Contributing to Android undermines open source because that little-known failed 'Honeycomb' variant is closed source.
Honeycomb is just an example of how Google could arbitrarily close the source of their AND YOUR changes. Android, as a whole, takes from opensource but does not contribute, and is incompatible with the rest of what exists in the open source realm solely due to the fact that it was supposed to be closed source an proprietary.
AOSP rocks!
The AOSP, really, is a disaster. When you have to download files for your device from sites like rapidshare, something is fucked.
Open Source, the way we know and love it today, is filled with projects that struggle with direction. GNOME, KDE and other extremely well known projects suffer from having too many people in charge. Meanwhile, commercial projects have the advantage of having stronger direction which is great from a perspective of getting a project planned, built and "completed."
Which is beside the point, as the kernel itself has a small number of people that decide which way things go, but is wildly successful at achieving goals laid out despite having thousands of developers. It's also completely open.
Google is attempting to keep the project as open as it can while still maintaining its direction.
No, they're keeping it open in such a fashion that they can absolutely control which way it goes while giving an advantage only to the device makers that have partnered with them, while also breaking ties (not that they had any, since it was originally a closed-source project) with everything else in the open source community.
So in addition to being an OS, it is also an "experience" that needs to be consistent and reliable.
Which is beside the point.
And keep in mind that this tablet computing is a new format of computing.
No it isn't. That statement is a lie being fed to justify lockdown and DRM. It's a computer with no keyboard and only a touchscreen, the only new thing is developers being forced to think out their UIs better.
But none of this has anything to do with how completely divorced from the rest of the open source world Android is.
Yeah, probably only related to changes made to the kernel as everything else is Apache licensed. Nothing of use or real value, seeing as how little of it ever gets into the mainline, and nothing contributed to any other parts of Android help any other open source software.
Intel still builds ARM processors. Their entire line of "IO Processors" are basically dual-core ARM chips used for RAID cards. Adaptec and Highpoint both use these chips, for example.
I think you mean, an OS developed under the banner of the Linux Foundation with support from SuSE and Intel that can't be arbitrarily taken and held closed on a whim. Nokia is mostly peripheral, though they were decent up until the point that MS "bought" them.
To head off the stupidity before it infects Slashdot, no.
Intel sells processors. Any OS that will run on their processors is OK by their standards.
Of course, contributing to Android is to undermine open source as a whole, seeing as how they continue to hide the Honeycomb source but deliver it to Intel. If you truly appreciate open source and want it to succeed in the mobile space, you should support and push for MeeGo (and stop buying shit from companies like Motorola.)
If it is being collected you can guarantee it is being sent, how and when is another question entirely. Never mind the privacy implications with respect to other people that may have access to your PC, or law enforcement suddenly knowing everywhere you've been over the last indefinite period.
But of course, no one has any rights before American Corporations.
Oh please, tell me you have a source for that statement.
Re:Sugar is not only toxic but it's addictive.
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 2
Rambling on about something being toxic does not make it so. If you wish to show something is toxic, start by applying bounds to your statement and show how it falls within them.
What you state seems less like something being addictive or toxic (sugar is addictive like water is) and more the symptom of people overeating cheap processed foods rather than any valid scientific argument. Much like Dr. Lustig's statements.
Wikileaks doesn't do a damned thing. They take information given to them. This is a violation of privacy done by intrusion into systems the newspapers have no business being in.
Aren't we just biasing our views based on if the story portrays the "correct" people as the villains? It's amusing to see the really hateful attitudes and spittle-flecked invective.
China shouldn't be calling anyone a hypocrite. As furious the barking in Washington has been there's no bite, and nothing compares to China's outright abuse of its people and efforts to censor the internet.
Android will always suffer (in a VERY GOOD way) from being open source
Google and the hardware vendors will always benefit from Android being selectively open source, but it's a black hole of open source that detracts from platforms that are far more open, diverse, compatible, and don't have so many elements of the OS controlled by a single organization that happily treats the open source community as second class citizens, allowing devices to ship with admitted rush job software they won't give to the AOSP for flaky reasons.
Sadly, it's stolen time and interest from other platforms and left us with people posting ROM images on file sharing websites and confusing and poorly documented processes on forums.
The point here is that although people think it's easy to build OSes, building one that's full featured and modern is extremely hard and can't be done by just throwing money at people . It takes years for bugs to be found and shaken off. See how Nokia failed inspite of employing tens of thousands of people to work on Symbian and Meego/Maemo.
Actually, Nokia was quite successful with that. Where they failed was internal execution of bringing the various R&D concepts they had developed to market, and doing so in a manner that was economically viable. They also hated the US carriers, and as a result only got low end phones on their networks.
It's sad, really. The N900 is, thus far, the last of its kind and is far superior to Android, technically, in many ways that would easily given it an edge. Too bad Nokia's management dropped the ball completely.
I used the CLI on my Mac for my entire last year of university. All of my CS assignments were done in the console using Bison, Flex, and GCC. Went back and forth with someone on my team who was using Redhat, no problem. At that point you could not prove the superiority of Linux over OS X to me, as I had the best of both worlds.
Now my Macbook runs Ubuntu, and I won't support Apple. They've shifted focus to their Mobile products, where Free Software is unwelcome and they've decided that access to the space is reserved for themselves and those who they bless. So IMO, OS X is something great that delivered ease of use plus optional power, tainted by a corporate drive to strip end users of that
Slashdot Mirror
Honeycomb is just an example of how Google could arbitrarily close the source of their AND YOUR changes. Android, as a whole, takes from opensource but does not contribute, and is incompatible with the rest of what exists in the open source realm solely due to the fact that it was supposed to be closed source an proprietary.
The AOSP, really, is a disaster. When you have to download files for your device from sites like rapidshare, something is fucked.
Which is beside the point, as the kernel itself has a small number of people that decide which way things go, but is wildly successful at achieving goals laid out despite having thousands of developers. It's also completely open.
No, they're keeping it open in such a fashion that they can absolutely control which way it goes while giving an advantage only to the device makers that have partnered with them, while also breaking ties (not that they had any, since it was originally a closed-source project) with everything else in the open source community.
Which is beside the point.
No it isn't. That statement is a lie being fed to justify lockdown and DRM. It's a computer with no keyboard and only a touchscreen, the only new thing is developers being forced to think out their UIs better.
But none of this has anything to do with how completely divorced from the rest of the open source world Android is.
Yeah, probably only related to changes made to the kernel as everything else is Apache licensed. Nothing of use or real value, seeing as how little of it ever gets into the mainline, and nothing contributed to any other parts of Android help any other open source software.
Intel still builds ARM processors. Their entire line of "IO Processors" are basically dual-core ARM chips used for RAID cards. Adaptec and Highpoint both use these chips, for example.
I think you mean, an OS developed under the banner of the Linux Foundation with support from SuSE and Intel that can't be arbitrarily taken and held closed on a whim. Nokia is mostly peripheral, though they were decent up until the point that MS "bought" them.
Please, make stupid statements elsewhere.
Intel can't do that though, they don't control the OS. And they have no real foothold in the mobile space to do that with just yet.
To head off the stupidity before it infects Slashdot, no.
Intel sells processors. Any OS that will run on their processors is OK by their standards.
Of course, contributing to Android is to undermine open source as a whole, seeing as how they continue to hide the Honeycomb source but deliver it to Intel. If you truly appreciate open source and want it to succeed in the mobile space, you should support and push for MeeGo (and stop buying shit from companies like Motorola.)
If it is being collected you can guarantee it is being sent, how and when is another question entirely. Never mind the privacy implications with respect to other people that may have access to your PC, or law enforcement suddenly knowing everywhere you've been over the last indefinite period.
But of course, no one has any rights before American Corporations.
The tragedy in how idiotic that image is, even if it is technically correct.
You can use truecrypt though. Bit of a hack, but it's possible.
Basically your whole point rests upon "natural" vs. "processed" but can you even highlight how it is dangerous?
The problem seems to be, by far, quantity consumed rather than the nature of the material, unless you can present some compelling proof otherwise.
You seem to have latched on to this quite tightly. Can you explain why you buy so intensely into this belief?
Oh please, tell me you have a source for that statement.
Rambling on about something being toxic does not make it so. If you wish to show something is toxic, start by applying bounds to your statement and show how it falls within them.
What you state seems less like something being addictive or toxic (sugar is addictive like water is) and more the symptom of people overeating cheap processed foods rather than any valid scientific argument. Much like Dr. Lustig's statements.
Wikileaks doesn't do a damned thing. They take information given to them. This is a violation of privacy done by intrusion into systems the newspapers have no business being in.
Wow, you must be reading Slashdot in Universe B.
And why would Google take actions that would be seen as blatantly anti-competitive? Even Microsoft was more subtle than that.
But how have they suppressed speech with respect to this issue?
China shouldn't be calling anyone a hypocrite. As furious the barking in Washington has been there's no bite, and nothing compares to China's outright abuse of its people and efforts to censor the internet.
I take it that your users consist exclusively of the types who use only Office and make phone calls and powerpoint presentations all day.
Google and the hardware vendors will always benefit from Android being selectively open source, but it's a black hole of open source that detracts from platforms that are far more open, diverse, compatible, and don't have so many elements of the OS controlled by a single organization that happily treats the open source community as second class citizens, allowing devices to ship with admitted rush job software they won't give to the AOSP for flaky reasons.
Sadly, it's stolen time and interest from other platforms and left us with people posting ROM images on file sharing websites and confusing and poorly documented processes on forums.
Actually, Nokia was quite successful with that. Where they failed was internal execution of bringing the various R&D concepts they had developed to market, and doing so in a manner that was economically viable. They also hated the US carriers, and as a result only got low end phones on their networks.
It's sad, really. The N900 is, thus far, the last of its kind and is far superior to Android, technically, in many ways that would easily given it an edge. Too bad Nokia's management dropped the ball completely.
I bet they're worried that someone will port it to the Nook Color and people will go for that instead of overpriced $500+ tablets.
Which is the kernel, and only the kernel. Which is usually published as a tarball on some obscure page.
I used the CLI on my Mac for my entire last year of university. All of my CS assignments were done in the console using Bison, Flex, and GCC. Went back and forth with someone on my team who was using Redhat, no problem. At that point you could not prove the superiority of Linux over OS X to me, as I had the best of both worlds.
Now my Macbook runs Ubuntu, and I won't support Apple. They've shifted focus to their Mobile products, where Free Software is unwelcome and they've decided that access to the space is reserved for themselves and those who they bless. So IMO, OS X is something great that delivered ease of use plus optional power, tainted by a corporate drive to strip end users of that
OS X 10.5 is Certified Unix.
They have not, to my knowledge, resubmitted later versions. I don't know if it applies to any of the 10.5.X versions.