Welcome to the world of advertising where they can allude to giving you the world, but unless they categorically say they will they don't have to do it, and as the site doesn't say "Market is part of the Android OS" you shouldn't expect it to be delivered.
If you click on the "Legal information" link at the bottom of the page there are the following clauses; "2.1 - You agree that Google may stop (permanently or temporarily) providing the Market (or any features within the Market) to you or to users generally at Google’s sole discretion, without prior notice to you." "3.3 - You agree not to access (or attempt to access) the Market by any means other than through the interface that is provided by Google, unless you have been specifically allowed to do so in a separate agreement with Google. You specifically agree not to access (or attempt to access) the Market through any automated means (including use of scripts, crawlers, or similar technologies) and shall ensure that you comply with the instructions set out in any robots.txt file present on the Market website." "3.5 - Unless you have been specifically permitted to do so in a separate agreement with Google, you agree that you will not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, trade or resell the Market for any purpose. " And one for the developers out there; "3.9 - Google reserves the right (but shall have no obligation) to pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove any or all Products from the Market. However, you agree that by using the Market you may be exposed to Products that you may find offensive, indecent or objectionable and that you use the Market at your own risk." It always pays to read the small print... Al. Disconnect wrote: > The big huge block on the front of android.com <http://android.com> says: > <http://market.android.com/> > > See the top applications available now on Android Market and publish > your own. > > > Not "buy a g1 to get android market".... > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > And the products you buy are called the G1 and HTC Magic which are > devices which run the Android OS, you don't buy "Android". > > Android.com does not say that Market, IM, Sync, etc. is part of the OS > (in fact the "What is Android?" page doesn't even mention Market let > alone giving the impression that it's a part of the OS), it shows what > apps can be run on Android, and on the front page their is a 4x3 block > of apps icons, none of these ship as part of the OS, yet they're still > shown on Android.com. > > We all would like to see a lot of things in Android, but our wishes > don't dictate what Android is. > > Al. > > Eric Friesen wrote: > > Yes, obviously. But they call it Darwin not OSX. They are not trying > > to pass off Darwin as anything it's not. So what is your point? > > > > -E > > > > On Mar 19, 1:05 am, Al Sutton <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > >> Ermm... Have you neve seen Apple Darwin? > >> (http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html) > >> > >> Al. > >> > >> > >> > >> Eric Friesen wrote: > >> > >>> It's not an argument that Google shouldn't be allowed to have > their > >>> closed source apps, or that carriers are taking the open > source code > >>> and modifying it. I think we all understand why these things > happen. > >>> The problem is that they take this approach but then want to > pass off > >>> that closed source stuff as if it were part of their > magnanimous open > >>> source effort. Either, A, make sure any Android phone can run the > >>> Market and Google Sync stuff (not necessarily by even open > sourcing > >>> it) or B don't advertise that functionality as being a part of > Android > >>> (like they do now). > >>> > >>> A good analogy would be like this. Apple announces tomorrow > that they > >>> are Open Sourcing OSX as an operating system to smash Windows > once and > >>> for all. Because it's open source you can port it to any > device you > >>> want, or add any feature you want, don't want iTunes? You can > replace > >>> it. All apps created equal, all device drivers created equal! > A month > >>> from now they open up a repository where you can download BSD. The > >>> only people who can actually commit to the Operating System > are Apple > >>> engineers. They start some forums for interested people to > discuss it. > >>> When people ask how they can get it to run on their PC systems > they > >>> say "Download the code and get it to work yourself.". Then people > >>> download the code from the repo to get it to work themselves. They > >>> then post "Hey? where is the code for Finder? Where is the > code for > >>> Carbon? Where is the code for iTunes?" > >>> > >>> It would be absolutely their right to keep all their code > private etc. > >>> But if they are doing that they should say "we are open > sourcing the > >>> underpinnings of OSX" etc or somehow make a clear distinction > that OSX > >>> does not include Finder, or Safari etc as opposed to videos of > >>> employees introducing OSX by saying "One of the great features > I love > >>> about OSX is how easy it is to navigate files using Finder." > >>> > >>> When Android.com lists the Marketplace as a feature of > Android, you'd > >>> expect it to be a part of Android. It's a small detail, but > the whole > >>> open source relationship is very much hurt when they say one > thing and > >>> do another. The "Why don't you just submit a patch?" mentality > found > >>> all over the place here doesn't feel very inviting when it > looks like > >>> if someone did all the work to port Android to some existing > handset > >>> hardware they wouldn't even be allowed to install all the > advertised > >>> features of Android. And I very specifically say Android and > not the > >>> G1. > >>> > >>> I don't know if others would agree but it just seems like if > the PR > >>> speak was a bit more inline with reality then perhaps there > would be > >>> more motivation to keep Android on the open path as well as > help keep > >>> the community from getting discouraged. > >>> > >>> -E > >>> > >>> On Mar 18, 8:32 pm, Eric Mill <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> That's exactly what I'm saying, Disconnect. Android is a > completely > >>>> open source OS. That's the abstraction. What gets shipped is a > >>>> partly-closed source fork of Android. > >>>> > >>>> Android Market is not a part of the OS; it's an application > written > >>>> for it. Under what advertising campaign do you see Google > implying > >>>> that their open source codebase includes the code for Market? The > >>>> only marketing Google runs is for the G1, which doesn't mention > >>>> anything about being open source (since the G1 isn't). > >>>> > >>>> That's why everyone should keep their anger directed at the > >>>> *carriers*, and not the Android project itself, which is an > entirely > >>>> free and open source OS that anybody can put on any phone. > >>>> > >>>> -- Eric > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Disconnect > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Linux is a bad example here. (BSD is better.) The devices > all come with a > >>>>> closed-source fork of "android". Try doing that with debian.... > >>>>> > >>>>> The other posters are correct, android is advertised (by > google and others) > >>>>> as having all of these things built in. (Easy low-hanging > fruit: ANDROID > >>>>> MARKET....) > >>>>> > >>>>> And its not "a completely open source OS" because > -completely- is an > >>>>> important word.. there is an open source android OS. > Unfortunately, that is > >>>>> not what is being shipped -by anyone-. What is being shipped > is a closed > >>>>> source OS with some example implementations. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Eric Mill > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Guys, this is ridiculous. Android, like Linux, is a > completely open > >>>>>> source OS, and we are all running variants of it, with > pieces of > >>>>>> preinstalled software of varying openness and licenses. All the > >>>>>> different RC updates are packaged for a specific client > (T-Mobile), > >>>>>> for their customer base. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Also, it gets said all the time on this list, but again: > the G1 isn't > >>>>>> Android. The Android codebase is a pure abstraction, > whereas the G1 > >>>>>> is a specific implementation of it, and is full of > compromises (like a > >>>>>> closed-source Market app, and not having root access). The > developer > >>>>>> phone has far fewer compromises, but even that has at least > one (no > >>>>>> access to copy-protected paid apps). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If you want a phone with no compromises, start a phone > manufacturing > >>>>>> company and make one. Thanks to Android, it's a whole lot > easier to > >>>>>> do exactly that. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- Eric > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Muthu Ramadoss > >>>>>> <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Anything not opensource and not part of android must be > yanked out of > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> android website and must be part of the particular > implemetation like > >>>>>>> g1, g2 > >>>>>>> etc., > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mar 18, 2009 1:30 AM, "Eric Friesen" > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Well this reasoning has been brought up numerous times but > I think it > >>>>>>> is quite lame. Visit android.com <http://android.com>. > More specifically visit > >>>>>>> http://www.android.com/about/videos.html#category=peeks > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Here you can see an "Android" phone boasting about > features that > >>>>>>> AREN'T android. This would be like going to Microsoft's > website for > >>>>>>> WindowsXP and having it boast about the features of the > paid version > >>>>>>> of Microsoft Office. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If they aren't going to make these bits of code a part of > Android, > >>>>>>> they shouldn't show them off on any OHA or android.com > <http://android.com> website. They > >>>>>>> should only be on T-Mobile's website for why you should > buy a G1. And > >>>>>>> they shouldn't be bragging about how there isn't a > googlephone there > >>>>>>> are many googlephones. Since it looks like the hardware > doesn't exist > >>>>>>> and if it did exist, wouldn't even have the full boasted > software > >>>>>>> stack. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> They want to eat their cake and have it too. "Android has > all these > >>>>>>> great features.. They just aren't actually provided" > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mar 15, 11:56 am, MrSnowflake <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Even > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> open source trees (mas... > >>>>>>> > >> -- > >> > >> * Written an Android App? - List it athttp://andappstore.com/* > <http://andappstore.com/*> > >> > >> ====== > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > >> > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or > it's > >> subsidiaries. > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > > > > > -- * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * ====== Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's subsidiaries. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
