Slashdot Mirror
Google's Definition of 'Open'
An anonymous reader writes "One of Android's biggest draws is its roots in open source. It enables a broad range of device manufacturers to work from the same code base, and provides app developers with more insight into the platform they're building on. But openness isn't a binary condition — there are many shades of gray. While Android is technically very open, from a practical standpoint it's much more difficult for device makers to distance themselves from Google, if that's their preference. 'Phone manufacturers and carriers that want to use Google's services must conform to Google's device standards, a stricter requirement than what basic AOSP requires. For some, this is a catch. For others, it's merely the cost of doing business. ... [Dianne Hackborn, one of Android's tech leads,] defends Google's right to include proprietary services, and to keep them proprietary, saying that its no different than any other proprietary app on Android. That's not entirely true, since Google does keep some API development to itself, but to its credit the company does open-source most of the new APIs introduced to Android.'"
Google’s iron grip on Android
Great story how Google gets it grip on Android.
You can use other apps and app markets on your android device. You don't have to use Google Search, Maps or Mail because there are free or very low cost alternatives to them and they don't have the clingy, Google scam you out of your data smell. Getting rid of them is a snap in most cases and there's literally dozens of websites that can help you do it. Sure when you get an "update" from your phone maker you'll probably get them all back again but it's easy enough to remove them or you can go with something like Cyanogenmod and never worry about it again. There are alternative AOSP based distros out there that don't have that Google smell so look around, It's really not that hard. If you've never rooted your phone or sideloaded an app or changed the OS it can be somewhat intimidating but you can also find help out there online and via local phone store kiosks (forget the pimple crowd at the Sprint, Verizon or AT&T stores) who can set you up in no time.
I do have to say that the nicest thing about Android based phones is that there are alternatives. For example, I don't have Google Apps and use Skobbler for the navigation. It uses OpenStreetMap and I recently downloaded a couple of countries and really like the fact that I could navigate, offline.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Android is a breath of fresh air after using Apple, I prefer Android in every way, so having Google "set a standard" is fine with me.
Otherwise what will we get.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Until Apple burst on the scene Carriers locked their platforms down, charged insane amounts of money for dev kits ($20k+) and were generally jerks to their customers. They had little or no desire to improve since they were making lots of money selling slightly better handsets and super high prices. Google does a good job reigning that in. The carriers aren't powerless in this equation either you know. I like that they're all at each other's throats :P.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
try making an iOS device and taking on the Apple Empire...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
I prefer OsmAnd for offline navigation because it is GPL Free Software that uses Open Street Maps data. Can you trust *any* proprietary maps application to not spy on you?
Also use ReplicantOS, an Android distro based on Cyanogenmod that replaces all non-Free software with Free GPL licensed alternatives. It uses F-Droid app store.
Neo900 is an open hardware phone currently under development based on the next-gen GTA04 boards. It's designed to use Nokia N900 case design (slide out keyboard) and will be able to run ReplicantOS.
With the Kindle, I think the Amazon has been one of, if not the most, successful at embracing what Android provides as a core, but extending/customizing it to support their preferred business model. Sure, they did a lot of work on their fork of Android, but if other companies aren't willing to put the work in, don't complain about something you're getting for free.
"When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before." (Mae West)
Well, this can be generalized to choosing between several evils. That would mean choosing WP for a lot of folks, I suppose... But what's scary is, choosing WP doesn't scare me any more.
Not every phone that's out there has an AOSP or CM ROM available for it. So for some people, they really are stuck with whatever the OEM and carrier chose to cram on there. If you don't already have a phone and are willing to look for your ROM before buying, this is great. Those with existing handsets though have good odds of being stuck unless they're lucky enough to have a flagship device.
The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
its no different than any other proprietary app on Android
Except I don't like all the proprietary crud that my tablet came with, regardless of whether it's from Google or the manufacturer. It's doing god-knows-what in the background and its removal is well beyond the ability of the average user (which is the entire point, isn't it?).
So ol' "Don't Be Evil" is now "Don't Be More Evil Than Our Business Partners?"
Business is like a wretched plague that insists on infecting every area of life. Computing and communications are more vulnerable to the infestation than most other aspects of life. The net started as a wonderful idea that was to be a super breakthrough and uplifting idea never before possible for humanity. And I don't mind porn one bit but almost overnight half of the traffic on the net was porn. Worse than porn every half witted scheme to defraud people attached itself to the net and became fixated as a permanent part of the net. Next the net became a battleground as soon as organizations and governments found out that people really would communicate on the net. I do realize that some economic incentives are needed to cause better hardware and communications abilities using computers. But somehow that gets disgustingly translated into some supposed right to sell phony Viagra tablets, made in some fools kitchen to the masses. We really need to crack down on fraud and beat some of these "businesses" back to the stone ages.
Honestly, in my opinion the most offending point of Android is Google Play Services. Google making all its services depending on one another is something we've all been seeing for years now, one could argue that we're expecting and used to it. Now, a service at the center of it all, which can do anything it wants, whenever it wants, that's honestly going too far in my opinion.
That's point #1, actually.
#2 is the fact that for many people (myself included), the days of tinkering with devices is over. It can be a hobby sometimes/for some people, but I for one like to separate what I rely on from what I play with. So at best an Android device would be a toy, not something I rely on daily.
Now, if anyone can point me to a simple/reliable way to use Google's Android without Google Play Services owning the device, and without being forced to nurse custom/specific distros/ROMs for it, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Please, one of the big ones needs to be our knight in shining armor and make an Android phone without all the Google tie-ins. Make your own app-store that doesn't require a login or GUID from users, only from authors. Make a map and navigation app based on OSM. Include offline calendar and to-do lists, with optional syncing to a computer or an open source online service. Resist the urge to replace Google's apps with your own proprietary apps. Just make a phone worth buying.
You mean a Kindle?
Or you can just buy a phone that has good Cynogenmod support and stick with the F-Droid open source app repository.
Google are to be admired for their energy and inventiveness. However, all big companies (and those who aspire to be big) all want the same thing: dominate the markets they are in, or take over everything they can. Google hides behind the fig leaf of "open source" when it suits their ends. If we compare Google to Apple, however, it's like comparing the US to North Korea.
The problem is that you won't (legally) get access to Google Play Services this way, which means you will be missing out on a lot of Android apps. I would be curious to find an actual number, though; all I'm seeing is a nebulous "many".
If you can't convince them, convict them.
Suck. No matter who provides them.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
While Android phones are almost always tied-in to Google, cheap tablets most commonly are NOT, and they do just fine. The success of the Kindle Fire should be a sign that you can sever those Google ties without too much trauma.
You're not getting all that much from the fees paid to Google.
You can find other free maps and navigation easily enough (MapQuest, OsmAnd~, etc.).
You can find 3rd party YouTube apps, or you can just leave users to view YouTube in a web browser like desktop users do.
You can set-up Gmail access without the official Gmail app.
etc.
The biggest stumbling block is the app store. Google has market effects on their side. There are several competitor app stores, but none as complete as Google's. Still, as long as you have the most-popular apps, your customers won't complain. GetJar and Amazon are passable.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Its almost like there is a concerted campaign this month against Android openness - or are journalists seeing buzz around earlier stories and creating more link bait? I think this article and the others all demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the open source world.
There is more than one model, while there are entirely open projects like the Linux kernel, there are also a great many projects with both open and proprietary components. See MySQL, JBoss, Glassfish, Solaris, ExtJS, Nexus, etc., all of these projects are completely functional products but the companies provide additional functionality for profit.
Android code is available under an OSI license, the code comprises a complete functional product (assuming device drivers, but that isn't Google's responsibility). The Open Source world is driven by contributing back, not by getting everything on a silver platter for free.
MS still lacks market share, and one of their main problems is that windows phone 7 is the last platform supported by apps builders. It is that bad that they consider running android on windows.
At the same time they have to push all phone makers to pay them patent licenses for patents for fat and what they madeup when windows mobile (5.x 6.x) was the big thing.
MS Never said to be open. They controll the gates to their app store, just like Apple takes full control of everything htat is allowed to run on their phone.
Beside your point of not being able to include google apps on them, developers are tied to using a devkit that does not have a lices that allows anyone to fork it.
Only a little time ago, there was lots of "OMG Android is becoming fragmented" stories. Now the stories are essentially the opposite: that device makers are closely tied into what Google does.
Is there someone behind this? Or am I seeing consipiracies where there are none?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Problem is, it's not an 'all-bad' or 'all-good' issue. It's bad, because Google is obviously not open here, and have been making moves to keep things less open. It's good though, because a lot of their code IS open source. So each side has something to argue.
If you really want to troll the Android fanboys, point out that Apple is just as open, because their base OS is completely open.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If you destroy the value of something the minute you fork it, it isn't open. Period.
Biggest enemy of Open Source Software there is.
I have 4 different browsers installed on my android device (no root). Tell me again how many browsers you can install on IOS (no root)
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
I dont think they are trying to hide anything when it comes to this. Its very straight forward actually.
If you want the google play you have to include all google software. If you dont want google play, you dont need to worry about it. Amazon is doing quite fine with its kindle
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Ironically, Microsoft via the Nokia Normandy is likely to be the first of the big players to do this.
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
well now I feel stupid, I was under the impression that IOS still did not allow other browsers in the app store
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Well, technically, they're as much of a browser as MyIE/Maxthon were - custom shells around built-in WebKit.
Apple doesn't allow anything that remotely looks like interpreting code that's not packaged with the app or typed by user, even up to rejecting games that let you download user-generated levels. Custom HTML renderers and JS engines are right out.
I had a look, and all of the proprietary Android apps that I'm currently running are available on the Amazon store, which you can download as an apk. I'd love to have a phone with the Amazon store and F-Droid installed by default, but without any of the Google things. If the device manufacturer would guarantee OTA security updates for 4-5 years, I'd buy one today.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Also, I find that it's pretty easy with an Android phone to go into the Application Manager and disable the most onerous Google bits. I turn off Google Plus, Gmail, the Play Store video/audio/ebooks clients, Google's Chat and Wallet, etc. The functionality to disable these binary chunks is right in the configuration settings. You can't recover the storage space they consume, but you can clear out any updates and data files, and shut off lots of the functionality that communicates back to the Googleplex.
Good to know; thanks.
If you can't convince them, convict them.
App updates, including updates to Google Play Services, always ask for explicit permission if the app's device permissions change (if an app needs to use GPS and hadn't previously, for instance). When apps haven't changed their requirements, you can still turn off automatic updates in order to prevent any app (once again including Play Services) from updating without your explicit permission. If you don't add a google account to your device, you won't even be alerted about possible updates, let alone see them applied without permission (once again, this includes Google's Play Services). And in the very extreme case of an entire system update, you are always asked for explicit permission before upgrading. In other words, even when your device comes with Google Play Services by default (as most do), you are NEVER forced to apply system or app updates without authorization.
Well yeah. The Android apps you would miss out on are (only) the ones that are designed to require Google's cloud services specifically (Drive storage, Maps navigation, Google's voice search, Play games syncing etc). No big surprise there.
There are entire categories of apps which don't need any cloud services of course, and many others where the apps are written to use alternative services, or where the bulk of the app is entirely usable even when a given service is unavailable (e.g. when sold through Amazon's app store). In all cases though, it's the developer's decision, and Google's cloud service APIs are completely optional & not part of the base Android framework.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Unlike making a copy of open source software, every access to Maps or YouTube servers costs money. Giving the cloud away without any revenue or strategic advantage is not a valuable business model.
What other choices are expected besides licencing Google cloud services, rolling your own or doing without?
But how do you download MapQuest onto an Android device without Google Play Store? The only download links I could see on mobile.mapquest.com were for Apple App Store, Google Play Store, and Windows Store.
Are Firefox OS and Jolla even available in Slashdot's home country (the USA)?
It's the way Android lets me spy on the wireless signals passing through my body that I like. The user can choose to delegate management of the Wi-Fi data link to a specialized application, which lets users choose to contribute to an access point map. Because Apple has chosen not to make an equivalent API available to iOS applications, there won't be "an app for that". The user of an Android device can also choose to install from trusted third parties, unlike Apple which spies on all installations of all apps onto all iOS devices that aren't associated to a paid developer or enterprise program. So who's the spy now? Ha ha ha, boom boom.
With just Replicant and F-Droid, how will you find games to play? I imagine it's harder to finance development of video games for F-Droid because even if the game engine is free software, promotion of the non-free mission packs whose sale funds development triggers the "NonFreeAdd" antifeature that hides the app from the majority of users.