I'm a bit surprised these companies that have the hype don't post a prerelease APK to the store that can just be updated to the actual game upon it's official launch.
Google Play has support for "pre-order" for apps. They used it for Allo.
At a minimum, it would help them gauge the demand upon launch.
And if demand is low... what? Don't release the game?
Two decades after the Democrats got caught taking money from the Chinese, and 32 years after Ted Kennedy BEGGED the Soviets to intervene in the 1984 election, NOW you're worried about a foreign country "trying to influence US Elections?"
Two decades after the Republicans got caught eating baby human meat, and after Ronald Reagan was found raping large numbers of women in the ear hole, NOW you are not worried about a country "trying to influence US Elections?"
The Russians hacked the GOP as well. If they had leaked information that had damaged Trump election chances would you have been as non-plussed about that as well?
LOL I've been using personal computers since the 80s, and I haven't had malware since the 90s, so I think you should consider that there might be known working strategies for managing that already.
LOL I've been using smart TVs since the 2002, and I haven't had malware ever, so I think you should consider that there might be known working strategies for managing that already.
Let's compare the number of stories about malware on PCs vs. smart TVs. Oh...
There also might be more security built in to the OS than on the OS in the story. There are sandboxes and VMs and such things that are available for all the desktop OSes that allow to safely run some sort of 3rd party appy bullshit it if you really want it on a screen.
There's security built into the smart TVs OS as well. Apps run in sandboxed VMs. There are bugs though, just like there are bugs in PCs that allow them to get infected.
AOSP is NOT Android. If you don't understand the distinction, you don't know what you're talking about.
I work for a company that took AOSP and built a custom dist of Android to run on very customized hardware. You could argue that what we are running isn't "Android". In the same way CM isn't "Android" nor is any other 3rd party dist you load onto your device. That distinction is moot however. Developers can still write Android apps using the Android SDK and they run on our devices.
The fact that it isn't Android(tm) doesn't stop an AOSP-based dist from being extremely useful. It may be useless to you since you don't have the expertise to do anything with it, okay. For people that need an OS to run on their mobile or embedded devices, compared to having to build your own OS from scratch it's gold.
I can't think any better demonstration of why smart TVs are such a bad idea than this. I hope this story gets as much chatter as possible.
There's no story here. The TV has a user accessible factory reset. It didn't work. Who knows why, but in almost any case removing malware is just a factory reset away, same as with any other smart consumer device.
If your point is that if it wasn't smart, it could not get malware, then fair enough, but you are either forgoing smart features, or you are driving them from some other device (a PC?), and that device is smart and can get malware same as your TV.
What I do for sandboxing is I buy a regular stupid TV, and then plug an HDMI cable from a computer into it. And if I want applications to draw on the TV, I can just change the input source. Done.
Aren't you just moving the problem to your PC? What stops it from getting malware?
There's no problem here. For some reason which is unspecified, the factory reset procedure didn't work. Who knows why that is. Maybe the tech was new and didn't know how to do it right. Maybe it was user error. Maybe the malware disabled it (unlikely). The point is that on almost any smart TV, removing malware is just a factory reset away... unlike your PC.
I'm with you. I don't think locking down devices with proprietary software and putting them behind walled gardens is the right solution. I think each device should have a physical switch or dongle which needs to be flipped or plugged in to make the OS partition read/write.
The OS partitions on most consumer Android devices are read-only. Moreover, it's signed so if something changes within it (somehow) it won't boot. That's why you need to unlock your bootloader prior to flashing any new firmware on Android devices.
Point to the part that says I can't update to a newer version of Android.
I never said that did I? I said that Google requires vendors to pass a suite of tests before they license Google apps on their dist of Android running on their device. Ergo, if the build you are running hasn't passed those tests, it isn't licenses to run Google apps.
If the dist you are running didn't come with a version of Google apps in the firmware, it isn't licensed to run them. That's not a rule of course, just pointing out the obvious that if someone went through the hassle of passing the tests and the cost of licensing Google apps, they'll surely have included them in the firmware. It's the reason why CM could never bundle Google apps and you always needed to go off and download the APK somewhere else.
See, the problem with this post, and the thinking behind it, is that it ignores the customers and their concerns.
Sigh. I'm only stating the way it is, not the way it should be. My name isn't Mr. Google, I don't work for Google, and believe it or not they don't turn to me for business strategy.
My vendor was granted the right to extend that license to me, and that's what they did.
Well that sounds interesting. I'm sure you'll provide that license.
And I've replaced that OS with a reasonable facsimile, based on code provided by... Google.
You can't change a contract after it's written and agreed upon. Regardless of how reasonable the modifications seem to you. That's a contract for you. If everyone got to muck around with the terms according to what they think makes sense a contract would be worth nothing.
Pretty sure I can think of something. After all I just need to argue the point.
I have a license to run play services on Android on this phone.
Did you sign any agreement with or pay Google any money? You don't have a license for anything, your device's vendor has a license and the license has stipulations. Google licensed their apps to run on top of the stock OS that came on your phone. Google required the vendor to run a rigorous tests before it would allow them to run the Google apps.
You have to be a major OEM (Samsung, HTC, etc.) and pay big, big money to get Android source code, as well as agree to bundle in (and pay separately for) other shit like Google's Play store and dozens of Google services and apps.
False. We were a company of ~10 people when we started building a product on Android (custom hardware), starting with AOSP. We now have 4 soon to be 5 hardware devices running Android. We're not "Google certified" nor do we license or run Google apps.
The only way to get a free and open and usable Android experience is to do so illegally - use AOSP and inject Google's apps and services
What you really meant was: "The only way to get the GOOGLE experience...". Sort of like saying "The only way to get HBO with my free basic cable is to do so illegally."
Not only is AOSP bare and useless
Getting AOSP up on your hardware isn't hard*. It is however more than flashing some pre-built binary. It's a development task, not an end user task. You know Linux is open source as well, but does anyone provide a dist of it that runs on your phone? Who are you mad at about that?
Google won't do a damn thing to flex that muscle on something as simple as forcing the carriers to not stymie any updates.
You profoundly misunderstand the relationship between Google and the carriers.
Android exists as it does today so as to make the carriers feel safe. Safe that if Google screwed them in some way they'd have all the source to their OS and the expertise to carry on without Google. Google may have the $$$, but carriers own the wires, cables, poles, lines to your homes, cell towers and the agreements that allow them to exist, and the spectrums themselves. Android's entire business model was to be the anti-Apple. Worried about losing control of the devices on your network? We (Google) have a compromise! You own the software, you control the updates, and you decide what bloatware goes on the device. Carriers tell Google what to do, not the other way around. If Google tried to put the screws to the carriers, you'd start seeing Tizen / Baidu / Meemo / etc phones on their networks before you can blink an eye.
Google's model is one of education not coercion. Nexus (and Pixel) exist to show carriers and OEMs that a model of open software and updates will sell more devices. Think of them as a "best practice" in phones. You can choose to support this, or you can keep buying locked down phones from Verizon. Up to you.
Look around you. Smart watches, and especially Apple Watches, are a niche product. They weren't the Next Big Thing.
How many products last year were the next big thing? The year before? I count zero. Yet somehow the economy chunked along and consumers spent billions on products. Is the fog clearing yet?
I believe the logic would imply it was ok for auto companies to put oil changes behind some DRM key, so that you must take it to the dealership to get a change.
More like making sealed transmissions that can't be serviced. Oh wait. They do that.
To go from km to miles, we get $8.4 million USD per mile of solar road per lane. Further breaking this down, it is about 16% more expensive to construct a mile of solar road than it is for regular road. Not bad.
Functionally, do you think it's equivalent to non-solar road? Maintenance? Load bearing? Longevity?
Not to mention it's going to be extremely inefficient/ It can't tilt towards the sun. It's going to be dirty all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
Would let me skip things I didn't want to hear more of
That's because you need to pay for that. Of course there are many services that allow you to skip songs.
I'm a bit surprised these companies that have the hype don't post a prerelease APK to the store that can just be updated to the actual game upon it's official launch.
Google Play has support for "pre-order" for apps. They used it for Allo.
At a minimum, it would help them gauge the demand upon launch.
And if demand is low ... what? Don't release the game?
The future is NOW.
Two decades after the Democrats got caught taking money from the Chinese, and 32 years after Ted Kennedy BEGGED the Soviets to intervene in the 1984 election, NOW you're worried about a foreign country "trying to influence US Elections?"
Two decades after the Republicans got caught eating baby human meat, and after Ronald Reagan was found raping large numbers of women in the ear hole, NOW you are not worried about a country "trying to influence US Elections?"
See, I can do it too.
The Russians hacked the GOP as well. If they had leaked information that had damaged Trump election chances would you have been as non-plussed about that as well?
Duh, yes?
The key flaw to socialism is: Excessive concentration of power. The fact you don't know this yet shows you have not been paying any attention.
That explains why those socialist countries in northern Europe are having such a hard time of it. Oh wait ...
Where the concentration of power in the US? Answer: corporations.
The USA and a bunch of other countries imposed strong sanctions on Russia as a result of their aggression in Ukraine. Is that not concrete action?
I'm sorry, that doesn't fit with any anti-Obama narrative. Disregarded.
As a reminder, his response on Ukraine was basically wagging his finger at them, saying "bad Russia, bad boy" - no concrete action.
What did Russia do when the US invaded Iraq? Anything more than finger wagging?
LOL I've been using personal computers since the 80s, and I haven't had malware since the 90s, so I think you should consider that there might be known working strategies for managing that already.
LOL I've been using smart TVs since the 2002, and I haven't had malware ever, so I think you should consider that there might be known working strategies for managing that already.
Let's compare the number of stories about malware on PCs vs. smart TVs. Oh ...
There also might be more security built in to the OS than on the OS in the story. There are sandboxes and VMs and such things that are available for all the desktop OSes that allow to safely run some sort of 3rd party appy bullshit it if you really want it on a screen.
There's security built into the smart TVs OS as well. Apps run in sandboxed VMs. There are bugs though, just like there are bugs in PCs that allow them to get infected.
AOSP is NOT Android. If you don't understand the distinction, you don't know what you're talking about.
I work for a company that took AOSP and built a custom dist of Android to run on very customized hardware. You could argue that what we are running isn't "Android". In the same way CM isn't "Android" nor is any other 3rd party dist you load onto your device. That distinction is moot however. Developers can still write Android apps using the Android SDK and they run on our devices.
The fact that it isn't Android(tm) doesn't stop an AOSP-based dist from being extremely useful. It may be useless to you since you don't have the expertise to do anything with it, okay. For people that need an OS to run on their mobile or embedded devices, compared to having to build your own OS from scratch it's gold.
I can't think any better demonstration of why smart TVs are such a bad idea than this. I hope this story gets as much chatter as possible.
There's no story here. The TV has a user accessible factory reset. It didn't work. Who knows why, but in almost any case removing malware is just a factory reset away, same as with any other smart consumer device.
If your point is that if it wasn't smart, it could not get malware, then fair enough, but you are either forgoing smart features, or you are driving them from some other device (a PC?), and that device is smart and can get malware same as your TV.
What I do for sandboxing is I buy a regular stupid TV, and then plug an HDMI cable from a computer into it. And if I want applications to draw on the TV, I can just change the input source. Done.
Aren't you just moving the problem to your PC? What stops it from getting malware?
There's no problem here. For some reason which is unspecified, the factory reset procedure didn't work. Who knows why that is. Maybe the tech was new and didn't know how to do it right. Maybe it was user error. Maybe the malware disabled it (unlikely). The point is that on almost any smart TV, removing malware is just a factory reset away ... unlike your PC.
I'm with you. I don't think locking down devices with proprietary software and putting them behind walled gardens is the right solution. I think each device should have a physical switch or dongle which needs to be flipped or plugged in to make the OS partition read/write.
The OS partitions on most consumer Android devices are read-only. Moreover, it's signed so if something changes within it (somehow) it won't boot. That's why you need to unlock your bootloader prior to flashing any new firmware on Android devices.
Point to the part that says I can't update to a newer version of Android.
I never said that did I? I said that Google requires vendors to pass a suite of tests before they license Google apps on their dist of Android running on their device. Ergo, if the build you are running hasn't passed those tests, it isn't licenses to run Google apps.
If the dist you are running didn't come with a version of Google apps in the firmware, it isn't licensed to run them. That's not a rule of course, just pointing out the obvious that if someone went through the hassle of passing the tests and the cost of licensing Google apps, they'll surely have included them in the firmware. It's the reason why CM could never bundle Google apps and you always needed to go off and download the APK somewhere else.
I'm not stating how it should be, only how it is.
See, the problem with this post, and the thinking behind it, is that it ignores the customers and their concerns.
Sigh. I'm only stating the way it is, not the way it should be. My name isn't Mr. Google, I don't work for Google, and believe it or not they don't turn to me for business strategy.
My vendor was granted the right to extend that license to me, and that's what they did.
Well that sounds interesting. I'm sure you'll provide that license.
And I've replaced that OS with a reasonable facsimile, based on code provided by... Google.
You can't change a contract after it's written and agreed upon. Regardless of how reasonable the modifications seem to you. That's a contract for you. If everyone got to muck around with the terms according to what they think makes sense a contract would be worth nothing.
On what basis?
Pretty sure I can think of something. After all I just need to argue the point.
I have a license to run play services on Android on this phone.
Did you sign any agreement with or pay Google any money? You don't have a license for anything, your device's vendor has a license and the license has stipulations. Google licensed their apps to run on top of the stock OS that came on your phone. Google required the vendor to run a rigorous tests before it would allow them to run the Google apps.
Android is not open source.
https://source.android.com/sou...
Maybe what you meant was: the software running on my phone isn't open source.
You have to be a major OEM (Samsung, HTC, etc.) and pay big, big money to get Android source code, as well as agree to bundle in (and pay separately for) other shit like Google's Play store and dozens of Google services and apps.
False. We were a company of ~10 people when we started building a product on Android (custom hardware), starting with AOSP. We now have 4 soon to be 5 hardware devices running Android. We're not "Google certified" nor do we license or run Google apps.
The only way to get a free and open and usable Android experience is to do so illegally - use AOSP and inject Google's apps and services
What you really meant was: "The only way to get the GOOGLE experience ...". Sort of like saying "The only way to get HBO with my free basic cable is to do so illegally."
Not only is AOSP bare and useless
Getting AOSP up on your hardware isn't hard*. It is however more than flashing some pre-built binary. It's a development task, not an end user task. You know Linux is open source as well, but does anyone provide a dist of it that runs on your phone? Who are you mad at about that?
* Making it stable and performing is hard.
Arguably, I'm entitled to take your car for a joyride. Arguably.
Is the software on your flip phone open source?
Oops.
Google won't do a damn thing to flex that muscle on something as simple as forcing the carriers to not stymie any updates.
You profoundly misunderstand the relationship between Google and the carriers.
Android exists as it does today so as to make the carriers feel safe. Safe that if Google screwed them in some way they'd have all the source to their OS and the expertise to carry on without Google. Google may have the $$$, but carriers own the wires, cables, poles, lines to your homes, cell towers and the agreements that allow them to exist, and the spectrums themselves. Android's entire business model was to be the anti-Apple. Worried about losing control of the devices on your network? We (Google) have a compromise! You own the software, you control the updates, and you decide what bloatware goes on the device. Carriers tell Google what to do, not the other way around. If Google tried to put the screws to the carriers, you'd start seeing Tizen / Baidu / Meemo / etc phones on their networks before you can blink an eye.
Google's model is one of education not coercion. Nexus (and Pixel) exist to show carriers and OEMs that a model of open software and updates will sell more devices. Think of them as a "best practice" in phones. You can choose to support this, or you can keep buying locked down phones from Verizon. Up to you.
Pixel, the dumbed down Nexus, is now sold exclusively on Verizon.
It's sold unlocked for use on any carrier.
Look around you. Smart watches, and especially Apple Watches, are a niche product. They weren't the Next Big Thing.
How many products last year were the next big thing? The year before? I count zero. Yet somehow the economy chunked along and consumers spent billions on products. Is the fog clearing yet?
I believe the logic would imply it was ok for auto companies to put oil changes behind some DRM key, so that you must take it to the dealership to get a change.
More like making sealed transmissions that can't be serviced. Oh wait. They do that.
To go from km to miles, we get $8.4 million USD per mile of solar road per lane. Further breaking this down, it is about 16% more expensive to construct a mile of solar road than it is for regular road. Not bad.
Functionally, do you think it's equivalent to non-solar road? Maintenance? Load bearing? Longevity?
Not to mention it's going to be extremely inefficient/ It can't tilt towards the sun. It's going to be dirty all the time.