<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [OT] Is Android really free? (was Re: root almighty)</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText29237 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>> No, they really aren't. You can download<BR>> and install stuff from outside the<BR>> approved store on commercial android handsets<BR><BR></FONT><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>Hello, is it true that Google can uninstall an app not approved by themselves (that is, an app not included in the 'Android Market')? I understand the app would be uninstalled when the user visits a Google shop or accesses a Google service?<BR><BR></FONT><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>Regards,<BR>Juan Lucas</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV dir=ltr><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>De:</B> community-bounces@lists.openmoko.org en nombre de Gothnet<BR><B>Enviado el:</B> jue 21/05/2009 15:53<BR><B>Para:</B> community@lists.openmoko.org<BR><B>Asunto:</B> Re: [OT] Is Android really free? (was Re: root almighty)<BR></FONT><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><BR><BR></DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>Ignacio Torres Masdeu wrote:<BR>><BR>><BR>>> in fact there is a lot of closed linux devices out there , for example<BR>>> routers,motorola phones, ebook reader... and those doesn't mean Linux<BR>>> is closed,<BR>><BR>> It only means that if they don't publish the code, and that's usual,<BR>> they are violating the GPL. <A href="http://gpl-violations.org/">http://gpl-violations.org/</A><BR>><BR>><BR><BR>Not necessarily. They don't have to provide any mechanism to re-flash the<BR>device, then the linux based device is just as closed, even when they<BR>publish the source. GPL does not protect against this (v3 might, not sure).<BR><BR><BR>Ignacio Torres Masdeu wrote:<BR>><BR>><BR>> The problem with Android is not the license of the OS, but the<BR>> "ecosystem" around it. Closed hardware, DRMd content (applications,<BR>> music), the restrictions imposed on the OS by cell companies... it's a<BR>> nightmare, and the freedom of the user doesn't even appear in the<BR>> horizon.<BR>><BR><BR>It's BSD style FOSS. Anyone can do what they like with it. The fact that<BR>others can close their versions doesn't detract from that. If you want to<BR>argue that it loses flexibility as a platfor, when you're using a self- or<BR>community-compiled version, then sure.<BR><BR><BR>Ignacio Torres Masdeu wrote:<BR>><BR>> I have strong feelings against Android, for the restrictions around it<BR>> are very similar to those of the iPhone, though Apple doesn't try to<BR>> disguise themselves as "open source paladins".<BR>><BR><BR>No, they really aren't. You can download and install stuff from outside the<BR>approved store on commercial android handsets<BR>and on free/open ones ones (Android on FR) you have full control, including<BR>the full source under APL2.<BR><BR>You just try getting the source from Apple and running it somewhere else.<BR><BR><BR>Ignacio Torres Masdeu wrote:<BR>><BR>> Android, as a platform (not an OS, not a device) is worst than closed,<BR>> for it lures developers with the false concept of an open environment.<BR>><BR><BR>Yes, just like the entire BSD operating system! It's a trap!<BR>*facepalm*<BR><BR><BR><BR>Ignacio Torres Masdeu wrote:<BR>><BR>> Yes, people could fork and create gAndroid but where would they run<BR>> it? It's a wolf with a lamb skin,<BR>><BR><BR>Why fork when you can port? There are several places doing just that and<BR>re-submitting upstream when they have good results. It's being ported to<BR>some nokia devices, netbooks, FR etc.<BR><BR>And why is it a wolf in lambs skin? I mean, what the hell are you talking<BR>about at this point? Where would they run what?<BR><BR><BR>Ignacio Torres Masdeu wrote:<BR>><BR>> And my last rant. Why did they create yet another isolated platform?<BR>> For f*cks sake! It's not even standard java! At least Objective-C<BR>> builds on top of C! Couldn't they create a set of libraries? Or use if<BR>> they wanted portability use Python? Argh!<BR>><BR>> My 2 cents<BR>><BR><BR>Java is the most popular language on the planet right now, more people know<BR>it than know pretty much anything else going. Attracting developers is<BR>essential to the success of the platform. Why *not* use java?<BR><BR>I use python myself, and I like it, but I don't see why choosing java was<BR>wrong.<BR><BR><BR>Frankly, I think you're nuts. A big corp puts a lot of work in and releases<BR>a whole new userspace environment targeted at MIDs, phones etc, under one of<BR>the least restrictive licenses out there, and you're calling it worse than<BR>closed source!<BR><BR>You're weird!<BR><BR>You instinctively decide to hate it due to some features you don't like<BR>(which are aimed at supporting proprietary apps, and you're free to disable<BR>in your version, or just not use those apps). There's nothing stopping<BR>people from releasing android apps as FOSS. personally I really like the<BR>idea of paying for apps from an app store if I choose to, or using/writing<BR>free ones if I don't.<BR>--<BR>View this message in context: <A href="http://n2.nabble.com/-OT--Is-Android-really-free--%28was-Re%3A-root-almighty%29-tp2943035p2952092.html">http://n2.nabble.com/-OT--Is-Android-really-free--%28was-Re%3A-root-almighty%29-tp2943035p2952092.html</A><BR>Sent from the Openmoko Community mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Openmoko community mailing list<BR>community@lists.openmoko.org<BR><A href="http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community">http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community</A><BR></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>