If you needed further proof that Android is not an "open platform", Google just supplied it. On Thursday, the company said that as its select partners release the first tablets based on Android "Honeycomb" – the latest version of its mobile operating system – it will not open source the Honeycomb code. As first reported by …
It is an "open platform"
And that means?
So in a way Windows NT, OSX, OS/2, CP/M
An "open platform" has nothing to do with "Open Source". Besides Android phones are not usually open Platforms.
I'm only here for the
flamewar, keep it up lads. :)
It's brilliant, isn't it.
I'm going to need a new keyboard shortly.
<--- In the meantime, chuck a few of these in to keep things ticking over!!
It is fun, yes...
Virtual marshmallow, anyone? :)
Does the author work for Apple?
What nonesense conclusions. The rationale is abundantly clear. The source code will be released when its finished. In the meantime a version will be released so Android can compete in the tablet market and meet deadlines it's presumably commited to. Its not ideal but the alternative is that users buy other products.
The ONLY winner out of that scenario is Apple which is why I ask the question. Anyone with an interest in competition will be disappointed the source code will not be released but will be delighted there will be a wider range of products.
The test will be whether the version is adapted to work on devices with a smaller form factor and it is does Google *then* release the source code.
Reading too much between the lines?
The moment you follow 'surely' with 'or perhaps' then maybe you should rethink the sentence, or at least stop guessing the worst.
People getting hung up on what "yet" means as if that somehow negates that right now, currently, the time up until "yet" there is no source code published.
That means that right now, it is not open source because right now the source isn't open. It's so simple it's almost genius.
A nice simple everyday example. If your comfortable home where you're sitting typing these comments from hasn't burned down yet, do you say that it is a burned out husk? Woe is you for living in a burned out husk of a house?
besides the fun-poke, don't really care...
...whether it is open source or not. That is so 100% irrelevant to fitness for purpose. I've not tried honeycomb tablets but have never liked any of the Android phones I've tried because it always feels barely finished and only semi-coherent.
The hardware on some of the Android phones is the best on the market but the usability of the OS feels lacking. Features to the max. Usability, not so much.
Yaay for the inconsistent moderation in this comments thread.
Well, don't call a man with cancer horrible names, DF118. If anything like that got accepted earlier it's because it wasn't my shift dealing with you sensitive geniuses, kay? Kay.
At first I was like... then I was all...
At first I thought "Cade has cancer?! Eek! How the hell was I supposed to know? But hang on, I didn't even call him a horrible name" ... and then I realised you were talking about His Jobsness. What can I say, I'm a bit hard of thinking. I didn't realise he had cancer again, and shucks - I've seen the S word used around here dozens of times before (in fact I'm sure learned it here) so I...
Aw fuck it I'll just stop. Point taken!
with your opinion on this Cade.
It's just as likely that Google would rather keep the code hidden just now, to prevent it getting hacked onto phones and giving users a bad experience with Android.
At a time when Android has great traction against the other mobile software plaforms, it seems very sensible to make sure users have a good experience until they're ready to open the source code to allow for other hardware platforms.
They have to go to market now with a decent tablet based OS, in order to keep up with Apple. This it seems comes at the expense of not having time to prepare Honeycomb for smaller devices. That's a fair trade-off in order to stay shoulder to shoulder with Apple until they can nudge ahead and open the code.
A fiver says they open the code once they've blown Apple's tablet sales out of the water.
Can't do what you want with it?
Isn't that the point of open source, you can grab the code and do what you want with it?
Isn't that the whole argument against Apple, too much control freakery? so now that Google are doing similar where are all the fandroids criticising Google?
I suspect Google are slowly realising what Apple and Microsoft realised, that you need to think about the end user's experience and not let people grab unfinished code and stick it in a product and get lots of average phone reviews.
I with Richy S and Les M, don't care who wins i enjoy the fight, popcorn and beer are required
vi vs emacs anyone ?
flame on my hearties don't let me down
It's Google FFS
Until the source is open for examination, assume it to be full of spyware.
Yes, that's probably the best assumption to make...
Nice hat, by the way.
Fandroids lack of comprehension is staggering...
The nub of it is...
Google attack Apple for not being open. Their proof is a command line to get and make their 'open' software. You can't do that with Apple so that means Apple are closed and closed is bad.
Can you do this with Honeycomb, no. So by their own argument Google are closed. End of story. It's amazing how easy it is to wind people up who clearly can't comprehend a very simple article ;-)
I really shouldn't, but what the hey...
When it comes to comprehending anything tech-related, you're likely to get a better score from an Android enthusiast than an iOS user. Sorry, but there it is. If it makes you feel better, the android bunch are unlikely to be dressed quite as stylishly.
BUT my reply above was about a side-issue: the assumption that the Honeycomb source code was being held back to hide all the spyware that Google had crammed in there. Let me know if there's anything else you're having trouble with and I'll try to explain it in nice, short words for you.
@BorkedAgain proves my point
Where in the article does it talk about the spyware - er oh it doesn't.
My post was about the article not inane Fandroid wibble about the reasons why Google being closed is ok.
Prosecution rests m'lord.
I guess I was confused by the way that you posted your comment on the article in a reply to my reply to some anon cowherd being silly 'bout the spyware. Context is all.
Nonetheless, I put it to you that you hav a face like a squished tomato hav havent hav ect chiz.
Nothing to see here, move along...
Tired of that crap
I'm really tired of the crap BorkedAgain is spewing. Android enthusiasts are NOT automatically better at comprehending tech-related issues and if the crown I hang with is any indication I would even say far from more likely.
It's a fucking phone operating system based on Linux and Java which have been used for years before Android. You don't need a lot of background in CS and systems engineering to get it. Most so called enthusiasts only know how to install mods made by others - many unknowns with haxx0r-looking handles - and even then get it wrong (like the dumb suggestions of installing journaled filesystems in SD flash media)
Some people just have bigger fish to fry than spending their time fussing about with unfinished code ON THEIR PHONE. You try running an HPC server farm at work with a bunch of users and see if you get that excited to go home and install patches on your puny little devices or the latest must have weather widget. It's simply beyond boring.
So best get off your imaginary high horses, 'cause there's plenty of iOS people more than able to take you on.
Yikes, touched a nerve, eh?
Okay, all's I was saying is that for every 1337 coder iPad user (and I'm sure I'd bow to your superior skills...) there's about a dozen marketing wonks won over by the latest shiny. Android, on the other hand, is pretty exclusively loved by geeks.
Sorry if I hurt your feelings, though. Bless...
"Android, on the other hand, is pretty exclusively loved by geeks."
A week late on this, but what utter bollocks! Everyone wants a smartphone these days and the HTC Wildfire, Orange San Francisco et al. are given away for free with cheap contracts or at low cost on PAYG! I've seen as many Android handsets in the wild as iPhones! In fact it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to suggest that the rampant uptake of Android devices is in no small part down to the extremely low cost of entry! Of course, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this, but you are suggesting that 'geeks' are more or less exclusively buying into the Google based smartphone ecosystem, which is unmitigated horse poop, especially when the evidence is considered. As a long term iPhone user (still got my 3G, which despite reports to the contrary is still a perfectly capable device) and I've considered Android, with the Nexus S being the handset I'd go with. However I'm loathed to switch because the ecosystem appears fractured, the quality of the apps seem poorer and the handsets themselves appear to be poorly supported and over modified by the manufacturers (hence Nexus S). The perceived 'openness' of a platform is, by and large, of no consequence to the end user. It is a straw man for internet 'flame warriors' to beat others with. For the majority of consumers, the people who Google et al. need for the platform to be dominant, this is a non-issue. Of course, YMMV. However in my opinion it leaves Google and Andy Rubin especially (his tweet was the most asinine description of open ever!) with egg on their faces and proves that Google are no different to Apple or Microsoft.
Cathedrals are back
Someone tell Eric Raymond! Cathedral-style development is back in fashion.
Open Source Development? or shall we say shared source.
What happened to anyone being able to contribute to the development, this sounds like closed source development with publishing the source code after its finished.
Looks like a lot of people are getting open source and open platform terribly confused.
As far as I know, it is the same for Google TV at this time ...
But I never heard any noise about this one.
Is that linked to the "limited" success ?
... a load of sandal wearing beardies are annoyed. No one else really cares. Google make money. The world moves on.
Paris - she's open.
What does the GPL say about indefinitely postponing source publication?
Well it's only an academic question, there's nobody with Larry's money behind it.
To think the company which claims it's the most open could end up rendering the GPL effectively toothless. Small price to say to sell a few more ads and gather a bit more data about everyone...
FSF v Google?
Umm, correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Android kernel and some of the root file system tools rely heavily on derived source code from the Linux kernel and FSF created tools under GPL licenses?
Long and short of it, if they withhold the source then they are braking the terms of the GPL license.
The FSF could clean up on this if they were to take Google to court as Google would be in valiation of the GPL license.
Does the GPL state when anyone has to release a Linux based OS as open source? Is there a time limit on that? If not, in theory, if Google says they aren't ready to release the source code "yet", then they aren't violating the GPL, as long as they haven't stated clearly that they will NEVER release the source code for Honeycomb. Besides, by the time they've finished Honeycomb (all year), won't it be time for Ice Cream? I could care less when or if Google releases the source code to an OS I'm not using no devices I'm not buying. I'm more interested in when Gingerbread will come to my EVO. This whole situation does point out the obvious- that Honeycomb is a beta, isn't finished, needs work, and that all of you Xoom owners are beta testers. This makes comments others have made about Android appearing to be "unfinished" and "buggy", to have credibility. Every now and then something strange happens on my EVO with Froyo. I hope Gingerbread is more consistent.
When you have to release Source Code
The only way you can comply with the GPL is by releasing Source Code at the same time as, or sooner than, the binary. Unless something is entirely your own work, if you even upload the binary to a server first before you upload the Source, you are technically in breach of copyright.
I was holding out for Honeycomb tablet .. not sure I see the point any more .. isn't the iPad2 out today?
From what I read, there was nothing in the Google announcement that stipulated that Honeycomb would not be open source.
The quote I read indicated that Honeycomb was work-in-process code and not ready for widespread release.
So, why not allow the Google resources to complete their work and pass judgement then.
Open or closed source, it doesn't really matter. The Android OS is one of the worst mass distributed software releases I've ever seen (IMHO since Windows Millennium Edition). We gave it a trial run at work and after six months 26 of the 30 people in the working group wanted their BlackBerry's back. Android can suck a fat one.
Steve who? I thought he quit?
Steve Jobs is a condecending goofball. A Bill Gates wannabe. If you repeat a lie long enough, does it become the truth? Android by definition is OPEN. Versions do not change it. Apple has NEVER been open. Get over yourselves FANboys.
repeat a lie...
250 million ipods sold since 2001 means I guess nobody really gives a crap about open or closed, as long as you can get your device to do what ever it is you need it to do.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but being "OPEN" won't save the world or make a product instantly awesome.
Time to do your job. Rally the lawyers and sue Google; they have violated the letter of the licence…at least on the kernel.
And that, peeps, is why we have the GPL
Anytime any developer says anything bad about the GPL, you should know that they have exactly one thing in mind: they want to do the one and only thing which the GPL does not allow them to do.
Now, since the Apache licence ostensibly permits Source Code distribution even if you didn't actually receive the Source Code in the first place, does that mean someone could reverse-engineer the binary code and release their results while remaining entirely compliant with the licence?
Why use the phone naming convention ?
If, as I understand it, Honeycomb is just for tablets, then why give it a name in the Android Phone sequence ? They should maybe have started a new 'tablets' sequence, with initial letter aligned with Android phones perhaps. Hazelnut.
Closed until it's open
By some of the arguments here, Android "Poptart", "Quality Street", "Rum Truffle", "Spotted Dick" etc are also closed ... until public push occurs.
Vindicated? No way
how is steve jobs vindicated by this? sure it demonstrates the appeal his model has for those interested in a profit. yet for us consumers it means that we'll have no decent open source os for tablets. google sure is making me question their 'no evil' policy.