What I really don't get, is all of these apps (gmail, gmap, etc) google provides for free for blackberry and iphone users. WTF is up with that?
On Sep 26, 9:34 am, Disconnect <[email protected]> wrote: > Everyone who is insisting that its just "oh no, don't distribute > gmail".. I challenge you to try AOSP. It'll take some time, but grab > the source and build it. Without proprietary bins. (No, seriously. > Don't copy a bunch of crap off the old image, don't include any of the > proprietary bins that -you are not allowed to redistribute-.) > > It won't boot. If you manage to get past that, it won't make noise. > LED doesn't work. No way to talk to the cell modem (so no cell > services, at all.) Good news, the wifi will probably work. But even if > you include the (proprietary!) RIL, it won't make or break calls > (oops, setting the initial setup/provisioning flag is "proprietary".) > > Seriously, this isn't a case of "oh, just stop distributing gmail". > This is - as ryebrye said in JBQ's thread - a case of "AOSP doesn't > work AT ALL without tons of proprietary crap". > > If we are going to have to recreate all that, I -really- suggest doing > it with someone else's services. Why give them the added business? > (Alternately, release the OSS replacements under a more restrictive > license - GPL is perfectly android-compatible, except they can't take > it inside the wall and profit from it at the expense of the > community.) > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Is everyone forgetting there are OEMs who are already shipping devices > > without the Google software (e.g. vobis.ru, Archos)? > > > If their Googles work then Google has the right to say who can > > redistribute them, that's the basics of the laws of copyright as has > > been established for a century or two. > > > You may not agree with it, you may not like how it stands, but that is > > a rule thats' part of the society we live in. > > > Al. > > > -- > > > * Looking for Android Apps? - Tryhttp://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. > > > On 26 Sep 2009, at 04:05, Streets Of Boston wrote: > > >> You're right. > > >> I hope Google won't just send this C&D and then go 'you figure it out > >> and if you can't, screw you'. > >> I hope that Google is cooperative in getting around this issue. > > >> If not, the backlash will be big (it is already getting a little out- > >> of-hand). > > >> On Sep 25, 10:56 pm, schwiz <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Lets hope that is the case, although its still unclear at this point. > >>> But on a side note, with developers already having a horrible time > >>> making a living off of the googl.., i mean- android market How well > >>> is > >>> it going to blow over when they kick 30,000 enthusiasts out of the > >>> marketplace? The users who actually have space on their phone to > >>> install more than 20 apps? > > >>> On Sep 25, 9:39 pm, Streets Of Boston <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > > >>>> don't think it's a load of crap. > > >>>> You can't modify the Market app to allow for download to the sdcard. > >>>> But you can create your own market, ala SlideMe, to do what you > >>>> want, > >>>> i.e. download apks to the sdcard. > > >>>> But what has this to do with distributing software that is not yours > >>>> or that is not opensource? Cyanogen did that (not with bad > >>>> intention, > >>>> i'm sure of that) and was noticed a C&D by Google. > > >>>> I do hope, though, that the 'offending' binaries are not an integral > >>>> part of Android and that leaving it out would not entirely cripple > >>>> it. > >>>> If that's the case, I have all confidence that Cyanogen will be up > >>>> and > >>>> running soon again, with their mods but without the proprietary > >>>> (google) apps. > > >>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> On Sep 25, 8:42 pm, schwiz <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> Thats an interesting blog post by the devs, but I frankly think > >>>>> its a > >>>>> load of crap. I've seen devs post here on the forums on more > >>>>> than one > >>>>> occation to customer requests of apps2sd as being 'do it yourself > >>>>> its > >>>>> not a priority' -paraphrased However they failed to mention that > >>>>> doing it yourself was violating the TOS for the software that your > >>>>> phone needs to function like it should. Am I missing something > >>>>> here? > > >>>>> On Sep 25, 7:16 pm, Streets Of Boston <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> Some more info here, from Google:http://android- > >>>>>> developers.blogspot.com/2009/09/note-on-google-apps-fo... > > >>>>>> "...we've been seeing some really cool and impressive things, > >>>>>> such as > >>>>>> the custom Android builds that are popular with many > >>>>>> enthusiasts..." > > >>>>>> "...we developed Android apps for many of our services like > >>>>>> YouTube, > >>>>>> Gmail, Google Voice, and so on. These apps are **Google's way of > >>>>>> benefiting from Android*** in the same way that any other > >>>>>> developer > >>>>>> can, but the apps are not part of the Android platform itself. > >>>>>> We make > >>>>>> some of these apps available to users of any Android-powered > >>>>>> device > >>>>>> via Android Market, and others are ***pre-installed on some phones > >>>>>> through business deals***. Either way, ***these apps aren't open > >>>>>> source***, and that's why they aren't included in the Android > >>>>>> source > >>>>>> code repository. Unauthorized distribution of this software > >>>>>> harms us > >>>>>> just like it would any other business, even if it's done with > >>>>>> the best > >>>>>> of intentions..." > > >>>>>> "...We always love seeing novel uses of Android, including custom > >>>>>> Android builds from developers who see a need..." > > >>>>>> Cyanogen was giving away non-opensource applications that generate > >>>>>> some revenue for (benifits) Google. That they want to nip this > >>>>>> in the > >>>>>> bud (as soon as possible) is understandable. > > >>>>>> But Google doesn't want to shut down Cyanogen, and others like > >>>>>> them, > >>>>>> all together. Google actually like to see these kinds of > >>>>>> activities. > > >>>>>> At least, that's what i understand from this blog-post. > > >>>>>> On Sep 25, 10:57 am, PhoenixAG <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>> Google, > > >>>>>>> We love you as a company and love the Android platform. It is > >>>>>>> only > >>>>>>> made better when it is enhanced by people like Cyanogen who use > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> open nature of the platform to further it and attracts many more > >>>>>>> people to it, as a result. > > >>>>>>> I am one of the people who was attracted towards Android not > >>>>>>> for the > >>>>>>> official rom, but because of the open nature of Android and > >>>>>>> that I > >>>>>>> could use a custom rom on it. > > >>>>>>> Someone who has put in so much hard work on the platform should > >>>>>>> not be > >>>>>>> told to cease and desist, but commended and encouraged to > >>>>>>> continue to > >>>>>>> work better. > > >>>>>>> Don't become Apple! > > >>>>>>> The 30,000 users of CyanogenMod and many more Android users > >>>>>>> will thank > >>>>>>> you for it. > > >>>>>>> Remember, "Don't be Evil!"- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >>> - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
