Slashdot Mirror
Samsung's AdBlock Fast Removed From the Play Store (androidheadlines.com)
New submitter Alexander Maxham writes with the news reported at Android Headlines that Samsung's ad-blocking Android app called AdBlock Fast "was apparently ousted from the Play Store for violating section 4.4 of the Developer Distribution Agreement, stating that an app cannot disrupt or interfere with devices, networks or other parties' apps and services. (Also noted by Engadget.)
The F-Droid app store allows ad blockers. These are just two:
https://f-droid.org/repository...
https://f-droid.org/repository...
F-Droid only contains free and open source apps. Each of them is fully built from source. https://f-droid.org/
app cannot disrupt or interfere with devices, networks or other parties' apps and services.
Oooh, ooh, can an app mess with my internet connection by loading many ads? So anything that uses the device bandwidth excessively could also be banned now?
This is why Android isn't really Open Source in spirit. It is as closed as Apple is.
Hardly. Even on a non-rooted device all you have to do is tick "Allow untrusted sources" in the settings and then you can install stuff outside of Play Market as much as you like. Play Market is closed, yes, but it's also a separate thing and not required for using an Android-device. iPhones and iPads and the likes, as far as I know, require doing a lot more than just ticking a single box to allow installation of things from outside of Apple's AppStore.
What's so crazy about it? Google makes almost all of their money from advertising and Apple makes practically none of theirs that way. Is it that difficult to see that one company would rather sell you a cheap device that serves plenty of ads and the other would rather you pay a premium for a device that will block all the ads?
No, you took stupid pills. As is so fondly said around here: Follow the money.
Apple's customer base want something that "just works" and lacks clutter. They'll pay a premium for this.
Google's customer base doesn't mind advertisements and are willing to put up with them as long as it keeps the apps and devices on the cheap.
While Slashdotters may disagree, these are the facts for about 95% of Android's user base. Most of them don't give a fuck about open source or custom distros, they like getting a cheaper device and free apps.
Except there's not only the play store, but it allows 3rd party apps to be loaded as well as competing stores like the amazon store.
While i don't agree with Google Play's policy, there's at least a choice, which is the world of difference between Apple and Google.
It strikes me that "in spirit" is just a sort of goalposting shifting term, very convenient to trot out when you feel like you might be losing an argument, but having absolutely zero utility for describing anything at all.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
AOSP is missing a hell of a lot more than the play store.
There is no choice: it is controlled by a single corporation. Google, Inc. Android is not Open Source in spirit.
Google's core business is delivering targeted advertising and marketing data, give it away "free" then monetize the hell out of it. They're only opposed to malware and deceptive ads because it hurts their much bigger business of ordinary ads. What on earth made you think Google likes ad blockers? They're all cloud and web apps and put your data online so we can analyze it. And praise Jeebus they didn't get anywhere with G+, if they had Facebook's data too you'd almost have them shoulder surfing with you. Apple? It's the iSphere and you're paying for it but as long as they get a cut they're happy. And they got all sorts of stores like iTunes to sell things themselves, don't need to remind people of the world outside the iSphere. Maybe you're thinking about the part where Google uses open source, but that's just on the client side to break monopolies and get users hooked up to Google services. It's a tool and sometimes there's a common enemy but they're not your friend.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Oh yeah, all you have to do is this and that.
"This and that" is tick one box, that is present in the settings.
That is why I say "in spirit"
And you are wrong. If they were the same "in spirit" they wouldn't GIVE you the option to load apps from anywhere else on a silver platter.
Android is about as open as iOS.
No, android is a LOT more open than iOS.
Can I opt to use an alternative app store like fdroid or the humblebundle store on android? Yes, I can. Its officially supported. Can I do that on ios? No way, not without literally breaking ios.
Can I buy a game for android directly from the developer, on his website, download it and install it? Yup, I can do that if i want to. Can I do that on ios? Nope.
Can I download the source for android modify it and flash it to my device with the full support for doing so provided by the manufacturer (although obviously they'll no longer support the operating system I install). On some devices from some manufacturers: yes, you can. With Apple, on any device -- no. The software cannot be downloaded and modified, and no they do not support allowing you load any customizations you might make at all, period, ever.
To say they are the same even "in spirit" is simply... lying.
Running an Android phone today, without relying on the Google stuff, is really hard. No store sells such a phone (except those cheap phones that replace it with the Amazon equivalents). You usually have to root the phone, and the manufacturers won't honor the warranty. You risk some hardware not working, not getting updates, etc.
Face it: The hand held phone industry is 100% vendor lock-in. They aren't like PCs where you still have Linux if you want to control your machine. Heck, even Windows and OS X don't try to lock you down the way Android, iOS, and Windows Mobile (or whatever it is called now) do.
I don't know what Samsung's ad blocker is doing differently, but Eyeo's Adblock Browser is still available in the Play Store. I have it on my Nexus - no problems, and it makes browsing much nicer. The Android version of Firefox also supports ad blockers. But, people gotta hate on Google.
I'd rather have ads then paywalls. Youtube is now trying it with the "red" program & if that's the case say good bye to a free internet.
I'm in Google's customer base, and I want something that just works and lacks clutter, but which is also usable.
Could ba a good argument against Android.
> Oh yeah, all you have to do is this and that. That is why I say "in spirit". Android is about as open as iOS. Linux is Open.
all except for that inconvenient detail that you just glossed over.
They allow for alternate sources of apps. The method of allowing this is so simple that even a blithering idiot (or an Apple user) can manage it.
Conceptually, it's pretty similar to adding a PPA to Ubuntu.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Yes, most of android devices ship with the play store, but you still have the option to completely ignore it.
No, you don't have that option as long as it's installed. Play store will update apps on your device that it didn't install. Install Firefox from F-Droid, and googleplay will update it. There's no way to remove it. The only way to get rid of Play, is to install a ROM that doesn't have it pre-installed.
The Play Store and other Google core apps are not free, not open source, etc. They're to be bundled with Android, the locked-down, not free, not open source mobile OS. OEMs have to pay Google to get access to these apps as well as pay Google to get access to Android.
You have the option of downloading it illegally from someone who dumped it from their own phone, got it from "somewhere, wink wink", etc. Alternatively, you can download a custom ROM with it baked in from someone who did that step for you. I DGAF about downloading it illegally, but let's not claim that AOSP+Google's apps are a free and open option.
... an app cannot disrupt or interfere with devices, networks or other parties' apps and services.
I imagine these rules are meant to apply to unintentional/unknown actions, not ones by design for which the user specifically installed the app to perform. Otherwise, all those call/text/spam blocker apps (like Mr. Number) need to go, 'cause they're interfering with things too...
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
You're surprised that an advertising company pulls an ad blocker from their app store?
Where is the APK? Play store is not the only app source for android devices.
So technically, Anti-virus apps should be banned from the Play Store because they "disrupt or interfere" with a virus-containing app? lol
The only app for which this is true is Firefox however. All other apps on F-Droid are built by F-droid itself. Firefox isn't built by f-droid team out of multiple reasons, and is only kept inside the store because of its popularity, and the lack of alternatives.
But yeah, as long as the play store is installed, google essentially has root access over your phone, as gapps are (almost) always installed as system apps, and those apps can trivially become root to do stuff.
OH yeah, because my grandmother can add a "PPA to Ubuntu" whatever that is. 98% of android users don't know what sideloading is. Give me a break.
Try a different ad blocker, maybe? I've been quite happy with BlockBear. I must admit that it doesn't block all ads, but it catches the vast majority of them.
AOSP follows the "cathedral" approach of open source. gapps are closed and proprietary, that's true, and most apps require one or another gapp. Google has managed to get most apps rely on their services one way or another, even though they published most of the OS as open source. This can't be said for microsoft, or iOS (yeah, the compiler, browser engine and the kernel are open source, but what else?), so kudos to google for this.
Yes, Android is proprietary, but I still like that almost the whole OS is open source. Anyways, I wouldn't want to use the proprietary components anyways, e.g. their maps app, which sends the position I am interested in to google's servers. I use osmand, and have the full map on my device. I don't need to send google my position every time I look at the map, or tell google which route to drive, or etc. Or take the GCM service, which is good in thought, I don't deny that, but I don't trust an advertising company to run it, I prefer to have a free choice over this.
I'm comfortable with the fact that these apps are proprietary. I don't want spyware on my device. I don't want it to be integrated into the system and my ROM creator doesn't care to remove the spyware features. Its already now pretty common among CM users to download gapps onto their phones, even though its illegal, imagine the pressure from the community if the devs removed a spyware component from the open source part that rendered 90% of all apps unusable.
Probably your grandmother can't click "next next finish" on the usual windows installer either.
Well Google makes the majority of their money from Ads (90+ percent of their revenue)
The "interfere with other apps" is because a good adblocker can block ads not just in your browser but everywhere on the box- they can deny web connections cleverly, so apps can't refresh their ad-pile.
On ios, none of these adblockers exist (well, maybe with a jailbreak)- the content blockers function in the ones that use safari to render (so web pages).
Android also offers other ways to get things like this on your phone.
It's just two radically different approaches. Google can behave like a general purpose computer with some fighting, but then you are worried about the standard drama of adminning your box. Apple fights this hard- it takes a jailbreak to actually do that kind of thing there, but they aren't hostile to ad blockers in the same way, even creating a class of application that can deny connections just for it.
You realise that if you try to install something that would be blocked by not having this checked, the dialog box that pops up actually links to the place in the settings to change it, right?
If you can't find it then, you have no placed operating any piece of technology built in the past 30 years
Who could have guessed that Google, a company that exists primarily to serve ads, would have a problem with something that blocks ads?
It's shocking and was completely unforeseen.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Lol no you aren't. Their customer base is the people who PAY them, aka the advertisers. Revenue from devices is non-existant and cloud services like Google Apps is a piss in the ocean.
Is it that difficult to see that one company would rather sell you a cheap device that serves plenty of ads and the other would rather you pay a premium for a device that will block all the ads?
But where is that third option, a premium device with no ads or tracking, that I can do what I want with?
Except for the part that alternative ROMs usually update their ROMs longer than, hardware vendors. Not without reason it's called "aftermarket" firmware.
They aren't like PCs where you still have Linux if you want to control your machine.
If your phone is well supported by a third party ROM vendor, the situation is IMO actually comparable to the PC world. Most of the stuff you want to run won't work (like MS office, the Adobe tools, or games), but the basics _do_ work.
The existence of alternative (open source) ROMs is only on Android. Not on iOS, nor windows mobile.
Probably there is one difference: In the PC world a far larger percentage runs "truly" open devices (where the full application/OS layer is open source), than on android, which has a strong inclination towards gapps. Google basically moved the border closer to them, and getting many open source developers write for their platform only.
The open source community love everything Google.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
I'm in Google's customer base
Only if you're buying advertising space. If you're not buying ad space then you're part of Google's product base.
Apple makes it money from selling you hardware/software/services. Apples approach means they can push for privacy because it does not impact the bottom line
Google makes most of its money from selling adverts. Googles approach means that privacy be damned they need to spy and sell your info.
Easy to see the difference it attitude.
But you know what? Likely only 2% give a fuck about "The Open Source Spirit", have no interest in that, and don't want some screeching yowling loon telling them it's not open source enough.
So, before you keep going all RMS and howling about how it's not pure enough for you ... do kindly remember almost nobody else cares.
The rest of the world just rolls their eyes, tunes this shit out, and reaches for Candy Crush and Facebook.
Neither Google nor Apple are in the business of making phones to appease the rabid open source people. You may have to live with that fact.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I prefer the option being "default deny" rather than "default let users execute whatever shit they find on the net". On windows, there are tons of sites, with varying reputability, and even the larger ones offering you to install you some bloatware of theirs. On android you only have google (note the "only have", google is an ad company after all). I consider this better for the average person.
I can download the source of Android right now, and I can run commercial software on a "spiritual" Linux distro. So you're just talking rubbish, the kind of rubbish kooks who irritate their families at dinner.
"Do we have to invite him over, all he ever talks about is the righteous purity of open source..."
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Is it that difficult to see that one company would rather sell you a cheap device that serves plenty of ads and the other would rather you pay a premium for a device that will block all the ads?
But where is that third option, a premium device with no ads or tracking, that I can do what I want with?
The Amiga will rise again!
Android has Firefox, and Firefox had Adblock Plus. I use an Android phone and I refuse to run any browser but Firefox on it. And I NEVER log on to Google's services in Firefox. Real Firefox isn't even available in iOS.
"Every" is a word you are obviously not qualified to use.
chrome on android has a popup blocker.
how is that not "interfering with networks" or whatever. it has also "content protection" which is just basically the same thing.
also chrome app store has no such limitation.
so what the fuck google what the fuck
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Google's customer base is advertisers. Android users, which pay nothing to Google, don't mind the advertisements.
What's being left out is that Google is NOT blocking an Adblocker, (this was quickly covered by real tech news sites, some of which *gasp* actually reached out to Google to fact check before blindly parroting 'news'.) Instead, they are blocking Adblockers that violate Google's terms of use. (modifying system files, interfering with other apps, etc.) You are perfectly welcome to build, publish, and even sell ad blockers. You aren't permitted to break functionality of other apps.
So, before you keep going all RMS and howling about how it's not pure enough for you .
Even RMS doesn't seem to care about the setting being 'difficult to find. Especially since you can install your own version of the OS. His biggest worry is that some drivers are binary blobs.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I thought the very purpose of an app is to interfere with devices, networks or other parties' apps and services.
Buy a good Android device with an unlocked bootloader and use an AOSP based ROM with no gapps. Use Firefox mobile with your favorite blocking extensions as your browser. Use permission control to restrict apps that are a bit too curious. There you have it : premium device, no ads, no tracking. It may not be enough if you wear a tinfoil hat but nothing is good enough for tinfoil hats.
According to XDA, Sony seems to be the recommended brand because they are developer friendly and produce nice devices. Nexus have good support too. Also don't buy your phone through your carrier.
It is not as easy as buying a phone off the shelf and there are some downsides but you have understand that what you are asking is not what most people want. People want tracking because it allows plenty of nice features (like Google now), they like free stuff and ads are an effective way of financing free stuff, and they just want things to work out of the box rather than control all the details.
Google is an ad-company (and maybe an NSA front, who knows), while Apple is a devices company.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Considering how the Firefox developers currently seems hell-bent on doing away with Adblock as we know it by removing its underpinnings and, more recently, moving in the direction of removing the ability to say "NO" to cookies, I'd be a bit hesitant to endorse them.
Google's customer base doesn't mind advertisements and are willing to put up with them as long as it keeps the apps and devices on the cheap.
Then why are there so many expensive Android phones sold? The latest Galaxy S model costs the same as an iPhone.
Since there are such a wide variety of Android devices available, you can't really characterize the billion+ owners by price bracket. Also, cheapskates are often the ones who appreciate ad-blocking the most, since if you pay there are usually less ads anyway.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Heh... Yup.
I guess you could say... That was fast...
B) *walks away* (I've actually seen a couple of episodes of that show!!! Yay! Pop culture reference - I've come out from under my rock once or twice.)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Available in the play store, and supports ad-blocking extensions.
Adblock Browser for Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.adblockplus.browser&hl=en
Ghostery Privacy Browser: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghostery.android.ghostery&hl=en
Probably there is one difference: In the PC world a far larger percentage runs "truly" open devices ...
What's kind of worrisome (and I do mean legitimate worry) is that there are an increasing number of people who push for the elimination of the general computing device - i.e. the desktop and much greater choice in the software that runs on it.
I think I've posted enough so that I needn't expound on my being an open source aficionado and not an open source zealot. As an example: I don't really care that someone uses Windows and I'm glad they have that choice - I don't even think that all software should be open source, I think a person should be able to pay for closed source software if they want to.
That said, open source has done a hell of a lot for the industry and for enabling people, regular people, to do great things. I don't know who I'm quoting, and it's not verbatim, but somebody recently said something like this: "Android is Linux after they've taken the kernel into the basement and performed a vivisection on it while raping it with a garden hose."
For 95% of the users, there's not a damned thing open about their phone. While they may not care, or even know, it means as many people are starting to rely on their mobile as their only compute device that the influence had by open source software is going to be lessened. People are giving up their choices, they're not maintaining those choices by keeping desktops, they're giving them up. "It's good enough."
I'm kind of old... (58) So, I might not be here but what will the scene look like in 15 or 20 years? What will the industry look like without the zealots having influence to counter the abuse potential or outright abusive behaviors? What choices will the user have, what will they *really* have for choices? No, not tomorrow - not next year, but twenty years from now.
I'm not a futurist and I don't really do the prediction thing but it's worrisome. I read a lot of comments. Many, many folks seem to be pushing for this and the adoption of this trend is amazingly fast as far as tech goes. What happens when the desktops become rarities and require arcane lore to operate? What about if they become too expensive for the average person to afford as they become specialist items? What about when they're only used by developers and not much else but black boxes exist?
There are a lot of worrisome trends. The trend to return to the days of dumb terminals and leasing time on someone else's hardware is another one that I find concerning. They've got a supercomputer in their pocket but want to run their office suite in the browser, on someone else's hardware, and paying for their slice of time. That looks remarkably familiar. What's the landscape going to look like in 15 or 20 years?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
The fact that they're not in the Google Play Store shouldn't stop you.
So how do we fix this? Is this important enough to drop our current projects and go "Okay, we need this." I don't contribute to much open source (I have 2 young children) but maybe this cause is a worthy one.
On android you only have google (note the "only have", google is an ad company after all).
*cocks head quizzically*
I gave up Android a while back but I'm not yet senile and I've got an Android tablet almost within reach. I don't think Installed one single app from Google on my last phone except for Opera. The tablet has Opera and Firefox. I have, however, installed apps from a lot of other places that were, quite specifically, not Google.
If you want to install something off the 'net that you found on some sketchy site, unless I'm forgetting, it actually prompts you to enable installing stuff from 3rd parties. Err... I kind of only know this because I'm that oddball that doesn't actually go installing a whole bunch of things but I've come across a few apps that looked interesting and weren't in the store.
I reread your post a few times, trying to see if I was missing something, and I'm pretty sure I'm not. Also, I don't really agree with you - as tempting as it is. If a user wants to shoot themselves in the foot, I guess it's just easier to let them do so. Taking away the idiots access may also take away the access from the smart person. I'm really not sure that reducing things to the lowest common denominator is the ideal solution? But, that's another point entirely.
I'm pretty sure, positive really, that I've more than Google as an option on my Android tablet and on my old phone. It's like a box. Tick the box and you're good to go. If you try to install something and that box is not ticked, it'll happily take you to that box in the settings so that you can tick it. Once ticked, it seems to stay ticked.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Android is about as open as iOS.
Can I download the source for android modify it and flash it to my device with the full support for doing so provided by the manufacturer (although obviously they'll no longer support the operating system I install). On some devices from some manufacturers: yes, you can. With Apple, on any device -- no. The software cannot be downloaded and modified, and no they do not support allowing you load any customizations you might make at all, period, ever.
To say they are the same even "in spirit" is simply... lying.
You're comparing "freedom" with "openness", and there is a difference.
Yes, you are free to install whatever you'd like from wherever you'd like on Android. I wouldn't go so far as to say "re-flashing the phone with a different Android" is supported. In fact, doing so voids any warranties with the manufacturer and as you mentioned I couldn't bring it into a T-Mobile store for a fix. In many cases there's a bunch of hoops to jump through to even get to the point of installing Cyanogenmod. So sure, there's some freedom there.
Openness, however, is really lacking. Google has a stranglehold on the market with their Google Apps (Play, gmail, movies, music, etc...). I've rooted my phone and attempted to remove those google apps I don't use, such as calendar and gmail, and each time my phone checks for an update those apps are reinstalled. I vaguely remember some being uninstalled remotely somehow on another phone, too. I'd also argue that when most people see the "Install from a non-trusted source?" dialog, they'll cancel out of whatever they were trying to do. Have you seen the source for any of the Google Apps? No? then they aren't 'open' are they?
Heh... Normally, I'd let ya be but I actually decided to scroll back up here to fuck with you.
See, I read some more of your posts and you're drooling on yourself in public. You rant and rave about corporations. You rant and rave about open source. Well, son... Today is the day you either learn to be humble or you decide to go off in a fit of rage.
Allow me to post a link...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Allow me to quote from that link:
The Free Software Foundation was founded in 1985 as a non-profit corporation supporting free software development.
Emphasis added, emphasis mine.
http://www.linuxfoundation.org...
Heh, there's the corporate charter. Let me get you the salient text...
(an Oregon nonprofit mutual benefit corporation)
Emphasis added, emphasis mine.
Shall I find the articles of incorporation for the folks behind BSD?
'Snot that I'm gonna disagree that Android is Open Source in many, many ways. (See prior posts in this very thread.) It's that your spouted spittle flecked gibberish is a bit silly when the very things you sit there and claim to stand for and appeal for are the same things you claim to hate. I'm afraid that trying to have them both makes you look a bit silly. If you want to know what a corporation is, you need but ask and I'll take the time out of my schedule to explain it to you.
If you don't know the meaning of words, you probably ought not use them in front of people until after you've looked them up. Corporations are not bad things. Corporations are just things. Are you using software or a computer to read this? You're a corporate apologist! Your posts, supporting open source? That's you - being a corporate apologist.
When you say, it's not open source "in spirit" that's just you picking one corporation over another. Yeah, that's a good corporate apologist. I hope you enjoy the taste of leather while you're down there kissing that corporate boot that is the FSF! Bend over and take it for the Linux Foundation - you corporate apologist!
Yeah... Kind of sorry but I couldn't just let that slide. It's okay, we've all posted drunk and stupid on Slashdot. You corporate apologist! ;-)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
An Amiga phone! Hell yes!
People don't mind ads until they take over your phone. I hate when viewing a site having an ad pop up to cover what I'm trying to read. That doesn't inspire me to buy anything. I tend to hate the people doing it to the point that if I note what they're selling I vow never to buy it. Getting in my face is the wrong way to sell me anything and I wonder what kind of people actually buy stuff from those shitstains using that kind of method.
It's a sad fact that you are correct. It applies in fact to almost everything in life. Most people, as long as you let them alone to do pretty much as they please, care little about anything going on under the surface. We see this with things like the "Patriot Act" and the Trans Pacific Partnership. Nobody cares unless they can't see their favorite show.
Well, and just as important to remember ... people have no interest in having their cell phone or internet browser be politicized to this level. It's annoying.
People just don't give a damn. It's hard to save some energy to care about real things instead of getting dragged into some bullshit screed about how Android doesn't embody the Open Source Spirit.
The problem is a lot of open source advocates ratchet it up to extreme levels, which are not unlike the crazy guy on the street corner telling us the end is night ... at a certain point, it just becomes melodramatic and irrelevant noise.
Equating open source zeal with some of the really scary stuff happening in the world is a little loopy, and mostly comes off like someone off their meds.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
What's 2% of 7 billion? I'm not good at maths but I bet it's a bit more than fuck all.
Let's phone up Gateway and see how that's going...
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Well, part of it is cultural. People are moving away from general purpose computing. Is that because they never took advantage of it before? Is that for some other reason or reasons?
Maybe open hardware? That's a trend that folks are working at but it's not as realistic as I hope. No, I'm not expecting end-users to jump all over open hardware necessarily. I'd expect others to do things that enabled others to utilize their freedoms more.
Be vocal but not obnoxious? "There's no need to store your photos in the cloud. You can host them on your old computer at home just as easily."
It's bigger than open source software, I think. Hell, a lot of it is (currently) running on open source software. People have managed to take open source software and find a way to *reduce* their freedom - voluntarily. Or, in the case of businesses, for the sake of saving a percent of a percent by using the "cloud." Yes, yes I'm aware that a cloud can be hosted locally. We called that a server room.
We've got enough compute power, in everyone's pocket, to do great things. Yet, here we are, using them as dumb terminals. That's sort of okay, what about when you want to make something?
If I see one saving grace, and this may seem odd, it's that I'm seeing more devices come with a keyboard now - or at least with that as an option. It has usually been an option, just not always utilized. I'd like to hope that the keyboard may turn things around. The keyboard may change it from being a consumption device to a creation device.
If they're a creation device then that might be the drive that keeps the general purpose computer, in the home, alive. I'm open to suggestions... I'll be buggered if I know the answers. I don't know how to fix it but I can tell you that my wrist is well and truly screwed. I really don't know how to fix this. I can't think of a magic fix - it's also cultural and no software seems to fix that. I can't even blame it on Facebook, Twitter, or even the kids today, the kids don't know any better.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
But Google Owned Motorola when I bought my phone. So I did pay Google for the phone and the OS that came with it. There's also the Nexus phones that you can order from Google's website. Sure, some other company makes them, but I'm sure that Google gets a cut of sales.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
What actual point are you making? Is there any device you can describe where a non-technical user can install software without using he default distro and without being more likely to get malware than what they were seeking? How would that even work?
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
On the contrary, a good imagination loosed on the world is a good thing.
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
You just wait, Palm will put their BeOS purchase to good use any day now.
Make me.
Don't want to invoke you-know-who but is there a way to use a hosts file with either android or iOS?
True, but then it's all part of the same thing. Some are just more extreme. I watch the national debt clock climbing away and wonder if it'll hit 100 trillion in 3 years or only 2. Everyone sees it climbing but they don't worry about it. The world keeps spinning though, it always has.
I wouldn't go so far as to say "re-flashing the phone with a different Android" is supported.
I qualified that as being supported by SOME manufacturers/devices, which it is.
. In fact, doing so voids any warranties with the manufacturer and as you mentioned I couldn't bring it into a T-Mobile store for a fix.
Actually those select manufacturers have committed that reflashing the OS does NOT void the warranty. But yes, naturally you can't take it to T-Mobile to troubleshoot a problem with syncing your email. If you swap out the OS you take ownership of that. But those manufacturers have committed to dealing with buttons that fail, batteries that fail, and other hardware warranty issues. Worst case you may have to flash it back to a stock OS to demonstrate that its not a software issue.
I'd also argue that when most people see the "Install from a non-trusted source?" dialog, they'll cancel out of whatever they were trying to do.
That's the right decision for Grandma and the VP of marketing. If they doesn't know f-droid from myHappyLuckyTotallyNotAScamStorePlusPlus then they shouldn't leave the google play store.
Have you seen the source for any of the Google Apps? No? then they aren't 'open' are they?
I haven't see the source for Portal either, which runs on linux. That doesn't make linux non open. Android is not google apps, and you can use android without them. I ONLY use the google app for maps myself.
You're comparing "freedom" with "openness", and there is a difference.
I don't deny that android as an ecosystem, especially from the perspective of the major corporations behind it is not ABOUT openness per se. Corporations are motivated by marketshare, profitability, revenue, etc... I get that. I get that they aren't ABOUT openness as a concept. Even RedHat isn't really ABOUT openness, its just a means to an end.
Nevertheless Android is still MUCH more open in actual practice. And even in spirit, it is far less hostile to openness than Apple is even if openness isn't the primary consideration driving all decisions.
You're using the wrong blocker. Try 'Distilled'.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
Hmm... this is interesting given his previous 2012 Slashdot response when asked if he owned a mobile phone:
"RMS: I certainly do not! A cell phone is Stalin's dream: its movements are tracked, and it can be converted (through the universal back door) into a listening device."
Yeah, there are other aspects he dislikes about Android, and he is supporting some open-source hardware projects, but "complicated UI for allowing third-party software" is not his concern lol
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
You can't avoid logging on to google's services on android, no matter which program you're using. They know where you live.
Man, I could have gone another year without hearing about those idiots! To hell with Gateway.