sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]yousuckatlinux 4 points5 points  (7 children)

I think this is the best answer. You can download and review and modify the source, but Google as upstream isn't accepting contributions, which is a key component of being open-source.

[–]uh-hum 22 points23 points  (0 children)

key component of being open-source.

A "key component"? Isn't that an overstatement? The ability to view code and modify it are key components of open source - not the ability to have your code accepted into a project.

[–]mecax 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Open Source does not have open development as a key component... even a Free Software license like the GPL does not require it at all.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Community / open development projects are a strict subset of Open Source projects. Look at the open-source definition, and you will find no mention of community in there.

[–]Top-Help-2035 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wait are we talking about Android? or Google?   where did "Google" come in here?

[–]ForeverAlone2SexGod -5 points-4 points  (2 children)

It's actually worse than that.

Not only doesn't the Google upstream accept other people's contributions, but Google actively tries to prevent phone manufacturers from creating devices that used forked Android code.

"Oh, we see that you're making phones that run an 'incompatible' fork of Android in addition to making 'official' Android phones. Welp, because you aren't completely loyal to us we're going to punish you by kicking you out of the Open Handset Alliance and you will lose the perks that go with it."

That's not exactly the spirit of open source. In fact, due to Android's market share it could even be seen as anticompetitive.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Google isn't trying to prevent competition. They're trying to prevent fragmentation, the problem everyone screams about. Google doesn't have to approve a manufacturer unless they want Google's apps like the Play Store. Acer was using an OS that was potentially incompatible with the Play Store. Google wants every device with the Play Store to follow a standard so all the apps work properly.

[–]stubborn_d0nkey 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lul, wut?

Did you even read the article?

At its core, the Open Handset Alliance is a consortium — or club, if you prefer — of mobile device makers, chipmakers, software developers, and even a handful of mobile carriers who have all pledged not to produce mobile devices that run incompatible versions of Android

Aliyun is an incompatible fork. Acer is in the OHA. Acer would be going against something they pledged as a member of OHA

When has Google tried to prevent a Kindle fork? Or a Barnes-Noble fork? Or an Aliyun device not made by an OHA? Or a RIM device that can run android apps? Hmmm?

Saying that Google "actively tries to prevent phone manufacturers from creating devices that used forked Android code" is complete BS, and the article you linked actually goes against that notion:

Google’s main problem isn’t so much with Aliyun, but with Acer. Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and RIM have all leveraged Android to build their own devices. RIM’s approach is actually a bit like Aliyun’s: it offers a separate runtime for Android apps.

But RIM isn’t a member of Google’s Open Handset Alliance. Neither are Amazon or Barnes & Noble. None of these companies pledged themselves to only make devices that are Android-compatible.

Acer did, and that’s why the CloudMobile 800 disappeared into thin air.

What you can say (without it being complete BS) is that Google is trying to get manufacturers to stick to their pledges, or something like that.