be enlightening. As a result, it is best to point them out and just move along.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
I'm surprised to find out Google actually put a clause in there forbidding their current android phone makers to make phones for other operating systems (that may run a jvm (that can run a dalvik app))
Yes, fair enough. I may be jumping to incorrect conclusions based on the article. "Google refuses to comment". However, IF things are how the article says, it's an evil move of Microsoft proportions. That's similar shit to what they pulled on the PC manufacturers in the 90's (not only IBM)
Google might do that, if they just couldn't get used to the idea of a free software license. They may have meant it to be a private threat (Acer bound by NDA regarding their business dealings with Google?), not counting on the other company to make it public.
Acer should be within their rights, as long as they don't use Google's logos and stuff. From what I understand, Aliyun isn't an exact clone of Android.
Ask Redhat about this... they are good sports about it and don't complain when other distributors use the source rpms (srpms, which are source code packaged up in a convenient layout, with spec files to use Redhat's package building system to compile your own packages. It's practically spoon feeding) from Redhat Enterprise Linux to make an identical distribution. Redhat is charging money for the value of the backing of a big company behind support of the product, knowing you can't take the code back once it's GPL.
Using their Smartphone OS monopoly to prevent Apple from getting the iPhone into the market?
Cyanogenmod *was* violating copyright when it included the proprietary Google binaries (hence the threat of a lawsuit).
Cyanogenmod *now* ships without those proprietary Google binaries, but provides links to locations where those Google binaries can be downloaded by users acting on their own wishes.
However, in our modern world, merely providing LINKS to data stored and served by other people can be regarded as a crime (hence the criminalization of The Pirate Bay, which only offered information about torrents)!
I assume that the Google binaries are not offered for direct download by end-users, but must only be distributed in packages approved by Google. Or, if Google *does* allow those binaries to be downloaded directly by end-users, I'm guessing the terms of use of their copyrighted product is that the binaries only be used with Google-approved devices. If both of these assumptions are false, then ignore the remainder of this comment!
Although I personally think criminalizing actions that are one or more steps *before* actions which *actually* cause damages (or are very likely to cause damages) is dangerous -- because of the extreme chance that widespread punishments of "pre-crime" might have an overall cost to society that is far greater than the harm of the anticipated crimes (had they been carried out) -- I think the common person, were they to consider whether or not LINKS ALONE constituted encouraging and enabling subsequent action, would agree that it makes sense to criminalize the act of providing links. The same logic is used to support criminalizing possessing, selling, or buying drugs; because the very likely consequence is that someone will consume those drugs, which itself is illegal. I'm not defending the laws, or the "pre-crime" laws in particular. I'm only speculating that a civil lawsuit, or criminal case, might succeed against the developers or distributors of Cyanogenmod.
From what read elsewhere, it seems that the Aliyun people are probably not in compliance with the GPL, so they are in direct copyright infringement of code written by Google and others. While this is not too surprising given the sorry state of GPL compliance in the PRC, but this gives Google every right to strong-arm anyone touching this project.
OS Reviews: Free and Open Source Software
A backdoor about the size of an airplane hangar.
it's more likely they're from the bunch of some 1 000 000 people with livelihoods directly dependent on the performance of windows in the future(if they're worth their salt, it's not dependent on it, but their current jobs are MS tied, either by being ms reps, devs for ms platforms or so on. I'm pretty sure you know a few on some other social networks than slashdot).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
The fact that your application is not available in the Amazon appstore is not Amazon's fault, or Google's. It's your bank.
And if Acer wants to drop Google Play Store while continuing to make its products useful to people who use their phones to bank online, it needs to negotiate with the major banks to provide their applications on Amazon Appstore. As of today, Acer has not done this.
Antitrust rules aren't about ethical principle, they are about the pragmatic effects of leveraging overwhelming market power on the choices on which the practical benefits of free markets depend. The actions prohibited by antitrust regulations are, in general, mala prohibita rather than mala in se.
"What I don't understand is how Aliyun can even sell it. Not the mechanism by which they get money in exchange for some code, but how anyone would willingly pay these people for something they can get for free. What exactly is Aliyun adding to the Android base that isn't already there?"
Better access to the mainland market? A number of Google offerings are banned or censored in mainland China. I'm assuming Aliyun is going to replace them with their mainland equivalents. But then who knows if Alibaba merely has the right "connections" and Acer is simply trying to please the local boss? I remember reading somewhere that Aliyun is nearly as big as Amazon and Ebay combined, so here's a company you definitely want to brownose.
Oh yes, that's a dupe refried and served hot.
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.