"Connecting Android to Amazon services...WHICH BY THE WAY Amazon sells as a service to other companies so they have built it to be easily incorporated."
You seem to be talking about AWS. OMG, you really aren't aware that Amazon has their own successful line of mobile products based on their own version of Android, are you?
We've had this whole discussion, with your acting condescending and obnoxious throughout, and it turns out that you don't even know what we are talking about.
There is this company called Amazon - I guess you haven't heard of them...
"If it was so easy to rework Android the way you suggest company's would be doing it."
Built their own app store, notification system, browser, payment services, user interface, all on top of Android. You should check it out.
" BlackBerry is positioning themselves for the future....not for the now. "
Yeah, unfortunately, companies that don't worry about the 'now' end up not having much of a future. While you are learning about Amazon, you might want to check BB's stock price...
The biggest security issues with Android are #1. manufacturers who don't provide updates (there was a good article from the ACLU in the last few days). #2. it is simply not a priority for most of its users and the manufacturers, so not much emphasis is put into it. #3. the open appstore - in my opinion much less of an issue then #1, and #2.
RIM could easily resolve all of these issues. #3 is the hardest because it means creating their own appstore, but that's what we are talking about anyway.
Getting QNX ready took 2 years. How long would it take RIM to create a distribution of Android that addressed these issues.
One reason I'm bummed about the route RIM took is because I would have loved to have seen what RIM could do with Android. Now, instead, we are questioning whether they even have a future.
Finally, you are talking about QNX as some kind'of salvation. I"m hearing a lot of that these days, but when I read the reviews of BB10 I see nothing to suggest that QNX itself will save RIM. The good stuff is the Hub and Blackberry Balance - both of these have nothing to do with QNX. Yeah, it's nice and slick and responsive, but iOS and Android (as of 4.1) are now too.
The only thing I see in the reviews that is really about the core OS is the complaints that the battery life is horrible.
Yes, and if were a 'devices' company they would have to charge more, perhaps work with carriers etc., but the part about skinning Android - and putting their effort into that skin, and into getting to market fast - could have been the same.
Amazon has their own appstore, their own push notification service, their own browser, their own payment service, etc. For most of the stuff that matters they made it their own.
Would it have made sense for them to spend an extra year on the stuff their customers will never see?
And in the end, this much touted QNX, which cost RIM so much, doesn't actually sound so great. For example, the battery life is apparently terrible. If I'm not careful to keep my Playbook charged then it is toast (this has happened to several friends). I'm not saying QNX is bad, but it wasn't worth the delay.
BB appears to think is is an OS company. It even seems to be describing a backup plan that involves selling BB10 into embedded markets.
Surely, this is a mistake. They have/had great smartphone features, particularly around messaging, and they have server software running in most corporations around the world. But they have let these advantages slip away as they pursued the perfect OS.
Instead, they could have done as Amazon did, and skin Android to their liking. This would have got them to market at least a year sooner with a product that could easily still have been uniquely BB on the surface - and the surface is the only thing the smartphone user sees.
"said Soghoian, principal technologies and senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union."
Finally, an article about the dangers of Android that quotes someone I'm prepared to listen to. I'm not entirely sure why the ACLU would be involved in this stuff, but I do have some respect for them and believe them to be objective in this matter.
I'm tired of the barrage of articles about the security problems with Android, and the need for anti-virus to resolve them - quoting people paid by the anti-virus companies.
"It is a protocol and API developed at the IETF and W3C for real time communications (RTC) by companies like Google, Mozilla, but also Microsoft."
Microsoft? Isn't their role to wait until WebRTC starts to catch on and then introduce their own version in a transparent attempt to undermine the standard?
And no, I'm not being facetious - it seems like MS does that with every useful open web technology.
Whether they are better yet, I'm not sure, but Yes, they have indicated that they want people using CardDAV/CalDav instead of Exchange.
Not too surprising, given that they have to pay MS for Exchange licensing, but I don't think these open protocols have the push support that Exchange had.
Maybe Apple gave them decent terms as long as HTC swallowed a bit of a poison pill: the patent license deal dies if HTC is purchased by, or merges with another company (Apple did something similar with RIM). The last thing Apple wants is consolidation that would make the Android ecosystem healthier.
Or maybe MS played a role? It was reported that HTC managed to get Microsoft on side, largely by agreeing to continue to make Windows Phones'. Maybe having Microsoft on their side helped in negotiations with Apple.
Maybe it's divide to conquer? If the weaker manufacturers in the Android ecosystem have a license to use all the basic touch screen methods, and the stronger ones don't then it could lead to greater inconsistency between Android phones and could weaken the strong players (i.e. Samsung).
Ultimately, Apple's biggest threats are Samsung and Google/Nexus. I mention Nexus in particular because there is nothing that Apple & MS could hate more then the low margins of the Nexus devices. Whether or not the Nexus 4 itself is a success, the nexus line has become a threat to the traditionally high margins on mobile devices and it must have re-inforced Apple's determination to kill Android.
It mentions the ridiculous number of patents required to make a smartphone (can't remember the number) and the legal impossibility of making arrangement for all those patents.
In some countries and on some carriers one of the promises of the Nexus brand was broken: we didn't get timely OS updates.
I felt this was a breach of trust - the sort of thing we expect from our carriers and some manufacturers - and it meant I couldn't recommend the Galaxy Nexus to others.
Fortunately, it seems that what happened with the Galaxy Nexus was not acceptable to Google either, and I'm really impressed with the lengths they are going to - bypassing the carriers completely in my country - to set things right.
They will probably only sell a tiny number of the new Nexus w/o carrier support but then again, the carriers' were never going to like or promote a phone that came unlocked and with broad carrier support - so they did little to promote the G'Nex anyway.
"their intentions obviously aren't very nice if they're doing it"
Based on what we know of them so far, I'd say that they are just trying to figure out a way to make some money, not be evil.
Personally, I hope they are successful in making money, and if there users feel that this latest initiative is the wrong approach then I hope they will respond in a constructive manner and not abandon Ubuntu.
A clarification has been posted: it is the Office 97-2003 (not 2003-2007) formats that are being dumped, and it is
Gotta say, though, that Google takes as much care with their blog posts as they do with their products: everything is beta.
Would be interested to know what the rationale is. Did they have to pay a licensing fee for these old proprietary formats? Or did they just want to stop supporting rather old, very proprietary formats of their competitor?
Note that they also recently announced that they are dropping IE8 support soon, so they are generally being very ruthless about culling out technologies. I guess I can forgive them that - supporting lots of old MS technologies must be painful.
either I want AdBlock, or if I must view ads - and I guess it is how the sites I use make their money - then I prefer personalized ads rather then random ones.
Users can decide which apps "have terrible functionality or a poor UI".
Getting Apple out of the business of censorship entirely - they should ban apps that are malware or those that they are forced to remove anyway because they break the law (e.g. hate laws).
The question of which countries' laws should be heeded (if we move beyond just heeding U.S. laws) is complicated, but I think it would have to be the app publisher's country.
Slashdot Mirror
"Connecting Android to Amazon services...WHICH BY THE WAY Amazon sells as a service to other companies so they have built it to be easily incorporated."
You seem to be talking about AWS. OMG, you really aren't aware that Amazon has their own successful line of mobile products based on their own version of Android, are you?
We've had this whole discussion, with your acting condescending and obnoxious throughout, and it turns out that you don't even know what we are talking about.
Now it really is time for you to hit yourself!
There is this company called Amazon - I guess you haven't heard of them...
"If it was so easy to rework Android the way you suggest company's would be doing it."
Built their own app store, notification system, browser, payment services, user interface, all on top of Android. You should check it out.
" BlackBerry is positioning themselves for the future....not for the now. "
Yeah, unfortunately, companies that don't worry about the 'now' end up not having much of a future. While you are learning about Amazon, you might want to check BB's stock price...
The build-in CalDAV and CardDAV are broken. It is Google pushing those standards - RIM and MS are pushing back. Hopefully RIM fixes their support.
User-selectable permissions sounds great. I didn't realize it had that.
"You don't deserve a response with substance. To be honest you don't even deserve this retort..."
You have made yourself clear.
The biggest security issues with Android are
#1. manufacturers who don't provide updates (there was a good article from the ACLU in the last few days).
#2. it is simply not a priority for most of its users and the manufacturers, so not much emphasis is put into it.
#3. the open appstore - in my opinion much less of an issue then #1, and #2.
RIM could easily resolve all of these issues. #3 is the hardest because it means creating their own appstore, but that's what we are talking about anyway.
Getting QNX ready took 2 years. How long would it take RIM to create a distribution of Android that addressed these issues.
One reason I'm bummed about the route RIM took is because I would have loved to have seen what RIM could do with Android. Now, instead, we are questioning whether they even have a future.
Finally, you are talking about QNX as some kind'of salvation. I"m hearing a lot of that these days, but when I read the reviews of BB10 I see nothing to suggest that QNX itself will save RIM. The good stuff is the Hub and Blackberry Balance - both of these have nothing to do with QNX. Yeah, it's nice and slick and responsive, but iOS and Android (as of 4.1) are now too.
The only thing I see in the reviews that is really about the core OS is the complaints that the battery life is horrible.
Yes, and if were a 'devices' company they would have to charge more, perhaps work with carriers etc., but the part about skinning Android - and putting their effort into that skin, and into getting to market fast - could have been the same.
Amazon has their own appstore, their own push notification service, their own browser, their own payment service, etc. For most of the stuff that matters they made it their own.
Would it have made sense for them to spend an extra year on the stuff their customers will never see?
And in the end, this much touted QNX, which cost RIM so much, doesn't actually sound so great. For example, the battery life is apparently terrible. If I'm not careful to keep my Playbook charged then it is toast (this has happened to several friends). I'm not saying QNX is bad, but it wasn't worth the delay.
Gotta love a response that says "hit yourself with something" and provides no response or substance at all. Classy!
BB appears to think is is an OS company. It even seems to be describing a backup plan that involves selling BB10 into embedded markets.
Surely, this is a mistake. They have/had great smartphone features, particularly around messaging, and they have server software running in most corporations around the world. But they have let these advantages slip away as they pursued the perfect OS.
Instead, they could have done as Amazon did, and skin Android to their liking. This would have got them to market at least a year sooner with a product that could easily still have been uniquely BB on the surface - and the surface is the only thing the smartphone user sees.
No, it doesn't.
"said Soghoian, principal technologies and senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union."
Finally, an article about the dangers of Android that quotes someone I'm prepared to listen to. I'm not entirely sure why the ACLU would be involved in this stuff, but I do have some respect for them and believe them to be objective in this matter.
I'm tired of the barrage of articles about the security problems with Android, and the need for anti-virus to resolve them - quoting people paid by the anti-virus companies.
"It is a protocol and API developed at the IETF and W3C for real time communications (RTC) by companies like Google, Mozilla, but also Microsoft."
Microsoft? Isn't their role to wait until WebRTC starts to catch on and then introduce their own version in a transparent attempt to undermine the standard?
And no, I'm not being facetious - it seems like MS does that with every useful open web technology.
Isn't this why Google created Google Fiber?
The primary purpose of Google Fiber is to give the industry a kick in the arse.
Whether they are better yet, I'm not sure, but Yes, they have indicated that they want people using CardDAV/CalDav instead of Exchange.
Not too surprising, given that they have to pay MS for Exchange licensing, but I don't think these open protocols have the push support that Exchange had.
"Specifically when it's a woman. You might call me old fashioned or sexist here, but where I'm from we get taught not to use violence against women."
Where I'm from we get taught not use violence against people.
You should only used violence when faced with someone who is going to do physical harm to you or others, whether male or female.
Very curious about what happened here?
Maybe Apple gave them decent terms as long as HTC swallowed a bit of a poison pill: the patent license deal dies if HTC is purchased by, or merges with another company (Apple did something similar with RIM). The last thing Apple wants is consolidation that would make the Android ecosystem healthier.
Or maybe MS played a role? It was reported that HTC managed to get Microsoft on side, largely by agreeing to continue to make Windows Phones'. Maybe having Microsoft on their side helped in negotiations with Apple.
Maybe it's divide to conquer? If the weaker manufacturers in the Android ecosystem have a license to use all the basic touch screen methods, and the stronger ones don't then it could lead to greater inconsistency between Android phones and could weaken the strong players (i.e. Samsung).
Ultimately, Apple's biggest threats are Samsung and Google/Nexus. I mention Nexus in particular because there is nothing that Apple & MS could hate more then the low margins of the Nexus devices. Whether or not the Nexus 4 itself is a success, the nexus line has become a threat to the traditionally high margins on mobile devices and it must have re-inforced Apple's determination to kill Android.
Just because it isn't very much isn't really a good reason to barf on them.
This announcement is actually a good thing and HP should get some credit for it.
Perhaps the Linux Foundation should double the cost of becoming a Platinum member, but that's a separate discussion.
We're a large part of the way there: there are very few companies in the world with sufficient patent arsenal to make a phone.
Here is a recent NPR podcast:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/10/23/163480928/episode-412-how-to-fix-the-patent-mess
It mentions the ridiculous number of patents required to make a smartphone (can't remember the number) and the legal impossibility of making arrangement for all those patents.
In some countries and on some carriers one of the promises of the Nexus brand was broken: we didn't get timely OS updates.
I felt this was a breach of trust - the sort of thing we expect from our carriers and some manufacturers - and it meant I couldn't recommend the Galaxy Nexus to others.
Fortunately, it seems that what happened with the Galaxy Nexus was not acceptable to Google either, and I'm really impressed with the lengths they are going to - bypassing the carriers completely in my country - to set things right.
They will probably only sell a tiny number of the new Nexus w/o carrier support but then again, the carriers' were never going to like or promote a phone that came unlocked and with broad carrier support - so they did little to promote the G'Nex anyway.
So, I'm disappointed that the new Nexus doesn't have LTE, but there is some sense in it (see the linked below for a good explanation) and I believe that the Nexus is once again worth recommending to friends*.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/29/3569688/why-nexus-4-does-not-have-4g-lte
(*assuming the reviews don't uncover lots of bugs or unexpected shortcomings.)
"their intentions obviously aren't very nice if they're doing it"
Based on what we know of them so far, I'd say that they are just trying to figure out a way to make some money, not be evil.
Personally, I hope they are successful in making money, and if there users feel that this latest initiative is the wrong approach then I hope they will respond in a constructive manner and not abandon Ubuntu.
Seriously, I've heard that many of them have started making a little extra doing espionage for foreign governments - to feed their habits.
They should be sued and shamed - they are supposed to do their design and development in a bubble!
A clarification has been posted: it is the Office 97-2003 (not 2003-2007) formats that are being dumped, and it is
Gotta say, though, that Google takes as much care with their blog posts as they do with their products: everything is beta.
Would be interested to know what the rationale is. Did they have to pay a licensing fee for these old proprietary formats? Or did they just want to stop supporting rather old, very proprietary formats of their competitor?
Note that they also recently announced that they are dropping IE8 support soon, so they are generally being very ruthless about culling out technologies. I guess I can forgive them that - supporting lots of old MS technologies must be painful.
Agreed - even if TNT worked, I wouldn't want it.
either I want AdBlock, or if I must view ads - and I guess it is how the sites I use make their money - then I prefer personalized ads rather then random ones.
Personally, I'm waiting for Verizon to introduce the Droid Razr Super Maxxx HD LTE 2.
I'm a dedicated Android fan, but I'm sick of the overload of different models and ridiculous names. Some variety is great, but please....
One thing I like about the Galaxy line is that, though there are endless spin-offs, they are essentially delineated into generations I, II, III, etc.
Users can decide which apps "have terrible functionality or a poor UI".
Getting Apple out of the business of censorship entirely - they should ban apps that are malware or those that they are forced to remove anyway because they break the law (e.g. hate laws).
The question of which countries' laws should be heeded (if we move beyond just heeding U.S. laws) is complicated, but I think it would have to be the app publisher's country.